[Sone7]

"Presumably America’s companies are better run when the most talented executives put in a 50-year career than if they put in only 20 or 30."

Are we talking about the executives most talented at increasing shareholder profits, or executives most talented at improving people's lives? To put it another way, there's a lot of good reasons we put term limits on politicians, why are business executives different?

[omonra]

I am not sure if you are kidding, but the serious answer is that politicians who can stay in power without limits (witness Putin now) tend to rearrange the political process of their country with sole purpose of never leaving their post. Then they lose all accountability and do as they please without worry of being voted out.

Companies, on the other hand, exist in the ecosystem of the market (so a single CEO can not rearrange the playing field). If the company is doing poorly, its shares will drop and forces will gather to remove the CEO (note how Balmer or recent CSFB CEO were removed).

[JetSpiegel]

Of course it can: monopolies, collusion, corruption at the highest level, lobbying.

[zo1]

2 / 4 of those items you mention are actually problems caused by having a corruptible state, not by the market.

[walterbell]

Some founders have special classes of voting shares, e.g. Google and Facebook.