4 ms·
Well sure, but this perspective ignores that past a certain point you no longer need to take sizable risk to convert your massive mound of money into an even mo
by BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Well sure, but this perspective ignores that past a certain point you no longer need to take sizable risk to convert your massive mound of money into an even more massive mound of money. It also ignores the criticism that most people don’t ever get to try their hand at risking a large amount of capital, thus keeping them from the large prizes.
- WalterBright 2y agoMoney isn't the only thing people can use to invest. They can also invest their time, such as spending time learning a valuable job skill. Microsoft was founded with $5000. Allen and Gates saw opportunity that nobody else did. They took a large risk in abandoning their Harvard degree program to focus on Microsoft. Steve Jobs famously sold his Volkswagen for $1500 to found Apple. Jobs took an enormous risk in investing in the iPhone prototype. He bet the company on it. What would our society be like today if people were not willing to make enormous risks? Boeing bet the company on the 707, and then again on the 747. There was no guarantee of success with either of those bets. Edison bet everything on his electric power company, which became General Electric. Where would we be if people were satisfied with making a modest living?
- sfpotter 2y agoBasically where we are now, if not better off. The vast majority of people are satisfied with making a modest living, and none of these bets would have paid off if they weren't. The crux of the issue is how to create a stable arena in which sociopathic risk takers can innovate without destabilizing society. The brilliant implementer who finds he's satisfied with punching the clock is grist for Jobs' mill. No need to destroy him in the process.