This is of course false. The world is not starving for competent people. It's starving for high-status resumes. If those resumes are attached to people who are competent or hard workers, that's a bonus.
The high-status resumes without that affiliation will be no less effective; their associated human will no doubt wash out of a series of roles when it becomes clear that they're neither "smart" or "gets things done", but in most of the industry it takes so long for that process to run to completion that resume status accrues to those failed roles, and those people have an easier time finding their next role, failing upwards until one assumes they reach management somewhere and perpetuate the cycle.
Erin, Patrick, and I tried to do a company to exploit this phenomenon and it was not a success; even the smartest, most engaged teams we worked with were a brick fucking wall when it came to resume status filters. So much so that I was happy just to walk away from it and work with some friends to boot up another company that hires in a more effective way and exploit the phenomenon directly, rather than trying to end it.
I guess I'm saying I agree strongly with Dan Luu when he quotes me as saying that smaller companies that hire like this are playing to lose.
I conclude with the immortal words of Herman Blume: "Take dead aim on the rich boys. Get them in the crosshairs and take them down. Just remember, they can buy anything but they can't buy backbone. Don't let them forget it."