A thing I believe with medium confidence: One reason many institutions today are weaker than counterparts were generations ago was that allocation of smart people got more efficient for certain definitions of efficient, and institutions no longer benefit from so much free lunch.
-
Show this thread
-
I don't know what to do with this belief, because on the one hand I rather like many institutions, but I don't particularly think they have a right to nosh on peoples' time and talents, and I think it feels unlikely that this genie goes back in the bottle.
6 replies 2 retweets 67 likesShow this thread -
"Can you give me an example?" The Catholic Church for much of recorded history, teaching as a profession prior to women having routine access to professional employment, the United States federal government between about 1920 and about 1960, etc.
11 replies 4 retweets 127 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @patio11
I am pretty sure there's some amount of truth to this. That said, I think we should be cautious for two reasons: (1) the returns in the field are *somewhat* endogenous (maybe urban construction would be much more interesting to those people if it weren't so inhibited!).
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
(2) When spending time with people in the relevant domains, am often struck (in a positive way) by their quality. Larger bureaucratic/institutional dynamics seem to be significant forces.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes
But whether what you describe is 20% or 80% of the phenomenon (and what exactly it is that drives that allocation) is something I often wonder about.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.