I have just read a pair of articles from RealClearPolitics.com, a site I enjoy and read several times per day.Both of them deal with the same issue- accountability.
Passing the buck, foisting a problem off on someone else has a very long history. The first example that has always come to my mind is Adam. When asked by God if he had eaten of the fruit of the tree he was commanded not to eat, he replies 'the woman, whom you gave me, she gave me, and I ate.' Translated, it's not my fault. It's her fault, and your fault.
You hear this sort of thing from surgeons not infrequently. When a case is a bloody mess (not so much when there is a significant complication- surgeons tend to own those properly) the surgeon most commonly blames the lighting, or the instruments, less commonly the assistant. Nonsense. Any of us should be able to perform our procedures with less than ideal equipment and lighting. The man makes the clothes, not vice versa.
In a recent interview, a major friend and advisor fo the president blames the tough first year on 'the mess we inherited'. She takes credit for Obama improving the economy, claiming that upon taking office, the nation was losing 700,000 jobs per month, and is now losing 30,000 jobs per month. There is no specific finger pointing- just a nod toward the past in general as being responsible for a tough first year.
In a look at school performance, it is noted that teachers' unions have rules that give teachers tenure after 3 years. It is almost impossible to fire a teacher, even for poor performance, after that time. About 0.05-0.1% of teachers are fired for cause annually in the US. Think that's the proportion teaching badly?
Both these situations have people in authority foisting blame on someone else, or society in general. Unions once served a great purpose. I'm not at all against a collective which watches over mistreatment of those who individually have little voice. But I am thoroughly against any organization that prevents judgement on merit. We are accustomed to governments taking responsibility for economic booms, and blaming their predecessors for recessions. But that's nonsense. There is good evidence that economic cycles have virtually nothing to do with governmental policy. Some policy decisions, like tax rates and regulatory environment, can affect the depth or height of a bust or boom, but it appears that a capitalist economy has cyclicity inherently built into the system.
Teachers who perform badly, whose students perform badly, as measured against others in the same school, deserve no raise, and if performance steadily lags, deserve to be fired. Government officials should talk about their policies and efforts, not the mistakes of others.
How long do we tolerate a sub-par teacher? How long can we credibly blame someone else for our own problems? Everyone gets a chance to perform, even a couple of chances. After that, it's the individual's problem. As my father said often, how many times will someone spit in your face, and you say it's raining?
Ted
Passing the buck, foisting a problem off on someone else has a very long history. The first example that has always come to my mind is Adam. When asked by God if he had eaten of the fruit of the tree he was commanded not to eat, he replies 'the woman, whom you gave me, she gave me, and I ate.' Translated, it's not my fault. It's her fault, and your fault.
You hear this sort of thing from surgeons not infrequently. When a case is a bloody mess (not so much when there is a significant complication- surgeons tend to own those properly) the surgeon most commonly blames the lighting, or the instruments, less commonly the assistant. Nonsense. Any of us should be able to perform our procedures with less than ideal equipment and lighting. The man makes the clothes, not vice versa.
In a recent interview, a major friend and advisor fo the president blames the tough first year on 'the mess we inherited'. She takes credit for Obama improving the economy, claiming that upon taking office, the nation was losing 700,000 jobs per month, and is now losing 30,000 jobs per month. There is no specific finger pointing- just a nod toward the past in general as being responsible for a tough first year.
In a look at school performance, it is noted that teachers' unions have rules that give teachers tenure after 3 years. It is almost impossible to fire a teacher, even for poor performance, after that time. About 0.05-0.1% of teachers are fired for cause annually in the US. Think that's the proportion teaching badly?
Both these situations have people in authority foisting blame on someone else, or society in general. Unions once served a great purpose. I'm not at all against a collective which watches over mistreatment of those who individually have little voice. But I am thoroughly against any organization that prevents judgement on merit. We are accustomed to governments taking responsibility for economic booms, and blaming their predecessors for recessions. But that's nonsense. There is good evidence that economic cycles have virtually nothing to do with governmental policy. Some policy decisions, like tax rates and regulatory environment, can affect the depth or height of a bust or boom, but it appears that a capitalist economy has cyclicity inherently built into the system.
Teachers who perform badly, whose students perform badly, as measured against others in the same school, deserve no raise, and if performance steadily lags, deserve to be fired. Government officials should talk about their policies and efforts, not the mistakes of others.
How long do we tolerate a sub-par teacher? How long can we credibly blame someone else for our own problems? Everyone gets a chance to perform, even a couple of chances. After that, it's the individual's problem. As my father said often, how many times will someone spit in your face, and you say it's raining?
Ted
Comments
Post a Comment