I voted for him once. I think he was a very good man, but he was confused and thought personal morality applied to governments. It doesn’t. Presidents, prime ministers, kings, and CEO’s of all sorts need to be at turns nasty, dishonest, brutal, almost criminal for the good of the institution they lead.
I wish it were otherwise. But I respect him as the man he was. God bless him and his wife and daughter.
Grant, the guy at Wharton has done a lot of research on CEOs. The most successful ones are usually not ruthless, dishonest, near criminals. They are mostly decent people who treat their staff well. They arent pushovers and they have to make hard decisions. The really good ones have vision. There are real assholes in the group and they get a lot of coverage but they are not representative.
On Carter, like most presidents he had his positives and negatives. He should be remembered for the consequential deregulation he put in place for which Reagan generally gets credit. It was the kind of stuff that really improved the economy. Reagan deregulated the finance sector, and we got the S&L crisis.
Well sorry, but I remember him by the double nickel speed limit, although now that I’m older I kind of miss it.
Also remember a feature in the local newspaper, a researcher cut a full facial photo in half and then using a mirror created a new full facial image using two mirrored left half images. His “research “ results claimed that if the result were asymmetric the subject would not have a very long future. Carter was put to the test and forecasted an early death.
This was 1976.?
Drew- I was not comparing the two as I am not aware of similar research on government leaders. I suspect it would be more mixed if it were done, but there is a fair bit of research on CEOs and it contradicts the claims that they are all dishonest, psychopaths.
I voted for him once. I think he was a very good man, but he was confused and thought personal morality applied to governments. It doesn’t. Presidents, prime ministers, kings, and CEO’s of all sorts need to be at turns nasty, dishonest, brutal, almost criminal for the good of the institution they lead.
I wish it were otherwise. But I respect him as the man he was. God bless him and his wife and daughter.
Grant, the guy at Wharton has done a lot of research on CEOs. The most successful ones are usually not ruthless, dishonest, near criminals. They are mostly decent people who treat their staff well. They arent pushovers and they have to make hard decisions. The really good ones have vision. There are real assholes in the group and they get a lot of coverage but they are not representative.
On Carter, like most presidents he had his positives and negatives. He should be remembered for the consequential deregulation he put in place for which Reagan generally gets credit. It was the kind of stuff that really improved the economy. Reagan deregulated the finance sector, and we got the S&L crisis.
Steve
Well sorry, but I remember him by the double nickel speed limit, although now that I’m older I kind of miss it.
Also remember a feature in the local newspaper, a researcher cut a full facial photo in half and then using a mirror created a new full facial image using two mirrored left half images. His “research “ results claimed that if the result were asymmetric the subject would not have a very long future. Carter was put to the test and forecasted an early death.
This was 1976.?
I’m not a good enough historian to say “the most,” but he certainly was a good man, and did good things.
Steve. CEOs of corporations are not heads of governments, with the attendant issues they face. To conflate the two is light.
Drew- I was not comparing the two as I am not aware of similar research on government leaders. I suspect it would be more mixed if it were done, but there is a fair bit of research on CEOs and it contradicts the claims that they are all dishonest, psychopaths.
Steve