“No, not unfortunately, Thankfully!”

“No, not unfortunately! Thankfully! Otherwise, there wouldn’t be any greats”

---

A great colleague of mine said this to me in response to me describing the current market as unfortunately over saturated with mediocre products and services.

This is another example of Pareto’s distribution. Fundamentally, it can be summarized in common applications, like a few people making the biggest decisions in a business or even nation. Also, we see that most books sold yearly are only written by a handful of authors. Moreover, and dare I say even more clearly, 1% of the world’s population owns 99% of its wealth.

This law has both a #malevolent and #benevolent nature to it.

It works FOR us, such as in the example of #authors. Having the best authors selling most of the #books means they make more #money. So that, in turn, means they can write more #influential masterpieces for us! Rewarding competence is invariably a good idea.

But then comes the latter example. Wealth distribution. Even reminds me of when former US president Donald Trump sent US citizens in need, a stimulus package during the 2019 Pandemic. Where do you think those stimulus cheques were spent? I would bet you my life they were definitely not put into savings, nor invested strategically. They were used in purchases from Amazon, Walmart and Target. Putting all that money into the pocket of the 1%. So does the Pareto law here lock us in a cycle we cannot seem to break?

Was Carl Jung wrongfully attacked by Freud for his theory on archetypes? Do we humans inherit part of our mentality generation after generation? Or is it simply making sense of human nature and analyzing it to plot such distributions?