..Is it really a good idea to let the President of the United States decide who should be CEO of a company?
I don't care about the politics of this, or what party the president belongs to. But if the shareholders, board members and creditors of General Motors were unhappy with the CEO, they had it in their power to remove him. But now the President and his staff have decided the CEO had to go, and so he is gone.
Isn't this a little bit chilling? I'm not defending General Motors, which has been a terribly-run company for years. I'm no auto industry expert, though I spent a few years in the business, working for both Lincoln-Mercury and Chrysler. GM has been making poor products for years, their union contracts have been out of touch with reality and they deserve to be where they are today, teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.
But having said all that, do we really want to hand a politician the power to decide who runs a company? There's a free-enterprise system at work in this country that has functioned pretty well for a long time (our current situation notwithstanding), and I wonder if this kind of government involvement isn't setting a horrible precedent.