"According to his LinkedIn profile, he is now an analyst for the private equity firm Blackstone. He is 22." What does "he is 22" have to do with anything? He's

"According to his LinkedIn profile, he is now an analyst for the private equity firm Blackstone. He is 22." What does "he is 22" have to do with anything? He's joining as an analyst at the age that people join as analysts, right out of college. And the thing about his only experience being his family wealth fund is not correct - from his linkedin, he did a 3 month summer internship last year at blackrock and presumably got a full time offer at the end of it. I don't understand how a rich kid getting a job as an analyst as a PE firm after doing a summer internship there is the most compelling example of people "failing up," especially in the context of the examples the rest of the article brings up (nepotism in the white house). This article is just so poorly written. An analyst position is an example of everything wrong with american capitalism? The fact that a guy that went to USC (maybe we should focus on how he got into university), the fact that a guy who went to university and interned at a firm then got an entry level job at the firm - that's a "glass floor?" The article acts as if it's shocking that someone with "two failed ventures" ends up as an analyst. If you have a successful venture, you're not going to start as an analyst! That's the bottom of the ladder! That's like an 85k base salary in NY + bonus - that's not a glass floor for a billionare! People make more money in their first year coming out of state school in tech jobs in NY, you ahve to move up the ladder to make real money, and blackstone isn't going to move him up the ladder if he doesn't do a good job. Yes, he always has his wealth fund to fall back to, but "rich people have intergenerational wealth to stay not poor" is not as compelling a headline as "rich people are stealing our jobs" I guess.