"I hire people smarter than me."

First-of-all, how do you know when someone is smarter than you are? Does it mean the person has more knowledge in a particular area, some better technical skills, able to better interact with people, more experience, better management skills, better at math & science, better at what you do? What does it mean?

In any case, just because someone is smarter (whatever the metrics are), it has no bearing on whether the person can do a good job. Are they compatible with the company culture; are they experienced in the specific work; are they easy to work with? Etc…

Now for the real issue, but also the real rub. Very few people hire others with more experience - at their job - than they have. Many times 'more experienced' means 'older'. Take the youth-oriented Silicon Valley culture for example; very few companies generally hire 'more experienced' people; it's usually forced upon them by investors or boards in order to add valuable experience, which may be lacking.

The reality is that people hire people like themselves - and of the same age or younger.

"Our schools are in shambles because they are not putting out enough technically trained workers for our (high-tech industry) needs."

It's basically not a deficiency in the school systems, but a comment of hubris:

• Just because this industry expands extremely rapidly does not mean its inability to fill its positions is the fault of any particular group, it's the result of its own expansion.
• "Our" industry is the center of everything, so the educational industry must do what we need. If we don't survive, it's all over for everything and it's their fault.
• When someone is successful at something, then their viewpoint likely develops from their own analysis of their immediate history. Consequently, if they lack humility, their reasons for success are 'new' and should be broadcast as the standards by which we all should operate, including the education industry.