On one hand, he is 100% correct that superstars in the private sector can earn a LOT more than their counterparts in government.
On the other, those in the private sector are expected to produce real, actual, tangible results, whether it be base hits, touchdown passes or enhanced shareholder value.
Most politicians, meanwhile, gear their appeal to the lowest common denominator of idiot voters, whom they promise free sh*t paid for by somebody else.
Yeah, we occasionally get lucky and elect a Ronald Reagan, Ted Cruz or Mike Lee. More often we elect a worthless (or worse) celebrity like an Obama, Clinton or post-JFK Kennedy whose main talent is bamboozling lowest common denominator idiot voters.
Paying them more isn't going to attract real talent, just those even more talented at bamboozling lowest common denominator idiot voters.
The only long-term solution lies in educating their constituents to demand more real performance and less free sh*t paid for by somebody else.
“bamboozling lowest common denominator idiot voters”
because they outnumber us...
“post-JFK Kennedy whose main talent is bamboozling lowest common denominator idiot voters.”
What makes you think that wasn’t true of JFK? Or, as my dear, sainted mother used to call him, “That pig-eyed, inbred, shanty Irish trash.”
Without TV, he wouldn’t have come anywhere near close enough for election fraud to put him over the top.
He may have been right to take us to the brink of nuclear war, but the way he got us off that brink was to give Khrushchev everything he wanted.