Nostr Web Client

Most large companies have a board of directors and a CEO...

If the CEO is doing a good job, the board of directors keep the CEO in charge, if appropriate, for life, if he/she is a good manager and gets the job done with excellence, there is no need to change, if you are a shareholder you would not like a CEO change, moreover if the earnings are good and the company is doing great under that individual leadership...

Let's extrapolate...

Most countries in this world under the political system we call democracy have one president which is changed every 4 to 6 years depending on the country... Consider that a president is a company's CEO, the fact that we have to choose a new one every 4 years is part of a big problem and one that speaks volumes alone, that individual after three years in office has little to no power and therefore his capability to negotiate long term deals with other nations is questionable... The next president to come and his backers may cancel or change that deal...

Current tines are very difficult and important players like UK, Germany, France and US keep changing leaders, in caaes like UK very often and with that, policies as well, making them unreliable partners in many geopolitical matters that affect regions and their own constituency..

IMO, change is needed, our current system needs an upgrade, perhaps removing the cap of two presidential terms would be an easy and good start, a good president (Country's CEO) could do as many terms as the constituency allows him/her to do... Extending the terms to 6 years would be another good step, making the system more stable and focus in the constituency needs instead of being reselected every 4 years... Reducing the maximum age to be in office seems needed as well, having octogenarians in office is illogical.

What would you change in our current political system is anything?

shortwavesurfer2009 1y ago

I've thought about this and I think if there's one thing I could change, I would dilute the power of the presidency by requiring three presidents and two of whom must agree on any change in order for it to happen. I'm thinking like executive orders and stuff. At least two would have to agree on it beforehand. Either that or have one president for each nationally recognized political party. And then if there's some sort of tie for some reason, then something like the Speaker of the House would have a swing vote or something on any actions.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

rod ✪ 1y ago

That is an interesting idea and is actually working for many years in Switzerland, in fact, since 1848...

Switzerland’s political system is characterized by a federal structure, direct democracy, and a unique system of government, where 7 Federal Councillors collectively serve as the head of state and government

Notable Facts:

- Switzerland has had 7 Federal Presidents since 1848, with each serving for a year.

- The first Federal President was Jonas Furrer (1805-1861).

The longest-serving Federal Councillor was Ulrich Ochsenbein (1809-1872), who served for 24 years.

- The Federal Council has always included representatives from the country’s four main language regions (German,French, Italian, and Romansh).

Key Takeaways:

Switzerland’s political system is characterized by a collective head of state and government, ensuring stability and balance.

The rotation of the President role promotes consensus-building and prevents any single individual from dominating the government.

The Federal Council’s departmental structure allows for specialized expertise and effective governance.