Many if not most people in positions of power are there because they know someone, not because of merit. I mean they have to be competent, but the person runnin

Many if not most people in positions of power are there because they know someone, not because of merit. I mean they have to be competent, but the person running the top company in the world, isn't the top CEO in the world necessarily. How do you even gauge that? Who is the better programmer, Englebart or von Neumann? Hard to say, and even if I said it, it is easily arguable. Each would be better at different things. It's like asking what is the best video game? There is no score in programming. Business has a lot to do with trust. I have a few people I've worked with for years that I prefer to continually work with. I know them, I know how they think, I know what to expect, I know they won't screw me over, I know I don't have to deal with petty bullshit. They might not be the best in the world, or even the best that I know, but they're the best for me to work with. The same thing happens everywhere. To think any market is 100% efficient at anything, or even resembling that is extremely naive. A capitalistic market's only claim to fame is it's the most efficient way to allocate resources that we know of. That certainly doesn't mean it's near 100% efficient. Add to that, Google is horribly inefficient. They can be though, they make so much money off search with little competition. They have a really good search engine, but many of their project ventures fail, and that's ok; but to consider them 100% efficient in hiring is just silly. Finally, more often than not, young people are cheaper and more willing to suffer fools. They are eager to impress because they haven't been screwed over yet. They still believe success, and I mean big success, is based on their skills.