I like winning. There's also a certain joy in it. I feel fulfilled by it.

We're not about liquidating companies, but if you do that, why is that terrible? We're not blowing up the factories. The person who buys it should be able to make the asset more productive.

Now the guy that got to the top, the CEO, would obviously be stupid to have a number two guy who was a lot smarter than he is. So by definition, since he's a survivor and he got to the top and he isn't that brilliant, his number two guy is going to always be a little worse than he is. So, as time goes on, it's anti-Darwinism, the survival of the un- fittest.

Don't confuse luck with skill when judging others, and especially when judging yourself.

Im a cynic about corporate democracy and boards.

And I'm convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you can work with the unions because the unions want to survive. If they are confronted simply with the question: "Do you want this company to survive or do you want it to be broken up?" they will listen. It's their livelihood.

CEOs are paid for doing a terrible job. If the system wasn't so messed up, guys like me wouldn't make this kind of money.