4 ms·

The only thing they have incommon is that they refuse to change their lives. They don't make use of their own capabilities to make changes. Specially the Ameri

The only thing they have incommon is that they refuse to change their lives. They don't make use of their own capabilities to make changes. Specially the American culture has this idiotic thing where people are so afraid to called a failure or to be someone who quits. That's probably doing more damage than anything to yourselfs.

tluyben2 5y ago
I am not sure that is true though. When I was really into 'becoming a big startup' etc, I was taking lessons from almost exclusively US founders. If things fail, go bankrupt and repeat was a main point. But I was in the EU and here (outside of the UK, at least as far as I have seen in practice) bankruptcy is a big taboo and you are judged by it. Instead of it being something you at least tried but failed, it is seen as a deep flaw over here and it can haunt you for a long time as bankruptcy information is public. Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost, but that seriously makes no sense in many cases which can be outside your control. My last one was 8 years ago: I pivoted and it has been good since then. After selling a company, I have to find something new and that seems to fail 1-3 times in short succession, not all with bankruptcy of course, and then a business picks up momentum. I digress, but I think the US has a healthier attitude towards failure. Maybe I am wrong of course: I never lived there.
- Hokusai 5y ago
  > it is seen as a deep flaw over here and it can haunt you for a long time When a company goes bankrupt it can bring down with it smaller providers and self employed workers. If you only lose venture capital, that is not so bad as it is part of the risk/reward. Why anyone would like to do business with an entrepreneur that uses bankruptcy to move on? I guess that in-advance payments could be a solution. Bankruptcy is a last resort mechanism. It makes sense to let people move on when, without bad intention, they just failed a business. To make mistakes is human. But to abuse the privilege betting in high risk business and letting others pay for it seems immoral and not long-term sustainable for the economy.
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    Agreed, it should not be abused, but when it is inevitable it should be possible to move on and be some kind of stigma held over you.
- watwut 5y ago
  Bankruptcy means that somebody else ends up paying for what you spent on the business attempt. It means that people and companies who provided services don't get paid. It is not no harm done who cares event. High risk businesses have a cost. Trying multiple of them and expecting others to swallow looses they did not caused sounds to me like abusing the system meant to get you out of genuine failure.
  - tluyben2 5y ago
    It is a last resort: the point was it should not put a permanent stigma on your head. I am not talking about people who abuse it: I am talking about doing your best and it does not work with no way out.
    - watwut 5y ago
      > If things fail, go bankrupt and repeat was a main point. This is not treating it as a last resort, this is "you rely on repeated bankruptcy" as a part of strategy. So they go into high risk business with expectation that someone else will pay if that fails. (Which is ok in only speculators loose money, but not ok if they end up not paying suppliers, sub-contractors etc for services.) > Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost, but that seriously makes no sense in many cases which can be outside your control. This is judges and lawyers treating bankruptcy as a last resort.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost Judges and lawyers probably do that very close to the extent that that is actually a requirement of the bankruptcy laws, which are intended as a last resort.

tluyben2 5y ago

I am not sure that is true though. When I was really into 'becoming a big startup' etc, I was taking lessons from almost exclusively US founders. If things fail, go bankrupt and repeat was a main point. But I was in the EU and here (outside of the UK, at least as far as I have seen in practice) bankruptcy is a big taboo and you are judged by it. Instead of it being something you at least tried but failed, it is seen as a deep flaw over here and it can haunt you for a long time as bankruptcy information is public. Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost, but that seriously makes no sense in many cases which can be outside your control. My last one was 8 years ago: I pivoted and it has been good since then. After selling a company, I have to find something new and that seems to fail 1-3 times in short succession, not all with bankruptcy of course, and then a business picks up momentum. I digress, but I think the US has a healthier attitude towards failure. Maybe I am wrong of course: I never lived there.

Hokusai 5y ago
> it is seen as a deep flaw over here and it can haunt you for a long time When a company goes bankrupt it can bring down with it smaller providers and self employed workers. If you only lose venture capital, that is not so bad as it is part of the risk/reward. Why anyone would like to do business with an entrepreneur that uses bankruptcy to move on? I guess that in-advance payments could be a solution. Bankruptcy is a last resort mechanism. It makes sense to let people move on when, without bad intention, they just failed a business. To make mistakes is human. But to abuse the privilege betting in high risk business and letting others pay for it seems immoral and not long-term sustainable for the economy.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  Agreed, it should not be abused, but when it is inevitable it should be possible to move on and be some kind of stigma held over you.
watwut 5y ago
Bankruptcy means that somebody else ends up paying for what you spent on the business attempt. It means that people and companies who provided services don't get paid. It is not no harm done who cares event. High risk businesses have a cost. Trying multiple of them and expecting others to swallow looses they did not caused sounds to me like abusing the system meant to get you out of genuine failure.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  It is a last resort: the point was it should not put a permanent stigma on your head. I am not talking about people who abuse it: I am talking about doing your best and it does not work with no way out.
  - watwut 5y ago
    > If things fail, go bankrupt and repeat was a main point. This is not treating it as a last resort, this is "you rely on repeated bankruptcy" as a part of strategy. So they go into high risk business with expectation that someone else will pay if that fails. (Which is ok in only speculators loose money, but not ok if they end up not paying suppliers, sub-contractors etc for services.) > Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost, but that seriously makes no sense in many cases which can be outside your control. This is judges and lawyers treating bankruptcy as a last resort.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost Judges and lawyers probably do that very close to the extent that that is actually a requirement of the bankruptcy laws, which are intended as a last resort.