Page 2 of 2
Re: Andrew Yang for President
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2019 3:25 am
by Abscate
JLT wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:02 pm
Abscate wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:47 am
You don’t need a smart person to be President. Who in their right mind thinks one woman or man has some monopoly of ideas on the problems of guiding the nation?
Well, you need a person smart enough to know who the smart people are, which people are the best fit for their jobs. You know, FEMA managers who have actually managed disasters instead of raising racehorses, Education secretaries who have actually taught school or administered public school systems, Interior secretaries who really understand climate change and the fragility of the environment ... need I go on?
That's what we are really electing presidents for. The success or failure of their administrations rests on their ability to make the government work for the citizenry and their citizenry's descendants, not for just the rich people who bought them. That's true of any public servant, anywhere.
I have some experience in this. You don’t need to be smart to assemble a smart team, I’ve done it 19 times and all companies have succeeded. Its a skill set, not an intelligence test. In some ways, smarts are almost a liability to team building. To complete the analogy with CEOS, of the 5-6 functional areas in a company a good CEO might excel in 2, maybe 3. I’ve never seen 4,5, or 6.
The tests above are pretty simple, and yet failed by so many.
Re: Andrew Yang for President
Posted: Sat Jul 06, 2019 8:27 pm
by Amskeptic
Abscate wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2019 3:25 am
JLT wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:02 pm
Abscate wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:47 am
You don’t need a smart person to be President. Who in their right mind thinks one woman or man has some monopoly of ideas on the problems of guiding the nation?
Well, you need a person smart enough to know who the smart people are, which people are the best fit for their jobs. You know, FEMA managers who have actually managed disasters instead of raising racehorses, Education secretaries who have actually taught school or administered public school systems, Interior secretaries who really understand climate change and the fragility of the environment ... need I go on?
That's what we are really electing presidents for. The success or failure of their administrations rests on their ability to make the government work for the citizenry and their citizenry's descendants, not for just the rich people who bought them. That's true of any public servant, anywhere.
I have some experience in this. You don’t need to be smart to assemble a smart team, I’ve done it 19 times and all companies have succeeded. Its a skill set, not an intelligence test. In some ways, smarts are almost a liability to team building. To complete the analogy with CEOS, of the 5-6 functional areas in a company a good CEO might excel in 2, maybe 3. I’ve never seen 4,5, or 6.
The tests above are pretty simple, and yet failed by so many.
Skill sets are nice, but leadership is one of those intangibles that cannot be readily defined. A President can be a dry bythebook "commander" or an inspired spirit who brings out the best in people.
We unfortunately, can't have nice Presidents any more.
Colin