4 ms·
I think that the rich and the poor should have equal protection of the laws, as a matter of principle. Investor accreditation could be done on the basis of pas
by nokcha 9y ago
I think that the rich and the poor should have equal protection of the laws, as a matter of principle. Investor accreditation could be done on the basis of passing an exam (similar to how lawyers need to pass a bar exam in order to practice law) instead of on the basis of net wealth or annual income.
>There is no person (a) who doesn't meet the accredited investor requirement and (b) for whom an illiquid, volatile security like start-up equity is a prudent risk-reward decision.
I disagree. I don't meet the wealth or income requirements for 'accredited investor' status, but if I had been allowed to invest some money in early-stage tech start-ups, I could have done quite well for myself.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoHow much would you have invested, and how well would you have done had the start-ups went belly up?
- patentatt 9y agoDon’t know why this is being downvoted. The above comment makes it seem like early stage venture capital is an easy money spigot, and the only barrier to them getting rich is the big bad government.
- nokcha 9y ago>How much would you have invested Only what I could have afforded to lose. Around $5k. Not a lot of money (maybe even too small an amount to overcome the friction of traditional early-stage fundraising), but I would have gotten a much better RoI than my indexed stock-market fund got. >and how well would you have done had the start-ups went belly up? Well clearly I would have done poorly in that case. But that is why I don't invest more than I can afford to lose in risky investments.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago"but I would have gotten a much better RoI than my indexed stock-market fund got." Are you sure? How many stories have we heard here about people being diluted to shit when big investors come in?