Whom can we employ as the President?
The first tour of the President election has passed, leaving us again at the ballot-box. By voting, each of us determines not only the lot of the state, but one. s personal lot as well. The decision is difficult. It seems absurd to vote for a communist since this set of myths lost its popularity, and the life under the communists. power was rather bleak. Yet, for eight years our new leaders have no leftish outlook, but the life has become much worse.
The main indicators, such as gross industrial output, the duration of life and rating of the country according to the UNO assessment, are falling fast and have reached the critical value. Cold and hunger have become common for millions. So which can be the civilized exit?
I think that the way out does exist. The essence of the problem is that in electing a President there is a great probability of error, of the possible situation when the new President will be unable to improve the situation. After all this is a common difficulty, and the standard solution is well known and tested in life.
If the employer has doubts that a worker to be employed will work badly, then the mechanism of sacking must be made simpler. New employee is taken for a probation period, determined in the contract. Presidential election can be made similar: the employer (the Ukrainian people in our case) takes the President. If there are doubts about his efficiency, the way out is to shorten the term of employment, thus ensuring that the error can be corrected, i.e. the President can be sacked in a simpler way.
So I suggest (taking account of extraordinary circumstances) to elect the President for two years. It is clear that during this time a good President can substantially improve the situation. Everyone must understand that four years is a long term, and, having an inefficient President, the country may just collapse. Yet, to fire the legally elected President before the legal term is now practically impossible.
So it is necessary to elect the President for two years. Certainly, this means additional expenditures, but four years with an inefficient President will be more expensive.
It goes without saying that to realize this plan one must introduce changes into the Constitution. But it is possible.