Hacker News Reader

Comment by matwood | Hacker News Reader

> TL, DR; On an average, it is much easier to start a start-up if you have some basic level of financial security in your life.

I didn't realize this was some secret. Someone who has parents who are doing well and can pay for their college and living expenses indefinitely will be at an advantage. They can take risks others can't.

BTW, this is true from the time someone is born. Parents who are well off will send their child to pre-pre schools, pay for the best elementary, middle and high schools. Then their child gets to go to college, likely loan free, and can focus on college and not working to pay the bills. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this, and I certainly didn't grow up this way. I'm surprised it wasn't common sense.

View on HN

yes, it is common sense and everyone indeed knows it. But many want to believe in SV as some not rest of the world place with equal opportunities for everyone, just be smart. We all want it to be ruled by meritocracy. That's why we keep drinking this koolaid.

Life isn't fair, especially when it comes to economics. Whenever you think you've found some sector of industry that is more egalitarian, you've probably either stumbled into something where you haven't identified the advantaged and disadvantaged parties (it's easier to miss when you are part of the advantaged group), or the current social context makes it easier to hide. That said, there are lots of very different industries, and one of them probably advantages you in some way if you can find it.

To be honest, I only want to be ruled my a meritocracy if I can define myself as the most intelligent person in the world. (Or, in the upper 10% or something). A true meritocracy scares me. And this from a guy who was in the upper 10% of my high school (upper 4%). But I've seen much more brilliant people out there.

So who honestly wants a meritocracy either?

Another option would be that whoever works hard is taken care of. That sounds like the 1950s corporate job with a pension. It may be less exciting and sounds like it would produce less motive for innovation, but it is also less scary and a bit more fair than rewards to the affluent risk takers.

I have no idea how to get the best of all systems. So I make do in this one. I'm just pointing out that no system (known to man) is perfect.

I'd be frightened to see the world run by people like me, but I'd love to see the world run by the best of the best, as long as we can somehow select for morality as well as intelligence.

Wisdom, integrity, and respect are far more important than intelligence in making a good leader.

It is a bit of koolaid, but I believe we are closer to a meritocracy than we ever have been. Some people will always have it easier, but in software the capital cost to start a company has approached zero. What's left is time, and that is the main thing my post tried to hone in on.

"I believe we are closer to a meritocracy than we ever have been"

While it has always been true that the strongest factor in a successful life is rich parents, I understand that it is more true today in the US than it has been for the last fifty years. That would suggest that we are further from a meritocracy than we were, and moving away from it.

I don't agree with the money angle. What is hurting the US isn't money, but the complete break down of the family structure. And no, I'm not talking about the religious 1 man 1 woman family, but the 2 parent family. Kids need discipline and someone to guide them to make good choices early on. I don't see that as much anymore and you get to where we are today.

I grew up without much of anything. Neither parent finished college and both worked all the time. Yet somehow they drilled into me hard work, education, and don't get a girl pregnant while in high school. I am by no means rich, but have done much better than my parents.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com