"Wisconsin is broke!" (wink, wink)

Government bad, private business good.

Got it.

 

Actually, that's the beauty of getting rid of the union protection for those of you who want to do that. You can fire someone for any reason, up to and including that you don't like say, the fact they've had two DUIs!

 

There is not a chance in hell that Bill Gates would ever do that and yes, I'd disqualify him. One good reason to do that would be that there's probably someone who needs the money way more than him to have that job. Also, not really sure I'd want Gates to be heading up cyber security considering he stole the ideas to create Windows but that's another discussion.

 

Yes, Ace. You got it.

 

Maybe Gates wouldn't, but many wealthy people have decided they want to give back and work in Government.

I'm just pointing out the folly of drawing the line in such a manner.

 

My apologies. I was reading incorrect info on another article, most likely from a left-leaning site that was trying to pump up his shaky resume.

Nobody's dumb enough to think patronage jobs don't exist. Walker's seems a particularly egregrious example. Also, I don't believe we've commented here, but it was noted in the article that walker's infamous budget bill converts 37 management-level state jobs from civil service (a more formal hiring process) to governmental appointment. Although this wasn't one of those jobs, it's certainly an indication of what factors are going to matter most when it comes to hiring the people who lead Wisconsin out of tough economic times.

 

No folly to me. If I were hiring, I'd decline to hire him because there is someone out there who needs the money far more than him. Also, he has been known to steal ideas. Of course, in government work, maybe that's a good thing.

 

This whole thing is sort of funny to me, to be honest with you.

In 1999 I was hired by the Mayor's office of New York to raise money for their office of special events.

Technically, I was hired as the Chief of Staff of the New York City Tax Commission. And, I actually did have some duties there. When I was hired, we didn't even have voice mail. We didn't have email, we had a piss poor website, and our ability to accept claims electronically was woeful.

The Commissioner actually was a political flunkie. His dad was a union organizer who backed Giuliani. (The stories I could -- and have -- told about that guy!) He was terrified of technology and actually fought my attempts to get voice mail. Over his objections, I got voice mail. I got us email. I had a new website built and I improved our IT.

But, my real job was at City Hall. Though I didn't have a college degree, I had been getting corporate sponsors for city events on a volunteer basis.

I was able to raise millions of dollars. More than had ever been raised in what had previously been a very uncoordinated effort.

Because of my success, I was offered a full time job. They actually did have to alter the job requirements to get me hired on at a salary that topped my current job (I was working full time in commodities when I was raising money on a volunteer basis).

I got a good salary -- and great benefits. But, based on how much money I raised, I was very underpaid. In the private sector, I would have been paid on a commission basis. As a City employee, I drew a straight salary.

I created and helped produce money making events. (I got Best Buy to donate $1,000,000 dollars in order to hold a free concert in Central Park with Sting. They bared all the costs of the concert.)

I created new inventory to sell.

I was successful enough at it that it lead to a corporate job heading up sports/event marketing at a major corporation.

But, if someone had looked at my resume when I was hired, it would have been very easy to say that I was unqualified.

Now, I didn't have any connections to political donors and I didn't have a DUI, but I also don't have a college degree.

So, I have a hard time, based on my own experience drawing the line for a job in the Commerce Department at a college degree. It's a promotional job -- a sales job. It's not like he's heading Emergency Management.

 

You had a strong work history and they had very good reason to believe you would be successful. Is that the case with Brian Deschane?

 

His company may have been successful. I just haven't found many references of it that don't come from his official bio, so it's hard to say.

As for the jobs being political vs. civil service, that's a tough one too. In general, i think an elected official should be able to appoint people who will implement his agenda.

Should that include 37 people at an agency like the Commerce Department, probably not. The people at the very top should be political appointees. Midlevel folks should be civil servants. But, if they resist implementing the agenda of the political office holder, then they should be fired.

You can't be an elected official and have people in your agencies working against you. That's a recipe for disaster.

 

Actually, I had lost all of my money twice trading commodities. I had owned a seat and small brokerage firm on the floor of the NYFE (New York Futures Exchange), but I shut it down after going blowing out the second time.

I had done ok as a commodities broker and in commodities sales since, but I wasn't lighting the world on fire, and the company I was working for was in the process of going out of business.

I did have success doing the job on a volunteer basis, but it wasn't a very long history. If they had advertised the job, I'm sure they would have found applicants with college degrees and more experience.

I'm not sure if they would have found anyone better at it though.

 

The first reason is a terrible reason to make hiring decisions.

Would you apply it in all circumstances?

I remember when we had to lay people of at the airline after 9/11. Some people were single mothers. As much as I sympathized with them, I wouldn't think it's right to let that play into the decision of who to lay off and who to retain.

It wouldn't result in retaining the best people and it wouldn't be fair to people in different circumstances who also needed a job.