I think it is also an inaccurate view of the world that most capable people drop their passions in pursuit of a career and monetary gain. not only that, but talent is multidimensional, and being a great engineer does not imply making great rice wine under different circumstances
poverty, and lack of social mobility, is largely a curse of wasted potential, not a silver lining of talent molded into artisanal goods
The "more meaning" business is cope because as societies add more ability to excel, people of ability switch into economically rewarding activities at a high rate.
There's a nice middle where you can exploit them for positive externalities. In the past, through religion (many monks were undoubtedly great researchers) and today through a mediocre (but not awful) society.
Not five minutes. Fifty years and five minutes.
Lots of people in North America work in jobs with positive externalities (teachers, nurses, etc) and they're generally treated like shit compared to 9-5 office workers. I don't think the issue is that the former is group is less capable, they're just not sociopathic resource-collecting robots.
Maybe you mean poor job mobility for office work. Economic mobility as a whole is high enough for whole towns and villages to become desolate as former residents decamp for the cities.
* Poor economic mobility
* Individual compliance with the social contract
* Liberty to run small businesses
* Good land use laws
Perfect mobility is awful because all the capable people get to maximize earnings. The better The Sort (as patio11 calls it) the more capable people move out of doing things with high positive externalities.