Sure, if they become entirely transparent with all money entries and spending, and have actual enforced punishment for bribery (lobbying yes) and other relevant crimes, are banned from getting cushy jobs afterwards (see: bribery), and generally speaking actually try to make the country better and not just theirs and their buddy’s wallets fatter.
But we’ll probably see sentient AI before we see that happening…
The thing is, he’s kinda right. If you grow up rich there is a high chance you’re exposed to how to work in politics. If your parent became rich due to their own work, they have to be a CEO or someone very high on the ladder. These positions are thought-work and mostly politics in it self. And this shapes what you teach your children. Politics needs a certain base stance to survive in the long term and having to learn this stance might take a while. Although I wouldn’t assume that is a lack of talent but a different focus in the former live of the candidate.
I’m confused at what you’re trying to say.
Are you saying that one requires more rich people for a political class to survive? And only people living in wealth can become politicians?
I wanted to say it is very hard to compete with people who’ve been learning a fundamental part of a job their whole upbringing when you had other struggles to face (idk, low-income jobs, rent, etc)
From a skill set perspective, you’d like to have colleagues with the same fundamentals. Is it fair? No. Should it be that way? Also now IMHO. But to get the one thing, you’d have to change other aspects of the whole system. And history has shown that ‘the ruling class’ gas no interest in that - why make more competitors ?