Jobs & Obama

[nathanm]

At least they started with the correct path, unlike another example.

Feature phone was the wrong way, hence their reversing course.

[Red Arrow]

Feature phone was the wrong way, hence their reversing course.

At least it was a phone.  They didn't start with a geiger counter connected to the AT&T land line.

[Conan71]

Wow, what delicious irony. You do realize you also just described PPACA? And that you reinforced my point precisely? Apple looked at what they wanted to do, decided it was impossible and went for the next best thing.

Up is down, I guess.

We weren't discussing PPACA, but since you managed to weave it into the conversation:

I suppose you've missed it when I've said I hope the ACA does improve the level of healthcare for all Americans but I'm doubtful it will really change outcome and here's why:

All this does is increase access to healthcare via insurance or expanded eligibility for Medicaid.  Insurance is not healthcare, it's simply a way to pay for it.  Getting people to take a more proactive approach to their health in the first place by eating healthier, exercising, not using tobacco, and using alcohol in moderation is what will improve "outcomes", longevity, and reduce mortality rates.

I'm hoping that increased access to healthcare providers will result in more people getting annual check ups and following up with healthy lifestyle changes when they are recommended.

Look at our obesity rates in this country as well as our general indifference to personal health vs. other countries, and I'm simply not very optimistic this changes anything.  I hope I'm wrong.  I hope PPACA is a smashing success so long as it doesn't bankrupt the country.

[AquaMan]

Why is what Jobs said about difficulty in communicating with Obama on his terms even legitimate? I still see this errant attitude that success in one field or endeavor indicates potential success, knowledge and insight in a completely different field. Never met a pilot who didn't think he was the best driver on the road because of his skills in flying. Two different areas, two different skill sets. At the very least it shows lack of respect for others positions.

This is like a disease that Americans are misdiagnosing. We think because Romney was a success in accumulating capital in the private market and utilizing it to amass wealth is somehow the right credentials for operating a publicly funded governmental system. Jobs was impatient, demanding, creative and working within a small sphere of the business world. You can be that way in the private world and do well. Try to run government like that and you lose big. Congress is not like a board of directors.

I'm sure it was culture shock for both men to realize that they couldn't do each others jobs. But here, in Tulsey, in the ground central of red culture, its an indictment for only one of them.

[Conan71]

Why is what Jobs said about difficulty in communicating with Obama on his terms even legitimate? I still see this errant attitude that success in one field or endeavor indicates potential success, knowledge and insight in a completely different field. Never met a pilot who didn't think he was the best driver on the road because of his skills in flying. Two different areas, two different skill sets. At the very least it shows lack of respect for others positions.

This is like a disease that Americans are misdiagnosing. We think because Romney was a success in accumulating capital in the private market and utilizing it to amass wealth is somehow the right credentials for operating a publicly funded governmental system. Jobs was impatient, demanding, creative and working within a small sphere of the business world. You can be that way in the private world and do well. Try to run government like that and you lose big. Congress is not like a board of directors.

I'm sure it was culture shock for both men to realize that they couldn't do each others jobs. But here, in Tulsey, in the ground central of red culture, its an indictment for only one of them.

And Jobs would have turned to you and said:

"And you don't have a clue either!" 

But taking your point to heart, why would you think someone like President Obama, who has never worked in the corporate world would have the slightest clue what small business, large corporations, and their role economy needs to prosper?

[Townsend]

But taking your point to heart, why would you think someone like President Obama, who has never worked in the corporate world would have the slightest clue what small business, large corporations, and their role economy needs to prosper?

I've worked in the corporate world.  So that means I know more about running the country than someone who hasn't?

[AquaMan]

And Jobs would have turned to you and said:

"And you don't have a clue either!" 

But taking your point to heart, why would you think someone like President Obama, who has never worked in the corporate world would have the slightest clue what small business, large corporations, and their role economy needs to prosper?

I would have knocked Jobs on his donkey.

I will take your point to heart. One job, the corporate world, is a subset of the larger world. As Mullin Plumbing has proved, most anyone can take a business and overcome its previous owners failures with dedication, a little good financial management and hard work. Yet, you wouldn't expect Mullin to do any better in Europe than Romney has done. And if Mullin screws up a plumbing job its not a tragedy. So many good examples of successful businessmen who simply cannot fathom life outside their subset but never let it stop them from trying to educate others that their way is the only successful way.

The other job, is all encompassing in its effect on everyone on the planet. It requires knowledge of anthropology, psychology, organizational dynamics, government systems, law, history, communications, technology, religion and on, and on. Because, if the president screws up it could mean multiple tragedies.

Bush was a great businessman so we're told. He put us into two wars and a financial meltdown. Carter was a poor president so we're told yet he was a successful peanut farmer.

[TulsaRufnex]

Yeah, too bad Obama didn't get an MBA.... like Dubya.

Let's see....

Herbert Hoover was a businessman (mining & investments worth $4 mil, once quoted as saying "If a man has not made a million dollars by the time he is forty, he is not worth much"), Franklin Roosevelt was not...
Harry Truman was a businessman (albeit a poor one), Ike Eisenhower was not...
Jimmy Carter was a businessman (wealthy peanut farmer) , Ronald Reagan was not...
George H.W. Bush was a businessman (founded Zapata Petroleum, which ultimately became Pennzoil), Bill Clinton was not....

Sorry Mitt Romney, Good Businessmen Rarely Make Good Presidents
Businessmen like Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover, and the Bushes went on to be some of the worst presidents
By Peter Allan
February 17, 2012
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/02/17/sorry-mitt-romney-good-businessmen-rarely-make-good-presidents

We have had 20 presidents in the modern era (i.e., since 1900). Five of those had significant business careers before entering politics. Unfortunately for Romney, the results are not good for the businessmen.

None of the great or near-great presidents—Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, or Woodrow Wilson—was a businessman. Truman was a failed businessman (a haberdasher) before entering politics, but that hardly constitutes a ringing endorsement of Romney's claim for private sector ascendency.

For that matter, none of the better-than-average presidents was a businessman either. In this category think of Presidents John F. Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton.

Probably the most successful president with real business experience (and success) was George H.W. Bush. Before going into politics he founded Zapata Petroleum, which ultimately became Pennzoil. Bush 41 ended up a one-term president unable to kick-start an economy in a recession and seemingly out of touch with the problems of the common man. Sound familiar?

It gets worse from here. Jimmy Carter, another one-term president beset with economic woes, was a success in agribusiness (peanut farming) before getting into politics. He generally falls into the lower half of the historians' rankings.

And then we get the big three—the men widely considered by historians to be the worst presidents of the modern era: Warren G. Harding, Herbert Hoover, and George W. Bush. One left the country on the verge of a depression, one left the country in a depression, and one presided over such corruption and ineptitude that despite the failings of the other two he still manages to get the lowest ranking of them all. And yet all three made millions of dollars in the private sector before entering politics. All three were successful businessmen (a newspaper publisher, a mining tycoon, and the owner of a professional baseball team). Bush 43 even went to Harvard business school, like Romney, and like Romney promised to bring business principles to the Oval Office.

With this kind of track record, maybe voters should apply some market principles to the core Romney Rationale and choose a different brand of dog food.

[Gaspar]

Yeah, too bad Obama didn't get an MBA.... like Dubya.

Let's see....

Herbert Hoover was a businessman (mining & investments worth $4 mil, once quoted as saying "If a man has not made a million dollars by the time he is forty, he is not worth much"), Franklin Roosevelt was not...
Harry Truman was a businessman (albeit a poor one), Ike Eisenhower was not...
Jimmy Carter was a businessman (wealthy peanut farmer) , Ronald Reagan was not...
George H.W. Bush was a businessman (founded Zapata Petroleum, which ultimately became Pennzoil), Bill Clinton was not....

Sorry Mitt Romney, Good Businessmen Rarely Make Good Presidents
Businessmen like Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover, and the Bushes went on to be some of the worst presidents
By Peter Allan
February 17, 2012
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/02/17/sorry-mitt-romney-good-businessmen-rarely-make-good-presidents

Based on that logical argument, I have an idea for the next Progressive candidate.

[nathanm]

All this does is increase access to healthcare via insurance or expanded eligibility for Medicaid.  Insurance is not healthcare, it's simply a way to pay for it.  Getting people to take a more proactive approach to their health in the first place by eating healthier, exercising, not using tobacco, and using alcohol in moderation is what will improve "outcomes", longevity, and reduce mortality rates.

I'm hoping that increased access to healthcare providers will result in more people getting annual check ups and following up with healthy lifestyle changes when they are recommended.

The data clearly shows that people with coverage of some sort (medicaid, insurance, doesn't really matter) are less likely to have major health problems, presumably because the major things are caught early before they become hard to treat and involve expensive hospital stays. Granted, it's even better if people eat healthily and exercise and don't smoke and on and on, but it's not really required to see a benefit from having better access to health care.

Conan, Romney's experience tells him nothing about what businesses actually need to thrive in the long term. He knows how to fatten them up for slaughter. He does not really know how to be in it for the long haul. Bain is/was one of the langoliers of the economy.

[Conan71]

Hahahahaha!

Wow!  Steve Jobs, one of the most innovative American businessmen in the last 35 years, explains to the president what business needs to expand in the United States, and it's summarily dismissed in one of the biggest mental gymnastics sessions I've seen on here.

Here, have fun with it:

[Gaspar]

Hahahahaha!

Wow!  Steve Jobs, one of the most innovative American businessmen in the last 35 years, explains to the president what business needs to expand in the United States, and it's summarily dismissed in one of the biggest mental gymnastics sessions I've seen on here.

Here, have fun with it:

Would make no difference if it was God himself.  No one is holier than the anointed one.

[nathanm]

and it's summarily dismissed in one of the biggest mental gymnastics sessions I've seen on here.

It doesn't take mental gymnastics to realize that the manufacturing jobs Apple pays for are not the sort we want here in this country. Not many folks here are terribly interested in taking work for $10 a day, working 12 hour days with no weekends, living in dormitories, and being woken up at 2AM because Apple decided they needed to make a change to their latest gadget and production has to be restarted right freakin' now.

So yeah, I think I'll ignore anything Jobs had to say about manufacturing and do it with a clear conscience. Now, if you'd like to relate his advice on design or even computer engineering, I'd love to hear it.

[Townsend]

So yeah, I think I'll ignore anything Jobs had to say about manufacturing and do it with a clear conscience. Now, if you'd like to relate his advice on design or even computer engineering, I'd love to hear it.

There you go.

[Conan71]

It doesn't take mental gymnastics to realize that the manufacturing jobs Apple pays for are not the sort we want here in this country.

I only ask out of morbid curiosity. 

1)  What sort of manufacturing jobs do we want in the United States?