17 ms·

Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something. Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the targe

Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something. Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the target and get a small prize. A very few hit the center bullseye and get a bigger prize. Rags to riches! The American Dream lives on. Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. Some keep going until they hit the center bullseye, then they give speeches or write blog posts about "meritocracy" and the salutary effects of hard work. Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it. -- Original comment from notacoward here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15659076 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15659076

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nightski 4y ago
The world will never be fair, I'm not even sure that is an ideal goal. The best things in my life have come from when I faced adversity, not when I was in a position of privilege. While opportunities are not always equal in quality or number, there are opportunities if you seek them. It's ironic that even though lots of things come down to luck, it's very possible to put oneself in a position that makes it feel like they are very lucky! "Luck" tends to follow those with initiative.
- coldtea 4y ago
  If fairness is not an "ideal goal" what is? >The best things in my life have come from when I faced adversity, not when I was in a position of privilege Does that hold for kids hungry and unable to finish school because their parents don't make enough then? (Or much worse situations)?
  - detourdog 4y ago
    The hard thing to understand about privilege is that it may have just as many constrictions as having nothing. They are different but can be every bit as challenging to a good life.
    - detourdog 4y ago
      I guess people want to believe that if only they were born with more privilege they would be happier and have more freedom to fail. I find that attitude makes the person and circumstances. I won't deny having one's mom rub elbows with the chairman of IBM is a very rare privilege.
  - nightski 4y ago
    To remove barriers and give people a chance to achieve what they desire (if they desire). That doesn't mean everyone will have the same opportunities and/or the same circumstances. And no it doesn't, this is not an argument against assistance programs.
    - digging 4y ago
      Seems like an arbitrary line. Lifting someone out of poverty is removing a barrier. Helping people make social connections is removing a barrier.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > The world will never be fair, I'm not even sure that is an ideal goal. Which is exactly why it is important to have an accurate assessment of who is truly an entrepreneurial genius, contributing to society, and who is starting another Juicero.
boplicity 4y ago
> Middle class kids can afford one throw. Gotta disagree with this. As someone who grew up middle class, I was fortunate, in a lot of ways, to also learn to be prudent with money. I started bootstrapping microbusinesses with almost no monetary investment. This eventually allowed me to support myself (on a very low budget), and then, later, on a slightly larger budget. Eventually, one of these businesses became successful enough to support a family comfortably with an "upper" middle class income. The mistake a lot of people make is that they need to spend significant time and/or money to start a business. You don't. You can work on low-risk businesses, building your skillset so that your odds of success improve over time. No need to aim for the "center" bullseye, either. This is a case where low ambition can be helpful. Instead of trying to grow a huge startup, I was ecstatic when I was able to afford rent in my cheap apartment (with a roommate.) Of course, the situation may be different now for middle class kids. Maybe they don't have some of the same luxuries my family was able to give me: a couple of years of college paid for, attending a few business/marketing conferences as a teenager, examples to follow from my dad and brother. I suspect some of this is true; I sense a lot of pressure on young adults that I didn't feel when I was young. I also recognize that "middle class" in the states is definitely a case of "wealth" in comparison to other parts of the world. Also, when I was young, and learning the ropes, I was young. I didn't have responsibilities; just being able to afford a crappy apartment and food was more than enough.
- nsoonhui 4y ago
  >> Middle class kids can afford one throw. > Gotta disagree with this. As someone who grew up middle class, I was fortunate, in a lot of ways, to also learn to be prudent with money. You said you are fortunate, that actually proves rather than disproves the parent comment, no?
  - boplicity 4y ago
    I don't understand your logic. I was middle class, and could afford more than one throw. The assumption in the OP was that a middle class kid can only afford one throw, which wasn't true, in my case. I was fortunate, because I knew better than to "throw" all of my money at an opportunity, not because I wasn't middle class.
plehoux 4y ago
What a depressing take. Starting young (at 20 years old or earlier) gives you over a decade to explore and discover your entrepreneurial path with low risk. Stop making excuse.
- teolandon 4y ago
  Being under the age of 30 doesn't protect you from bankruptcy.
blueprint 4y ago
what universe do you live in where someone making gte 100k working the carnival is poor?
- jabroni_salad 4y ago
  The median income in the USA is 41k.
  - blueprint 4y ago
    what's your fallacy called? i don't remember. but obviously the comment was about the circus enabling the rich kids' startups. if the circus was the rest of the us then it would be everyone's circus, not the aforementioned one. duh. now the real question is are you arguing in good faith or are you actually on, eg, the side of those rich kids? either way, fallacy is fallacy and you should be downvoted.
czbond 4y ago
Realize the game you and your family are playing. Middle class have 3 paths out: - Single shot entrepreneurship - Repeated entrepreneurship with a job (no free nights or weekends) - Long term, multi generational wealth building over the course of 40-100 years with a mixture of stable career or above A wealthy family did the above but a generation or two before you or yours & someone else is reaping the benefit. Don't get mad at someone else because of your own families path.
- wootland 4y ago
  That's not how most generational wealth was created. From mobsters that went "legit" (Bronfmans, Kennedys...) to people who build their fortunes off war profiteering, slavery, genocide, child labor... They weren't grinding away for 40-100 years at some labor job. They exploited people, captured the gains, then used the power law to stay on the top.
  - czbond 4y ago
    Sure - those are some very specific examples. But whatever town you're in, drive around the nice areas. Those $1M-$5M houses with BMW's or etc. Are they gangsters and warlords? No, they're just normal people who tried and took a different path. Some by luck, some by skill, some by experience. Just as one can't judge a person who's on the streets - one can't judge a wealthy person with such lenses.
    - wootland 4y ago
      The vast majority of those people are middle/upper-middle class people in massive debt. The kind of upper-class Harvard grad that VCs like are most definitely of the old money variety.
      - ameister14 4y ago
        >The kind of upper-class Harvard grad that VCs like are most definitely of the old money variety. Do you have any evidence for this? [edit] Of course, you'll likely be able to find a single case and that's any evidence. So how about is there sufficient evidence to support your conclusion that "old money" is getting all the VC funding?
david38 4y ago
Funny how this doesn’t apply to immigrants. Being lower, middle, upper class is mostly a mindset that dictates your tolerance for risk. Immigrants of the same income level as US born have a far higher tolerance.
- brianwawok 4y ago
  Isn't this self selection bias? The most risk tolerant people are also the most likely to immigrate to a new country? The more conservative people buckle in for a life at the fruit stand or whatever they have in their home country. Maybe not a great life, but it's steady and they know it keeps them fed.
brightball 4y ago
Starting a business is much easier for married couples who are on the same page about what to do. Succeeding is a heck of a lot harder. Both work, you live off the job income from one while the other focuses on starting the business. In preparation for living on a single income, you budget and save the income of the other spouse to start the business. This strategy also works great for saving for a down payment on a house too. A dual income couple can accomplish a lot if they communicate, plan and support each other.
blitz_skull 4y ago
If you can't afford to sink the money into a startup, you probably should not attempt to do so, right? The fallacy here lies in assuming that every startup requires capital. Capital greases the wheels, sure. But far too many people think entrepreneurship is just dumping money into an "idea" until it works, and that's actually the worst possible way to go about building a business. I've been building businesses since I was 10. Very low income family. They certainly weren't funding anything (nor was I in middle-school). But the spirit of entrepreneurship has always been there.
- wootland 4y ago
  If you have a family and live in the US, you will be saddled with mandatory health insurance payments that are basically untenable without a full-time job.
badpun 4y ago
> Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it. Aren't many first-generation immigrants (Koreans etc.) in the US entrepreneurs? They're certainly not middle class, and yet they make in it the business world.
- svnt 4y ago
  Poor isn’t just a temporary personal financial situation. In this case often the parents continue to sacrifice everything so that their children can have a chance at a better life. Being the recipient of the sacrifice of two capable people is not a state of poverty.
- peterxpark 4y ago
  As a son of Korean entrepreneur immigrants, I can say that many of them work less than minimum wage per hour at their business. These bets can work out but it can also be worse than their employees.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago
This ignores generational change. You can bump up your kids to the next level. You see this most often in many of the immigrant families First generation are janitors. Second generation are accountants/engineers. Third generation are doctors/lawyers Fourth generation are entrepreneurs
- danjac 4y ago
  So sucks to be you if you happen to be on the janitor tier, no? That's not really what a meritocracy is supposed to be.
jonnycomputer 4y ago
Actually, poor people start lots of businesses, particularly immigrant families. In lots of cases those tend to be mom-and-pop operations, not things intended to become unicorns or anything, just enough to afford independence from "the man", or to give the kids an opportunity to get an education etc. (Kim's Convenience really gets at this dynamic pretty well for immigrant families). Often times too, poor people's businesses are in the gray economy. Pushing around a cart selling ice-cream, going house to house selling tamales, maintaining a clientele fro nails and hair styling. In fact, one of the biggest obstacles to these folks are the local regulations. I'm no libertarian, but it has long been clear to me that the licensing requirements etc. for some of this stuff is a real obstacle to moving out of the gray economy for them.
- ROTMetro 4y ago
  When I lived in California there were yearly stories about homemade cheese that was getting sold and killing people and a push to remind people of this reality. The 'licensing requirements' are there for a reason, around food the reason is to prevent deaths or permanent disabilities from food poisoning.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    Sure, but other requirements are stupid, like you can't open a cafe in US without having a lot of land for parking. Also in Britain, surprisingly, you can register a takeaway anywhere, even at your home, and if you don't handle animal products, there is no requirements to meet at all. You don't have to show your hygiene rating to customers either. "When you start a new food business or take over an existing business, you must register with your local authority. It’s free to register, and your registration cannot be refused. You should register at least 28 days before opening. If you’re already trading and have not registered, you need to do this as soon as possible."
PragmaticPulp 4y ago
> Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. I see this story repeated over and and over again on the internet, but I don't really see it playing out the same way in the real world. I've seen a lot of "rich kids" try to start businesses, but then quickly realize that it's a huge amount of work and not guaranteed success. Then they look around and see all of their opportunities for safe, high-paying jobs that leverage their expensive education and their parents' network, and decide that taking one of those jobs is a much easier way forward. I lived near a highly ranked MBA school for a while. I would constantly get LinkedIn requests from stereotypical "rich kid" MBA grads who banded together and wanted to "do a startup", but they just needed a few engineers to actually do all the work. It was funny to hear the pitches about how they'd give me 1-5% for doing all of the tech work of their company while all of them (up to 7, in one case) would handle the business side of things for me. No thanks. There are definitely some "rich kid" startup founders out there, but a lot of the founders I've worked with over the years came more from the end of the spectrum where they grew up learning how to work hard, that money doesn't come easy, that they can't rely on parents to bail them out, and so on.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  Rich kids does not mean rich idiots and does imply they do no work. It simply implies that in a case where both have considerable skills and effort, the 'rich kid' will get much farther
  - PragmaticPulp 4y ago
    > It simply implies that in a case where both have considerable skills and effort, the 'rich kid' will get much farther Well if you assume everything is equal but you give one person more money then, sure, that person has a higher chance of success. But that's missing the point: Many important things are not equal between the two groups, and it doesn't always benefit the wealthier one when it comes to starting companies.
- dumbotron 4y ago
  > but then quickly realize that it's a huge amount of work and not guaranteed success The other path I've seen rich kids take is get a good enough job in sales and marketing where they're doing fine, but not as good as their parents. Revision to the mean is real. It's also like the three-generation rule for family businesses. The first builds it, the second maintains it, the third loses it. Alternatively, > My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel
Dig1t 4y ago
I’ve seen this analogy repeatedly many times and it’s becoming a meme. I think this is wrong and that it trivializes people’s accomplishments and hard work as nothing but random chance. There are tons of examples of entrepreneurs who came from nothing that spent long periods of time living with their parents and eating ramen, grinding until they finally made it.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  And for every one of those, there are 10 who did not. Random chance is a dominant factor in life, in some walks of like it's The Dominant Factor. Look at Olympic champions, they all work hard but for every athlete that succeeds, there are 100 that worked just as hard and did not. If you were not randomly allocated the right genes, your chance of winning the Olympics is 0% no matter how hard you work. Or look at traders, they work 100 hours a week, consume cocaine, some die of overwork, some die of overdose. And we have research to prove that random chance is the dominant factor in their work. Working hard for them is a necessity to stay in the game, but it does not assure success.
  - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    > If you were not randomly allocated the right genes, your chance of winning the Olympics is 0% no matter how hard you work Tonya Harding would like a word with you. More seriously, luck beyond can help beyond genetics. Such as having local access to a world-class trainer. Or changes to the rules of a competition (I have heard that Simone Biles' 10s are partly possible because of changes in scoring which value her skillset more than they did previously).
goodpoint 4y ago
> Middle class kids can afford one throw. More like upper middle class or if you are in the right country.
JamesBarney 4y ago
If you're a dev living moderately in a reasonable cost of living city you can afford to go all in on a startup every few years without any familial income or wealth.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  This describes a member of the unlanded gentry class, not the middle class.
ROTMetro 4y ago
This doesn't explain the success rates that low wealth immigrants have when it comes to entrepreneurship. It does feel like an analogy someone would write a sudo-intelectual book based on because it 'feels accurate' while being nothing but pop-crap people use to put energy into being resentful or to justify limits they put on themselves.
dehrmann 4y ago
> Rich kids can afford many throws. True, but those throws are still expensive, and the prize is worth less than the cost to play. This is what downward mobility looks like. It's a kid who grew up wealthy, but ended up upper middle class because they weren't as lucky/ambitious/talented as their parents. It happens a lot, but it isn't dramatic, and the outcome isn't "bad," so it doesn't get much attention, but downward mobility absolutely happens.
- brianwawok 4y ago
  Isn't the trope that the first generation makes the wealth, the second generation maintains it, and the third spends it?
JohnFen 4y ago
> Middle class kids can afford one throw. > Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. This doesn't agree with my experience. I grew up poor, and by the time I hit middle class income levels, had already thrown the dart more than once. At middle class, I also threw the dart a few times. One of the things people misunderstand about starting businesses is that they think you need a lot of money to do it. You don't. Adequate funding makes the experience more comfortable (fewer nights going without eating, the ability to hire people to help, etc.), and perhaps makes the venture more likely to succeed (although that's a matter of legitimate debate), but isn't necessary. What's necessary -- regardless of monetary resources -- is an almost pathological drive to do whatever it takes to make the business work. I've found, personally, that the single factor that makes the difference between success and failure is being in a position where failure would mean complete and total personal disaster. Then my survival instincts kick in and help.
hgs3 4y ago
Being well connected is far more important than being rich. Consider Bill Gates: he came from an affluent family, is intelligent, and hardworking...but so are many people. What ultimately set him apart was that his mother knew the chairman of IBM.
inglor_cz 4y ago
"Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to..." Yeah, if. The old military adage about capability and intent comes to mind. Rich kids do have more raw resources, but they may, at the same time, lack motivation. What do they have to gain by throwing, and especially by learning to throw accurately and at a desirable target? Motivation is quite a big factor in success. Motivated people fail, too, but unmotivated people rarely succeed; there is always enough distractions around to spend money and time on (sports, sex, travelling, gambling, drugs etc.).
Mistletoe 4y ago
That is golden.
revelio 4y ago
A nice analogy but it doesn't work. There aren't that many entrepreneurs who failed multiple times before succeeding at a business. If you look at the big businesses that dominate the US tech economy, they're all first time founders (Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft etc). There are also very few entrepreneurs bootstrapping their own business. Even rich kids go to VC, they aren't usually risking their own funds. Finally, if you try multiple times, learn something important from each failure, and then succeed, it seems reasonable to claim that this is now due to the skills you developed and not mere luck. You can't even claim it's privilege - it might be, but as this article argues, being an entrepreneur isn't being handed a nice life on a plate even if you're successful. For sure there are counter-examples where some rich kid spent their parents money trying and failing over and over, then got lucky without learning anything, somehow had an incredibly easy life from that point on and then started talking about merit. But they're going to be the exceptions that prove the rule. The carnival analogy therefore feels like ideologically motivated reasoning of the most common Marxist kind (claiming hard work and risk taking don't matter, that all success in life is the inherited privilege of capital).
- jotjotzzz 4y ago
  This sounds like survivorship bias. Rich kids have a golden parachute for a smoother fall than all the other kids. In addition, most rich kids belong to wealthy, well-connected parents who have already built a network for them. Middle-class to poor kids do not have these resources. However, that doesn't mean bootstrapping will not work. But it is harder for them than rich kids to build a multi-million business.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  I think you need to leave tech and VC money. VC’s are happy to throw money behind a bunch of smart college kids. Go try to go a different route and see all the doors shut. Also you don’t get to see all the people who don’t try their hand at entrepreneurship because the gamble is too great for them.
  - revelio 4y ago
    Yes, but the reason it's harder to get money for those sorts of businesses is because they're much less likely to generate large returns. The BBC couldn't / didn't want to find any tech entrepreneurs for this article (it's not like the UK doesn't have them), so they focus on people doing contracting or agency work. Of course it'll be tough to get investment in such a low margin and competitive business, VCs don't invest in tech outsourcing body shops either. There just isn't the possibility of large profits without product development.
shubhamjain 4y ago
[flagged]
- EliRivers 4y ago
  Money where your mouth is, otherwise you're exactly the same as what you complain about.
- lapcat 4y ago
  Please review the HN guidelines for comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- aww_dang 4y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29688489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29688489 It isn't the first thread like this. No sense in rehashing the same arguments again and again. Pessimists cannot be convinced. Their world view is self-reinforcing. Worse yet, they have every incentive to ignore evidence to the contrary. Arguments from first principles are always the strongest. If you don't try, you cannot succeed.
- andrepd 4y ago
  > There are thousands of examples that will refute your assumptions. Someone needs to take a statistics/numeracy 101 class :)
- ericmcer 4y ago
  Agreed, article was about the emotional impacts of working for yourself vs someone else. GP warped that into some metaphor about classism. Cool but unrelated.
pvsukale3 4y ago
I agree, a lot of things you do in life are based on how many times can you absorb the failure and recover from it. This ability is just not financial, it also has physical, mental health, relationships aspect to it. You could get be the "lucky" person either tomorrow or 10 years from now, question is how long can you afford to continue.
- czbond 4y ago
  You can always afford to continue - just with your after hours work job nights and weekends. In my experience, the stress and mental aspects are the hardest because each has to decide what to give up for potentially nothing in return.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > You can always afford to continue - just with your after hours work job nights and weekends. I don't like pointing out 'privilege', but this is it. Many of us have to spend weekends and evenings looking after kids, or ill parents. Family responsibilities in other words. Some of us have jobs that demand more than standard 9/5. And some have to work a second job to make ends meet.
    - czbond 4y ago
      What you pointed out is adults have responsibilities. We all have responsibilities to work around to follow your goals and dreams. Not having responsibilities is not a sign of privilege - but just a sign of a different phase of life. So that means one has to be tactical to pick the opportunity that matches what effort & energy one can put towards that opportunity.
      - thrashh 4y ago
        You can’t work around all responsibilities. For example, if you have to take care of your sick mom, you simply cannot do it. I’m going to be honest. You don’t sound super privileged but you are more privileged than a lot of people and you don’t seem to realize it. There is nothing wrong with privilege and there are definitely lazy people but it gets ridiculous when you keep posting “if I could do it, why can’t everyone else?”
jakey_bakey 4y ago
Can confirm this as middle class kid. Co-foudned a startup a few years ago, was good fun, didn't end up going anywhere. Got a decent bit of parental help with childcare. Now childcare has gone up a ton and I'm in a market-rate dev job with no intention to change. Co-founder came from money, and is definitely under no such constraints in starting another business.
chiefalchemist 4y ago
> Rich kids can afford many throws. True. But the advantage is broader than that. They also have more able networks. Their parents more likely to know someone who can help who might know someone else who can help. The (support) network matters. But that's not the difference marker. It's WHAT they throw those darts at that matters. True story... A few years ago I attended (as a spectator) a hackathon at Princeton Univ. It was mostly PU teams but there were a handful of outsiders. On day one each team presented their ideas. The team from Rutgers' idea had to do with drinking. An app that figured out the amount of alcohol in your glass or something like that. I honestly don't recall the PU ideas but I know they didn't center around partying. It was then I realized the difference between those two schools. It's not the quality of the education per se. It's WHAT you think about and HOW you think about it. Rich kids are exposed to a way of thinking (and role models) that is 100x more rare in the middle class or below. Sure you can claw up from the middle/bottom but it's 100x easier from the top.
- grardb 4y ago
  As a Rutgers alumnus who was involved in the scene when college hackathons started really taking off (2009-2013, attended 40+ hackathons), I can say that this anecdote doesn't reflect my experience at all. Had you attended HackRU instead of HackPrinceton, I can guarantee you that the app ideas would be pretty much indistinguishable from those at other universities. As for thinking differently, I can't speak much to that, but I've met quite a number of rich people with average and below-average thinking capabilities.
  - chiefalchemist 4y ago
    It's my comment above yours. I went to RU as well so I know what that edu and campus experience is like. I grew up in central NJ so I am familiar with Princeton. I went to public school. I had friends who went to private schools (e.g., Hun). There IS a differnce, and it ain't just income. You're absolutely right. It's a small sample size. Nonetheless the contrast was stark and obvious. Network, environment and role models all matter. They are things a lack of money can't buy.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nightski 4y ago

The world will never be fair, I'm not even sure that is an ideal goal. The best things in my life have come from when I faced adversity, not when I was in a position of privilege. While opportunities are not always equal in quality or number, there are opportunities if you seek them. It's ironic that even though lots of things come down to luck, it's very possible to put oneself in a position that makes it feel like they are very lucky! "Luck" tends to follow those with initiative.

coldtea 4y ago
If fairness is not an "ideal goal" what is? >The best things in my life have come from when I faced adversity, not when I was in a position of privilege Does that hold for kids hungry and unable to finish school because their parents don't make enough then? (Or much worse situations)?
- detourdog 4y ago
  The hard thing to understand about privilege is that it may have just as many constrictions as having nothing. They are different but can be every bit as challenging to a good life.
  - detourdog 4y ago
    I guess people want to believe that if only they were born with more privilege they would be happier and have more freedom to fail. I find that attitude makes the person and circumstances. I won't deny having one's mom rub elbows with the chairman of IBM is a very rare privilege.
- nightski 4y ago
  To remove barriers and give people a chance to achieve what they desire (if they desire). That doesn't mean everyone will have the same opportunities and/or the same circumstances. And no it doesn't, this is not an argument against assistance programs.
  - digging 4y ago
    Seems like an arbitrary line. Lifting someone out of poverty is removing a barrier. Helping people make social connections is removing a barrier.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> The world will never be fair, I'm not even sure that is an ideal goal. Which is exactly why it is important to have an accurate assessment of who is truly an entrepreneurial genius, contributing to society, and who is starting another Juicero.

boplicity 4y ago

> Middle class kids can afford one throw. Gotta disagree with this. As someone who grew up middle class, I was fortunate, in a lot of ways, to also learn to be prudent with money. I started bootstrapping microbusinesses with almost no monetary investment. This eventually allowed me to support myself (on a very low budget), and then, later, on a slightly larger budget. Eventually, one of these businesses became successful enough to support a family comfortably with an "upper" middle class income. The mistake a lot of people make is that they need to spend significant time and/or money to start a business. You don't. You can work on low-risk businesses, building your skillset so that your odds of success improve over time. No need to aim for the "center" bullseye, either. This is a case where low ambition can be helpful. Instead of trying to grow a huge startup, I was ecstatic when I was able to afford rent in my cheap apartment (with a roommate.) Of course, the situation may be different now for middle class kids. Maybe they don't have some of the same luxuries my family was able to give me: a couple of years of college paid for, attending a few business/marketing conferences as a teenager, examples to follow from my dad and brother. I suspect some of this is true; I sense a lot of pressure on young adults that I didn't feel when I was young. I also recognize that "middle class" in the states is definitely a case of "wealth" in comparison to other parts of the world. Also, when I was young, and learning the ropes, I was young. I didn't have responsibilities; just being able to afford a crappy apartment and food was more than enough.

nsoonhui 4y ago
>> Middle class kids can afford one throw. > Gotta disagree with this. As someone who grew up middle class, I was fortunate, in a lot of ways, to also learn to be prudent with money. You said you are fortunate, that actually proves rather than disproves the parent comment, no?
- boplicity 4y ago
  I don't understand your logic. I was middle class, and could afford more than one throw. The assumption in the OP was that a middle class kid can only afford one throw, which wasn't true, in my case. I was fortunate, because I knew better than to "throw" all of my money at an opportunity, not because I wasn't middle class.

plehoux 4y ago

What a depressing take. Starting young (at 20 years old or earlier) gives you over a decade to explore and discover your entrepreneurial path with low risk. Stop making excuse.

teolandon 4y ago
Being under the age of 30 doesn't protect you from bankruptcy.

blueprint 4y ago

what universe do you live in where someone making gte 100k working the carnival is poor?

jabroni_salad 4y ago
The median income in the USA is 41k.
- blueprint 4y ago
  what's your fallacy called? i don't remember. but obviously the comment was about the circus enabling the rich kids' startups. if the circus was the rest of the us then it would be everyone's circus, not the aforementioned one. duh. now the real question is are you arguing in good faith or are you actually on, eg, the side of those rich kids? either way, fallacy is fallacy and you should be downvoted.

czbond 4y ago

Realize the game you and your family are playing. Middle class have 3 paths out: - Single shot entrepreneurship - Repeated entrepreneurship with a job (no free nights or weekends) - Long term, multi generational wealth building over the course of 40-100 years with a mixture of stable career or above A wealthy family did the above but a generation or two before you or yours & someone else is reaping the benefit. Don't get mad at someone else because of your own families path.

wootland 4y ago
That's not how most generational wealth was created. From mobsters that went "legit" (Bronfmans, Kennedys...) to people who build their fortunes off war profiteering, slavery, genocide, child labor... They weren't grinding away for 40-100 years at some labor job. They exploited people, captured the gains, then used the power law to stay on the top.
- czbond 4y ago
  Sure - those are some very specific examples. But whatever town you're in, drive around the nice areas. Those $1M-$5M houses with BMW's or etc. Are they gangsters and warlords? No, they're just normal people who tried and took a different path. Some by luck, some by skill, some by experience. Just as one can't judge a person who's on the streets - one can't judge a wealthy person with such lenses.
  - wootland 4y ago
    The vast majority of those people are middle/upper-middle class people in massive debt. The kind of upper-class Harvard grad that VCs like are most definitely of the old money variety.
    - ameister14 4y ago
      >The kind of upper-class Harvard grad that VCs like are most definitely of the old money variety. Do you have any evidence for this? [edit] Of course, you'll likely be able to find a single case and that's any evidence. So how about is there sufficient evidence to support your conclusion that "old money" is getting all the VC funding?

david38 4y ago

Funny how this doesn’t apply to immigrants. Being lower, middle, upper class is mostly a mindset that dictates your tolerance for risk. Immigrants of the same income level as US born have a far higher tolerance.

brianwawok 4y ago
Isn't this self selection bias? The most risk tolerant people are also the most likely to immigrate to a new country? The more conservative people buckle in for a life at the fruit stand or whatever they have in their home country. Maybe not a great life, but it's steady and they know it keeps them fed.

brightball 4y ago

Starting a business is much easier for married couples who are on the same page about what to do. Succeeding is a heck of a lot harder. Both work, you live off the job income from one while the other focuses on starting the business. In preparation for living on a single income, you budget and save the income of the other spouse to start the business. This strategy also works great for saving for a down payment on a house too. A dual income couple can accomplish a lot if they communicate, plan and support each other.

blitz_skull 4y ago

If you can't afford to sink the money into a startup, you probably should not attempt to do so, right? The fallacy here lies in assuming that every startup requires capital. Capital greases the wheels, sure. But far too many people think entrepreneurship is just dumping money into an "idea" until it works, and that's actually the worst possible way to go about building a business. I've been building businesses since I was 10. Very low income family. They certainly weren't funding anything (nor was I in middle-school). But the spirit of entrepreneurship has always been there.

wootland 4y ago
If you have a family and live in the US, you will be saddled with mandatory health insurance payments that are basically untenable without a full-time job.

badpun 4y ago

> Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it. Aren't many first-generation immigrants (Koreans etc.) in the US entrepreneurs? They're certainly not middle class, and yet they make in it the business world.

svnt 4y ago
Poor isn’t just a temporary personal financial situation. In this case often the parents continue to sacrifice everything so that their children can have a chance at a better life. Being the recipient of the sacrifice of two capable people is not a state of poverty.
peterxpark 4y ago
As a son of Korean entrepreneur immigrants, I can say that many of them work less than minimum wage per hour at their business. These bets can work out but it can also be worse than their employees.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago

This ignores generational change. You can bump up your kids to the next level. You see this most often in many of the immigrant families First generation are janitors. Second generation are accountants/engineers. Third generation are doctors/lawyers Fourth generation are entrepreneurs

danjac 4y ago
So sucks to be you if you happen to be on the janitor tier, no? That's not really what a meritocracy is supposed to be.

jonnycomputer 4y ago

Actually, poor people start lots of businesses, particularly immigrant families. In lots of cases those tend to be mom-and-pop operations, not things intended to become unicorns or anything, just enough to afford independence from "the man", or to give the kids an opportunity to get an education etc. (Kim's Convenience really gets at this dynamic pretty well for immigrant families). Often times too, poor people's businesses are in the gray economy. Pushing around a cart selling ice-cream, going house to house selling tamales, maintaining a clientele fro nails and hair styling. In fact, one of the biggest obstacles to these folks are the local regulations. I'm no libertarian, but it has long been clear to me that the licensing requirements etc. for some of this stuff is a real obstacle to moving out of the gray economy for them.

ROTMetro 4y ago
When I lived in California there were yearly stories about homemade cheese that was getting sold and killing people and a push to remind people of this reality. The 'licensing requirements' are there for a reason, around food the reason is to prevent deaths or permanent disabilities from food poisoning.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  Sure, but other requirements are stupid, like you can't open a cafe in US without having a lot of land for parking. Also in Britain, surprisingly, you can register a takeaway anywhere, even at your home, and if you don't handle animal products, there is no requirements to meet at all. You don't have to show your hygiene rating to customers either. "When you start a new food business or take over an existing business, you must register with your local authority. It’s free to register, and your registration cannot be refused. You should register at least 28 days before opening. If you’re already trading and have not registered, you need to do this as soon as possible."

PragmaticPulp 4y ago

> Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. I see this story repeated over and and over again on the internet, but I don't really see it playing out the same way in the real world. I've seen a lot of "rich kids" try to start businesses, but then quickly realize that it's a huge amount of work and not guaranteed success. Then they look around and see all of their opportunities for safe, high-paying jobs that leverage their expensive education and their parents' network, and decide that taking one of those jobs is a much easier way forward. I lived near a highly ranked MBA school for a while. I would constantly get LinkedIn requests from stereotypical "rich kid" MBA grads who banded together and wanted to "do a startup", but they just needed a few engineers to actually do all the work. It was funny to hear the pitches about how they'd give me 1-5% for doing all of the tech work of their company while all of them (up to 7, in one case) would handle the business side of things for me. No thanks. There are definitely some "rich kid" startup founders out there, but a lot of the founders I've worked with over the years came more from the end of the spectrum where they grew up learning how to work hard, that money doesn't come easy, that they can't rely on parents to bail them out, and so on.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago
Rich kids does not mean rich idiots and does imply they do no work. It simply implies that in a case where both have considerable skills and effort, the 'rich kid' will get much farther
- PragmaticPulp 4y ago
  > It simply implies that in a case where both have considerable skills and effort, the 'rich kid' will get much farther Well if you assume everything is equal but you give one person more money then, sure, that person has a higher chance of success. But that's missing the point: Many important things are not equal between the two groups, and it doesn't always benefit the wealthier one when it comes to starting companies.
dumbotron 4y ago
> but then quickly realize that it's a huge amount of work and not guaranteed success The other path I've seen rich kids take is get a good enough job in sales and marketing where they're doing fine, but not as good as their parents. Revision to the mean is real. It's also like the three-generation rule for family businesses. The first builds it, the second maintains it, the third loses it. Alternatively, > My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel

Dig1t 4y ago

I’ve seen this analogy repeatedly many times and it’s becoming a meme. I think this is wrong and that it trivializes people’s accomplishments and hard work as nothing but random chance. There are tons of examples of entrepreneurs who came from nothing that spent long periods of time living with their parents and eating ramen, grinding until they finally made it.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago
And for every one of those, there are 10 who did not. Random chance is a dominant factor in life, in some walks of like it's The Dominant Factor. Look at Olympic champions, they all work hard but for every athlete that succeeds, there are 100 that worked just as hard and did not. If you were not randomly allocated the right genes, your chance of winning the Olympics is 0% no matter how hard you work. Or look at traders, they work 100 hours a week, consume cocaine, some die of overwork, some die of overdose. And we have research to prove that random chance is the dominant factor in their work. Working hard for them is a necessity to stay in the game, but it does not assure success.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  > If you were not randomly allocated the right genes, your chance of winning the Olympics is 0% no matter how hard you work Tonya Harding would like a word with you. More seriously, luck beyond can help beyond genetics. Such as having local access to a world-class trainer. Or changes to the rules of a competition (I have heard that Simone Biles' 10s are partly possible because of changes in scoring which value her skillset more than they did previously).

goodpoint 4y ago

> Middle class kids can afford one throw. More like upper middle class or if you are in the right country.

JamesBarney 4y ago

If you're a dev living moderately in a reasonable cost of living city you can afford to go all in on a startup every few years without any familial income or wealth.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago
This describes a member of the unlanded gentry class, not the middle class.

ROTMetro 4y ago

This doesn't explain the success rates that low wealth immigrants have when it comes to entrepreneurship. It does feel like an analogy someone would write a sudo-intelectual book based on because it 'feels accurate' while being nothing but pop-crap people use to put energy into being resentful or to justify limits they put on themselves.

dehrmann 4y ago

> Rich kids can afford many throws. True, but those throws are still expensive, and the prize is worth less than the cost to play. This is what downward mobility looks like. It's a kid who grew up wealthy, but ended up upper middle class because they weren't as lucky/ambitious/talented as their parents. It happens a lot, but it isn't dramatic, and the outcome isn't "bad," so it doesn't get much attention, but downward mobility absolutely happens.

brianwawok 4y ago
Isn't the trope that the first generation makes the wealth, the second generation maintains it, and the third spends it?

JohnFen 4y ago

> Middle class kids can afford one throw. > Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. This doesn't agree with my experience. I grew up poor, and by the time I hit middle class income levels, had already thrown the dart more than once. At middle class, I also threw the dart a few times. One of the things people misunderstand about starting businesses is that they think you need a lot of money to do it. You don't. Adequate funding makes the experience more comfortable (fewer nights going without eating, the ability to hire people to help, etc.), and perhaps makes the venture more likely to succeed (although that's a matter of legitimate debate), but isn't necessary. What's necessary -- regardless of monetary resources -- is an almost pathological drive to do whatever it takes to make the business work. I've found, personally, that the single factor that makes the difference between success and failure is being in a position where failure would mean complete and total personal disaster. Then my survival instincts kick in and help.

hgs3 4y ago

Being well connected is far more important than being rich. Consider Bill Gates: he came from an affluent family, is intelligent, and hardworking...but so are many people. What ultimately set him apart was that his mother knew the chairman of IBM.

inglor_cz 4y ago

"Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to..." Yeah, if. The old military adage about capability and intent comes to mind. Rich kids do have more raw resources, but they may, at the same time, lack motivation. What do they have to gain by throwing, and especially by learning to throw accurately and at a desirable target? Motivation is quite a big factor in success. Motivated people fail, too, but unmotivated people rarely succeed; there is always enough distractions around to spend money and time on (sports, sex, travelling, gambling, drugs etc.).

Mistletoe 4y ago

That is golden.

revelio 4y ago

A nice analogy but it doesn't work. There aren't that many entrepreneurs who failed multiple times before succeeding at a business. If you look at the big businesses that dominate the US tech economy, they're all first time founders (Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft etc). There are also very few entrepreneurs bootstrapping their own business. Even rich kids go to VC, they aren't usually risking their own funds. Finally, if you try multiple times, learn something important from each failure, and then succeed, it seems reasonable to claim that this is now due to the skills you developed and not mere luck. You can't even claim it's privilege - it might be, but as this article argues, being an entrepreneur isn't being handed a nice life on a plate even if you're successful. For sure there are counter-examples where some rich kid spent their parents money trying and failing over and over, then got lucky without learning anything, somehow had an incredibly easy life from that point on and then started talking about merit. But they're going to be the exceptions that prove the rule. The carnival analogy therefore feels like ideologically motivated reasoning of the most common Marxist kind (claiming hard work and risk taking don't matter, that all success in life is the inherited privilege of capital).

jotjotzzz 4y ago
This sounds like survivorship bias. Rich kids have a golden parachute for a smoother fall than all the other kids. In addition, most rich kids belong to wealthy, well-connected parents who have already built a network for them. Middle-class to poor kids do not have these resources. However, that doesn't mean bootstrapping will not work. But it is harder for them than rich kids to build a multi-million business.
vlovich123 4y ago
I think you need to leave tech and VC money. VC’s are happy to throw money behind a bunch of smart college kids. Go try to go a different route and see all the doors shut. Also you don’t get to see all the people who don’t try their hand at entrepreneurship because the gamble is too great for them.
- revelio 4y ago
  Yes, but the reason it's harder to get money for those sorts of businesses is because they're much less likely to generate large returns. The BBC couldn't / didn't want to find any tech entrepreneurs for this article (it's not like the UK doesn't have them), so they focus on people doing contracting or agency work. Of course it'll be tough to get investment in such a low margin and competitive business, VCs don't invest in tech outsourcing body shops either. There just isn't the possibility of large profits without product development.

shubhamjain 4y ago

[flagged]

EliRivers 4y ago
Money where your mouth is, otherwise you're exactly the same as what you complain about.
lapcat 4y ago
Please review the HN guidelines for comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
aww_dang 4y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29688489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29688489 It isn't the first thread like this. No sense in rehashing the same arguments again and again. Pessimists cannot be convinced. Their world view is self-reinforcing. Worse yet, they have every incentive to ignore evidence to the contrary. Arguments from first principles are always the strongest. If you don't try, you cannot succeed.
andrepd 4y ago
> There are thousands of examples that will refute your assumptions. Someone needs to take a statistics/numeracy 101 class :)
ericmcer 4y ago
Agreed, article was about the emotional impacts of working for yourself vs someone else. GP warped that into some metaphor about classism. Cool but unrelated.

pvsukale3 4y ago

I agree, a lot of things you do in life are based on how many times can you absorb the failure and recover from it. This ability is just not financial, it also has physical, mental health, relationships aspect to it. You could get be the "lucky" person either tomorrow or 10 years from now, question is how long can you afford to continue.

czbond 4y ago
You can always afford to continue - just with your after hours work job nights and weekends. In my experience, the stress and mental aspects are the hardest because each has to decide what to give up for potentially nothing in return.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > You can always afford to continue - just with your after hours work job nights and weekends. I don't like pointing out 'privilege', but this is it. Many of us have to spend weekends and evenings looking after kids, or ill parents. Family responsibilities in other words. Some of us have jobs that demand more than standard 9/5. And some have to work a second job to make ends meet.
  - czbond 4y ago
    What you pointed out is adults have responsibilities. We all have responsibilities to work around to follow your goals and dreams. Not having responsibilities is not a sign of privilege - but just a sign of a different phase of life. So that means one has to be tactical to pick the opportunity that matches what effort & energy one can put towards that opportunity.
    - thrashh 4y ago
      You can’t work around all responsibilities. For example, if you have to take care of your sick mom, you simply cannot do it. I’m going to be honest. You don’t sound super privileged but you are more privileged than a lot of people and you don’t seem to realize it. There is nothing wrong with privilege and there are definitely lazy people but it gets ridiculous when you keep posting “if I could do it, why can’t everyone else?”

jakey_bakey 4y ago

Can confirm this as middle class kid. Co-foudned a startup a few years ago, was good fun, didn't end up going anywhere. Got a decent bit of parental help with childcare. Now childcare has gone up a ton and I'm in a market-rate dev job with no intention to change. Co-founder came from money, and is definitely under no such constraints in starting another business.

chiefalchemist 4y ago

> Rich kids can afford many throws. True. But the advantage is broader than that. They also have more able networks. Their parents more likely to know someone who can help who might know someone else who can help. The (support) network matters. But that's not the difference marker. It's WHAT they throw those darts at that matters. True story... A few years ago I attended (as a spectator) a hackathon at Princeton Univ. It was mostly PU teams but there were a handful of outsiders. On day one each team presented their ideas. The team from Rutgers' idea had to do with drinking. An app that figured out the amount of alcohol in your glass or something like that. I honestly don't recall the PU ideas but I know they didn't center around partying. It was then I realized the difference between those two schools. It's not the quality of the education per se. It's WHAT you think about and HOW you think about it. Rich kids are exposed to a way of thinking (and role models) that is 100x more rare in the middle class or below. Sure you can claw up from the middle/bottom but it's 100x easier from the top.

grardb 4y ago
As a Rutgers alumnus who was involved in the scene when college hackathons started really taking off (2009-2013, attended 40+ hackathons), I can say that this anecdote doesn't reflect my experience at all. Had you attended HackRU instead of HackPrinceton, I can guarantee you that the app ideas would be pretty much indistinguishable from those at other universities. As for thinking differently, I can't speak much to that, but I've met quite a number of rich people with average and below-average thinking capabilities.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  It's my comment above yours. I went to RU as well so I know what that edu and campus experience is like. I grew up in central NJ so I am familiar with Princeton. I went to public school. I had friends who went to private schools (e.g., Hun). There IS a differnce, and it ain't just income. You're absolutely right. It's a small sample size. Nonetheless the contrast was stark and obvious. Network, environment and role models all matter. They are things a lack of money can't buy.