Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mikestew 1744 days ago
That is, maybe the problem is who we decide are "well qualified capitalists"

I don't think that's a problem, as I don't think the decision is "well-qualified" as in competent, but rather "won't end up on the dole if this investment falls through". Henry Kissinger isn't signing up for food stamps/EBT because his Theranos investment went belly-up. The problem is that many thought, "well, if Henry Kissinger is in...", without asking about Mr. Kissinger's qualifications to evaluate medical claims.
1 comments
HWR_14 1744 days ago
Oh, "qualified investor" qualifications. In that case, why does anyone think that they would be particularly skilled at hiring CEOs?
link
perl4ever 1744 days ago
Compared to who?
link
HWR_14 1744 days ago
I'm not sure why they would be more skilled than any random people off the street, or a coin flip, etc. There's no reason to think they produce a result better than whatever control group you can think of compared to any other subset of people.
link
perl4ever 1744 days ago
The modal random "qualified investor" is probably a dentist, not Kissinger.
link
HWR_14 1743 days ago
And your point is you think Dentists (or Kissinger) should be presumed to be good at choosing a CEO?
link
perl4ever 1742 days ago
I don't know why the person that started this subthread thought the CEO was chosen by the investors.

Holmes founded the company beforehand, then people gave her money. As far as I know.

So it seems a bit off to frame it as though someone else founded the company and hired her.

link