How People Get Rich Now • Hacker News Board

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#671

Post by wizzwizz4 » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #575

tjs8rj wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sharper metric: it tends to do with whoever is responsible for the success of the company at the least cost to shareholders. Imagine a company starting out. If they need you to join or they fail, and they can get you for 1% of the company, that founder is rewarded incredibly for securing you with very minor cost to the company, making them rich and you not, even if you are responsible for the success of the company…

The problem with this position is its naivety. Are you going to say with a straight face that all potential founders are equally likely to be funded by investors purely on their probability of success, and not via false signals and stereotyping if not straight up bigotry? That there aren't credentials that can be effectively bought to gain access to that? Markets are just markets, not oracles of unbiased merit. Makin…

It's advocating for evil – how evil such advocacy actually is depends on your influence.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#672

Post by Aunche » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

xur17 wrote: post #610

Alex3917 wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why didn't employee profit-sharing increase at the same rate as non-salary compensation did for CEOs? Because employees generally hated profit sharing and created unions to fight against it. Joseph Blasi talks about this in his book The Citizens Share. And it's not like he's some crank conservative, he's the economic advisor for Elizabeth Warren.

A good example of that [0]. Amazon is quoted as saying that hourly employees prefer the "predictability and immediacy of cash to RSUs", and I imagine Amazon would prefer to give RSUs, so this is probably accurate. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17934194/amazon-minimum-w...

Cash is generally better than its equivalent worth in RSUs. If Amazon faces fiscal troubles, then you can potentially both lose your job and your retirement plan. The upside of potentially becoming a millionaire doesn't make up for this.

The problem is that a lot of people will spend their surplus cash on more consumer goods rather than rather than investing it their 401ks.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#673

Post by bradlys » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #656

bradlys wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

omfg. dude, we're not comparing devs in developing countries to people in SV. What kind of troll comment is this? Is it a surprise that cost of living DIFFERS WILDLY based upon LOCATION?

I don't see your comment as a valid response to the parent. They were not talking about developing countries. They were talking about in the US. They even pointed out that most devs do not live in the SV area (in response to your statement about most people in tech...). The majority of the people in tech in the US do not live in SV and the median salary for a dev is about $100k-110k.

No. They literally were talking about 15% of $100k being sufficient. Re-read it.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#674

Post by bradlys » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:11 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #663

bradlys wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, $200k isn't enough. You won't get the house. I know because I've applied. No landlord is renting out homes to single income in the peninsula at $200k/yr. $400k at FAANG - yes (they're all afraid of people losing their jobs at startups and lots of FAANG out there to rent them homes up). But, again, we're talking about "very comfortable" - not comfortable. Not okay. Not "I managed". Very comfortable - something…

I'm just curious, why do people choose to put themselves in that environment? I'm mean, based o the cost of living one could move to practically anywhere else (excluding about five areas) in the US and have this "very comfortable" lifestyle on $100k-150k.

Because you aren’t surrounded by peers. Some of us have lived in other areas and don’t want to go back for good reasons. People in other areas have jobs. People in SV have careers. Many more reasons to list. Average education among my peers is obscenely high (a bachelors is seen as being undereducated - masters is average with PhD being very common).

The area isn’t that bad except for COL. Once you’re rich, it isn’t that bad. So, just get rich. That’s the basics of it. It sucks but at least there is a solution for those that are ambitious enough. Can’t fix bad weather or jobs.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#675

Post by WalterBright » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:14 PM UTC

bumby wrote: post #669

WalterBright wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're creating the value, not taking it from others.

While you're not wrong, I think what you're missing is an important qualifier. Sometimes they are creating perceived value that doesn't materialize. Meaning the value is at least part speculation, rather than realized value. E.g., did Broadcast.com really create nearly $6B in value just because that's what it was speculatively valued at when purchased? I'd argue no, unless you think the "greater fool theory" is the c…

If you've got a superpower that enables you to determine the "real" value of something rather than its "perceived" value, you can use it to become the richest man in the world.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#676

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:15 PM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #73

> It's easier now to start and grow a company than it has ever been. That means more people start them, that those who do get better terms from investors, and that the resulting companies become more valuable. This may be a quibble, because I think Paul Graham really means a certain type of high-growth startup in mind when he says "start a company". But the rate of new business formation in the US has fallen off a cl…

You're a successful machinist/plumber/accountant/chiropractor/electrician/IT specialist/etc with a couple decades under your belt working for other people. In decades past you'd strike out on your own.

In 2021 you look at the regulatory environment and overhead costs of starting a business, say "screw that" pick it up as a side gig and find a day job where you can coast. Maybe if you have some special love for the IRS you make an LLC and call yourself a consultant.

This change has affected both the blue collar trades and a growing share of white collar professions these days. The larger of a headache it is to be Real Business(TM) the larger the potential upside needed to justify it. Unless you think your ideas are gonna change your industry or you plan to become the regionally dominant player in your niche why start a real business when a cash only side gig will scratch that itch most of the time?

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#677

Post by bumby » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:16 PM UTC

alpha_squared wrote: post #454

missedthecue wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate this comparison. Stock based compensation didn't exist in 1965. It's an oranges to apples comparison. CEO salaries today are still about 20-1, depending on the business. For instance: - Doug McMillon of Walmart makes $1.2 million in salary. - James Quincy of Coca-Cola makes $1.5 million in salary. - JPMorgan's CEO Jamie Dimon has a $1.5 million salary. - Sundar Pichai of Google makes $2 million in salary. You…

You're not wrong, but the perspective feels like missing the forest for the trees. So what if stock-based compensation was uncommon in 1965? The average employee doesn't get to benefit from the very real contributions they've made to the company, while the CEO does benefit. Why didn't employee profit-sharing increase at the same rate as non-salary compensation did for CEOs? That's still relevant. Additionally, your c…

To a certain extent, I think the worker is at least in part to blame. According to the BLS, union membership has declined from over 20% in the early 1980s to 6.3% today in the private workforce. I personally don't think it's by chance that this coincides with wage stagnation or even decline.

Union membership is much higher in public institutions (I personally have some issues with that but it's a digression) which probably un-ironically are known to be relatively stable and well paid.

And yet, workforces continually vote against unionization while these debates about pay abound. Maybe it's just the vocal minority, but I don't quite get it.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#678

Post by asdffdsa » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:17 PM UTC

samatman wrote: post #613

alpha_squared wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong, but the perspective feels like missing the forest for the trees. So what if stock-based compensation was uncommon in 1965? The average employee doesn't get to benefit from the very real contributions they've made to the company, while the CEO does benefit. Why didn't employee profit-sharing increase at the same rate as non-salary compensation did for CEOs? That's still relevant. Additionally, your c…

> The average employee doesn't get to benefit from the very real contributions they've made to the company, while the CEO does benefit. Why didn't employee profit-sharing increase at the same rate as non-salary compensation did for CEOs? That's still relevant. This is correct, but the post you're replying to has the answer: CEOs successfully claimed more of the portion of surplus value which was going to stockholders…

Give stock to employees. Easy

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#679

Post by bumby » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:17 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #675

bumby wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While you're not wrong, I think what you're missing is an important qualifier. Sometimes they are creating perceived value that doesn't materialize. Meaning the value is at least part speculation, rather than realized value. E.g., did Broadcast.com really create nearly $6B in value just because that's what it was speculatively valued at when purchased? I'd argue no, unless you think the "greater fool theory" is the c…

If you've got a superpower that enables you to determine the "real" value of something rather than its "perceived" value, you can use it to become the richest man in the world.

Intrinsic value can be measured, albeit imperfectly. Equity, as an example, is measuring real assets as opposed to some pie-in-the-sky assumption of future worth built on a foundation of hopes and dreams. Value investors have in fact gotten rich this way for a long time.

Re: How People Get Rich Now

#680

Post by throwaway22211 » Mon, Apr 12, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

ivan888 wrote: post #645

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually? Please ... That's called insider trading and those who do that ends up in jail or at best have to hide in the sun for the rest of their life.

Is "hide in the sun" an idiom I'm unfamiliar with? Genuinely curious about what this means

Non-extradition countries are often tropical. "in the sun". https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...

Latin countries, while not technically non-extradition, are still easy to hide in ... and also "in the sun"