CEO or President... think carefully

Some argue that what America needs is a successful business CEO inhabiting the White House. If a CEO can make a business highly profitable and extremely efficient, then those leadership skills can do the same for America. Sounds great…. if you don't actually think about it.

The fact that a CEO and the POTUS have 2 very different purposes is simply overlooked.

The singular goal of a successful businessman is the maximization of private profit.

In direct contrast, the Presidency offers watch over the American economy as a whole, as well as every issue affecting the general welfare of the nation.

Most things which maximize profits do so through a financial and human cost from someone else.

I'm not talking about simply making a better product or just general efficiency. These are fundamental criteria for any business just to compete in the marketplace.

The difference comes when the never-ending push to increase profits is what drives the company. When increasing sales don't show enough profit increase at each quarter to satisfy shareholders, that prime directive must be met in other ways.  Cheaper parts, lower wages, reduced benefits, dividing the work of three employees between only two and eliminating the third job, shipping US jobs overseas to take advantage of labor so cheap it makes our $7.25 minimum wage look like a king's ransom, taking safety risks, buying (lobbying for) exemptions or eliminations of pollution standards, etc., etc., etc…..

In short, I'm talking about all the things that must be done in order to squeeze out even higher profits and make a business as economically efficient as possible. Every one of these comes at a very real human cost.

These human costs are not the concern of a CEO.

They are however a required concern for any POTUS. If you don't believe that, just ask any President if the unemployment rate doesn't matter.

For every shortcut taken, wage reduced, or job eliminated, business profits typically rise. Yet every person now un- or underemployed as a result, adds to the burden of America's general welfare.

Even in the best of times, putting a CEO in the White House is a bad idea.

Now look at today's economic realities.

Record high profits, yet record low taxes.

High unemployment, yet critical but crumbling infrastructure left untouched.

Obscenely record high CEO pay, yet stalled and falling middle class incomes.

These are today's economic realities. Restoring sustainable balance is something that must be considered, influenced and presided over by the highest elected American official.

The Presidency is a job like no other. It requires a unique skill set that no person's field of expertise or accomplishments could ever evidence them as being properly qualified for the job.

Yet no position could present a more distinct conflict of interest than electing a "successful CEO" to the Presidency. Especially amidst these conditions.

Think it sounds like a great idea to argue that America needs a profitable businessman or successful CEO as President? I propose you think again.

If you enjoy my blog, you can also follow my output on my Facebook page - SnarkySigns. Don't dig the Facebook thing? You can also see all my SnarkySigns at www.SnarkySigns.com