I wrote the parent comment last thing at night before going to bed. On reflection, and having read the article again, I still stand by it, although I couched i

I wrote the parent comment last thing at night before going to bed. On reflection, and having read the article again, I still stand by it, although I couched it in strong terms in response to the smugness and sneering tone of the article. Young people today are more qualified than ever. They have more degrees and spend longer in education than any generation before. On top of that, there are huge numbers of grad schemes, growing startups and government jobs. Graduate employment is extremely high. His observation that startups have a high failure rate is completely self evident. Obviously deciding to become an entrepreneur doesn't put you on a path to riches. The fact that younger founders have higher failure rates is tautologically obvious too, since most people don't get lucky on their first startup. Most successful founders I know struck gold on their second third or even fourth attempt. That's partly experience (experience in starting startups, not whatever experience he things it is you get from politicking in a corporate in your thirties) and partly how probability works. Now if you want to critique the role of corporates and government in all this - throwing money at useless incubators and other schemes and running competitions that amount to exercises graphic design and a slick presenting style - then I'm all ears. But for a non-risk taker to lecture risk takers on risk just really wound me up.