Why Becoming an Entrepreneur is a "No-Brainer"

The writer's grasp of probability is almost as bad as the graphic.

Ouch, the logic hurts.

Major Premise: 2 out of 3 millionaires are entrepreneurs.

Minor Premise: You could be an entrepreneur.

Conclusion: You could have a 2/3 chance of being a millionaire.

Am I getting the argument correctly? I'm hoping that I'm missing something or interpreting it wrong

The argument presented is invalid. This does not mean that you (or all entrepreneurs) have a 2/3 chance to making it to millionaire, but that millionaires have a 2/3 chance of being an entrepreneur. The question to ask yourself is how many entrepreneurs aren't millionaires? What if 9/10 entrepreneurs go bankrupt? The decision is not quite as easy as the author makes it out to be. Maybe only 1/3 millionaires are royalty, but 9/10 of royalty are millionaires. It makes more sense to be the 1/3 royalty than the 2/3 entrepreneurs. Your odds are better. (Crazy examples used for educational purposes only. You can't decide to be royalty in my experience.)

Please don't misunderstand my motives. I have very strong entrepreneurial leanings and I hope to support myself in the future by my own ventures.

your absolute chance of becoming a millionaire isn't 2/3. 2/3 millionaires are entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurial route to millions is at least double that of the non-entrepreneurial route (assuming there are no more entrepreneurs than there are non-entrepreneurs -- a reasonable assumption)...in the example game given at the post, the non-entrepreneurial route is assigned the chance of 1/3 (assuming 1 out 3 non-entrepreneurs are millionaires -- not so reasonable assumption)...so 2/3 is at least double of 1/3.

To be clear, if there are 30 millionaires and 3K non-entrepreneurs and 3K entrepreneurs, the entrepreneurial route obviously wouldn't be 2/3, but it will be double that of the non-entrepreneurial route.

Excuse the confusion.