Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is one of the main reasons I am so heavily in favor of UBI, even though I am quite the anarchist if we are talking about idealism and not pragmatism. There IS money being made out there by large firms and small firms alike, but it is absolutely NOT based on merit or skill at all. Whether a business is a failure or a success is 99% based on the relationships and contracts it forms. Typically, unskilled managers a…
> Whether a business is a failure or a success is 99% based on the relationships and contracts it forms. Typically, unskilled managers and executives will forge the deal FIRST, and then go get the expertise and skilled laborers after. Maybe - forming the relationships and contracts and forging the deal - is a valuable skill too, and since I've been on a lot of interview panels - getting the skilled laborers and exper…
For example, "Rich people deserve to be rich because they showed the ability to accumulate wealth." - Well, that was easy...
Or another one "good enough" products are good enough because they are bought. Investing any more, e.g. into making a software have less bugs, or an electronic device, or anything, last longer, are useless, or the market would already have provided that outcome. What a nice and easy circular argument. Imagine Gillette produced razors that last ten years, including blades. Very bad for them! Would it be bad for the mankind overall? If you believe in "the market" then yes, it would be bad for mankind. You can take any other product and company, incl. all the "lemon market" stuff. If the market prevents you from voluntarily doing better (because you will be outcompeted) it must be what is good for everyone or the market would not have produced that outcome, Q.E.D.
I think that while the skill is obviously extremely valuable, also to society, what you can get with it is too much. It always leads to optimal outcomes if you already believe it does (because "market", magic word).
Just like in biochemistry a reaction can be enzyme-limited or substrate-limited, i.e. the path is too hard or there is not enough supply, I think the rewards for being well-connected are oversized because we don't have an issue with too few people desiring to be well-connected, but that the path is hard. Paying more does nothing to how hard it is to become well connected, and increasing the desirability of being well-connected doesn't do anything either.