Quote:
Originally Posted by Iaintliein
I'm always amused when people talk about experiences that could qualify someone to do such a unique job. Theoretically, the president is the chief law enforcement officer and CNC of the armed forces. But I don't remember any cops ever running, and damned few generals.
I also think it is a mistake to compare the office of POTUS to that of a CEO in business. The government should not be a business. I also don't think electing a POTUS with any agenda other than sticking to the letter of the Constitution is a good idea.
|
I guess I tend to differ a bit with that conclusion...albeit, as brief as your post is, I'm sure there are more thoughts behind it.
I think of a CEO (at least of a large multinational company) as being a manager of people. He actually does very little in terms of what we would normally call "work". He surrounds himslef with smart folks who have a good understanding of their particular role. While it is a personal opinion of mine...I prefer a CEO that rose through the operational side of the business (and then learned finance)...as opposed to a CEO who rose through the finance side of the business...and then tries to learn operations. It is easier to learn finance (on your own) than it is to learn operations (on your own). The working end of a shovel can only be understood by actually working it. I think the CEO who came up from operations has a better understanding of the ramifications of his (and his subordinates) decisions than the finance CEO...but I'll admit that is an opinion.
I do think we misuse the CEO title though. For instance, I think Trump is more of an entreprenuer than a CEO. And an entrepreneur is a different breed of cat than a CEO. An entrepreneur involves himself much more in the decision processes than a CEO. The entreperneur has less trust (or maybe confidence is the right word) in his subordinates than the CEO, and will tend to say "Get the f*ck out of the way, I'll do it myself"...rely on his own instincts...and just bull his way through to a successful outcome. That gets harder and harder to do as the organization gets larger and larger. And the Fed Gov is a pretty large organization.
That is a longwinded way of saying that I think a true CEO is probably
exactly the right man for the job. It is easier for a man (or woman) who understands operations and finance, to hire a subordinate to remind him that there are more things to think about than money...than it is for a man (or woman) who understands all the things other than operations or finance, to hire a subordinate to remind him of operations and finance.
. We all know that's why I voted for Obama. LOL.
