|
A couple of different thoughts come to mind. Concerning doctors and lawyers and such; in my opinion some doctors are overpaid indeed. However, there is a good reason that doctors tend to make a higher average salary than other Ph.Ds. On average, their work is a hell of a lot more stressful and inherently risky. If an engineer makes a stupid design, then some other guy can come behind in review and tell him/her that the plexion catalever is obviously going to detorquerize and conflibbulate the crossbeam, resulting in immediate death for everyone in a 50 ft radius. If a surgeon screws the pooch, then you've got one less heart than you need to live. If Ustwo accidentally jukes you in the throat or cuts off your tongue or drowns you with the little water squirty thingy, you're screwed. Some non-medical/legal Ph.D.s do make a shit-ton of money, and their work tends to be high risk / high payoff. I think the level of disparity between the accomplished work in other fields and those in, for example the medical field, is too great - but I don't have a problem with the basic concept. Don't forget the massive debt most medical students are in when they graduate.
Related, there's a reason that and MRI or a CatScan instrument costs megabucks. A lot of R&D is behind that thing, and the company that sells them only sells a limited amount of them a year. It's not like chewing gum or jimmyhats.
Ustwo, in terms of the argument on a national level, policy decision: I think you are lumping in people who can't make lots of $$$ with people who choose not to make lots of $$$. They are not always the same, and I think the people who choose not to pursue wealth accumulation have important things to say about the economy. Things like: school teachers saying "quit cutting our funding. we need books." or firemen saying "we need another fireengine doohickey" etc. I think if you're saying that when it comes to questions of national economic policy that have to do with increasing the wealth and economic stability of our nation as whole that we should seek the advice of those who know how to accumulate wealth, then I'd have to agree with you.
However, seeing as how I think you'll find some pretty rich people in Congress these days, who have been there through multiple administrations and so on and so forth, and we seem to be potentially el fucked economically, I'd have to return to the question of whether or not you can trust that opinion from el richy rich. I posit that he would be quite tempted to suggest policy that is good for him, not so good for me. Thus, I don't think it's as simple as using someone's wealth or accumulation thereof to judge their fitness to make policy decisions, but I can see it as a factor.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|