Live data from Hacker News

Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

nymag.com

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the traditional definition of middle class in the United States. The traditional American dream was a middle class life: stable career, single income family, house in the suburbs and a nice pension check when you retire. Fair to point out that that is a bygone era and maybe you do need $6 mill now, but maybe we need a different name than “middle class” to describe it.

That is the original meaning of the term middle class - a class that does not need to sell its labor to a boss to survive but who is also not part of the idle rich crowd.

In pre-revolution France, yes.

But not in the United States.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in a funny state because calling oneself 'rich' or 'upper class' sounds like bragging even if it is more accurate. If some 6-figure-earner went around calling themselves 'rich' most people would roll their eyes. 'Upper-class' is not much better because 'class' is still a loaded term. Does 'upper-class' mean 'has more money' or 'knows what fork to use' So everyone uses 'middle class' unless they own a jet or an…

IMO, the Marxist definition is a good one. Do you work for your money, or do you get most of your income through the leverage of your capital? Thus you end up with four categories: Those that cannot meet their needs, the poor, those that meet their needs exclusively through wages with no significant capital, the lower-middle class, those that need to work to make ends meet but can offset some of that through the leve…

Terminologically, both the middle and upper classes in the Marxist framework are bourgeois, the middle (mixed capital/labor dependent )being the petit bourgeoisie and the upper (pure capital dependent) being the haut bourgeoisie.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The third way is to add sweat equity and build a business slowly around your normal 9-5. There is just as much downside to this route, it’s also risky, you take time away from hobbies and relationships, and even if you’re successful there’s a period where you will basically just have two full time jobs. That said, I did it this way, and I know a lot of others that have, and I was able to see it through. Timeline: 201…

This path is also fraught with legal risk, depending on your "normal 9-5" employer. If it's a FAANG or other large tech company, most of them (at least the ones I've worked for) lay claim to every single IP you create while working there, on or off the clock, using your own equipment or theirs. It doesn't matter whether or not they legally can--you are unlikely to be able to afford a legal defense against them.

No its not. Just dont sign any rediculous IP assignment documents. These are illegal in a lot of states now anyway.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#44

$6 million in personal wealth is middle class? Woof!

As painful as it is for some people to hear this - yes, $6 million in personal wealth is middle class. If you have to work a 9-5 for somebody else to survive then you're working class, not middle class.

[flagged]

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#45
post #39
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$6 million x 4% safe withdrawal rate = $240,000 a year. It's enough for comfort, but it's still considered a middle-class income in the more expensive parts of the country. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/takes-middle-class-americas-l...

You guys. Median income in the USA is about 76k per year (according to https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percen... ). 230k will quite literally put you in the top 10% of income earners in the USA, and probably much higher elsewhere.

Sure and 76K will put you in the top 1% in sub-Saharan Africa.

I think you are missing the point. In most of the US, there simply aren't enough opportunities to make 6M. To make 6M in the first place, you have to be in a high CoL place like SFBA or NYC. Or at least that was the case until very recently.

And once you put roots down in a high CoL place and have a total wealth of 6M, it is much harder to uproot and move somewhere else. Barring maybe a few who came from low CoL areas and still have roots and connections there.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#46
Article could be summed up by "Comparison is the thief of joy."

The guy has built a successful, profitable company, with satisfied customers and a culture he claims to be proud of. And yet the whole article is him carping.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also it's a false dichotomy mainly pushed on you by venture funds to encourage you to play in their world. Bootstrapped tech startups have such low costs and labor as to make other traditional small-business owners jaws hang on the floor in envy. Unicorn money is a distraction that's keeping everyone's eye off the ball and deluding people into ignoring the power in their fingertips.

The low cost base also means it’s really hard to compete against. A lot of VC money is aimed at monopolizing a niche and extracting long term above average returns out of it. Having a lifestyle company operating in their niche destroys that as a possibility and means they’ll never be able to get the returns they want.

Which is an interesting perspective if you're considering a lifestyle business. Can you build a small but meaningful competitor and draft off all the treasure some VC is plowing into r&d and marketing?

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're buying into the false dichotomy. A lifestyle business isn't organic growth. It's sitting on a beach pulling in $20k/mo for your Gmail plugin, or getting to buy lots of cool cameras which you love, paid for by your camera-based Youtube channel. There's a whole world of businesses that exists between unicorns and lifestyles.

Also it's a false dichotomy mainly pushed on you by venture funds to encourage you to play in their world. Bootstrapped tech startups have such low costs and labor as to make other traditional small-business owners jaws hang on the floor in envy. Unicorn money is a distraction that's keeping everyone's eye off the ball and deluding people into ignoring the power in their fingertips.

I don't think it's pushed really. Certainly not on me.

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#49
post #39
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$6 million x 4% safe withdrawal rate = $240,000 a year. It's enough for comfort, but it's still considered a middle-class income in the more expensive parts of the country. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/takes-middle-class-americas-l...

You guys. Median income in the USA is about 76k per year (according to https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percen... ). 230k will quite literally put you in the top 10% of income earners in the USA, and probably much higher elsewhere.

[dead]

Re: Confessions of a Middle-Class Founder

#50

> I could have tried roughing it without venture funding, what the industry calls “bootstrapping.” The venture world has a condescending label for bootstrapped companies without scale potential: a “lifestyle” business, which roughly translates to: Good for you, now back to the sandbox until you’re ready to play with the big boys. Given my professed aim, this could have made sense. But there was so much funding for th…

You're buying into the false dichotomy. A lifestyle business isn't organic growth. It's sitting on a beach pulling in $20k/mo for your Gmail plugin, or getting to buy lots of cool cameras which you love, paid for by your camera-based Youtube channel. There's a whole world of businesses that exists between unicorns and lifestyles.

It can be as simple as where the business is located.

Perhaps the useful definition of a lifestyle business is one where explicitly part of business's purpose is to achieve personal non-business goals for one or more people involved. They can be tiny or fairly large, though at some point the distinction probably loses meaning.

Like the difference between a "startup" and a "new business" they can be useful distinctions but are often used sloppily.

Post reply on HN