This is itself nonsense. It presumes several obviously false things: - That people who are bad at writing books are either equally bad at everything, or deriv

This is itself nonsense. It presumes several obviously false things: - That people who are bad at writing books are either equally bad at everything, or derive most of their income from writing books. "Don't quit your day job" is a meme for a reason. - That writing quality (by some metric), as opposed to marketing, is the primary driver of book sales. Sales of Twilight demonstrate otherwise. It's even more clear in music: see any one-hit wonder from a past decade. In many cases, people who liked it then now wonder why. - That the economic model of book sales is representative of the economy as a whole. Books are almost pure intellectual property. Intellectual property is typically characterized by high development costs recouped through high margins. Services and commodity physical goods are typically characterized by low development costs and low margins, with non-commodity physical goods lying somewhere in between. The latter categories make up most of the global economy, so most of the economy doesn't meaningfully compare to books.