Except a good CEO can absolutely drive a company to more revenue and better services, while a bad CEO can bankrupt a company. The CEO guides a company, otherwise Apple would never have built the iPhone or iPad. If Stephen wasn't an important cog in blackstone than what made his firm worth billions and what made the others fail? If I remember correctly blackstone was build up completely by Stephen, down to the first hires and customers. After a lifetime of him building the company you want to just toss him out because you don't think he's contributing enough?

But imagine if what the author says is true, and someone had a new economic system that was even more effective at allocating wealth than a free market/capitalist society. Why would we try it in the richest nation on earth first? To be in the global 1% you need to make 34k a year, something that's easy to do here. Things we regard almost as human rights are luxuries most of the world will never experience. If this person has an answer they shouldn't' start in the US they should be going to some poorer country and trying to implement it there, if it works then we can bring it over here. The idea that we should throw out such a successful economy because someone wants to try what they perceive as a better system (with no data to show for it) seems borderline dangerous