Should Leaders Earn Average Wages to Ensure Better Governance?

[Tosh]

Things are becoming more money driven. Money needs to be there for the world to go round, but that doesn't mean there has to be excessive amounts of it for one person.

I think that the prime minister needn't be paid a lot, just the average wage, and they shouldn't have personal interests in the things that they govern. This way, they are working as a servant to their people, and they understand the peoples' lives better. And this would also promote better candidates to take the positions and only those interested in serving the people best would agree to take them.

I wanted to say something along the lines of "the best leaders never achieves the position of prime minister in democratic government because they have to have the best campaign promoting themselves and this contradicts the virtue of humility which is part of a good leader." Someone said this way better than I did but I can't remember how, if anyone can remember it that would be nice. I may have accidentally introduced wrong concepts, so please correct if you have it, and maybe when I read it, I will quote you back in this starter and remove my statement.

There is a wider discussion on money-driven activity, but I focus on choosing the best leaders.

 

[mjsd]

money/material reward driven society? Isn't that the great American dream?
A lot of us have forgotten the fact that the gain of one man is always balanced by the loss of another. You can buy cheap and good quality products because there are millions of "close-to-slave" workers in some country we probably never heard of and will never have the will to find out. While there is nothing wrong in working hard, earning lots of money and climb up the ladder, it is clear however that there can only be one CEO, one Prime minister, etc, and in order to get there you will have to break the dreams of many others. The moral is that if everyone wants to exact their rights to take whatever it is legitimate for them to take (and has the powers to do so), we will have the type of society we see today. Well, actually, it has always been like this. Everyone is a bit greedy. On the leadership issue:

I think that the prime minister needn't be paid a lot, just the average wage, and they shouldn't have personal interests in the things that they govern. This way, they are working as a servant to their people, and they understand the peoples' lives better. And this would also promote better candidates to take the positions and only those interested in serving the people best would agree to take them.

nice thought, but it won't work precisely because of the reason described above. What is a good leader? should a good leader goes ahead with his/her ideas even though some disagree with him/her? What good if you have a good leader no one will support? even the good leader is not corrupted some ppl around the circle will and in order to keep them loyal and not topple the system, you will have to "buy them out". There is no perfect world ... unfortunately.

 

[Tosh]

My idea comes from one of the old Khalifah's, Umar Ibn Al Khattab. For example, as the leader of the nation, he was not allowed to work any other jobs. One day he was seen selling goods in the market place, and was told that he was not allowed. He replied that he was not being paid enough to support his family and children. They allowed him an extra sheep skin for his wages.

Leaders like this we no longer seem to get; there are so many injustices in the world committed by bad leaders who claim to follow the same religion as this very Khalifah.

Personally, I think a leader should be asked to lead, rather than vice versa.