SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts
COHR 181.67+2.4%Dec 5 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Kirk © who wrote (12286)10/26/2021 11:13:46 PM
From: Sun Tzu1 Recommendation

Recommended By
TigerPaw

  Read Replies (1) of 26711
 
Social mobility in the US is the lowest in all of developed world. This is a fact and not a conjecture. To be sure, talent plays a role in America. If you are extremely talented and somewhat lucky, then you can be a major league player or a VC funded start up that makes it big. But most people are not major league material. Similarly, lack of talent plays a role. If you are dumb as nail, or utterly lack social skills, or tend to screw up at work, then you will go down.

But the vast majority of people are not outliers. They are neither major league material nor crippled. So the question is what kind of social mobility should they expect? The overwhelming answer in America is none. Study after study shows that where you will end up in America is very strongly correlated with what neighborhood you grew up in. It is statistically impossible for the American neighborhoods to be perfect pigeonholes of talent.

The American system's payout is like a casino jackpot system. A few people win big and are used to lure/convince the masses that you can beat the house and win big if only you are a talented enough player. But the real winners are always those who own the casino and set the rules.

Every VP and CxO that I worked with didn't get there b/c he was the most talented or the hardest working. He owed his, but b/c he had opportunities that others did not. I've witnessed first hand how those with an "in" get groomed for the higher positions. And once they got their foot in the door, they just cycled through various companies and various roles and collected "stamps" of experience.

Fundamentally, meritocracy goes against human nature. Given a choice, we will all choose our own children and family and friends for a better job than some stranger. It doesn't matter how talented that stranger is. We want meritocracy for others, not for ourselves. When a person has cancer, he wants the most competent doctor. When a CEO needs an operation engineer, he wants the most competent and the hardest working one. But when there is a university admission, we bring heaven and hell together to get our kid in there. It doesn't matter if another kid is more talented. And the CEO will groom his son to take over for him. He doesn't care if another employee is more talented.

Why so many people have a hard time appreciating that given a chance we will all distribute the candy unfairly is beyond me. A good government is then one that limits the ability of the people to act on their personal bias.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext