Nassim, this is it — — -as you say, NO SKIN IN THE GAME
“Plumbers, bakers, engineers, and piano tuners are judged by their clients, doctors by their patients (and malpractice insurers), and small town mayors by their constituents. The works of mathematicians, physicists, and hard scientists are judged according to rigorous and unambiguous principles. These are experts, plus or minus a margin of error. Such selection pressures from skin in the game apply to perhaps 99% of the population. But it is hard to tell if macroeconomists, behavioral economists, psychologists, political “scientists” and commentators, and think-tank policymakers are experts. Bureaucrato-academics tend to be judged by other bureaucrats and academics, not by the selection pressure of reality. This judgment by peers only, not survival, can lead to the pestilence of academic citation rings. The incentive is to be published on the right topic in the right journals, with well sounding arguments, under easily some contrived empiricism, in order to beat the metrics.
I stand by it. This is why our young are not thriving. In academics it is the default of the system…..NO SKIN IN THE GAME. They answer to no one. It as if their degree conceals them from responsibility.
From my own life perspective….When I falter, it is because I have NO SKIN IN THE GAME. No calling bigger than myself.
There needs to be a tag in Medium for SKIN IN THE GAME.