I believe he touched on this, explaining that most students who excelled in Calculus ended up in the stock market to become rich, rather than contibute their analytic powers to solving the worlds economic problems. His critique was that the prominent universities neglected to teach emphasis on public leadership qualities, instead of using their expertise for personal gain. The stock market seems to reflect the brilliance of Economists, whereas the government is full of incompetent administrators at every level. Government is full of politicians, not administrators.
I don't need a study for that. The number of people "in the stock market" who became rich as a percentage of those who took Calculus could not POSSIBLY come out to anything reaching "most". That's exactly the kind of hyperbole I'm accusing this guy of.
I believe we can agree that the general level of competence in government leadership is less than adequate.
Cutting education budgets or raising tuitions is not the way out of incompetency. I believe it is a problem that can be solved only by calculus. Where are the economic models from concerned "learned leadership"?
Now you're just challenging me to present some solutions. I don't have to do that to prove this guy doesn't have anything of value.