5 ms·

Definitely a class difference. From the essay > Computers were expensive in those days and it took me years of nagging before I convinced my father to buy one,

Definitely a class difference. From the essay > Computers were expensive in those days and it took me years of nagging before I convinced my father to buy one, a TRS-80, in about 1980." Based on a quick search, the price was probably about $1200-$2000 inflation adjusted dollars. I grew up in probably a similar environment, my dad was also a physicist, and I also had access to computers from a young age, and I was encouraged to explore interests in technology, science etc, without pressure to make sure I found a successful career. Over time I've realized that paradoxically, a culture of not valuing money/success is actually a marker of being upper class, because 1. You are quite likely to succeed even without any specific plan if you are well educated 2. The risk of financial ruin is not the same if your friends and family are financially stable enough that if worst comes to worst you would always have a place to sleep. Because this safety net does not involve any assistance except in the darkest timeline, it's very easy to forget that it exists as an invisible insurance that not everybody has. I wish everyone did.

dang 6y ago
I think you might be overestimating how much money pg's family had; I'm pretty sure they were squarely middle-class (e.g. the next sentence reads "The gold standard then was the Apple II, but a TRS-80 was good enough," and that took "years of nagging"). Strictly from a class point of view his background would have been risk-averse. But your point about the intellectual environment seems solid.
- jeremysalwen 6y ago
  I think people have different definitions of "upper class". Maybe "Upper-middle class" would have been a better term, since pretty much everyone in the U.S. calls themselves some flavor of middle class. But my point is is that most people are not doing nearly as well financially as a mathematician/manager working at Westinghouse modeling nuclear reactors[1][2]. For example, 70% of americans have less than $1,000 of savings[3]. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/work.html http://www.paulgraham.com/work.html [2] http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html [3] https://www.fool.com/retirement/2019/12/18/the-percentage-of-americans-with-less-than-1000-in/ https://www.fool.com/retirement/2019/12/18/the-percentage-of...
  - dang 6y ago
    I agree. The question is whether they were above or below the financial threshold where kids know they'll be fine no matter what they do, and so are freer to take risks and pursue their interests. That's a popular argument to make about entrepreneurship being a class privilege, for example showing up in many comments in this thread. I don't know where that line is, but my impression is that people making this argument usually draw it somewhat higher than Westinghouse engineers and middle-managers (except maybe when they want the line to turn out somewhere relative to a particular person they're arguing about). My sense is still that pg's intellectual background was more significant than this factor, but that's based on my own experience. Even though my upbringing was at the poorer end of the middle class (raised by a single mother who was a nurse), I didn't grow up risk-averse—and I also got the computer (a better one than a TRS-80, and totally not appreciating what my mom must have sacrificed to buy it). What I lacked was intellectual relationships or mentorship of any kind.
    - DC1350 6y ago
      What do you think about the idea that it's a generational mindset? What motivates me more than anything else is the fear that I'll never own property, and I'll have to live with roommates or a have a very long commute for the rest of my life. It's hard for me to get over this because it looks like that's just mathematical reality. There's not many careers that provide a decent lifestyle anymore so I don't have the opportunity to fail. I want to be wrong though
      - dang 6y ago
        My guess is no better than yours, but FWIW I doubt that it's generational. I think people tend to overestimate that factor, plus the current generation also has some advantages over earlier ones, not only disadvantages. I think the causality arrow more likely goes in the other direction: i.e. not that you have this fear because of the generation you were born in, but rather that the fear is influencing you to see things in these terms. I hope that doesn't sound overly psychologizing! It's actually good news if so, because you can't change when you were born, but it's possible to work with fear.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
auganov 6y ago
A large portion of the population seems perfectly happy leading a simple life. You don't need to worry about financial ruin if you work a basic job and have no debt. Nobody finds them not caring about money interesting since that's the rule. Also, many have a hard time believing others have different desires and will only believe those who can "prove it" by foregoing something they have easy access to.

dang 6y ago

I think you might be overestimating how much money pg's family had; I'm pretty sure they were squarely middle-class (e.g. the next sentence reads "The gold standard then was the Apple II, but a TRS-80 was good enough," and that took "years of nagging"). Strictly from a class point of view his background would have been risk-averse. But your point about the intellectual environment seems solid.

jeremysalwen 6y ago
I think people have different definitions of "upper class". Maybe "Upper-middle class" would have been a better term, since pretty much everyone in the U.S. calls themselves some flavor of middle class. But my point is is that most people are not doing nearly as well financially as a mathematician/manager working at Westinghouse modeling nuclear reactors[1][2]. For example, 70% of americans have less than $1,000 of savings[3]. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/work.html http://www.paulgraham.com/work.html [2] http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html [3] https://www.fool.com/retirement/2019/12/18/the-percentage-of-americans-with-less-than-1000-in/ https://www.fool.com/retirement/2019/12/18/the-percentage-of...
- dang 6y ago
  I agree. The question is whether they were above or below the financial threshold where kids know they'll be fine no matter what they do, and so are freer to take risks and pursue their interests. That's a popular argument to make about entrepreneurship being a class privilege, for example showing up in many comments in this thread. I don't know where that line is, but my impression is that people making this argument usually draw it somewhat higher than Westinghouse engineers and middle-managers (except maybe when they want the line to turn out somewhere relative to a particular person they're arguing about). My sense is still that pg's intellectual background was more significant than this factor, but that's based on my own experience. Even though my upbringing was at the poorer end of the middle class (raised by a single mother who was a nurse), I didn't grow up risk-averse—and I also got the computer (a better one than a TRS-80, and totally not appreciating what my mom must have sacrificed to buy it). What I lacked was intellectual relationships or mentorship of any kind.
  - DC1350 6y ago
    What do you think about the idea that it's a generational mindset? What motivates me more than anything else is the fear that I'll never own property, and I'll have to live with roommates or a have a very long commute for the rest of my life. It's hard for me to get over this because it looks like that's just mathematical reality. There's not many careers that provide a decent lifestyle anymore so I don't have the opportunity to fail. I want to be wrong though
    - dang 6y ago
      My guess is no better than yours, but FWIW I doubt that it's generational. I think people tend to overestimate that factor, plus the current generation also has some advantages over earlier ones, not only disadvantages. I think the causality arrow more likely goes in the other direction: i.e. not that you have this fear because of the generation you were born in, but rather that the fear is influencing you to see things in these terms. I hope that doesn't sound overly psychologizing! It's actually good news if so, because you can't change when you were born, but it's possible to work with fear.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

auganov 6y ago

A large portion of the population seems perfectly happy leading a simple life. You don't need to worry about financial ruin if you work a basic job and have no debt. Nobody finds them not caring about money interesting since that's the rule. Also, many have a hard time believing others have different desires and will only believe those who can "prove it" by foregoing something they have easy access to.