What corporate CEO or President would make the best President of the United States? And why?

Corporate leaders often make very bad politicians. Some of the reasons: 1) They are used to saying "do X", and people jump to it. That doesn't happen even for the super-popular Barack Obama in a time of global crisis.

The wheeling and dealing, wooing and persuading, cajoling and threatening is on a whole different level than anything business leaders have to deal with. 2) As Paul Krugman once wrote in the Harvard Business Review: A country is not a company. hbr.harvardbusiness.org/1996/01/a-countr... "Yet many people (not least successful business executives themselves) believe that someone who has made a personal fortune will know how to make an entire nation more prosperous.In fact, his or her advice is often disastrously misguided....My point is that the style of thinking necessary for economic analysis is very different from that which leads to success in business.

" 3) There is nothing that a normal business leader has ever done that would remotely prepare them for advancing Middle East peace, handling the relationship with China, or being able to build a national, let alone, a global consensus about climate change or trade. So the only kind of corporate leader who would have a snowball in hell's chance of being a good President would have at least two qualities a) non-business experience that would be relevant to poltiics and diplomacy, and b) enough humility to know their limitations, and listen to people who know a lot more about the issues than they do. Before I suggest anyone that might fit, I would remind you that Donald Rumsfeld was very successful in business.

And you could hardlly ask for a better example of why CEOs make lousy politicians. If I had to choose a business leader to be President of United States, and I'd only do it reluctantly and with dread, I would pick Bill Gates. He might be a disaster also, but he has a few things going for him.

He's already transitioned from being a startup guy to a mega-corporate guy to being a global philanthropist. In his philanthropy he is very much a wonk.It's said he knows more about the biochemistry of malaria than the average doctor. No doubt he'd apply himself in the same way to policy issues.

He is (as the wonkishness suggests) someone who is a big fan of studying all the data, and knowing the numbers inside out.In his business life, he seems to have known to team up with people who are good at what he is not so good at. He woud absolutely need to do that if he were in the White House. On the downside, it has been said that when people become very rich, they often forget how to listen.

They get too used to having it their way, everyone telling them they're great, and get too full of themselves. And I certainly have heard this said about Bill Gates. So I don't think he'd probably be a great President, but hopefully not a complete disaster either.

Warren Buffett, he would know how to improve the economy, as he's the best investor out there and one of the richest people in the world.

Elon Musk who founded PayPal and now is on the verge of being the founder of the first private company (Space X) to regularly lift satellites into orbit and will probably even provide service to the International Space Station. This is a can-do guy.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.