Great explanation. One of the things I consider, as someone who will eventually find enough resources to do this, is the separation of individual economic activity into risk-reward segment tiers.
The first being direct trading of time for money, wage-salary work. Second is service, which runs the gamut from contracting to consulting. Third is deal-making, which composes together individual service providers, the value-add being management, to create business vehicles. Fourth being business, the creation of a firm that employs human resources to scale up a product or service. Fifth is finance, which treats businesses as the economic units, either through trading financial instruments or through acquisition of entire businesses.
At what point does the risk-reward profile start to favor investment into the next level of economic activity? Is it worthwhile to try to skip over a tier, how does one think clearly about the endeavor?
For example, I don't see financial investment as worthwhile for the career individual except in two cases, home purchase, and retirement planning. It just doesn't provide enough returns, and the time investment involved in trading saps quickly assumes second job status.
What amount of capital should you have liquid before you can intelligibly make a foray into a particular tier? Such that you can throw money at problems rather than invest more time into understanding the situation? I don't need two careers, nobody needs two careers. Smart people can make forays into segments close to their careers and move up that way.
The mindset for rational and sane upward mobility seems to remain stubbornly out of reach, causing many honest, decent people to save up nest eggs which are then extremely vulnerable to scammers. If we had a body of information available that's better than the current personal finance advice, which seems geared for retirement planning, then we could cut down on a lot of tragic outcomes.