51–60 of 100 posts
At the end of the day he lost it all and had no money. Even when you have a percent of something, doesn't mean you have money to spend, if the cash is not in your bank account you can't buy.
Btw I bet that building is $5-10m -at least-. If the landlord even wanted to sell it.
I can't afford to. If I could afford to, I would have quietly done it. But real estate in Palo Alto is very expensive, and most of YC's investments are still illiquid. (Not that I have 5-8% in any case. We assume we get diluted down to 2% by exit, and I am one of several partners in YC.)
I can't afford to. If I could afford to, I would have quietly done it. But real estate in Palo Alto is very expensive, and most of YC's investments are still illiquid. (Not that I have 5-8% in any case. We assume we get diluted down to 2% by exit, and I am one of several partners in YC.)
I'm not about to second-guess PG, or any other single person. Maybe the capital they have isn't liquid enough; maybe they have other obligations; who knows? And it's worth pointing out that doing more awesome things doesn't require wealth. Why don't more poor people clean up their neighborhoods? Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? We should never point our finger…
For some reason this post by alnayyir is dead: >Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? People keep bringing this up, but I never see examples. If I saw one, I'd chase it like an alcoholic that's spotted Jim Beam at the bottom of a hill. To my detriment, and with gusto.
I'm not about to second-guess PG, or any other single person. Maybe the capital they have isn't liquid enough; maybe they have other obligations; who knows? And it's worth pointing out that doing more awesome things doesn't require wealth. Why don't more poor people clean up their neighborhoods? Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? We should never point our finger…
Wow, I must admit I would probably never invest so much into a place I am just renting. Your landlord won the lottery. Still, it makes me feel uncomfortable. Yes, society is cheering on the people who sacrifice themselves (just watch any movie from the US, that message gets driven home with a sledge hammer). But I doubt that is for the best of the individual. Of course people are cheering if they get something out of…
I don't feel like I'm investing into a place I'm renting; I feel like I'm investing into my home, and by extension, myself. Every time I walk outside, I feel like I've accomplished something, even if it's a relatively small thing. No matter how anything else is going in my life, that feeling is still there.
If the owners decided to boot us out this month and sell the place for more than they could have otherwise, or even rent it out to someone else now that they can get more for the rent, I still would not feel like I had done something foolish. I still, for a while, will have made a place better. Even if new tenants or owners stopped maintaining it and let it go to ruin, that would only be a decision they have made, and still not change what I had done.
It's made the other people in the neighborhood happy. It's made me happy. It's made the landlords happy. Maybe I could have spent the time and money on something else, but that's true no matter what I do. So, why not do something that makes so many people happy?
> Yes, society is cheering on the people who sacrifice themselves...
On my good days, I think that might be because society is looking for leaders that they can look up to. On my bad days, I think that might be because society has gotten lazy and just wants someone else to take care of it.
> But I doubt that is for the best of the individual.
It might not be best for many individuals, because it's easy to feel like you're being taken advantage of, or that you're giving up something you shouldn't be.
But, for some individuals -- a growing number of them, I hope -- some forms of sacrifice can be so rewarding that it doesn't feel at all like sacrifice.
> Of course people are cheering if they get something out of you for free.
Sure, but maybe you're getting to do something you enjoy anyway. If you go out for a hike or visit a river or beach, why not pick up some trash while you're out there? If you're going to live in a home, why not improve it a bit while you're there? If you're going to get together with some friends, why not bring some food? And if people cheer you on for that, is that so bad?
Anyway, the most powerful motivation, for me, is that I can see as clearly as if I were living in it now a world in which everyone else did things like this -- looked out for each-other, helped each-other up, cleaned up and improved the things around them, and invested in great little bistros and sandwich shops and bookstores and parks and such because they recognized the value of having such things in their community.
I've found that it's impossible to tell anyone else what that kind of world looks like, or to get them to believe in it by talking about it. So, instead, I try to make it.
One run-down house at a time. :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, I must admit I would probably never invest so much into a place I am just renting. Your landlord won the lottery. Still, it makes me feel uncomfortable. Yes, society is cheering on the people who sacrifice themselves (just watch any movie from the US, that message gets driven home with a sledge hammer). But I doubt that is for the best of the individual. Of course people are cheering if they get something out of…
Hmm. I'm not sure how to respond, honestly. I don't feel like I'm investing into a place I'm renting; I feel like I'm investing into my home, and by extension, myself. Every time I walk outside, I feel like I've accomplished something, even if it's a relatively small thing. No matter how anything else is going in my life, that feeling is still there. If the owners decided to boot us out this month and sell the place…
"living in it now a world in which everyone else did things like this -- looked out for each-other, helped each-other up, cleaned up and improved the things around them, and invested in great little bistros and sandwich shops and bookstores and parks and such because they recognized the value of having such things in their community."
I like that, except for the part where the house still belongs to the landlord, not to the community or you. I would pick up trash in the mountains, because the mountains belong to everyone (or the government, which in theory is everyone).
With the sandwich shops, I think capitalism could deliver: if people would realize the value of having sandwich shops in the park, they would perhaps be willing to pay for sandwiches, making it profitable to build nice sandwich shops.
Sandwich shop owners as well as people living near the park would be motivated to keep it nice, as it would improve both the sandwich shop and the value of the houses around it.
Maybe there are aspects of what you are doing that I don't see, though. As long as the landlord lets you live there, maybe you get to live in a nice place for a low rent. If you ever have to move, your landlord might write you a glowing letter of recommendation and make it easy for you to find another nice place. Then again, as they seem of the "not caring" kind, maybe they won't :-/
I'm not about to second-guess PG, or any other single person. Maybe the capital they have isn't liquid enough; maybe they have other obligations; who knows? And it's worth pointing out that doing more awesome things doesn't require wealth. Why don't more poor people clean up their neighborhoods? Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? We should never point our finger…
For some reason this post by alnayyir is dead: >Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? People keep bringing this up, but I never see examples. If I saw one, I'd chase it like an alcoholic that's spotted Jim Beam at the bottom of a hill. To my detriment, and with gusto.
If anybody's really actually serious about wanting their very own windmill to tilt at, and having trouble finding one on their own, my email address is in my profile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For some reason this post by alnayyir is dead: >Why don't more startups choose to solve problems that would really improve peoples' lives? People keep bringing this up, but I never see examples. If I saw one, I'd chase it like an alcoholic that's spotted Jim Beam at the bottom of a hill. To my detriment, and with gusto.
Out of curiosity, what would you think about a startup that aims to protect the 401k investments of Joe Trader? Is that something that would really improve peoples' lives?
"Buying a car or a house in cash is showoff-y"
When did buying a car in cash become showoff-y? My parents and grandparents always paid cash for their cars, because it's a depreciating asset and taking out a loan for it is just throwing money away. I didn't buy a car until I could afford it in cash - and when I did, that's when I realized this wasn't terribly typical, as the dealership kinda looked at me funny and lamented that they couldn't give me any further discounts (possibly because they were already selling it to me for like $400 under dealer price).