This seems like common sense -- those that have some sort of solid safety net tend to be able to stick to their search for a business model that works longer th

This seems like common sense -- those that have some sort of solid safety net tend to be able to stick to their search for a business model that works longer than someone that doesn't. Obvious. There are examples of people that take other paths but they tend to need more raw luck than people at the other end of the scale. But I also notice that these people need not be from great wealth. They just need to know that they won't starve or go homeless and, perhaps, get a bit of help with business expenses. It just turns out that even that level of wealth is a bit hard to come by and doesn't apply to the majority of people in the US. This is why I advocate for some sort of 'solid floor' socialism in the US. If people knew that they always had a meal and a place to live we'd see a lot more 'risk taking' because we will have removed a risk singularity from the market. We are really, really close to this already -- it would not take that much more to make our 'soft floor' welfare into something people can unquestionably count on. We'd also see a lot more entrepreneurs serving currently underserved populations just because they will be drawn from that population and will know their pain points and how best to serve them.