6 ms·

But if you have less to win, why should you take risks anyway?

by bobo99 16y ago

michael_dorfman 16y ago
Speaking as one who has started several start-ups in Norway, I'd say: there is still quite a bit to win, there is much less risk, and at the end of the day, we're not really in it for the money, are we?
- rick888 16y ago
  "Speaking as one who has started several start-ups in Norway, I'd say: there is still quite a bit to win, there is much less risk, and at the end of the day, we're not really in it for the money, are we?" That last part makes me think that you aren't really making that much and justifying it by saying: "we're not really in it for the money, are we?". Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. If you aren't in it for the money, start a non-profit. Here is a list of the largest 500 companies in Norway (with gross and net revenue): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_companies_of_Norway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_companies_o... Those numbers look pitiful (I'm not sure what the actual dollar amounts are, but I'm just comparing them based on percentages). Having health insurance to fall back on does help with starting a company. But once you get the company established, the amount of taxes you will be required to pay for employees and other things will outweigh any benefits you received initially.
  - michael_dorfman 16y ago
    That last part makes me think that you aren't really making that much and justifying it by saying: "we're not really in it for the money, are we?". Bad guess. My first startup had a successful exit; I'm not at liberty to discuss the numbers, but let's just say that it was for a satisfying amount with the appropriate number of zeroes. Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. If you aren't in it for the money, start a non-profit. I'm not purely in it for the money; I'm in it for the quality of life. After a certain point, each additional dollar/kroner fails to significantly impact the quality of life. Similarly, there are plenty of things I absolutely won't do for money. Having health insurance to fall back on does help with starting a company. But once you get the company established, the amount of taxes you will be required to pay for employees and other things will outweigh any benefits you received initially. Again, wrong. I also received some very generous innovation grants from the Norwegian government. The benefits were plentiful.
    - rick888 16y ago
      "Bad guess. My first startup had a successful exit; I'm not at liberty to discuss the numbers, but let's just say that it was for a satisfying amount with the appropriate number of zeroes." ok. So why say "we all aren't in it for the money", when that is obviously not the case for you. "I'm not purely in it for the money; I'm in it for the quality of life." So you are interested in running a lifestyle business (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business). You also cashed out early. However, what about the people that want to run long-term businesses to help the quality of life for others (by hiring employees and paying them a wage)? "After a certain point, each additional dollar/kroner fails to significantly impact the quality of life." Is this because of taxes? Even if it's not, you can't make that blanket statement for everyone. As a late 20s single guy, I would need a lot less than someone with a wife and kids. You can always use more money for something to improve the quality of your life. Your kids futures, relatives, non-profit organizations, retirement...the list goes on. I don't feel like the government should put limits on my potential success. If it's all sucked away by taxes and other government fees, your choice is gone.
      - tankenmate 16y ago
        The point he was making is the marginal gain from $1,000,000 to $1,100,000 is very different from the marginal gain from $0 to $100,000.
        rick888 16y ago
        Does it really matter? It seems the leftists have flooded ycombinator and don't really want to hear anything besides their own viewpoint.
  - krakensden 16y ago
    > Those numbers look pitiful Number one on that list is the 36th on the Fortune Global 500- probably not /that/ pitiful.
  - stevenbedrick 16y ago
    > Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. No, everybody is not "in it for the money". You said it yourself, actually: most people are in it for the things that money allows them to do. That is a very important difference, and it's one that a lot of people forget about. Here in the US, a lot of the things from which we'd like to be "free" from (living in fear of health care-related bankruptcy, having to beg a boss for an extra week of vacation, being limited to absurdly short and unpaid (ma|pa)ternity leave periods, etc.) come with a hefty price tag, and as such are associated with (and often thought of as proxies for) having a lot of money. In a place like Norway, many of the things that that we Americans see as perks afforded to only the wealthiest of individuals are instead thought of as baseline facts of life. Is it so surprising, then, that people whose world-views are shaped by such a system don't have the same difficulties at disentangling financial cause and effect that we Americans have? They say that "past a certain point, money's just a way of keeping score," and it sounds to me as though that point is a lot lower in a place like Norway than it is here in the US. As an experiment, let's try formulating it (semi)-logically (it's been a while since I had logic, so if I'm getting this wrong, please let me know): if (has lots of money) -> (freedom from financial catastrophe, and lots of social perks) In the US, the inverse is true: not (has lots of money) -> not (freedom from financial catastrophe, lots of social perks, etc.) Because of how our system is set up, the converse is also typically true: if (freedom from financial catastrophe, lots of social perks) -> (has lots of money) This leads us to conclude that there's an inevitable relationship between having lots of money and having the freedom that you talk about. In Norway, however, the system is different, and it doesn't sound like the aforementioned inverse relationship between money and freedom is true: since you can have the freedom from healthcare-related financial catastrophe, a decent vacation policy, educational benefits, etc. all without having tons of money. Since there are different "givens", it's not surprising that Norwegians have arrived at different conclusions and attitudes towards money. QED?
    - rick888 16y ago
      "No, everybody is not "in it for the money". You said it yourself, actually: most people are in it for the things that money allows them to do. That is a very important difference, and it's one that a lot of people forget about." You need money though. So directly or indirectly, money is always a factor. "since you can have the freedom from healthcare-related financial catastrophe, a decent vacation policy, educational benefits, etc. all without having tons of money." Well, you had that money, it just went to the government instead of your pocket. The choices you could have made with that money are now gone. Once you are an established company in the US, you could afford those benefits yourself (which is more efficient because rather than paying for all healthcare, you can figure out what will work for your company). For many non-web related business, it will make it that much more difficult. If you need to spend money on physical goods and your profit margin is razor thin, huge taxes aren't going to make it easier. If you have a business that doesn't scale well with one person (IE: a tech business where you need to hire more employees quickly), the increased employee taxes and requirements might make it an impossibility to continue (if you have no funding). So, it might help with web businesses that can scale well with one employee or ones that are funded by VC. I wonder how many people are actually bootstrapping a company there. "Since there are different "givens", it's not surprising that Norwegians have arrived at different conclusions and attitudes towards money. QED?" Norwegians now have a sense of entitlement. It all depends on what you want. If you want an easier start, but have your overall potential income limited, start a company in Norway. If you want a riskier start, with less limits in the long-run, start your company in the US. I still have to wonder. If this was such a great system, why aren't more people starting companies? There is no risk, right? Why isn't Norway the center for startups?
  - Norse 16y ago
    If you're in it for the money, you won't succeed. That is for certain. If money motivates you, become a day trader, hedge fund manager, bank executive. Work with money. At the kind of shear stress you get at these levels, you need the edge that comes from doing something you want. Just trudging in day after day for the money just won't cut it.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
zdw 16y ago
Fiscal policy aside... Money isn't the only motivation for work, and frankly is a pretty poor/easily corrupted one, if the housing crisis and wall street shenanigans are any indication. Finding an intrinsic motivation (learning new stuff for the joy of it, doing something hard just to prove you can, etc.) is probably more personally satisfying in the long term, and helps avoid burnout.
xilun0 16y ago
Less to win, maybe, but still you can read from the article: "He bought a Porsche". And I doubt everybody wanted to have one in Norway can do so (and even if it is the case, it would be even greater :P ) No human being needs 1 billion dollar to live correctly, and even in indecent luxury. Some people also value well begin of other and not only their own. (It might still be partly egoistic in a sens that this makes them feels better and it's probably very cool to live in an environment where people are happier, but i don't thing that invalidate the whole idea...)
thomasfl 16y ago
If just being wealthy is not enough, then you probably want to live somewhere to become super rich. I would still prefer to live here in Norway.
beoba 16y ago
Same carrot, with less stick.
xxpor 16y ago
I suppose we should have a flat tax also?
- xxpor 16y ago
  Oh, sorry I didn't mean to reply to this comment.
Norse 16y ago
Because the risks are reduced far more than the rewards.

But if you have less to win, why should you take risks anyway?

by bobo99 16y ago

But if you have less to win, why should you take risks anyway?

Speaking as one who has started several start-ups in Norway, I'd say: there is still quite a bit to win, there is much less risk, and at the end of the day, we're not really in it for the money, are we?

rick888 16y ago
"Speaking as one who has started several start-ups in Norway, I'd say: there is still quite a bit to win, there is much less risk, and at the end of the day, we're not really in it for the money, are we?" That last part makes me think that you aren't really making that much and justifying it by saying: "we're not really in it for the money, are we?". Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. If you aren't in it for the money, start a non-profit. Here is a list of the largest 500 companies in Norway (with gross and net revenue): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_companies_of_Norway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_companies_o... Those numbers look pitiful (I'm not sure what the actual dollar amounts are, but I'm just comparing them based on percentages). Having health insurance to fall back on does help with starting a company. But once you get the company established, the amount of taxes you will be required to pay for employees and other things will outweigh any benefits you received initially.
- michael_dorfman 16y ago
  That last part makes me think that you aren't really making that much and justifying it by saying: "we're not really in it for the money, are we?". Bad guess. My first startup had a successful exit; I'm not at liberty to discuss the numbers, but let's just say that it was for a satisfying amount with the appropriate number of zeroes. Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. If you aren't in it for the money, start a non-profit. I'm not purely in it for the money; I'm in it for the quality of life. After a certain point, each additional dollar/kroner fails to significantly impact the quality of life. Similarly, there are plenty of things I absolutely won't do for money. Having health insurance to fall back on does help with starting a company. But once you get the company established, the amount of taxes you will be required to pay for employees and other things will outweigh any benefits you received initially. Again, wrong. I also received some very generous innovation grants from the Norwegian government. The benefits were plentiful.
  - rick888 16y ago
    "Bad guess. My first startup had a successful exit; I'm not at liberty to discuss the numbers, but let's just say that it was for a satisfying amount with the appropriate number of zeroes." ok. So why say "we all aren't in it for the money", when that is obviously not the case for you. "I'm not purely in it for the money; I'm in it for the quality of life." So you are interested in running a lifestyle business (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business). You also cashed out early. However, what about the people that want to run long-term businesses to help the quality of life for others (by hiring employees and paying them a wage)? "After a certain point, each additional dollar/kroner fails to significantly impact the quality of life." Is this because of taxes? Even if it's not, you can't make that blanket statement for everyone. As a late 20s single guy, I would need a lot less than someone with a wife and kids. You can always use more money for something to improve the quality of your life. Your kids futures, relatives, non-profit organizations, retirement...the list goes on. I don't feel like the government should put limits on my potential success. If it's all sucked away by taxes and other government fees, your choice is gone.
    - tankenmate 16y ago
      The point he was making is the marginal gain from $1,000,000 to $1,100,000 is very different from the marginal gain from $0 to $100,000.
      - rick888 16y ago
        Does it really matter? It seems the leftists have flooded ycombinator and don't really want to hear anything besides their own viewpoint.
- krakensden 16y ago
  > Those numbers look pitiful Number one on that list is the 36th on the Fortune Global 500- probably not /that/ pitiful.
- stevenbedrick 16y ago
  > Everyone is in it for the money. Money means freedom. Freedom from governments and your boss. No, everybody is not "in it for the money". You said it yourself, actually: most people are in it for the things that money allows them to do. That is a very important difference, and it's one that a lot of people forget about. Here in the US, a lot of the things from which we'd like to be "free" from (living in fear of health care-related bankruptcy, having to beg a boss for an extra week of vacation, being limited to absurdly short and unpaid (ma|pa)ternity leave periods, etc.) come with a hefty price tag, and as such are associated with (and often thought of as proxies for) having a lot of money. In a place like Norway, many of the things that that we Americans see as perks afforded to only the wealthiest of individuals are instead thought of as baseline facts of life. Is it so surprising, then, that people whose world-views are shaped by such a system don't have the same difficulties at disentangling financial cause and effect that we Americans have? They say that "past a certain point, money's just a way of keeping score," and it sounds to me as though that point is a lot lower in a place like Norway than it is here in the US. As an experiment, let's try formulating it (semi)-logically (it's been a while since I had logic, so if I'm getting this wrong, please let me know): if (has lots of money) -> (freedom from financial catastrophe, and lots of social perks) In the US, the inverse is true: not (has lots of money) -> not (freedom from financial catastrophe, lots of social perks, etc.) Because of how our system is set up, the converse is also typically true: if (freedom from financial catastrophe, lots of social perks) -> (has lots of money) This leads us to conclude that there's an inevitable relationship between having lots of money and having the freedom that you talk about. In Norway, however, the system is different, and it doesn't sound like the aforementioned inverse relationship between money and freedom is true: since you can have the freedom from healthcare-related financial catastrophe, a decent vacation policy, educational benefits, etc. all without having tons of money. Since there are different "givens", it's not surprising that Norwegians have arrived at different conclusions and attitudes towards money. QED?
  - rick888 16y ago
    "No, everybody is not "in it for the money". You said it yourself, actually: most people are in it for the things that money allows them to do. That is a very important difference, and it's one that a lot of people forget about." You need money though. So directly or indirectly, money is always a factor. "since you can have the freedom from healthcare-related financial catastrophe, a decent vacation policy, educational benefits, etc. all without having tons of money." Well, you had that money, it just went to the government instead of your pocket. The choices you could have made with that money are now gone. Once you are an established company in the US, you could afford those benefits yourself (which is more efficient because rather than paying for all healthcare, you can figure out what will work for your company). For many non-web related business, it will make it that much more difficult. If you need to spend money on physical goods and your profit margin is razor thin, huge taxes aren't going to make it easier. If you have a business that doesn't scale well with one person (IE: a tech business where you need to hire more employees quickly), the increased employee taxes and requirements might make it an impossibility to continue (if you have no funding). So, it might help with web businesses that can scale well with one employee or ones that are funded by VC. I wonder how many people are actually bootstrapping a company there. "Since there are different "givens", it's not surprising that Norwegians have arrived at different conclusions and attitudes towards money. QED?" Norwegians now have a sense of entitlement. It all depends on what you want. If you want an easier start, but have your overall potential income limited, start a company in Norway. If you want a riskier start, with less limits in the long-run, start your company in the US. I still have to wonder. If this was such a great system, why aren't more people starting companies? There is no risk, right? Why isn't Norway the center for startups?
- Norse 16y ago
  If you're in it for the money, you won't succeed. That is for certain. If money motivates you, become a day trader, hedge fund manager, bank executive. Work with money. At the kind of shear stress you get at these levels, you need the edge that comes from doing something you want. Just trudging in day after day for the money just won't cut it.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

zdw 16y ago

Fiscal policy aside... Money isn't the only motivation for work, and frankly is a pretty poor/easily corrupted one, if the housing crisis and wall street shenanigans are any indication. Finding an intrinsic motivation (learning new stuff for the joy of it, doing something hard just to prove you can, etc.) is probably more personally satisfying in the long term, and helps avoid burnout.

xilun0 16y ago

Less to win, maybe, but still you can read from the article: "He bought a Porsche". And I doubt everybody wanted to have one in Norway can do so (and even if it is the case, it would be even greater :P ) No human being needs 1 billion dollar to live correctly, and even in indecent luxury. Some people also value well begin of other and not only their own. (It might still be partly egoistic in a sens that this makes them feels better and it's probably very cool to live in an environment where people are happier, but i don't thing that invalidate the whole idea...)

thomasfl 16y ago

If just being wealthy is not enough, then you probably want to live somewhere to become super rich. I would still prefer to live here in Norway.

beoba 16y ago

Same carrot, with less stick.

xxpor 16y ago

I suppose we should have a flat tax also?

xxpor 16y ago
Oh, sorry I didn't mean to reply to this comment.

Norse 16y ago

Because the risks are reduced far more than the rewards.