What's better for a healthy society: a smaller number of good jobs, or a larger number of mediocre jobs?

It is hard to define a job as mediocre jobs. There are many examples of people doing good at ordinary jobs. But let us consider here that by Mediocre jobs means where employee is not expected to be highly skilled or can easily be trained as per requirements. A perfect balanceFor an healthy society it is very important to have a perfect balance, small number of jobs where one needs to be extremely talented and smart helps to create new ideas which are salable. But if there are very few people doing jobs (good jobs) and no ordinary jobs the market will ultimately be small, there will be less appreciation of the idea and less transactions. With right amount of ordinary jobs more number of people are employed which makes market healthy and the ideas/product created by talented people will be sold and bought. This makes a perfect cash flow and healthy economy. A perfect Pyramid is necessary, where each section represent a type of job, higher you go the higher the demanding job. (Image source: unknown) Result of too many Mediocre Jobs Reduction in per hour wages Reduction in total weekly hours Less innovation Result of small amount of or only high skill jobs Unemployment and uncertainty among skilled people Less economic flow could result into depression Edit: When I first wrote the answer there was no description for the question, where as after the question what I see is the comparison between Mediocre and Good is in terms of money not exactly in terms of job profile. I believe this question is more of Labor Law related than Economics, But still much points I said holds good.