> the same could easily be argued for going to work for a startup to begin with. Only if you're working at below market rate for dog shit equity (i.e. stocks t

> the same could easily be argued for going to work for a startup to begin with. Only if you're working at below market rate for dog shit equity (i.e. stocks that will be diluted into nothing). > It's a calculated bet. In the same way that buying lottery tickets or shoving more coins into a one-armed bandit is a "calculated bet". The calculation has already been done and the house always wins. Again, we're talking about a company that is mismanaged to the point of not making payroll. This is where you're placing your "calculated bet". And what happens if you "win"? Oh, you get the money that you had already earned in any case. This is lose-"break even" scenario. Even novice gamblers should know better to throw resources after bets like that. >Millions still smoke cigarettes <snip> So you make a big long list consisting partially with stupid choices people make out of peer pressure or down right stupidity, and partially out of things people do because they get a reward and there is a low risk of downside. How do you imagine that compares? Driving a car increases my quality of life in many ways. Even though driving is one of the more risky things you can do it's still a very small risk that anything will happen to me. And by engaging in this risk I can improve my standard of living dramatically. Taking a job from people who've proven they can't make payroll with the hope that they might pay me what I'm owed is not a similar thing. >Personally I wouldn't default to assuming someone is doing something dumb. If someone is doing something dumb (like buying a lottery ticket) then that person is doing something dumb. It's pretty straightforward. That doesn't mean that person is dumb, we all do dumb things from time to time. Maybe even on a regular basis. But we should at least stick to doing dumb things that have a low risk of a major downside.