> he had made a "mistake" in believing that banks in operating in their self-interest would be sufficient to protect their shareholders and the equity in their institutions. Greenspan said that he had found "a flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works."
It's not a stretch to apply it to all C-levels at all public companies: they will absolutely manipulate the company to benefit themselves at the expense of the shareholder.
This is my sister's observation after 20 years in manufacturing. All her experiences at the executive level were of folks manipulating the company to get their bonuses regardless of the damage they did. They'd simply move on when a company failed.
She got sick of it all after 20 years, and now runs a chocolate shop in semi-retirement.
He built his entire career, as a leader of USA financial policy, as a hardcore Randian Objectivist (he was a close friend of Ayn Rand herself, probably the most powerful Randian in the world), and then on the way out said "oops, I was wrong"?
"You found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working?" Greenspan agreed: "That's precisely the reason I was shocked because I'd been going for 40 years or so with considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well."
> It's not a stretch to apply it to all C-levels at all public companies: they will absolutely manipulate the company to benefit themselves at the expense of the shareholder.
No, that actually is a stretch, essentially by definition.
How are c-execs of public corps different from c-execs of other corps? They all get a bonus metric to meet and have the opportunity to game the hell out of it.
