3 ms·

In the US, universities were far more affordable when Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, etc were that age. Harvard like other Ivy League schools was probably still expens

by rpedela 12y ago

In the US, universities were far more affordable when Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, etc were that age. Harvard like other Ivy League schools was probably still expensive, but many were not. My father (slightly older than them) was able to pay tuition by working in a factory during the summer. He didn't need any loans. Unfortunately that isn't possible anymore. There was a time when you could be blue collar and still get a great education if you were willing to work hard while not being burdened with massive debt after graduation.

eli_gottlieb 12y ago
Yes, fine, but my point is: pretending that these men rose to become business magnates despite lacking wealth and background is completely incorrect. Even the lowest of them started within the professional upper-middle class (roughly where you and I probably are), which is already most of the way up the class scale, in percentile terms.
- lutusp 12y ago
  > Yes, fine, but my point is: pretending that these men rose to become business magnates despite lacking wealth and background is completely incorrect. Not so, and certainly not so in the case of Steve Jobs, an orphan. Each of the stories is of someone who certainly wouldn't have succeeded to the degree they did without personal qualities that transcended their origins, rather than family wealth, the original argument. Richard Branson didn't build his present empire by buying it with his family's money -- he created it out of his wits. Elon Musk is another story of the same kind -- it's hyperbolic to argue that he became successful because of inherited wealth as opposed to personal ingenuity and drive. > Even the lowest of them started within the professional upper-middle class (roughly where you and I probably are), which is already most of the way up the class scale, in percentile terms. But this isn't about class -- it might be about genetics, and it certainly isn't about family money, the original offered explanation. For these stories, class and family background are correlations, not causes. What we're talking about here are stories of exceptional success with no obvious cause apart from personal drive and ingenuity. They can't be dismissed as resulting from high birth or privilege -- it would be more consistent with logic to examine them on their self-evident merits.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    How about: They won the exploding-market lottery by being in the right place and executing well? Just another bunch of upper-middle-class white boys who could get into all the right clubs is another part of it.
    - lutusp 12y ago
      > Just another bunch of upper-middle-class white boys who could get into all the right clubs is another part of it. It's too facile (and clearly somewhat tempting) to argue that race, or old-boy networking, played a part. Most of these people (some of whom I have met) are so driven that the idea of joining a club of rich white guys would seem like torture. Some will argue that they're all Aspies anyway, thus very unlikely to be joiners of anything. > They won the exploding-market lottery by being in the right place and executing well? That makes more sense -- the role of blind chance. When I wrote Apple Writer for the Apple II in 1979, at the time I didn't fully appreciate the vacuum in which I was working, and how my program would seem more remarkable than it was, simply by being the only one.

by rpedela 12y ago

eli_gottlieb 12y ago

Yes, fine, but my point is: pretending that these men rose to become business magnates despite lacking wealth and background is completely incorrect. Even the lowest of them started within the professional upper-middle class (roughly where you and I probably are), which is already most of the way up the class scale, in percentile terms.

lutusp 12y ago
> Yes, fine, but my point is: pretending that these men rose to become business magnates despite lacking wealth and background is completely incorrect. Not so, and certainly not so in the case of Steve Jobs, an orphan. Each of the stories is of someone who certainly wouldn't have succeeded to the degree they did without personal qualities that transcended their origins, rather than family wealth, the original argument. Richard Branson didn't build his present empire by buying it with his family's money -- he created it out of his wits. Elon Musk is another story of the same kind -- it's hyperbolic to argue that he became successful because of inherited wealth as opposed to personal ingenuity and drive. > Even the lowest of them started within the professional upper-middle class (roughly where you and I probably are), which is already most of the way up the class scale, in percentile terms. But this isn't about class -- it might be about genetics, and it certainly isn't about family money, the original offered explanation. For these stories, class and family background are correlations, not causes. What we're talking about here are stories of exceptional success with no obvious cause apart from personal drive and ingenuity. They can't be dismissed as resulting from high birth or privilege -- it would be more consistent with logic to examine them on their self-evident merits.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  How about: They won the exploding-market lottery by being in the right place and executing well? Just another bunch of upper-middle-class white boys who could get into all the right clubs is another part of it.
  - lutusp 12y ago
    > Just another bunch of upper-middle-class white boys who could get into all the right clubs is another part of it. It's too facile (and clearly somewhat tempting) to argue that race, or old-boy networking, played a part. Most of these people (some of whom I have met) are so driven that the idea of joining a club of rich white guys would seem like torture. Some will argue that they're all Aspies anyway, thus very unlikely to be joiners of anything. > They won the exploding-market lottery by being in the right place and executing well? That makes more sense -- the role of blind chance. When I wrote Apple Writer for the Apple II in 1979, at the time I didn't fully appreciate the vacuum in which I was working, and how my program would seem more remarkable than it was, simply by being the only one.