3 ms·
I don’t know why people keep making this comparison. Billionaire founders become billionaire founders because they build companies and manage people. No one app
by ceilingcorner 5y ago
I don’t know why people keep making this comparison. Billionaire founders become billionaire founders because they build companies and manage people. No one appoints them to the office of CEO of a completely unrelated company at age 25.
- freudian-dev 5y agoI don’t know why you have a problem with one 20-something managing a ton of people because the market rewarded his idea while you have a problem with a different 30-something managing a ton of people. To argue that young founders that run big companies are capable while questioning if young bureaucrats are is purely ageist.
- ceilingcorner 5y agoThis line of reasoning makes no sense. A founder CEO is there because it’s his/her company. They built it up, they grew the company and grew with it. That’s how a business works. This is not the same thing as a person with little or no managerial experience being appointed to one of the the highest offices available. Your comparison would make sense if young businesspeople with little experience were made CEOs at blue chip companies. This obviously doesn’t happen very often.
- akiselev 5y agoThe main function of a federal agency head is navigating the political landscape; they're the bureaucratic janitors tasked with maintaining the organization so its subject matter experts can make better decisions. She has demonstrated that she has political capital by getting the appointment and confirmation, just like billionaire founds have demonstrated they have financial capital.
- ceilingcorner 5y agoThis is probably the most viable take. It doesn’t exactly make our government leaders look too bright, though... Thanks for the comment.