Every person somehow spends time in her life. We can say some people spend time more or less effectively, but "effectiveness" can be measured only against a certain goal. Different people can set different goals, so we can’t really compare effectiveness among everybody. Also, I think difference in effectiveness is minor. It may only matter if a person is sick. But even then you can say "she’s spending his time on fighting with disease, that’s why she pays less attention to / spends less time on other things".
Bottom line is that time is resource given to everyone in equal amount. But everyone can spend it differently, and, hence, develop different skills.
What I’ve noticed is that social skill ("common sense") is *a hard one*, which means, it requires a lot of time. Many people don’t perceive it as hard, they "just get it", but if you look at what they’re doing (how they socialize, play games, visit each other, cook, have small talks at work, unwind with friends etc) – they’re spending massive amounts of time, and they’re getting social skill in result. Apparently, if you spend massive amount of time on this skill, you have little time on everything else. Hence, a well-rounded person socially can rarely master a talent, a skill or a profession. She already invested *a lot* in being well-rounded person socially.
A natural conclusion is that people who are not well-rounded socially, they are kind of weird, but they are probably really good in something, which took their attention away from mastering social skills. Maybe they developed their inner world. Maybe they mastered some skill. Maybe they invested more time in being a great parent. In any case they've spent time and they should have something to be proud of in result. Look at scientists as example. To a "normal" person, they’re all weird. It’s hard for them to build families, so they do it much less often. Look at computer geeks & programmers. We, programmers, don’t consider ourselves weird, but, well, we know we look kinda funny to the average man.