Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 317 posts

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#241

Post by bakhy »

twcooper wrote: post #189
efaref wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. The risk of having to run back to mummy and daddy with their tail between their legs is no risk at all. I could be quite entrepreneurial if I didn't also have to pay for my apartment and food every month without fail.

But from a broader social standpoint, isn't it a good thing that people who can afford to take risks are the ones taking the risks? It sucks on an individual basis if you're living paycheck-to-paycheck and can't risk failure, but it's not such a bad thing that the affluent are taking larger economic risks than the poor.

yeah, the affluent, taking one for the team <3

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#242

Post by ddoscampaign »

Futurebot wrote: post #212
radmuzom wrote: post #11

Ten years back, when I was fresh out of college, I joined a startup - not as a founder but as the first employee. A lot of it was driven by reading Paul Graham's essays, and I was naive and immature enough to believe that I was doing something great (as an aside, I came from an economically disadvantaged family; and every cent of my assets today is something I have earned and not something which I have inherited or o…

Absolutely. What I think some stating that this is all "common sense" miss is that for many people it's NOT. All the advantages some have are advantages they believe that others have. Couldn't go to university because you had to work? Why didn't your parents help you? What? Nowhere to live? What about your old bedroom? You've supported yourself since you were a teenager? Where were your parents! No money left? Huh? N…

A million times yes. This is a common mistake of managers/older people assuming younger/inexperienced folks are dumb from their mistakes and lack of experience. The latter need patience and some guidance for the former to grow their "common sense" to become more capable/productive/successful.

The other antipattern is spoiling kids and helicopter parenting, which leads to sheltered/learned-helplessness kids. Letting kids struggle more to learn for themselves and earn things is important because the role of the parent to prepare people to become independent, survive and thrive. Also, expecting them to do more with much less improves their ingenuity out of necessity. People/startups that are broke can often attain what others cannot because they are able to make something awesome out of what other people call "junk" and waste less money.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#243

Post by mangamadaiyan »

known wrote: post #183

You need Cash/Caste to succeed as an Entrepreneur in India; http://goo.gl/NFK0A

Cash, yes. Caste - IMHO, not really.

Could you substantiate your statement with something other than a change.org link, please?

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#245

Post by bicknergseng »

logfromblammo wrote: post #155
bakhy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, but how many developers in the US get $100k? Throughout the first 10 years of their career? And I'm sorry, I should explain - I live and work in the EU, in Germany right now. So I can't compare. In any case, one can certainly save, and I'm not gonna lie, I could certainly spend less without losing too much :) But a claim like "10 years is enough to retire" seems a bit extreme.

You can consistently get $100k in Silicon Valley, New York City, and Washington DC Metro, although you will need Top Secret security clearance for the latter. It should come as no surprise that the expenses in those areas are much higher. If you settle for a lower salary in an area with lower living expenses, your effective savings rate could be higher. Also, you don't want those DC jobs. Just say no. The military in…

Good luck saving half your income, even at $100k, in any of those places. Median rent alone in SF is way over half of that in a year... BEFORE taxes.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#246

Post by nostrebored »

logfromblammo wrote: post #155
bakhy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, but how many developers in the US get $100k? Throughout the first 10 years of their career? And I'm sorry, I should explain - I live and work in the EU, in Germany right now. So I can't compare. In any case, one can certainly save, and I'm not gonna lie, I could certainly spend less without losing too much :) But a claim like "10 years is enough to retire" seems a bit extreme.

You can consistently get $100k in Silicon Valley, New York City, and Washington DC Metro, although you will need Top Secret security clearance for the latter. It should come as no surprise that the expenses in those areas are much higher. If you settle for a lower salary in an area with lower living expenses, your effective savings rate could be higher. Also, you don't want those DC jobs. Just say no. The military in…

Don't forget Seattle. Amazon/Microsoft/Expedia/etc.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#247

Post by nostrebored »

mindcrime wrote: post #195
ausjke wrote: post #131

Agreed, but nothing really surprised me. It's just some of those start-up pumpers keep ignoring this fundamental truth. It's not entrepreneur gene, however statistically, it's still the gene from your family tree, it normally takes generations to build the foundation for most people to take risks via education and efforts, and most if not all 'rich' families started from their disadvantaged ancestors. Rising from poo…

It's just some of those start-up pumpers keep ignoring this fundamental truth. And they should, because it's irrelevant. You can't change your parents, ya know. In the end, you play the hand you're dealt. If you're not from a rich family, maybe you just have to work that much harder, but I don't think the moral is "you were born poor, so just STFU and accept your lot in life". If someone wants to be an entrepreneur,…

Football analogy is probably actually pretty apt. You're playing a game where the vast majority don't get what they're hoping for, sacrificing opportunities along the way, while a large percentage get sports related injuries. The opportunity cost and actual cost of football greatly outweigh the likely benefit. Yet still, people think that they are the exception, and that the bad things can't happen to them.

I think that your latter point is fair, we do need people who are willing to challenge the squo, and we do need people with good ideas to try to make them realities. But going in blind doesn't help anyone, and ignoring the reality of the situation (which from your other comments, it doesn't seem like you're doing) doesn't let you think of potential solutions.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#248

Post by webjprgm »

pound wrote: post #196
matwood wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TL, DR; On an average, it is much easier to start a start-up if you have some basic level of financial security in your life. I didn't realize this was some secret. Someone who has parents who are doing well and can pay for their college and living expenses indefinitely will be at an advantage. They can take risks others can't. BTW, this is true from the time someone is born. Parents who are well off will send thei…

yes, it is common sense and everyone indeed knows it. But many want to believe in SV as some not rest of the world place with equal opportunities for everyone, just be smart. We all want it to be ruled by meritocracy. That's why we keep drinking this koolaid.

To be honest, I only want to be ruled my a meritocracy if I can define myself as the most intelligent person in the world. (Or, in the upper 10% or something). A true meritocracy scares me. And this from a guy who was in the upper 10% of my high school (upper 4%). But I've seen much more brilliant people out there.

So who honestly wants a meritocracy either?

Another option would be that whoever works hard is taken care of. That sounds like the 1950s corporate job with a pension. It may be less exciting and sounds like it would produce less motive for innovation, but it is also less scary and a bit more fair than rewards to the affluent risk takers.

I have no idea how to get the best of all systems. So I make do in this one. I'm just pointing out that no system (known to man) is perfect.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#249

Post by tertius »

lhc- wrote: post #219
twcooper wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But from a broader social standpoint, isn't it a good thing that people who can afford to take risks are the ones taking the risks? It sucks on an individual basis if you're living paycheck-to-paycheck and can't risk failure, but it's not such a bad thing that the affluent are taking larger economic risks than the poor.

It sorta spits at the idea of social mobility ("the american dream") though. The biggest rewards are only really available to those who can take risks like starting a business, and if you restrict that to only those who are already well-off, you remove most chances for the poor to ascend to the higher classes.

This implies that you believe that there is a global elite and there has always been a global elite and that they are all related and there is no way to become a part of that elite.

Because if you say that "if you restrict that to only those who are already well-off", their parents probably weren't or their parents' parents etc.

There are many occupations that really only require hard work and little risk that has big payout.

The end result here is that no, life isn't "fair". But by and large, a person that has the ability to take risk, does and succeeds will create that ability for others to do the same in the future.

Re: Entrepreneurs don’t have a gene for risk – they come from families with money

#250

Post by arcfor »

mindcrime wrote: post #193

Wow, talk about an article that is completely devoid of value. That stands out as soon as you see "cult of the entrepreneur" in the first sentence. OK, now we know that most entrepreneurs come from "families with money" (according to their definitions anyway). Great, so what do I do with that particular bit of information? I'm most definitely not from a family of means, so do I just quit now? Have I been deluding mys…

It's part of the movement toward a more realistic view of "entrepreneurs". Wishing to be a wealthy aristocrat with a sea of sharecroppers isn't a commendable goal, regardless of your background. This article just points out that aristocrats tend to beget aristocrats.
Post reply on HN