Having started now a couple of businesses, one of which is doing well, I can say:
There is a ridiculously high bar to vault in order to break through to a self-sustaining income valuable enough to employ multiple people. This is why vcs/investors hold so much power in the equation, and maybe why the studies are skewed wealthy.
Trying to do this is indeed a risk, as it is not only a lot of work but it could very easily change you and your personality. It could put your personal dollar reserves in jeopardy. In my case, it cost me a wife. I don't blame the work for that, I recognize that I am a very different man than I was before I took the leap.
I do think it is unfair though to say that only the wealthy are entrepreneurs, because that wealth came at some point through someone themselves making the jump. At the same time, I also think the barrier to entry needs to be looked at somehow.
> I do think it is unfair though to say that only the wealthy are entrepreneurs, because that wealth came at some point through someone themselves making the jump.
When we talk about entrepreneurs, it is important to distinguish between those who start from scratch, those who have upper middle class parents and those who are born truly rich. For the latter two buckets, it is not that those folks made jumps; its just that their parents accumulated enough wealth over time that they were able to provide their kids with enough cushions.
I'd like to be successful enough to give my kids that kind of cushion. Shouldn't they be able to take advantage of it since I worked for it and gave it to them? So the 'jump' is a team effort over a couple generations, does that make it less valid?
It's not about validity and it isn't making a claim that it's wrong to use the resources given to you.
It's simply saying that capital is more important than people think.
Business and entrepreneurship is honestly worse than religion. Thousands of garbage blogs saying "don't give up" is the key to everything. Self help books, videos of motivational navy seal speeches, "following your passion." When the reality is most of them simply had access to capital. I would imagine most entrepreneurs are hard workers already or are already motivated. But capital is what really matters.
>Shouldn't they be able to take advantage of it since I worked for it and gave it to them?
Let's turn that around. Imagine your business starts out well, you have a kid or two and then it fails. And you're broke. And your kids have no cushion. Should your kids now have a worse start into life?
Assuming we know nothing about you and knowing how many businesses fail, it's quite likely that this second situation might happen. And if you come out ahead, it happens to countless of people starting a business. Should their kids be at a disadvantage? I don't consider this reasonable.
> It could put your personal dollar reserves in jeopardy.
> I do think it is unfair though to say that only the wealthy are entrepreneurs
Many people don't have personal dollar reserves to take that kind of risk in the first place. While you might argue that people who aren't wealthy have personal dollar reserves, I think that having enough money to be able to forgo income for long enough to get a business off the ground and live of savings is a pretty good definition of wealth
Are you repeating this trope because you really believe it or because it's convenient for your argument?
Being poor is expensive. Thinking about how to survive on the little money you have is stressful. Having a negative worth just to have housing is both. Those living paycheck to paycheck don't have another choice.
You can see from basic math that people living paycheck to paycheck, who aren't "poor" are spending a lot more money than they could. Half the population is doing it, and looking the income distribution it is clear that most of those people don't have to.
Edit:
You're applying an argument about the poor to people making middle quartile income, which doesn't make any sense at all.
I spent many evening hours working, and did not foster the relationship. I stayed up late at night, she was going to bed alone. Even good relationships need constant work.
Secondly, I think working for myself somewhat transitioned me from "boy to man" so to speak, not in a good way. I became less inherently trusting of other people, and sometimes the stress wore on me and I became distant.
It's probably quite common. This is the part of Elon Musk's story which people rarely mention. Divorce is a high cost for any business, and I'm sorry you went through it.
I've read it takes a couple hours a day to maintain the feeling of romantic love in a relationship (according to Willard F. Harley). If you're in love this is pleasurable time spent rather than constant work, but it's really easy to let other stuff get in the way.
There is a ridiculously high bar to vault in order to break through to a self-sustaining income valuable enough to employ multiple people. This is why vcs/investors hold so much power in the equation, and maybe why the studies are skewed wealthy.
Trying to do this is indeed a risk, as it is not only a lot of work but it could very easily change you and your personality. It could put your personal dollar reserves in jeopardy. In my case, it cost me a wife. I don't blame the work for that, I recognize that I am a very different man than I was before I took the leap.
I do think it is unfair though to say that only the wealthy are entrepreneurs, because that wealth came at some point through someone themselves making the jump. At the same time, I also think the barrier to entry needs to be looked at somehow.