Lemdro.id

-6 points

6 days ago

… how directly involved do you think any CEO is?

If the state is making policy and planning decisions for both the public and private sectors, how does the distinction even matter? It’s like if Biden was Jeff Bezos’s boss.

report

Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml

[ - ]

10 points

6 days ago

It’s just an extremely odd thing to say and paints any leader as a CEO. The coach is the CEO of the football team, the Starbucks manager is the CEO of the store, etc. Etc.

report

[ - ]

-7 points

6 days ago

Not an argument. You’re just complaining about how there’s multiple words for “some schmuck in charge.” Do you realize that’s incompatible with your prior insistence he is not in charge?

report

Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml

[ - ]

9 points

6 days ago

Xi is in the highest seat of the CPC, that doesn’t make him a “CEO.” Your comment is nonsense word salad.

report

[ - ]

-4 points

6 days ago

If you can distinctly disagree with it then it’s not word salad. You’re just pulling insults from a hat.

The comparison between shmucks-in-charge is crystal clear. No CEO plans and runs an entire company. They have layers of people under them. They are still in charge. They pick those planners, and tell them what to do, in broad terms.

Your argument against this is that the state only has half the economy… and even that is undercut by acknowledging they “heavily plan” the other half.

report

Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml

[ - ]

7 points

6 days ago

No, my argument is that framing Xi as a CEO is nonsense. I disagree with the framing as it isn’t accurate.

report

[ - ]

-5 points

6 days ago

That’s not an argument. That’s a conclusion. The argument is the “why” part. Why is not not accurate?

You tried arguing why, and missed. That’s what all the stuff about layers of planners is about. If those are the actual reasons you reached this conclusion, it should change.

report