Fda tamiflu reactions….

That said, such a statement must be tempered by obvious reality. My mind and physical talents will naturally be bent toward one trade over another, and hence I am an engineer rather than an artist or musician by trade. And while I believe that I could well learn to be an artist, the lack of talent in that particular arena would mean I would spend years learning a base set of skills that another individual would be able to master in mere months or even days. For disciplines closer to my own, my mind will be sharper and more apt. For those further beyond the scope of my knowledge and experience, the time required to learn and ply that trade will rise proportionately, perhaps even exponentially.

It is also worth stating, then, that it is highly likely that the individuals upon whose trade I look and say, "I could do that," could as well, given the time and education, do my job!

That set of talents with which every individual is born, however, makes certain career paths easier or more likely. It is worth noting, for instance, that I spent my time in grade school connecting fans and switches and wires for the mere fun of it! I was doomed to be an engineer from an early age.

Your experiences in childhood and early adulthood truly are critical. As a youth, I spent years assisting my father with sound and video production in my home church. That knowledge and experience are still with me and I am able to begin picking up the workings of a new sound system in mere minutes, while an individual without that same experience learns more slowly simply because their mind has never been previously bent to such a task.

Hence, I would posit that there are two key factors in the typical specialization of labor:
1. Personal inclination and talent
2. … shaped and molded into a far more specific pursuit by experience and opportunity.

Of course, my entire post does raise a question. Are there certain skills that simply cannot be taught? By this I mean the creativity of an artist or the pitch-sensitive ear of a master musician.

I don't know what people in government think. Maybe some of them don't even think about it. But, like most people, they become socialized to the culture that they are part of.

IAC, the core of the problem is not people in government, but people who look to government as the default solution to social and economic problems.

The last time I was employed full time was nearly 8 years ago, and I turned in my resignation the day they signed me up for a Dale Carnegie course. They were 'grooming' me for management and wanted me to lose the Boston accent.

I said, "waddaya, retahded? I'm outa hea"

I have so much respect for good managers that I would never sully the position.

You wrote: [ It may be the detailed ] knowledge that leads to such successful black markets and innovation that by-passes regulation entirely even in completely top down economies.

You might like this story about the market that existed for burned out light bulbs in Russia.

Selling Burned-Out Lightbulbs

Great post. So true. What seems to be lacking in the discussion of the current "crisis" is an understanding that problems lay beyond mere tinkering with fiscal and monetary policy. If it were so with the right monetary and fiscal policy ecuador can become belgium. What is lacking is an understanding of organizational charactersistics and their inimical effect on productivity and initiative. How in large oranizations you will spend 75% of time with pointelss meetings, HR impeding hiring people you know can do the job, herd behaviors and norms precluding the best rise. In effect, organizations are now full of arogant highly degreed beta males and females smug in their superiority yet unable to fix a toaster. The problems lay in our organizations–bureacrices whether public or private.

The higher one goes up the academic ladder, the more concentrated the knowledge and in many cases, the more arrogant the attitude. A certain professor of Chinese thought he was the smartest guy on campus because he was an expert in the Chinese language and culture. A colleague finally shut him up by pointing out that in China even two year olds speak Chinese.

"http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/shop-class-as-soulcraft"

People in government do think they know better. If they didn't they wouldn't try to control everything from health care to auto bankruptcies to compensation. This prejudice clearly isn't confined to politicians. Even now, I have history professors pontificating on how the financial industry should be run and how the employees should be compensated. The fact that they can't so much as balance their own check book let alone understand what a trader or a banker actually does doesn't concern them in the least.

I'm guessing that it is this unimaginably detailed and dispersed knowledge that leads to such successful black markets and innovation that by-passes regulation entirely even in completely top down economies.

Countries like Germany have strong apprenticeship and technical training systems to keep these so called "middle skilled" jobs supplied (really just "different skilled"). We have a strong community college system in this country to do that as well, but I strongly agree that Americans need to reorient the way they think about human capital.

I do agree with K Ackermann – while I strongly agree with Hayek's insights, I don't think that's the same as saying the people in government think they "know better". I think that's a red herring.

Unfortunately, his actions do not live up to his words. I'll believe his rhetoric, when he starts following it.

Quote from K Ackermann: "Division of labor can be at odds with creativity. Some of the best ideas come from the fusion of disciplines."

Sounds like a new opportunity to divide the labor further, to me.

Thanks.

Andrew, I'm not sure that describes Obama. Bill Clinton, yes.

Obama has not staffed up with a bunch of cronies. He has delegated to people who are (reputed) to be effective, and he doesn't micro-manage.

Here is a quote of his that is at odds with the idea that he wants the government to do everything for people:

We need to steer clear of this poverty of ambition, where people want to drive fancy cars and wear nice clothes and live in nice apartments but don't want to work hard to accomplish these things. Everyone should try to realize their full potential.

Here is one where he does talk like a socialist. I believe the assertion can also be viewed as an investment where the gains cannot be taxed by the government:

We must make sure that people who have the grades, the desire and the will, but not the money, can still get the best education possible.

I particularly like this insight into the simple view that many people have of the world, although they are educated and aware of the complexities and challenges of their own field. An explanation why hope and change is so attractive. An evaluation of President Obama's abilities. Just an excerpt of what Joe Y experienced in party conversation.

[edited] The oddest thing about this election, was the continual leitmotif of Obama’s genius, from people that should have known better.

People like Obama, of which I know and am related to far too many, are unable to seriously consider that there is any job (oil company CEO, football coach, running the local post office) that they cannot do as well or better than the person currently in the role, should they ever exert the effort to do so.

It’s not a matter of faith, as faith requires a conscious effort; rather, it is a prejudice in the true sense of the word.