4 ms·
Have you talked to anyone over the age of say 25 about why they’re not starting a company? It’s not “it’s hard and I might fail.” I only ever hear: I have love
by ethanbond 4y ago
Have you talked to anyone over the age of say 25 about why they’re not starting a company?
It’s not “it’s hard and I might fail.” I only ever hear: I have loved ones whose health, education, and financial security I can’t put at risk.
This problem exists even if you have complete certainty you’ll succeed, because en route to that certain success, your loved ones are still at immense risk.
- em-bee 4y agothat doesn't make sense. if there is risk then i can't possibly have complete certainty that i'll succeed. "i can't put my family at risk" is exactly the same as "i might fail"
- highwaylights 4y agoIt’s not even remotely the same. I might fail to get a hole-in-one at mini golf, but the stakes of trying are pretty much zero. Anyone who either has no dependents or comes from enough money that it doesn’t matter can’t begin to relate to this.
- badpun 4y agoThe stakes of failing at a startup when having no dependands are not "pretty much zero". It sucks to kill yourself for a couple of years and have nothing to show for it, especially if you know that, for all that time, you could've coasted in some job and accumulated a nice sum.
- em-bee 4y agoif all you care about is money, sure. but if i hire you i care about your experience, not the money you already accumulated. and if your partner only cares about your money, find a better partner. spending a few years gaining experience instead of earning money is not nothing to show for. on the contrary. it's the more valuable experience for your future. money is not everything.
- badpun 4y agoMost people work for money... And you might be getting more valuable experience in a job than being a generalist who runs the startup (the market doesn't need many people like this).
- em-bee 4y agook, i see what you are getting at. fear of failure in itself vs actual risk of loosing your savings.
- highwaylights 4y agoFor most people it’s actual risk of rendering your children homeless.
- em-bee 4y agothat's pretty much limited to the united states though.
- highwaylights 4y agoIt's really not, I'm not sure why you'd think that. Even then, I imagine there's a lot of countries in the world where running out of money would mean landing in a safety net that still involves relocating to the the most basic accommodation available that may be neither safe nor close to any friends and/or family.
- em-bee 4y agoi can only speak about the countries that i know, but no, generally people are not forced out of their homes into the most basic accommodation available. at worst, they may be asked to move into a smaller apartment in the same area, or rent out some of the rooms to supplement the cost of the rent. they are also not uprooted, because family support and social ties are considered important (and better off relatives can be asked to help). especially when there are children, the social environment must be preserved. uprooting people would be considered inhumane. also most european cities generally do not have unsafe neighborhoods. that's really an american thing. (and in third world countries who don't have such a safety net anyways) this needs verification, but i speculate that those countries that actually have a safety net are doing this right, and other countries don't do much at all.
- ethanbond 4y agoNo, it's really not. If it takes you 5 years to hit your guaranteed $100MM payout, and en route your spouse got hit by a car while you had no insurance and your child had to skip vital years of college because you had no paycheck, then it doesn't actually matter that the $100MM payout came exactly when it was guaranteed to come.
- em-bee 4y agoyou are right, i keep forgetting that people in the US don't have affordable healthcare or free quality education.