Entrepreneurs don’t have a special gene for risk, they come from rich families(qz.com)
qz.com
Entrepreneurs don’t have a special gene for risk, they come from rich families
https://qz.com/455109/entrepreneurs-dont-have-a-special-gene-for-risk-they-come-from-families-with-money/
80 comments
Past comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10151566
Not all do, but those that don’t will have to raise a lot more and give up a ton more of the company to do so.
Where do rich families come from?
Luck, or crime, or some combination of the two.
Nobody worked hard for their money in your world?
I was cleaning floors at a fast food place just 15 years ago. If you were to see my parents driving the new car I bought for them this year (I need them to be safe), I bet you’d say the same. Do you understand what is wrong with your perspective?
I was cleaning floors at a fast food place just 15 years ago. If you were to see my parents driving the new car I bought for them this year (I need them to be safe), I bet you’d say the same. Do you understand what is wrong with your perspective?
Neither luck nor crime are mutually exclusive with hard work. Especially financial crime.
I dont know anyone who got rich cleaning floors in fast food. I did low level work too and it has zero with where my money come from now.
Many people work hard and never ever become well off.
I dont know anyone who got rich cleaning floors in fast food. I did low level work too and it has zero with where my money come from now.
Many people work hard and never ever become well off.
1) You’re probably not rich in the sense of generational wealth. 99% of people aren’t.
2) There’s no aspect of luck in your success? If you had gotten sick, would you be where you are now? If the company that hired you had gone with another candidate, would you be where you are now? Did a friend refer you to your job? If you had been born in a different time or a different country, would you have the same opportunities? Hard work is good for success, but it’s not sufficient. And that’s especially the case for gaining outsized wealth.
> You’re probably not rich in the sense of generational wealth. 99% of people aren’t
The majority of people who start new businesses do not have generational wealth. In fact, those who achieve generational wealth often turn into investors who collaborate with entrepreneurs.
> If the company that hired you had gone for another candidate, would you be where are now?
There were half a dozen other offers waiting. Looking at the performance over the years of the companies that made these offers, I would be wealthier.
> Hard work is good for success, but it’s not sufficient. And that’s especially the case for gaining outsized wealth.
Hard work is a key component of success. Even those who inherit generational wealth have the option of living off their trust fund or pursuing their ambitions.
It is key to understand that hard work is your best tool for success; it is the only thing you have control over.
Also, I am using here “hard work” in a broad sense. Hard work isn’t only putting hours in front of the computer, but also coming out of your shell to socialize in order to find mentors, learning new things, keeping yourself healthy, etc.
The majority of people who start new businesses do not have generational wealth. In fact, those who achieve generational wealth often turn into investors who collaborate with entrepreneurs.
> If the company that hired you had gone for another candidate, would you be where are now?
There were half a dozen other offers waiting. Looking at the performance over the years of the companies that made these offers, I would be wealthier.
> Hard work is good for success, but it’s not sufficient. And that’s especially the case for gaining outsized wealth.
Hard work is a key component of success. Even those who inherit generational wealth have the option of living off their trust fund or pursuing their ambitions.
It is key to understand that hard work is your best tool for success; it is the only thing you have control over.
Also, I am using here “hard work” in a broad sense. Hard work isn’t only putting hours in front of the computer, but also coming out of your shell to socialize in order to find mentors, learning new things, keeping yourself healthy, etc.
I’m glad you found success and that your hard work helped increase your satisfaction. It doesn’t take away from anyone’s achievements to acknowledge that accomplishing anything significant requires a lot of circumstances to fall into place, the majority of which are beyond any individual person’s control, and those circumstances generally play the larger role in determining the outcome.
What you mean is gaussian or normal distribution.
hard work, determination, consistency, outperforming
where do rain droplets come from?
Do you mean to imply that it's genetic?
He means rich families where also once poor.
bitwize(4)
communism
[deleted]
What a silly statement. Having access to family wealth does make many things in life, including being an entrepreneur, much easier but there are plenty of examples of entrepreneurs who have come from much more humble backgrounds.
Isn‘t it to be expected that there are a lot of entrepreneurs with „humble backgrounds“ because this pool of people is going to be a lot larger than the one with rich families?
[deleted]
people start on different bases, but everyone has the potential to score points.
This reminds me of one particular company where the press friendly founder back story is all about bootstrapping with credit cards when in reality both founders had millionaire parents who had invested a whole bunch into it.
It is simple.
1. Some people take risk because they CAN and probably what they have seen from their family/parents (a.k.a rich/privilege). It is the cool thing to do.
2. Some people take risk because they WANT to regardless of their family situation (I am in this category). I just cannot see myself working in a job.
3. Some people take risk because they HAVE to. They have nothing else going on for them and doing their own thing is the only thing they can try. I am sure there are quite a few entrepreneurs in this category. They were desperate and just tried something of their own as the only last option.
So yea, entrepreneurship can never be generalized. We can argue on the percent breakdown b/w the 3 categories above. CAN, WANT, HAVE TO
1. Some people take risk because they CAN and probably what they have seen from their family/parents (a.k.a rich/privilege). It is the cool thing to do.
2. Some people take risk because they WANT to regardless of their family situation (I am in this category). I just cannot see myself working in a job.
3. Some people take risk because they HAVE to. They have nothing else going on for them and doing their own thing is the only thing they can try. I am sure there are quite a few entrepreneurs in this category. They were desperate and just tried something of their own as the only last option.
So yea, entrepreneurship can never be generalized. We can argue on the percent breakdown b/w the 3 categories above. CAN, WANT, HAVE TO
It looks like you have just generalized entrepreneurship.
There are also some simple facts about growing up poor. Even giving a poor person a lot of money does not put them in the same boat as someone who grew up around the mentality of "money as a tool" instead of "money as a scarce resource." There are biological differences [1] to growing up poor vs wealthy. Those differences are often compounded by poor nutrition which leads to poor health and other real impairments [2] including learning impairment and unwise decision making.
Within your three categories, 1 and 2 look awfully similar to my eyes. There is a luxury of time, knowledge and choice implied. 3 is a wildcard for great success or great failure often decided by luck. Great failure might mean homelessness or even death. Smartly, many people in category 3 opt for life and an underpaying 9-5 (or several of them) rather than rolling those dice.
[1] https://www.sciencealert.com/being-poor-not-only-affects-you... [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10946800/
There are also some simple facts about growing up poor. Even giving a poor person a lot of money does not put them in the same boat as someone who grew up around the mentality of "money as a tool" instead of "money as a scarce resource." There are biological differences [1] to growing up poor vs wealthy. Those differences are often compounded by poor nutrition which leads to poor health and other real impairments [2] including learning impairment and unwise decision making.
Within your three categories, 1 and 2 look awfully similar to my eyes. There is a luxury of time, knowledge and choice implied. 3 is a wildcard for great success or great failure often decided by luck. Great failure might mean homelessness or even death. Smartly, many people in category 3 opt for life and an underpaying 9-5 (or several of them) rather than rolling those dice.
[1] https://www.sciencealert.com/being-poor-not-only-affects-you... [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10946800/
I agree that being poor puts you at a disadvantage compared to people who are not poor. But I don't agree with the premise of this article. Just because it is harder doesn't mean you cannot have the risk taking ability in you. People who really want to be an entrepreneur figure out ways to defeat their disadvantages.
I just don't buy that you cannot be an entrepreneur because you were born poor. However, I agree that it makes a lot harder.
I just don't buy that you cannot be an entrepreneur because you were born poor. However, I agree that it makes a lot harder.
I agree. I also think discussions like this article assume that running a company is unique from other similar choices.
Is trying to become a singer/actor becoming an entrepreneur? Its fairly similar in terms of entering a winner-take-all field where you'll face a lot of adversity at the beginning.
Is switching careers to something your eduction is not in the same type of decision that an entrepreneur makes? Even if you are just switching to another 9-5?
Is someone who leaves a salary job to one that is paid mostly in sales commission an entrepreneur? Even if you are working for a company?
I don't think any of these situations are identical - but if you are trying to figure out "is this cultural or genetic" it seems worthy to think of your definition. After all, being a tech CEO is not something everyone wants to do.
Is trying to become a singer/actor becoming an entrepreneur? Its fairly similar in terms of entering a winner-take-all field where you'll face a lot of adversity at the beginning.
Is switching careers to something your eduction is not in the same type of decision that an entrepreneur makes? Even if you are just switching to another 9-5?
Is someone who leaves a salary job to one that is paid mostly in sales commission an entrepreneur? Even if you are working for a company?
I don't think any of these situations are identical - but if you are trying to figure out "is this cultural or genetic" it seems worthy to think of your definition. After all, being a tech CEO is not something everyone wants to do.
And
4. For some people there simply isn't a risk.
4. For some people there simply isn't a risk.
The problem of discourses around the inevitability of some type success via hard work/talent, is the views it promotes against the ones deemed less successful or fortunate.
Each daily opportunity, for engaging with others, trying challenges and implementing entrepreneurial activities is a chance to move every so slightly in the direction of success. If you accumulate enough of these, and in the positive direction, you will achieve you success target.
However, each of these activities, offers the chance for a negative outcome, ever so slight in the negative direction. A random walk, just by the simple nature of life, can easily line up in front of you a series of negative outcomes that will push you too much into the opposite direction, or simply just to far from your intended target.
So you will run out of time, opportunities, capital, stamina, luck, space or creativity. In other words, and as somebody said: The multiple ways in which some are successful, are just one of many infinite ways in which other can be unsuccessful. You just have to encounter an enough number of negative events.
For a better society successful parties should promote true understanding of many reasons why one can be "successful".
"Life’s winners think success was earned even if it was down to luck"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2210263-lifes-winners-t...
"Bucca’s team explored the subject by creating a version of President that involved almost no skill, and in which the influence of the starting conditions could be dialled up or down. They recruited about 1000 people through a website, Amazon Mechanical Turk, giving people $2.50 for taking part and a $5.00 bonus if they won.
Whoever was randomly picked to play the first card in round one of the game always had an advantage that meant they were most likely to win that round. In some versions, this starting advantage was further boosted: after the cards had been dealt for round two, the winner of round one was able to swap one or two of their weakest cards with the strongest ones of their opponent. In other versions, the opposite happened: the starting advantage was weakened by the previous loser getting good cards from the winner."
"At the end of their game, people were asked if it had been fair. Regardless of the conditions, winners were more likely to say yes than losers. Even when the winners benefited from receiving either one or two strong cards from their opponent, they were twice as likely to judge it a fair game as the losers. What’s more, in most versions of the game winners were more likely than losers to attribute success in the game to talent – even though the game required very little."
"It’s not just how the game is played, it’s whether you win or lose"
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/7/eaau1156
Each daily opportunity, for engaging with others, trying challenges and implementing entrepreneurial activities is a chance to move every so slightly in the direction of success. If you accumulate enough of these, and in the positive direction, you will achieve you success target.
However, each of these activities, offers the chance for a negative outcome, ever so slight in the negative direction. A random walk, just by the simple nature of life, can easily line up in front of you a series of negative outcomes that will push you too much into the opposite direction, or simply just to far from your intended target.
So you will run out of time, opportunities, capital, stamina, luck, space or creativity. In other words, and as somebody said: The multiple ways in which some are successful, are just one of many infinite ways in which other can be unsuccessful. You just have to encounter an enough number of negative events.
For a better society successful parties should promote true understanding of many reasons why one can be "successful".
"Life’s winners think success was earned even if it was down to luck"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2210263-lifes-winners-t...
"Bucca’s team explored the subject by creating a version of President that involved almost no skill, and in which the influence of the starting conditions could be dialled up or down. They recruited about 1000 people through a website, Amazon Mechanical Turk, giving people $2.50 for taking part and a $5.00 bonus if they won.
Whoever was randomly picked to play the first card in round one of the game always had an advantage that meant they were most likely to win that round. In some versions, this starting advantage was further boosted: after the cards had been dealt for round two, the winner of round one was able to swap one or two of their weakest cards with the strongest ones of their opponent. In other versions, the opposite happened: the starting advantage was weakened by the previous loser getting good cards from the winner."
"At the end of their game, people were asked if it had been fair. Regardless of the conditions, winners were more likely to say yes than losers. Even when the winners benefited from receiving either one or two strong cards from their opponent, they were twice as likely to judge it a fair game as the losers. What’s more, in most versions of the game winners were more likely than losers to attribute success in the game to talent – even though the game required very little."
"It’s not just how the game is played, it’s whether you win or lose"
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/7/eaau1156
Complete, utter garbage. Cites no statistics.
The truth is, about 25% of new businesses in the US are started by first-generation immigrants. 30% of new business owners only have a high-school education. Here are a few more stats: https://www.smallbizgenius.net/by-the-numbers/entrepreneur-s...
The truth is, about 25% of new businesses in the US are started by first-generation immigrants. 30% of new business owners only have a high-school education. Here are a few more stats: https://www.smallbizgenius.net/by-the-numbers/entrepreneur-s...
> Complete, utter garbage. Cites no statistics.
I'm not sure your source is exemplary in citing cast-iron statistics - the article you cite includes a lot of referenced and very varied sources (some of them seem to be just news articles), but few concrete references to back-up their purported numbers.
> The truth is, about 25% of new businesses in the US are started by first-generation immigrants
And this assertion doesn't contradict the article unless we're supposed to assume that being a "first-generation immigrant" automatically means you are poor and without any family resources.
I'm not sure your source is exemplary in citing cast-iron statistics - the article you cite includes a lot of referenced and very varied sources (some of them seem to be just news articles), but few concrete references to back-up their purported numbers.
> The truth is, about 25% of new businesses in the US are started by first-generation immigrants
And this assertion doesn't contradict the article unless we're supposed to assume that being a "first-generation immigrant" automatically means you are poor and without any family resources.
I suspect that many of the immigrants that come to the US (and end up being successful/ business owners) are pretty well off themselves (relative to wealth of the country of origin). US isn't a country that is easy to immigrate to either.
This is an awful take. From experience, being “wealthy” in a third world country translated to being on one of the lowest brackets of poverty here in the USA.
but if you're earning "a lot" in 3rd world country, then you probably have e.g skills and with skills it'll be easier for you to transfer yourself and you aren't going to start from the bottom
Do you think you are born with those skills? When I was a kid I remember staying up past midnight always to finish my math homework. I had seen a bit of news saying that being good at math was key to becoming a video game developer, and that was enough to give me hope.
I had a computer when basically nobody else had one and I had the chance to learn programming when almost nobody in my country even knew what it is.
I also had relatively wealthy parents which enabled me to save up to move/emmigrate.
Emmigrating to a wealthy country is crazy expensive. Plane flights, rent/down payment etc
Which all boils down how massive of an advantage being wealthy is/middle class is even if that wealth is peanuts by US standards
I also had relatively wealthy parents which enabled me to save up to move/emmigrate.
Emmigrating to a wealthy country is crazy expensive. Plane flights, rent/down payment etc
Which all boils down how massive of an advantage being wealthy is/middle class is even if that wealth is peanuts by US standards
>The truth is, about 25% of new businesses in the US are started by first-generation immigrants.
So for me it seems like going to US makes you small outlier, the programming people that I know and went to US were really strong devs
So for me it seems like going to US makes you small outlier, the programming people that I know and went to US were really strong devs
Just FYI, they cite a paper here: http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf
Can't read the article since it's behind a paywall. But how do they define rich?
How much of this is simply because most successful entrepreneurs are in the top 10%?
What percentage of the population is entrepreneurs?
Why should anyone be surprised that kids are following in their parents footsteps?
How much of this is simply because most successful entrepreneurs are in the top 10%?
What percentage of the population is entrepreneurs?
Why should anyone be surprised that kids are following in their parents footsteps?
You can read it here: https://outline.com/5hNkgt .
The article doesn't really define rich but cites multiple papers and quotes a few economists. Seems like the core thesis is "having access to money makes you more likely to start a business" which seems like something that should be true. The title is a little incendiary though.
The article doesn't really define rich but cites multiple papers and quotes a few economists. Seems like the core thesis is "having access to money makes you more likely to start a business" which seems like something that should be true. The title is a little incendiary though.
Blaming others for your position in life will not change your situation. Divisiveness through lies like this, when there are plenty of examples to refute it, is not the solution. You are radicalizing the discussion on a topic only unity can tackle, and that will not end well.
This is just more of the pervasive attitude of grievance and blame gaming we have these days. Yes, some entrepreneurs come from rich families. But many more are for example, the immigrants that come here and have no choice but to become an entrepreneur to support their families. Entrepreneurs are everywhere. They are running pop ups at the flea market. They cook your food in the restaurants. There's a +billion entrepreneurial hustlers in the world doing whatever it takes to feed their families, without bitching about their situation. Stop letting idiots build imaginary barriers to your life outcome. Just go find a way and do it.
> There's a +billion entrepreneurial hustlers in the world doing whatever it takes to feed their families
If your definition of "entrepreneur" is "people doing what it takes to stay alive" then literally everyone is an entrepreneur and the term has lost any particular meaning.
I would take entrepreneur to mean "an individual who undertakes an unusually risky venture in order to have access to exceptional personal gains" and from that perspective it seems almost axiomatic that people who start with more capital have less downside risk, which in turn makes it easier to be an entrepreneur, so more of them will do it and with more success than the relatively less-resourced. What part of that do you disagree with, if any?
> Stop letting idiots build imaginary barriers to your life outcome. Just go find a way and do it.
Just buy enough tickets and you're guaranteed to win the lottery! How hard could it be?
If your definition of "entrepreneur" is "people doing what it takes to stay alive" then literally everyone is an entrepreneur and the term has lost any particular meaning.
I would take entrepreneur to mean "an individual who undertakes an unusually risky venture in order to have access to exceptional personal gains" and from that perspective it seems almost axiomatic that people who start with more capital have less downside risk, which in turn makes it easier to be an entrepreneur, so more of them will do it and with more success than the relatively less-resourced. What part of that do you disagree with, if any?
> Stop letting idiots build imaginary barriers to your life outcome. Just go find a way and do it.
Just buy enough tickets and you're guaranteed to win the lottery! How hard could it be?
[deleted]
I agree that many businesses are started by immigrants and lower income. I think the title of the article is sloppily worded but I believe it’s more so referring to tech startups. Unicorn founders are overwhelmingly from wealthy families.
This is likely the most accurate take. Psychologically humans tend to categorize the median with the extreme outliers. That’s why we eat these kind of articles up, when instead we should be talking about how to start a successful business without coming from a rich family.
[deleted]
Strawman argument.
[deleted]
Yes. TFA is racist, anti-capitalist nonsense.
I'd rather celebrate stories like the one featured on HN just the other day[1], about the Vietnamese immigrant who started Huy Fong Foods and _very successfuly_ popularized sriracha sauce.
[1] https://twitter.com/TrungTPhan/status/1409185044501987340
I'd rather celebrate stories like the one featured on HN just the other day[1], about the Vietnamese immigrant who started Huy Fong Foods and _very successfuly_ popularized sriracha sauce.
[1] https://twitter.com/TrungTPhan/status/1409185044501987340
financial risk is proportianal to how much money you have, abd it has always bothered me that people think its a huge risk to start a company as a really rich person. its not! doesnt mean its not hard to start one successfully, but you are essentially stealing valor from poorer people if you try to claim your risk was the same.
Blanket statements don't have a special gene for innacuracy. They come from bad editors.
This is such a horrible take I am not going to give the article a click.
I know two successful entrepreneurs who come from a situation of struggle in third world countries. Also my girlfriend, who grew up in poverty in Pennsylvania, and now is on her third stable business.
We are creating a culture of excuses for anybody who fails at chasing their dreams or doesn’t even have the motivation to do so; the equivalent of getting a “trophy for trying”, but tailored to adults. This culture is harming the perception of individuals who otherwise just need an extra push of positivity in their journey.
I miss the days (not so long ago) when the advice was “work harder and things will happen”. That’s the advice I got and it worked for me. If you don’t have that hope then you’ll defeat yourself.
I know two successful entrepreneurs who come from a situation of struggle in third world countries. Also my girlfriend, who grew up in poverty in Pennsylvania, and now is on her third stable business.
We are creating a culture of excuses for anybody who fails at chasing their dreams or doesn’t even have the motivation to do so; the equivalent of getting a “trophy for trying”, but tailored to adults. This culture is harming the perception of individuals who otherwise just need an extra push of positivity in their journey.
I miss the days (not so long ago) when the advice was “work harder and things will happen”. That’s the advice I got and it worked for me. If you don’t have that hope then you’ll defeat yourself.
I agree we shouldn’t create a culture of excuses but at the same time you have to notice that most successful founders come from wealthy backgrounds and the rest seem to be immigrants (who might be wealthy as well?). The average HN poster lives in a Silicon Valley bubble and doesn’t realize this.
Also with the famous 9 in 10 start-ups failing, I don't think we need an excuse for failed business attempts. Being on HN, I always assume founder -> start-up, that a lot of poorer folks are creating and running successful small businesses is a known fact. It's simply not the kind of business we talk about.
I am one of those immigrants who were “wealthy”, which meant my family was able to save money for years to afford my plane ticket to the USA. When I came here I was one of the poorest kids at school. Stop making excuses.
> Stop making excuses.
Strawman. No one is making excuses, we are explaining the massive and very uncomfortable inequalities that no one seems to bring up around here. The fact that this article is so highly upvoted but has such disdain in the comments tells me there are a lot of silent folks out there who understand what is going on.
Strawman. No one is making excuses, we are explaining the massive and very uncomfortable inequalities that no one seems to bring up around here. The fact that this article is so highly upvoted but has such disdain in the comments tells me there are a lot of silent folks out there who understand what is going on.
> We are creating a culture of excuses for anybody who fails at chasing their dreams or doesn’t even have the motivation to do so; the equivalent of getting a “trophy for trying”, but tailored to adults.
You seem to be implying that it's a moral failing of some kind to NOT be an entrepreneur - am I reading you right? As though failing at a risky undertaking - or not bothering in the first place - is something that needs to be excused?
You seem to be implying that it's a moral failing of some kind to NOT be an entrepreneur - am I reading you right? As though failing at a risky undertaking - or not bothering in the first place - is something that needs to be excused?
I’ve been saying this for years. The entire system funnels rich kids money. You need a safety net to quit your job and do this stuff. I have student loans and not a lot of savings because my family is not rich, my propensity to quit my job and dedicate years of my life and all my (very) hard earned savings is extremely low. I also don’t have family connections to raise cheap/free seed money.
Elon Musk was a son of a single mom and an immigrant (that said, his mom is an amazing person and definitely gave him a great start if life just by putting a right mindset in).
Jeff Bezos was again a son of a dirt poor single mom who later married a dirt poor Mexican immigrant - his life start was as bad as it gets. Yes his adopted father later became a mid-level manager for an oil company and managed to send him to a good college, but there is nothing exceptional there.
There are lots and lots of rich kids who smoke weed all day and contribute an absolute zero to the society, and so few good entrepreneurs.
Jeff Bezos was again a son of a dirt poor single mom who later married a dirt poor Mexican immigrant - his life start was as bad as it gets. Yes his adopted father later became a mid-level manager for an oil company and managed to send him to a good college, but there is nothing exceptional there.
There are lots and lots of rich kids who smoke weed all day and contribute an absolute zero to the society, and so few good entrepreneurs.
Bezos’ step dad was Cuban so not sure about any of your other stats. His mother’s side were also wealthy landowners with a 25k acre ranch. At a (very) conservative estimate of $1k/acre that’s $25mm. To this day Bezos is one of the largest landholders in Texas.
Regardless, these are anecdotes.
Regardless, these are anecdotes.
And one could argue that both are outliers.
[deleted]
y = mx + b
y = Where you are
m = Your ability to grow
x = Time
b = Where you start
Although where you start is important, your ability to grow (or decay) ultimately determines where you end up.
y = Where you are
m = Your ability to grow
x = Time
b = Where you start
Although where you start is important, your ability to grow (or decay) ultimately determines where you end up.
So you're telling me that all my acquaintance entrepreneurs from Africa who are black or brown or arab are all amateurs?
Or does scientific research only apply in USA?
My parents are poor, I run a large and successful startup.
The article does have a point though, definitely more common for people with a good buffer to start startups.
The article does have a point though, definitely more common for people with a good buffer to start startups.
Is it a risk when you have no other choice but to build, survive, and thrive??
@dang
Can you unflag this ? Does not show up in the main pages.
Maybe the article deserves the flag but the discussion is meaningful.
Never start a business without OPM*.
Also, in too many cases, the term applied should be 'entremanure', as the people in question are full of... You get the idea.
*Other People's Money
*Other People's Money
I'd be much more likely to start my own company if I didn't have the burden of health insurance for my family.
This made it a lot easier for me to start my startup and quit my day job. Both of which were very beneficial to me in the long run. I might not have taken the risk if I were American rather than Canadian with my new baby to take care of.
I put my success down to luck and the social safety net up north.
I put my success down to luck and the social safety net up north.
It is tough starting from very little and when your family has very few financial reserves - to deny this is disingenuous.
You have fewer resources, less influential contacts, less social standing, and are viewed as more of a credit risk. You may be viewed as easy meat by competitors. You cannot afford the same premises or advisors or equipment and when you are short of cash there is no bailout buffer. You have more obligations and less time to rest. You are likely to be more stressed and if you get ill, you will struggle.
This sucks - big time. It is going to mean that quite often less competent or industrious people are going to enjoy greater success and prosperity.
But you cannot let that consume you. You can still do a great deal by using your initiative and using the opportunities that are available to you. Because, it is possible to succeed even from very humble beginnings - I have known quite a few people do so.
And work with good people. Find intelligent, hard working types who appreciate where you are at and what you are trying to do and who will have your back. Work with these people - make sure you have their back too.
With the right allies it may cost each of you half the time and half the pain to improve your financial situations by 100% compared to going solo.
With the wrong 'allies' you are committing suicide, so drop them. Whilst people can be your greatest assets, they will generally also be your biggest liabilities.
Statistically, even with changes affecting government and society, more people are likely to be of below average wealth.
So, if you want to pursue a system-wide level of change, I suspect that a measured approach to doing so would be wisest, using opportunities as they arise, focusing on your immediate circumstances first and being aware that the tangible outcome for yourself can be very hard to control.
You have fewer resources, less influential contacts, less social standing, and are viewed as more of a credit risk. You may be viewed as easy meat by competitors. You cannot afford the same premises or advisors or equipment and when you are short of cash there is no bailout buffer. You have more obligations and less time to rest. You are likely to be more stressed and if you get ill, you will struggle.
This sucks - big time. It is going to mean that quite often less competent or industrious people are going to enjoy greater success and prosperity.
But you cannot let that consume you. You can still do a great deal by using your initiative and using the opportunities that are available to you. Because, it is possible to succeed even from very humble beginnings - I have known quite a few people do so.
And work with good people. Find intelligent, hard working types who appreciate where you are at and what you are trying to do and who will have your back. Work with these people - make sure you have their back too.
With the right allies it may cost each of you half the time and half the pain to improve your financial situations by 100% compared to going solo.
With the wrong 'allies' you are committing suicide, so drop them. Whilst people can be your greatest assets, they will generally also be your biggest liabilities.
Statistically, even with changes affecting government and society, more people are likely to be of below average wealth.
So, if you want to pursue a system-wide level of change, I suspect that a measured approach to doing so would be wisest, using opportunities as they arise, focusing on your immediate circumstances first and being aware that the tangible outcome for yourself can be very hard to control.
Flagged, huh?
:points at username:
:points at username: