Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Term Limits

OberHerr
Posts: 12,216
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 3:47:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Do you think that the US government should have term limits in ALL offices?

If only some, then which?

Why/why not?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

Signature Quote

"People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do."

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 4:15:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 3:47:35 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Do you think that the US government should have term limits in ALL offices?

If only some, then which?

Why/why not?

No

It violates the principle of free elections.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 4:45:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm kind of undecided. On one hand, term limits will reduce the problems of "incumbent advantage" in which one person has an advantage just because he/she is an incumbent, and as a result the principle/agent problem is more likely to take into effect. Furthermore, it's kind of easy to corrupt democracy If there are no term limits. For example, even nations that are considered tyrannies have "elections".

On the other hand, if you're only in there for a few term there is not much incentives to do good work because you won't get elected anyways.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 7,984
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 4:51:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 4:45:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm kind of undecided. On one hand, term limits will reduce the problems of "incumbent advantage" in which one person has an advantage just because he/she is an incumbent, and as a result the principle/agent problem is more likely to take into effect. Furthermore, it's kind of easy to corrupt democracy If there are no term limits. For example, even nations that are considered tyrannies have "elections".

On the other hand, if you're only in there for a few term there is not much incentives to do good work because you won't get elected anyways.

They will work harder that way so they can run for different office.

ended limit for representative? Run for senate. Done with senate? Go for Governor. Done there? President.
http://social-conservatism.blogspot.com...
Arms keep peace - Latin proverb
Never tell your problems to anyone...20% don't care and the other 80% are glad you have them.
- Lou Holtz
darkkermit
Posts: 11,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 5:04:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 4:51:25 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/11/2012 4:45:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm kind of undecided. On one hand, term limits will reduce the problems of "incumbent advantage" in which one person has an advantage just because he/she is an incumbent, and as a result the principle/agent problem is more likely to take into effect. Furthermore, it's kind of easy to corrupt democracy If there are no term limits. For example, even nations that are considered tyrannies have "elections".

On the other hand, if you're only in there for a few term there is not much incentives to do good work because you won't get elected anyways.

They will work harder that way so they can run for different office.

ended limit for representative? Run for senate. Done with senate? Go for Governor. Done there? President.

Didn't think about that one there. Good point.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
OberHerr
Posts: 12,216
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 5:08:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 4:15:09 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 3/11/2012 3:47:35 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Do you think that the US government should have term limits in ALL offices?

If only some, then which?

Why/why not?

No

It violates the principle of free elections.

Would you care to elaborate?

My reason for wanting terms limits, of say, two-four terms for Senate, and maybe four-eight for Rep, is because there is no new people, just a bunch of people that have been working at it for decades.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

Signature Quote

"People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do."

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 5:25:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 4:51:25 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/11/2012 4:45:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm kind of undecided. On one hand, term limits will reduce the problems of "incumbent advantage" in which one person has an advantage just because he/she is an incumbent, and as a result the principle/agent problem is more likely to take into effect. Furthermore, it's kind of easy to corrupt democracy If there are no term limits. For example, even nations that are considered tyrannies have "elections".

On the other hand, if you're only in there for a few term there is not much incentives to do good work because you won't get elected anyways.

They will work harder that way so they can run for different office.

ended limit for representative? Run for senate. Done with senate? Go for Governor. Done there? President.

(Using Brit politics to make sure i use the right terminology) Being an MP means you're running a constituency, and helping your local community. Being a PM means you're running the COUNTRY and helping on a national level. You get less time for your local constituency. That argument simply is forcing people to work & forcing people to do something they don't want to do.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Contra
Posts: 3,651
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2012 5:27:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 5:04:27 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 3/11/2012 4:51:25 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/11/2012 4:45:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm kind of undecided. On one hand, term limits will reduce the problems of "incumbent advantage" in which one person has an advantage just because he/she is an incumbent, and as a result the principle/agent problem is more likely to take into effect. Furthermore, it's kind of easy to corrupt democracy If there are no term limits. For example, even nations that are considered tyrannies have "elections".

On the other hand, if you're only in there for a few term there is not much incentives to do good work because you won't get elected anyways.

They will work harder that way so they can run for different office.

ended limit for representative? Run for senate. Done with senate? Go for Governor. Done there? President.

Didn't think about that one there. Good point.

+1
"If you live long enough, you make mistakes. But if you learn from those mistakes, you'll be a better person." - Bill Clinton

"A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both." - Milton Friedman

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility instead of a stagnant, government-directed economy that stifles job creation and fosters government dependency." - Paul Ryan
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/12/2012 8:57:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/11/2012 5:08:59 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 3/11/2012 4:15:09 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 3/11/2012 3:47:35 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Do you think that the US government should have term limits in ALL offices?

If only some, then which?

Why/why not?

No

It violates the principle of free elections.

Would you care to elaborate?

My reason for wanting terms limits, of say, two-four terms for Senate, and maybe four-eight for Rep, is because there is no new people, just a bunch of people that have been working at it for decades.

Thus, you want to limit. When one limits they remove an option restricting my choice. Hence, inhibits free elections. Limits at the local level result in the persons switching offices....kinda silly really.