BBBEE wrong

[adrianh]

Testing IQ without basic education is unrealistic. A person needs a certain amount of training to be able to apply deductive reasoning. The training I refer to is not a degree, it is basic reasoning skills.

Anyway, using IQ as a measure for who gets to vote is bizarre because clever people are not necessarily nice people nor good people. There are many highly intelligent psychopaths out there....just look at big business and politics.

[pmbguy]

My reasoning here is that intelligent people have a much better chance of understanding the situation and the solutions. Yes I agree that an IQ test is not ideal, I used it purely for example. A much broader measure is needed, that can accommodate dissimilarities between people etc etc etc – testing for intelligence. In any case no measure will be perfect and none of this will ever happen.

I reject the notion that somehow intelligence equals badness, a statistic positively showing this would be fractional and will certainly have no effect on the outcome of elections.

[adrianh]

I agree that intelligence doesn't necessarily reflect badness, but it also doesn't necessarily reflect goodness. I think that EQ may be a good measure to use as well as IQ (Then I'll never be allowed to vote)

[pmbguy]

Good one, when you add EQ to IQ it makes much more sense because you are essentially testing sociability by testing emotion – which relates to how well you chose your leaders – you understand what you and other people want and need.

[adrianh]

Exactly...

[pmbguy]

Ok so EQ and IQ each contribute equally to a single measurement.

Now everybody votes and completes the test anonymously. Then the counters arrange everybody’s votes according to how well they scored and only the top 49% have their vote counted.

[Blurock]

This demonstrates exactly how BBEEE works;

Company A had a tender and presumably performed a good service as they have been in this kind of business for more than 20 years.

When the tender came up for renewal, it was awarded to BBEEE at a higher than quoted price. BBEEE then re-appointed Company A to perform the same service, but at a higher rate than they had before, plus an up front implementation fee.

This suits Company A, who is now being paid more, but the performance risk, financial risk and dealing with all the potential problems now lies with BBEEE!

This is surely a win-win situation for the parties involved, but in the end it is us, the citizens and tax payers of this country who has to pay for the bulshit and corruption!

[Justloadit]

When the tender came up for renewal, it was awarded to BBEEE at a higher than quoted price. BBEEE then re-appointed Company A to perform the same service, but at a higher rate than they had before, plus an up front implementation fee.

Not always so, on a number of occasions, the BBEEE kept the money, and company A is out of pocket with the investment in the stock and services provided, and after a few months the BBEEE liquidated.

On a few other occasions the BBEEE company decided it would do the work, screwed it up, but were still able to collect initial payments and then were liquidated.

In the first instance a long standing company is forced to shrink to remain in business or even close down.
In the second instance the tender is requested again, and now at a higher rate because the initial work done, must be undone.

[Blurock]

Not always so, on a number of occasions, the BBEEE kept the money, and company A is out of pocket with the investment in the stock and services provided, and after a few months the BBEEE liquidated.

On a few other occasions the BBEEE company decided it would do the work, screwed it up, but were still able to collect initial payments and then were liquidated.

In the first instance a long standing company is forced to shrink to remain in business or even close down.
In the second instance the tender is requested again, and now at a higher rate because the initial work done, must be undone.

The problem with this is that it often leads to lawsuits with claims and counter claims. Wasteful expenditure that could have been spent on much needed services, infrastructure and alleviation of poverty by creation of meaningful jobs.

I am dreaming of the day that there will no longer be any politicians, but only people who govern their own affairs...

[Justloadit]

Its a no win situation for all, except for a handful of opportunists who make a quick buck at the expense of the economy and long term failure.

[pmbguy]

Tendepreneurs... I know of some who have government contacts for office automation, but they have zero experience and they slack as hell. Machines are often offline for months further crippling governments ability to function. Then there are the huge kickbacks, especially for consumables (Toners).

bbbee is a malignancy suffocating business in SA. In the long term it is even damaging to those it uplifted.

[Justloadit]

It is all about adding value to the supply chain.
BBEE fails to come anything close to this, and hence the unsustainable process which is crippling to all, even to those it is supposed to uplift.

Human nature is to take the easiest path to a final destination. BBEE is precisely this, so that no one along the path actually learns business, but rather learns how to screw the system with out putting any effort.

All they simply have to do is to state best price, best delivery will get the order.
You know a specific company can only do so many orders, and it's service will fail, that is when the competition comes in and takes the rest of the orders.
What this does, is to force the entrepreneurs to think long and hard in the process to get the order. Now you are learning and creating a sustainable solution.
It will be a win win situation for all - good service at the right price.

[Dave A]

This thread developed an interesting twist along the way.

OK - so the core theme is that BBBEE is not working out too well.
This is due in no small part to inefficiencies and corrupt practices.
Ultimately these inefficiencies and corrupt practices get the space to play because the filter (BBBEE) through which everything is measured introduces obfuscation in what would otherwise be a clear cut dynamic.

The discussion then turns to the electorate.
The quality of the results from the electorate are being questioned.
And the solutions proposed are variations of introducing filters of some sort (EQ, IQ, qualified franchise of some sort).

Can you see this would be introducing obfuscation into a process that is currently a very clear cut dynamic?
What would be the chances that this obfuscation might introduce greater problems than the ones you are trying to solve?

(Just like it has with BBBEE).

[pmbguy]

The electoral system may be clear cut and dynamic, but this in itself is certainly not enough to say it must be good by default because it’s clear cut and dynamic.

Yes it will be challenging to employ (IQ-EQ) and it will cause resistance, problems etc, sure, but a positive result should be considered too. Considerations of obfuscation are relative to the result.

I don’t subscribe to the idea of their being a large an us-them conflict arising from such a system, because the votes and IQ-EQ are anonymous, they don’t know whether their vote was counted or not. Technically you creating two classes yes, but people don’t know for sure which class they belong to so conflict between these two classes will be low.

People who disapprove and are resistant would be less inclined to voice their disapproval of the system when they start to see good results. I reject the notion that a technical class divide will automatically lead to the non-voters not benefiting from such a system.

Those who did not score enough to be counted are still participating. Their contribution is to create the database from where it is possible to select the top 49%.

In any regard, I don’t even think there is a remote possibility of such a system ever being used. It’s still an interesting concept though.

[Blurock]

According to a report by the Financial and Fiscal Commission, there is a need for R80bn over 11 years to address the current maintenance backlog in electricity, water and sanitation infrastructure and to return it to optimum condition.

The problem with any government that is not well managed is the agency factor. The employees have no pride, no motivation and no initiative. Maintenance does not exist in their vocabulary.

Imagine the ideal town where the community works together to elect their own officials to look after their own affairs (and not the interests of a political party). They will soon realise where their efforts and resources have to be directed. If you do not attend to your water supply, it may dry up. If you neglect your sewerage works, you may just contaminate your whole environment. An efficient bus service may alleviate some of the traffic problems and may get your employees to work on time.

By working with industry and commerce, community leaders can help to facilitate business growth and job creation, which will in turn stimulate the fiscus, so that there is money available for further development.

Oh why do we have to have politicians?