"We have helped them with contacts in corporations, but they have to do the interviews and “earn” the jobs." What? I'd bet there's way more "failures" (for wh

"We have helped them with contacts in corporations, but they have to do the interviews and “earn” the jobs." What? I'd bet there's way more "failures" (for whatever reasonable definition) out there that would have succeeded with a few good contacts than there are "failures" that would have blown it given the chance. There's a lot of other red flags in this article too. The section about how kids got to make their own rules sounds good, but the two examples they gave really don't sound like rational decisions that would be made by young children. Maybe they were subtlely encouraged to go in that direction by mum and dad, or maybe the children did naturally elect to go with those rules. Hopefully if they did, it was all 12 of them, because all I can think about is Paul Graham's article on good vs bad procrastination. If only 10 wanted to go along with it, what would the other 2 have accomplished instead if they didn't have to clean their room every single night of the first two decades of their lives? I haven't vacuumed my room in 6 weeks and I bet I earn more than at least half of these kids, if that's how we're measuring success. Maybe that half should have spent less time cleaning and more time playing puzzle games or manipulating the pokemon card market at school.