Thank you!

A method for allowing motivated people (by reason of economy) without degrees to tangibly improve their rewards by demonstrating the capacity for at least "productive parity" if not an even better value to the company. I believe that smart people, who are broke, deserve a chance too.

I feel a significant step toward that direction would be to determine an acceptably accurate method for evaluating the relevent experience of a non-degreed individual for suitability and capability in positions traditionally held by degreed individuals. Frankly, Colleges & Universities have for reasons of economy, are graduating mostly incompetent workers who, in school were good "Test takers" who just want to do their required 8 (and no more), get their $100k BMW & condo, and if there is an actual expectation along the way, their degree encourages them to become overpaid & unproductive job-hoppers for life. While the non-degreed (for reasons of economy) improve themselves and their work skills on a consistent basis because they know, that to not do so, would if unemployed consign them to the status of "unemployable". In my experience, it is the non-degreed individual (not feeling to have crossed any "finish line") who more often than not, is perfectly capable of running circles with little effort around the degreed-individual in the example, assuming both were given the same job, but in seperate offices.

Despite this I doubt that innovation or the economy can thrive in complete anarchy. Some form of property law, contracts, torts, criminal law, the courts and police to enforce these are going to be necessary.

I hope you are right that innovation can proceed despite regulatory obstacles, but the last decade in the US has not proven to be highly innovative and I think it is because of these regulatory obstacles.

From one of my other posts: Social Media vs Institutions – "Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance. You might make the connection to the Kübler-Ross model’s 5 discrete stages of how people come to terms with dying. This is how many institutions and organizations will come to terms with these new, communication, collaboration and coordination platforms."

I think most institutional entities are in the denial, anger and bargaining stages with regard to "capping" the freedom to innovate. I would also contend that "The Genie's Out Of The Bottle" and will mostly be done in vain and at the expense of America's tax payers (what the hell else is new).

Great observations in your post Dale. You definitely gave me new perspective as to how to look at this.

The only concern I have with the exponential growth in innovation thesis is that it makes it sound inevitable. All we have to do is sit back and wait and this amazing innovation will take over. I think the innovation rate in the U.S. has significantly declined in this decade compared to the 90s. In my opinion, little known regulations are killing off innovation in the U.S., see http://hallingblog.com/2009/05/26/innovation-regu...