In the past, it was common for the people running for president to point to their military service. This did make quite a bit of sense. After all, the president is commander in chief and being a military leader can be good preparation for making tough decisions. These days people still mention their military service (if they have any) but there is an ever increasing emphasis on business backgrounds. Romney, for example, has been pushing his business expertise.
One obvious question is whether or not success in business means that a person would make a better president.
On the one hand, there are some reasons to think that this could be the case. First, being a successful business leader requires making good decisions (or being lucky). Good decision making is obviously important in a president. Second, business leadership obviously requires leadership skills and a president needs these. Third, much of politics revolves around money and finances. Someone who is a successful business leader would have such skills.
On the other hand, there are reasons to think that this would not be the case. First, business decisions are often quite different from the sort of decisions that a president needs to make. As such, the skills might not translate. Second, business leadership is often quite different from presidential leadership. Businesses are typically not democracies and business leaders are usually accustomed to simply telling people what to do (backed up with the threat of firing). The president has to deal with a rather different sort of leadership situation and hence a good business leader would not automatically be a good president. Third, much of politics involves factors other than money and finance and a business person might not have skills in these areas. Fourth, the goals of business and the goals of the state are rather different. The objective in a business is to make money and act in ways that are conducive to that end. While this can work in business, applying this model to government can be ineffective or even highly problematic. Companies engage in practices such as pump and dump, corporate raiding, firing employees, outsourcing, bundling derivatives, and so on to enhance the bottom line. However, having the state engage in such practices would be rather harmful. As such, a business person who has been trained to make money might not be the best choice to be the president. After all, the president’s job is not to make money for the state, but to lead America.
But, this seems to be rather a fit matter for discussion. So, does success in business make a person more qualified to be a competent president?
“So, does success in business make a person more qualified to be a competent president?”
Yes, especially experience in starting and running a small business.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/business/15jobs.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
While big companies are buoyed by record profits, many small businesses, which employ half of the country’s private sector workers, are still struggling to break even. And if the nation’s small companies plan to further delay hiring — or, worse, return to laying off workers, as they now hint they might — there is little hope that the nation’s 14 million idle workers will find gainful employment soon.
“Never in the 37-year history of our company have we seen anything at all like this,” said Frank W. Goodnight, president of Diversified Graphics, a publishing company in Salisbury, N.C. He says there is “no chance” he will hire more workers in the months ahead.
“We’re being squeezed on all sides,” he says.
“’So, does success in business make a person more qualified to be a competent president?’
Yes, especially experience in starting and running a small business.”
Well. . .
http://blogs.forbes.com/frederickallen/2011/03/01/should-government-be-run-like-a-business/
And here’s a mixed bag of answers:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/strauss/2010-02-15-presidents-and-small-business_N.htm
The more I think about this question, I come back to the idea of a philosopher king. I really think that philosophers are best suited for the job — those with higher social intelligence will probably be liked better than others.
Does the track record of past presidents/leaders justify that business leaders will make better presidents or even win elections? Since the 30s, this is my memory of presidents: Roosvelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Jhonson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama. Has any of these presidents come from a business background? If theu did not how can we justify the claim.
W. Bush had a business background, of sorts.
Well, if that is the only president who had a business background; it appears to me that it did not do a lot of good to the country. At least economically that is clearly sopported by the consequences of his policies.
Therefore, there is no evidence that supports that a person with business experience would be a good president, just talk to promote what some people would like. If I like a cat for president, I would argue that cats have the rigth experience for presidents.
jjm, let’s take your statement:
“Therefore, there is no evidence that supports that a person with business experience would be a good president, just talk to promote what some people would like. If I like a cat for president, I would argue that cats have the rigth experience for presidents”
and replace “person with business experience” with “woman”
so that it reads:
“Therefore, there is no evidence that supports that a woman would be a good president, just talk to promote what some people would like. If I like a cat for president, I would argue that cats have the rigth experience for presidents”
Are you still happy with this statement? If not, then why not?
I am still happy with the statement because I did not argue that they can not be presidents. At no point my argument was that a person coming from business was unqualified for the presidency. The same I would certainly say about a woman. My point is that if there is no precedent of business people as presidents and/or good presidents; then there is no evidence to support the idea that business experience is preferable for candidates for presidents.
I believe that what makes a good president is very hard to pinpoint with accuracy as what makes a good leader. There thousands of studies on leadership, and each of them claiming to found the rigth stuff for leadership. In my opinion, we just do not know what makes a person surge and become a great leader. the essence of my point was to leave propaganda (unsustained claims favoring or attacking a person) out.
T.J.Babson, thank you for your comment.
W. Bush was not a great success in business, which some would argue foretold his presidency.
“Has any of these presidents come from a business background?”
Check the link I provided above for an answer to that.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/strauss/2010-02-15-presidents-and-small-business_N.htm
The other link is brief but provides some interesting opinion. . .
The link mainly seems to show that the presidents had other jobs and/or some involvement with business before being president. However, this view of having a business background would seem to apply to almost everyone. For example, I own stock (a tiny bit), I had my own painting and lawn mowing “businesses” as a kid, and I currently operate my own writing business. However, I would not cast myself as having a business background.
frk;
Thank you for the link. I read it and it is very interesting. Now, this is the way how I would tackle this. Let’s assume, following T.J. Babson ‘s comment that is not business but gender. No woman has been president of the USA, can I conclude that a good president has to be a man? Absolutely not, because I need to examine the causes of this observation. A quick research will clearly point out that women were allowed to vote with the pass of the 19th amendment in 1919. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that they were banned from political activity until then and it was not possible for this reason not to become presidents. So, I can conclude that there is no evidence supporting the role of gender in being a good president.
Let’s look at the evidence supporting the business experience. Let’s take A.Lincoln because he is recognized as a great president and is cited to have some business experience. So the question would be, was business experience key in his success as president and was it revealed before being elected? Well, after reading “Team of Rivals” (this is my only source, I am not historian) it appears that during an election for senate he earned the respect of key people in his party. 3 candidates could take the seat, Lincoln and an oponent held the majority of votes and a third party more akin with Lincoln’s party the minority. So reason would indicate that this person should support Lincoln’s nomination. But he did not, he wanted to be senator himself and risked the seat. But Lincoln sacrifized his candidacy to support this third party because he believed it was the better for the country. I believed this quality of Lincoln made him a great president, the ability to sacrifice his ambition for the good of the country, his ability to see and accept and value other people’s point of view in an inclusive manner. He embrace that on the Gettysburgh address.
Then, the question still remains, is there any evidence that bussiness experience is a must/highly preferable for a president?
You’ve done what any good reader should do when provided with information. You’ve read it with skepticism. You’ve also reached the kind of conclusion any clear thinker would apply to a question like “So, does success in business make a person more qualified to be a competent president?” A qualified “yes” and “no”. There are successful business leaders and there are successful business leaders. There’s Buffet, there’s Gates. . .and then there’s Trump. There are successful business leaders who just haven’t failed yet. Heads of major corporations and financial institutions who are at the tops of their professions yet soon will be failures. Ken Lay? Kenneth Lewis?
I’ve got a good question: “Does the name Kenneth make a person more qualified to be a competent president?