I think you neglect to consider that not all people are success-minded, that some, even given all the good influence and knowledge and skills, would rather not

I think you neglect to consider that not all people are success-minded, that some, even given all the good influence and knowledge and skills, would rather not use that to pursue things that are usually defined as success--except for the very very few who make it as cultural big names. These people are usually artists, intellectuals and researchers and their priorities are a far cry from money (and sometimes stability.) Some good decades ago they could get by with a variety of part-time jobs and work on what they believe on the side, and live their whole lives this way and be happy (even by the process of life itself, as opposed to goals and results.) Nowadays that's getting much harder to do of course, and people with this mindset are struggling to make ends meet, let alone live in a bustling city. Add to that student debts and all that--I think it's no wonder quality cultural production has somewhat declined in the views of many, especially in comparison to the 50s, or the 70s. New York used to have a bunch of these people, and it allowed artistical serendipity to take place easily, so dense were their ranks. Nowadays living there, for these people, is no option unless you can live with well-off parents. These kinds of people might be labeled the cultural elite, and historically they have created most of our art, either through making ends meet somehow (which was more possible) or being supported by patrons or parents--hence why I think 'cultural elite' is befitting, they're supported by an elite who tends to be success-minded or power-hungry (or rent-seeking, which used to be way more prevalent), but they themselves are not. They're somewhat carefree people, the saner of whom also do not need a lot to live on and don't want to raise a family, so those could conceivably live off basic income. I think that would be good for society, because the success-minded people who naturally come to control decision-making and run things around don't seem to care much (or don't grok) that there's this other side of mankind who don't quite fit in what they build. At least culturally these people still get a say, they do shape culture after all, but I'm afraid that's gonna be less and less so, at least when it comes to the masses. The internet helps give them voice, sure, but when those who are like this and have a cosmopolitan view can't afford a like-minded city, we lose scenes and movements and all these beautiful artistic expressions of a time and place and group of people. In the field of software development, of course, there are many, who usually devote their lives to open source or learning materials and don't really mind not having money (except when it starts pressing hard.) Richard Stallman could well be considered a great example who went on to make amazing contributions for our collective good, and his patron was the US Military. Alas, research budgets are being cut and cut, especially long-term research without sure profitability, and universities are on their way to bankrupcy, and times like that don't look like they're coming back again.