As a somewhat successful businessperson that has hit rough patches: yes, the rose-colored glasses of financial success are real, but you also have to account fo

As a somewhat successful businessperson that has hit rough patches: yes, the rose-colored glasses of financial success are real, but you also have to account for the bias around these people: society (to say nothing of close friends, family, partners, subordinates, social acquaintances, etc) is biased favorably towards people that a) act, and b) produce results. This is more easily seen when you lose some of that success: it isn't necessarily that people like you less (or kiss your ass less), it's also (mostly) that they take you less seriously. In a lot of circumstances, action itself (the courage to take it, the risk tolerance to deal with the outcome) is an outlier act. By definition (or selection bias) successful entrepreneurs are more likely to take action and deal with the results. What does it say about a society (or an era) that this is all we have left? that action/initiative itself carries such risks (financial, social) that our heroes (and villains) are quasi-psychopathic risk-taking billionaires because they are the only ones left willing to step up?