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

How People Get Rich Now

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 941 posts

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#181

Post by kdusneodnejdn »

notacoward wrote: post #137
harshaw wrote: post #32

I don't want to derail this too much with personal anecdotes, but I suspect you are much more likely to build wealth with the more established tech companies - and that wealth is "rich enough". Maybe I am just unlucky or unskilled, but I spent roughly 20 years working at startups or innovation labs. I was "close" to some big events where I could have made big $$ but made 0. Both at my own startup and being at early s…

Likewise, even down to being in the Boston area. I did OK at a couple of the eleven startups I worked at, but still made even more over just a couple of years at a FAANG. Many of my former colleagues on both sides have had similar trajectories. The vast majority of the "merely rich" in tech got that way by working at companies that had already broken away from the pack. Speaking of breaking away from the pack, that b…

"demographic distance"

You mean they're all white, and men, and you have decided that means they are all the same, regardless as to the details of their backgrounds.

This is literally racism, bigoted prejudice based solely on the group membership of people you don't like.

You can't just look at people in these positions and say "they're overrepresented therefore systemic racism" or you're going to get into a really awkward place when you start to notice that Jews are actually overrepresented in places of leadership.

If you consider race and sex the most important attribute of a person, then your statement about demographic makes sense. Only then.

Regarding your username, you are in fact a coward.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#182

Post by vmception »

> In 1982, 84% of the richest 100 people got rich by inheritance, extracting natural resources, or doing real estate deals. Is that really better than a world in which the richest people get rich by starting tech companies?

Data is a natural resource and is being extracted. It is not better. It has nominal differences and doesn't cause as much pollution.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#183

Post by hexhex »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #120
nindalf wrote: post #71

It's a classic PG article. Many true facts in there, lots of good analysis with just a few questionable claims thrown in here and there. At the end, there's a massive claim that isn't fully stated but implied. "Of course the Gini coefficient is increasing" translated means "income inequality is not a problem". Firstly, Gini coefficient is based on income, not wealth. That isn't stated clearly. Secondly, there's absol…

Paul Graham's articles always shoot immediately up to the top of HN, but I agree with you, they're generally cursory and pithy thoughts which don't convince my skeptical mind. I don't know, can someone explain why his work is so popular? Think of all the amazing writers across our civilization whose work is linkable, and we're worshipping these decent but not amazing blog posts?

My two cents on why his writings are popular: - He uses anecdotal evidence which appears to be sound at first. Looking at the top 100 billionaires seems to give a good idea on how wealth is created and distributed, but really it is only a glimpse at a much bigger phenomenon (especially since the data only comes from two years). - His style of writing is very accessible and natural. He wrote an article on his style (http://www.paulgraham.com/simply.html), and it seems to strike a chord with technicians who prefer this over more complicated prose.

I feel these are the same reasons for why effective altruism is so popular among technicians. It offers clear cut answers, and avoids uncomfortable questions.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#184

Post by FpUser »

cryptoz wrote: post #160
WhompingWindows wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paul Graham's articles always shoot immediately up to the top of HN, but I agree with you, they're generally cursory and pithy thoughts which don't convince my skeptical mind. I don't know, can someone explain why his work is so popular? Think of all the amazing writers across our civilization whose work is linkable, and we're worshipping these decent but not amazing blog posts?

PG's recent articles have changed from what they used to be. Recently (last few years) there is a dramatic change towards defending riches, logical fallacies to explain why being rich is okay, a lot of focus on wealth and how to get it and why it's okay. A lot less technically interesting than he used to post. I used to send Startup=Growth to everyone I knew. I think people are used to high-quality content from PG an…

>"being rich is okay"

Sure being rich is ok. As long as they make mortals better off which is not what is happening now. Rather majority of the people are getting worse for wear in the process.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#185

Post by rapnie »

BurningFrog wrote: post #125
justinlilly wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he means he's the tech equivalent. As in, "he was near many historical events, but not the focus or beneficiary of them"

That also sounds a lot like Forrest Gump :)

Forrest didn't care about fame and fortune, went for life and love.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#186

Post by jedberg »

harshaw wrote: post #32

I don't want to derail this too much with personal anecdotes, but I suspect you are much more likely to build wealth with the more established tech companies - and that wealth is "rich enough". Maybe I am just unlucky or unskilled, but I spent roughly 20 years working at startups or innovation labs. I was "close" to some big events where I could have made big $$ but made 0. Both at my own startup and being at early s…

I've worked two startups and two public companies (and a University) in my career. Other than the small salary, I made nothing from the startups. The first public company made me enough to buy a house in the Bay Area and the second made me enough to fund my own startup as well as invest in others.

So yeah, my experience tracks with yours -- all my wealth was made working for public companies (that I happen to catch during their biggest periods of growth). To be fair though, that may change if my investments work out. Then most of my wealth will be from investing in startups.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#187

Post by bambax »

nindalf wrote: post #71

It's a classic PG article. Many true facts in there, lots of good analysis with just a few questionable claims thrown in here and there. At the end, there's a massive claim that isn't fully stated but implied. "Of course the Gini coefficient is increasing" translated means "income inequality is not a problem". Firstly, Gini coefficient is based on income, not wealth. That isn't stated clearly. Secondly, there's absol…

The people he thanks for "having read drafts of this" are:

- his two lifelong friends and business partners

- his wife

- two prominent libertarian economists.

Missing from that list are his children and Peter Thiel.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#188

Post by dudeman13 »

DC1350 wrote: post #133
dudeman13 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just how bad at finances are you and people around you if 150k just really isn't that much? That literally places you amongst the richest 1%. Not metaphorically, literally. A couple of years worth of saving is enough to give you passive income to never need to work again for food or shelter.

$150k is not even enough to buy a small home near your workplace in a lot of cities. Janitors had better living conditions 50 years ago than $150k earners do today

>Janitors had better living conditions 50 years ago than $150k earners do today

Utter bullshit.

>$150k is not even enough to buy a small home near your workplace in a lot of cities

Live within your means for 5 years, invest the 70k/y excess money into index funds.

You can live of dividends anywhere in the world that isn't a capital in a first world country. Without even losing money.

Literally the 1% pretending to be poor and living in worse conditions that janitors 50 years ago. Yeah, right.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#189

Post by Der_Einzige »

anon_tor_12345 wrote: post #128
amznbyebyebye wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s probably rich man guilt, plus some attempt at rationalization through cherry picked facts and data.. Also why I think bill gates >>> pg

>It’s probably rich man guilt it's hilarious to me how so many talking heads think the solution to guilt is more speech instead of praxis. you feel guilty about all of your wealth? give large sums of it away. charity works wonders for the guilty conscience (speaking from experience here). but that's unthinkable so they just go on engaging in this kind of sophistry. lays bare that they're not actually trying to cure t…

The kind of people who use the word "praxis" don't end up having good praxis 99% of the time.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#190

Post by aardvarkr »

prostoalex wrote: post #164
nindalf wrote: post #71

It's a classic PG article. Many true facts in there, lots of good analysis with just a few questionable claims thrown in here and there. At the end, there's a massive claim that isn't fully stated but implied. "Of course the Gini coefficient is increasing" translated means "income inequality is not a problem". Firstly, Gini coefficient is based on income, not wealth. That isn't stated clearly. Secondly, there's absol…

> "Of course the Gini coefficient is increasing" translated means "income inequality is not a problem". The book "The Great Leveler" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/31951505-the-great-level... is probably the most comprehensive dive into history of inequality, and arrives at a fairly unexciting conclusion that periods of great inequality are correlated with significant economic growth (usually related to advances…

That’s a fascinating point!
Post reply on HN