5 ms·

I don't see what's emotional about it. I view the assertion that being a risk-taker in the startup world is synonymous with being privileged as absurd and adole

• bootload 10y ago
  " I view the assertion that being a risk-taker in the startup world is synonymous with being privileged as absurd and adolescent." Just being in the position to ^take risk^, is privilege itself.
  • aminok 10y ago
    It does not automatically mean one is more privileged than those who choose to work for startups, which is what the article implies.
    • crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
      Would you agree it does often mean that? More specifically, for what percentage of startups would you consider it fair to say?
      • aminok 10y ago
        I have no idea, but a statistical correlation does not justify the blanket characterization made by the article, where "risk-taker" is essentially held as a synonym for "privileged".
        • crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
          What's the harm?
          • aminok 10y ago
            It diminishes the accomplishments of entrepreneurs, and the sacrifices they've made. If they only have large equity stakes in the companies they founded because they're "privileged" it casts them as undeserving of the wealth they acquired.
            • crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
              Ok. And what's the harm in that?
              • aminok 10y ago
                Isn't it self-evident? It harms their standing and reputation, in being cast as in possession of wealth they are not morally entitled to. It's defamation.
                • crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
                  Privileged =/= undeserving Can you show an example of damage done by this sort of "defamation"?
                  • aminok 10y ago
                    Privileged clearly implies undeserving.
    • bootload 10y ago
      "does not automatically mean one is more privileged than those who choose to work for startups," It does in a way. Founders eating ramen, working long, odd hours, for an idea that may not pay off at all; Who can walk away from a startup and brush it off as experience. An employee doesn't get that opportunity. An employee also doesn't take the risk. They may never have the opportunity to take these kinds of risks.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• awinder 10y ago
  "Shame on the author for making such a ridiculous blanket characterization about entrepreneurs that discounts their sacrifice, in the name of brain-dead socialist ideology." What part of that was not a call to emotion?
  • aminok 10y ago
    Yes I admit that part conveys emotion, but that's not the part the parent commenter was citing. I think emotion has its uses, like defending entire classes of people from being unfairly denigrated by simplistic blanket characterizations.
    • robjan 10y ago
      Who is being denigrated?
      • aminok 10y ago
        The entrepreneur with a large equity stake. The entrepreneur who sacrificed and bled to build a company.
        • robjan 10y ago
          Ah. Poor entrepreneurs, I guess. Denigrated by the working classes.
          • aminok 10y ago
            No one should be unfairly denigrated. Your class based narrative doesn't justify treating people unfairly.
• crdoconnor 10y ago
  >I view the assertion that being a risk-taker in the startup world is synonymous with being privileged as absurd and adolescent. http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf "The factors that affect the supply of entrepreneurs are important but poorly understood. We study a sample of individuals who choose either to be employees or to run their own businesses. Four conclusions emerge. First, consistent with the existence of borrowing constraints on potential entrepreneurs, we find that the probability of self-employment depends markedly upon whether the individual ever received an inheritance or gift. Second, when directly questioned in interview surveys, potential entrepreneurs say that raising capital is their principal problem. Third, consistent with our theoretical framework's predictions, the self-employed have higher levels of job and life satisfaction than employees. Fourth, childhood personality measurements and psychological test scores are of almost no help in predicting who runs their own business later in life. It is access to start-up capital that matters." Further into the study: "Attitude to risk is not the central characteristic that determines who becomes an entrepreneur" tl;dr "adolescent" study demonstrates risk is a convenient narrative that justifies why some people can have nice things and others can't. Access to capital is what counts.
  • aminok 10y ago
    A statistical correlation does not justify a blanket characterization. Suggestions to the contrary are adolescent and absurd.