> If you look at the lists of the richest people that occasionally get published in the press, nearly all of them did it by starting their own companies.

And actually it's a stupid point to begin with; making a point by choosing the absolute top percentage as if there is nothing other than 'really' rich (forget whether that is even a good thing I'd argue it's not a plus to have that much money and notoriety). There is of course 'lots of money' or 'comfortable'.

Irony also that Paul is probably not on that list but even if he was it's not because he 'built a google' but rather he decided to be an investor and incubator spreading bets over many potential winners.

Also ironic that Paul had decided rather than making more money he'd rather spend time with his family.