I was having a 'discussion' earlier this morning with my cow-workers over my theory that you can estimate a lower limit for someone's intelligence by how much they earn. With the exceptions of dumb luck, illegal activities and third world countries that don't have first world job opportunities. I challenged them to provide counter-examples (ie. someone that is dumb that earns a lot) to disprove my theory and they did eventually manage to come up with footballers and porn stars, and for a different reason artists.
I think the ability to earn money, however you do it, is a good measure of the lower limit of someone's intelligence because at the end of the day there is only a finite amount of money in this country as defined by the Bank of England
1 and therefore we are all in indirect competition for it. This is achieved by value being placed on goods and/or services and that being represented by an income.
So with the footballer and porn star arguments, it just shows what strange things humans place value in! Art I believe has its own value, but not one that many modern-day capitalists have much time for.
1 - On a side note, how
do they govern and introduce new money into the economy? I realise that introducing more money without controls makes inflation spiral and devalues the currency against foreign currencies, but where does it enter the economy? With the government?
UPDATE:
This seems to give a good idea of how it works (and the effects of hyper-inflation) - through loans to businesses.