Working for someone vs. doing your own thing • Hacker News Board

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#61

Post by poulsbohemian » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

glfharris wrote: post #27

overcast wrote: post #5

Probably the biggest hurdle is dealing with healthcare on your own, it's just prohibitively expensive to deal with alone in the US. Multiple incomes is where it's at, at least until one of the projects takes off to cover cost of living and healthcare nonsense.

Wouldn't that imply startup rates to be much higher in countries with national healthcare? But I don't think that's borne out in data.

It isn't, and it is a known enigma. That said, I'm inclined to think our entrepreneurship rates would be even higher in this country if we had a non-employer based health care scheme. I base this on the anecdata of having met easily dozens of people over the years who wished to be entrepreneurs but stayed in job because of the health care benefits. Would love to see further studies of this correlation between health care costs + entrepreneurship.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#62

Post by bpt3 » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:52 PM UTC

daxfohl wrote: post #4

There's a pretty high correlation between parental wealth and success as a startup founder. I assume it's because of the safety net. My friends who have been successful (and who had blue-collar upbringings like me, and all in mid-40's now) all worked full time jobs until their side projects were self-sustaining. None of them hit unicorn status, but I think all of them have lived healthy, fruitful lives. Also note by…

> There's a pretty high correlation between parental wealth and success as a startup founder.

I'm not disagreeing, but is there any research to support this that you can share, or is it based on your personal experience?

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#63

Post by Tade0 » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:52 PM UTC

whytaka wrote: post #29

Tade0 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear it a lot, but this argument honestly falls flat on its face as long as you're not a weird hermit that only works from your house. Having worked remotely for close to five years now those who worked in coffee shops and not from the comfort of their own homes were usually the weirdos.

As a near daily regular of a cafe to work on my own projects, I’m curious why you think that. I won’t take anything personally. :)

This is just my experience so far.

For some reason those whom I worked with who were choosing to work in such places usually were also not overly sociable. I have, of course, at least one example of a person who works at home and is self-admittedly antisocial, but the correlation is still there.

I have this one friend who only really uses his tiny apartment for sleep and other basic stuff. He works at coffee shops and doesn't cook even though he's good at it. Getting to know this guy was a lengthy and laborious process.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#64

Post by ppeetteerr » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:52 PM UTC

daxfohl wrote: post #4

There's a pretty high correlation between parental wealth and success as a startup founder. I assume it's because of the safety net. My friends who have been successful (and who had blue-collar upbringings like me, and all in mid-40's now) all worked full time jobs until their side projects were self-sustaining. None of them hit unicorn status, but I think all of them have lived healthy, fruitful lives. Also note by…

Are you referring to this? https://qz.com/455109/entrepreneurs-dont-have-a-special-gene...

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#65

Post by charlesu » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:52 PM UTC

tempsy wrote: post #48

Thorentis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $530/mo Wow. Just wow. As an Australian, I cannot fathom having to include $530 into my monthly budget just to ensure I don't end up homeless (or heavily in debt) if I get really sick. I'm not a socialist (I'm quite a centrist when it comes to economic policies), but something about the US system absolutely must change.

the difference is probably negligible when you sum up taxes and like others said you would qualify for either free or subsidized insurance if you were low income

I don't think that's the case. $530 is nearly 10% the median household income. And that's just healthcare. Keep in mind countries with higher tax rates aren't just getting socialized medicine but vacation days, parental leave, cheaper education, and usable public transit.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#66

Post by aengvs » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:53 PM UTC

tempsy wrote: post #57

dkersten wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$530/month sounds insanely expensive to me as someone outside of the US. My private health insurance costs me approx $100/month. 530 is over half my rent (outside of a major city though, in the major cities rent is much higher)

how much do you pay in taxes though?

I've recently moved to the US from Australia. The amount my employer and I pay for my healthcare is significantly more than I paid in Australian taxes for healthcare. And that's before including my deductible, things my insurance doesn't cover and the amount I pay in US taxes for healthcare.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#67

Post by simple_phrases » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:58 PM UTC

glfharris wrote: post #27

overcast wrote: post #5

Probably the biggest hurdle is dealing with healthcare on your own, it's just prohibitively expensive to deal with alone in the US. Multiple incomes is where it's at, at least until one of the projects takes off to cover cost of living and healthcare nonsense.

Wouldn't that imply startup rates to be much higher in countries with national healthcare? But I don't think that's borne out in data.

Entrepreneurship in Scandinavia is higher than in the US.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#68

Post by Spooky23 » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 11:03 PM UTC

daxfohl wrote: post #4

There's a pretty high correlation between parental wealth and success as a startup founder. I assume it's because of the safety net. My friends who have been successful (and who had blue-collar upbringings like me, and all in mid-40's now) all worked full time jobs until their side projects were self-sustaining. None of them hit unicorn status, but I think all of them have lived healthy, fruitful lives. Also note by…

I wonder if there’s a concentration of poor founders and rich? In my small high school, the people who were poor and succeeded all started businesses (not startups).

The “smart” kids, myself included mostly had middle class backgrounds and all became professionals, there’s only one that I know of who is a business owner.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#69

Post by camhart » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 11:07 PM UTC

tempsy wrote: post #28

overcast wrote: post #5

Probably the biggest hurdle is dealing with healthcare on your own, it's just prohibitively expensive to deal with alone in the US. Multiple incomes is where it's at, at least until one of the projects takes off to cover cost of living and healthcare nonsense.

What is your definition of prohibitively expensive? I've bought a gold plan off the exchange in California for Kaiser and it's $530/mo with no deductible. That's lower than I expected.

I was looking last year in Washington. Cheapest option for my family was ~$1800 / month, and that had a 14k deductible and ~20k max out of pocket. It also couldn't be used outside of Washington state (which sucks).

Went with the health ministry route because we align with their principals already, plus we can visit family out of the country and be "covered".

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#70

Post by Thorentis » Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 11:08 PM UTC

tempsy wrote: post #48

Thorentis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $530/mo Wow. Just wow. As an Australian, I cannot fathom having to include $530 into my monthly budget just to ensure I don't end up homeless (or heavily in debt) if I get really sick. I'm not a socialist (I'm quite a centrist when it comes to economic policies), but something about the US system absolutely must change.

the difference is probably negligible when you sum up taxes and like others said you would qualify for either free or subsidized insurance if you were low income

Not at all! Using some simple online calculators, assuming you earn $125k in San Fran, your take home pay after tax is $85k. In Australia, your take-home pay after tax is $88k (and that includes the medicare levy deduction if you don't have private health cover).

So not only are you being taxed more in the US, you also have to pay for healthcare on top of it. Insane.