Live data from Hacker News

Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

jpost.com

241–250 of 291 posts

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#241
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if the tech scene is really a meritocracy, why are so many of its key players, from Mark Zuckerberg to Steve Jobs, white men? I disagree with the author that Jobs and Zuckerberg are evidence that meritocracy is a myth. According to Wiki: > ... Zuckerberg excelled in classes. After two years, he transferred to the private school Phillips Exeter Academy, where he won prizes in mathematics, astronomy, physics, and…

Are you aware of how much Phillip Exeter costs?

That’s not really relevant. Zuckerberg didn’t outperform his peers at an expensive high school because he was white.

But, “for families with incomes under $75,000, Exeter is free. We pick up the cost of tuition, books and academic supplies, and we provide a stipend ... We meet 100 percent of our admitted students’ demonstrated financial need. [1]”

Sadly, the idea that we live in a meritocracy is so politically incorrect that GSIs (TAs at Berkeley) are taught to interrupt a conversation where they hear a student saying “America is the land of opportunity” or “I believe the most qualified person should get the job. [2]”

[1] https://www.exeter.edu/admissions-and-financial-aid/tuition-...

[2] http://gsi.berkeley.edu/media/tool-recognizing-microaggressi...

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#242
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how do you measure innovation in poor families? Does jerry-rigging your car to work using duct tape and aluminum cans count?

In the discussion here, I am assuming innovation refers specifically to innovative products and business ideas, not stuff that remains confined to your close family.

Well yeah, you probably aren't going to get a lot of business innovation from the poor, but because they are resource constrained, you'll see innovation in other forms - such as how they adapt to broken cars, appliances, shortage of food, clothing, etc. The rich have no need to come up with novel ways to mend shoes - they just buy a new pair.

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#243
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any creation of affordable housing contributes to slowing down increasing prices. Many countries do this by putting legal limits against gentrification.

> Many countries do this by putting legal limits against gentrification. What does that even mean? I'm not aware of any country that restricts the change in the income mix of housing, or the renovation of dilapidated housing by new residents.

There are thousands of building regulations.

Here are few examples among some EU countries: setting a minimum density and number of floors in urban areas to prevent "mcmansions".

Mandated commercial areas (aka shops) on the ground floor on new buildings.

Requirements on walkability applied to new road design to prevent sprawls e.g. limit cul-de-sacs.

Minimum and maximum percentage of buildings for industrial / office / shop / domestic use.

Minimum and maximum apartment size.

Tons of limitations on renovation of historical buildings.

A lot of this stuff makes it very difficult to quickly transform an already urbanized area into a bunch of super-luxury villas or similar.

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#244
post #232
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would it though? From what I understand EU has way better social safety nets, yet much smaller entrepreneurship rates compared to USA. This is definitely a multiple factor problem, and health care is just one of them. A couple obvious ones - social acceptance/rejection of this as a path, and government/financial friction. If you have only been exposed to the US, it's pretty shocking how hard it is to get a company…

This. Not sure about the US, but starting a company seems pretty damn daunting from where I'm standing

This is all jurisdictional of course, but in parts of North America (I'm including Canadian provinces as well as US states) you can incorporate in less than 30 min online for a few hundred dollars. There are a few other details you'll have to sort out before your first tax filing, but that's about it.

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#245
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of how much Phillip Exeter costs?

That’s not really relevant. Zuckerberg didn’t outperform his peers at an expensive high school because he was white. But, “for families with incomes under $75,000, Exeter is free. We pick up the cost of tuition, books and academic supplies, and we provide a stipend ... We meet 100 percent of our admitted students’ demonstrated financial need. [1]” Sadly, the idea that we live in a meritocracy is so politically incorr…

I was referring to the fact that Zuckerberg success was possible because of his background (his parents were both professionals, one was psychiatrist, the other a dentist), and not necessarily because of good grades. Plenty of people get good grades.

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#246
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding the entrepreneurship rates, are gig economy workers considered entrepreneurs? Also, where did you find these numbers indicating such a big difference?

Exploited working class people who have no other choices I think you mean

Uber loses money on every ride because it subsidizes ride fare - not sure it makes sense to call them exploited even in a marxist sense

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#247
Social psychologist here. The article doesn't back the headline. They never mention the effect size, how much parental finances matter. The mention that smarts "explain 11% of the gap" or something, but they don't provide the number for parental finances, so we're left to just have some vague impression that this variable is "key" to entrepreneurship.

This was a government study, where the government researcher is explicitly talking about how the findings must have specific policy implications. I would bet that they advocated for those policies before ever conducting the study, and that any result would have been used to advance such policies. All we know is that the effect was north of 11% in variance explained. So, is 12%? 17%? 25%? What is it? And at which threshold does this variable become "key" to entrepreneurship? (Also, what would people have predicted in advance? And does the reality alter their policy prescriptions?)

They're also doing potentially invalid things with the stats in not using continuous variables, but rather dichotomizing them. And their slices are arbitrary. They're comparing the top 20% on one thing to the bottom 60% on another, for example, and it's not clear why they chose those specific slices. It could be the it was specifically those arbitrary slices that gave them the story they wanted to tell.

Also, parental finances will correlate with lots of variables, including culture, values, all sorts of behaviors and social norms, as well as concrete domain knowledge in things like business and banking. There could be a disposition effect where the children of people who are more likely to be entrepreneurs are themselves more likely to become entrepreneurs, which is almost trivial right? Or there might be a culture effect where these kids are exposed to the phenomenon of entrepreneurship in a way that is less likely or less strong for other kids.

What I mean is that starting a business doesn't even occur to some people, for various reasons. Like no one they ever knew growing up had a business, compared to someone growing up in Silicon Valley where starting a business or being employee # ≤12 at a startup is almost as common as having two arms. I noticed this kind of cultural difference in the US. I'm a Mexican-American from Arizona, but I've lived in Silicon Valley and the American South (North Carolina). When I lived in Chapel Hill, I ended up knowing a lot of natives from other areas of the state. They would talk about wealth as something that you got from your family – they just assumed that's where you got money. So if they meet someone and notice something expensive they have, like a car or pricey jewelry, or even housewares that seem high end, they might ask others afterward "Does she come from money?" I had never heard that expression elsewhere in the US. Does so and so "come from" money? It didn't make any sense. No one talks like that in Silicon Valley. People don't come from money here – they make it. They talk that way in Mexico though, where entrepreneurship of this sort is rare and poverty and class structures abound. So I think people who grow up affluent are more likely to think about starting a business because it's just kind of obvious or normal to them – it's what people do. It's a natural part of their choice space, something to think about and consider, whereas for others it's totally not, and wouldn't even come up in their thinking, planning, etc. The effect of having affluent parents could mostly be about the literal money situation, like people here are thinking, which is about having access to funding, or it could mostly be behavioral/cultural assumptions. I don't have any predictions or opinions about which is the strongest effect. It would take careful research to find out. But their affluence cutoff includes lots of households that wouldn't have nearly enough money to fund most start-ups. Making $125k a year is not the same as being able to provide seed capital for some business. So in that case, it might about networks and knowing people who have more money to invest. That kind of spills over into the cultural aspect of thinking of starting a business as a totally normal and smart thing to do.

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#248
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The focus here is on the hustling Bill of the 80s, not billionaire Bill of the 90s.

Don't forget that this guy full name is: William Henry Gates III. He is not your friend Bill from across the street that most of people could compare with.

Aren’t most people called Bill actually named William? I actually know a William III and he’s a not-rich ROTC kid. Bill Gates did have money but i’m not sure the degree to which his name is an indication of that

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#249
post #92

'Why haven't you sold a startup by now? ... go do your own thing...' Because, Since I was young, I've been hammering a cinderblock away that can grow 3 new heads at random intervals

>Because, Since I was young, I've been hammering a cinderblock away that can grow 3 new heads at random intervals English is my first language and I still have no idea what this means?

cuffed to my leg*

Re: Parents' income, not smarts, key to entrepreneurship

#250
post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the counter is that entrepreneurship has strong network effects, it really pays to be around other talented people and hear about the future they're busy inventing. The actual powerful network effects are essentially a somewhat benign form of cronyism, not mere inspiration from other entrepreneurs. People do more business with less haggling with friends than with strangers.

I think you're talking about networking for money, and that's a thing. But there are also ideas. Even in fields where there's basically no money, half the world's innovation happening within a circle of a few miles is routine. For instance this happens in music, repeatedly.

When has it happened with music in the last 60 years? If you’re talking about mostly classical music clusters then there are a lot more reasons for that than you’re suggesting
Post reply on HN