3 ms·

I think you've pointed out the fourth kind of luck, as described in the article. The people building the houses, driving the Bobcats, have a skill they've devel

I think you've pointed out the fourth kind of luck, as described in the article. The people building the houses, driving the Bobcats, have a skill they've developed over time through their effort, that now affords them employment. If you know how to do something, and someone needs that, they're going to call you up and ask you if you'd like to do that thing for some amount of time for some amount of money. So that ability is a form of wealth. I don't think he's talking about everyone in the world becoming passive investors; kind of the opposite actually.

vlovich123 5y ago
That literally is not what the author wrote though. He said that “if you’re the best at something and you’re connected with someone that needs that skill” then you’ll get some wealth potentially. That’s not the same as learning a trade that is easily accessible and attainable by anyone interested. What the author basically says in the article is “be part of the owner class generating wealth or you are a parasite”. Talk about playing the very same status games he claims to eschew.
- danlugo92 5y ago
  > a trade that is easily accessible and attainable by anyone interested. There's sufficient trades that people could go and pick up that pay well yet they don't.
  - vlovich123 5y ago
    Have you read the article? It’s discussing wealth. Learning a trade is literally not what it’s about. It’s taking about how you should try to find ways for wealth generation to be a passive enterprise, but with an extremely toxic perspective.