4 ms·
I think you missed the point. What I read from the statement is that Warren was not good at sports (arbitrary discipline not matching his forte for illustration
by skriticos2 10y ago
I think you missed the point. What I read from the statement is that Warren was not good at sports (arbitrary discipline not matching his forte for illustration) so he would suck in an economy focused around it. What he implies is that a lot of people suck at most of the fields that are in great demand, but also come with requirements that they just can't adjust to.. Especially with advanced age and with the disciplines commanding a certain amount of effort to master them (think years or decades). Most people are not very flexible and even the flexible people have their limits to adopt as the professions get more demanding on the menial side of preparation.
ps. I wanted to imply that professions and sought for jobs change faster than generations pass in recent times, which adds to the challenge of training people (especially with the still used model of train once, execute until pension model).
pps: oh, and low level grunt work for the folks that don't fancy studying is contracting fast, which compounds the problem.. you'll always have quite a few of these and they do have an impact.
- jdminhbg 10y agoNo, I understand that, but the problem with his analogy is that he's deliberately picked a field where one person's success is matched equally by another person's failure. He's overstating his case by projecting the image of the work economy being like getting dunked on by Lebron James day-in day-out.
- gloverkcn 10y agoI have blue collar friends and relatives that would describe their working life as getting dunked on by Lebron James day-in day-out. When jobs go offshore that is an example of "one person's success is another's failure"