[dba7dba]

And I want to make it clear I don't consider Facebook/Google/Twitter as vital as GM/Boeing/Tesla/SpaceX.

I don't care if Facebook/Google/Twitter don't end up with top brains. But I am concerned GM/Boeing/Tesla/SpaceX are not getting the top brains as much as they should.

[zhemao]

Why do you think those particular companies deserve a larger share of good employees.

Boeing hasn't been innovative in a while now. They make most of their money off of sales of their older models and defense contracts.

GM isn't doing so well these days and has moved most of their manufacturing overseas. Not exactly a win for the American economy. Consumer automobiles isn't exactly a growth industry right now.

Tesla and SpaceX are promising, but still small. I don't think they have that much trouble hiring. Due to their reputation and high compensation levels, they can easily compete with Wall Street for the best and brightest engineering minds.

So the question remains, why these particular companies? Are you really just talking about old-school heavy industry companies in general? Why not other sectors, like electronics, medicine, and IT?

[aianus]

GM, Boeing, Tesla, none of these companies would exist without the financial industry. There would be no such thing as large enterprise because no one person or institution can take on that much risk other than the government and we've seen what happens with centrally planned economies.

So, yeah, finance is more vital than any other business.

[gambogi]

This is a pretty broken argument. Those companies also wouldn't exist without the steel industry, or the construction industry, or the electronics industry, etc. etc.