Dare I say that something is amiss when the President fires the CEO of a major American corporation, as President Obama did with the CEO of GM? Even though the U.S. Government is loaning that corporation money, and even though it is possible that Rick Waggoner was not the most wonderful CEO on the face of the planet, it still strikes me as untenable a situation in which corporate CEO's answer to the President. This is not good for our economy or our country.
Why? Because that is not how our economic system should work. We don't have a nationalized economy, like the Soviet Union was. We made a societal decision long long ago that that type of economic system is not what we wanted in this country. It seems that this is being tested now. Isn't it ironic that China is moving in the direction of having a free economy while we move in the opposite direction?
I will tell you another reason it is not a good idea to have the President firing CEOs. The President is an elected official, a political animal. The drivers for the President are political calculations. That is the nature of the beast. Always has been. Always will be. On the other hand, the drivers for corporate CEOs are (supposed to be) delivering value to shareholder-owners and creating profits from economic activity. These two sets of drivers do not necessarily align.
It strikes me as obvious why we want them separated. They need to perform different roles in our country.
Woldy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment