Welfare and social programs did not make them successful. Opportunity did.
Even Elon Musk arrived with just a suitcase. He stayed in hostels because of lack of money.
Welfare and social programs did not make them successful. Opportunity did.
Even Elon Musk arrived with just a suitcase. He stayed in hostels because of lack of money.
It's instructive to see what's happening in Britain right now where many people dare not take jobs or even join training schemes to improve their prospects - because they will lose their benefits. To quote from the Spectator: "A Channel 4 (TV) program Britain’s Benefits Scandal hears from some of those affected – people who are often missing from the debate. We have 3.2 million trapped in a system in which they are given a decent payout – some I spoke to said about £1,300 a month, some significantly more – but who want to get back to work."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-sickness-benefit-tra...
So we have accountants and scientists who need back surgery intentionally working part-time barista hours.
As a programmer I’m all for gaming the system by knowing and navigating the rules, but the situation is comical.
[0] https://futurism.com/elon-musk-dad-emerald-mine
[1] https://www.the-sun.com/news/7911051/elon-musks-dad-errol-em...
If you live in the USA already, why didn't you start SpaceX? Millions of immigrants come to the USA. Why didn't anyone else start SpaceX?
With that being said, I'm not sure personal bankruptcy is a particularly meaningful risk when the individual in question can enjoy substantial riches by sheepishly(?) returning home to the care of their parent(s).
Granted, neither you nor I know if this is an option for Musk, but given that his mother speaks quite fondly of her son in public, it seems reasonable enough to me to believe that it is.
What I'm trying to say here is: Musk's risks are not mine. Would personal bankruptcy result in both he and his offspring living in poverty?
Celebrating someone for having taken a risk while omitting what exactly was on the line for them is a debate tactic built on a false equivalency which can be used as a cudgel to beat opponents down in arguments if its foundational trick goes unnoticed.
>> He jumped from the building and survived! Why can't you jump from the building too?
> The fire department erected a life net for him beforehand. All I have is sidewalk.
> Would personal bankruptcy result in both he and his offspring living in poverty?
Musk did spend time in the US with no money. He got a job. It was a dirty job cleaning industrial machinery. A job anyone with a willingness to work could get.
Instead of doing all this guessing and assuming and making up things about Musk, why not read an actual biography of him? The one I read is by Vance:
https://www.amazon.com/Elon-Musk-SpaceX-Fantastic-Future/dp/...
It costs $1.32. No excuses!
It took $100M to start SpaceX. The argument works better if you start with one of the more modest earlier efforts.
I don't live in the USA.
Because very few people has US$100 million of initial capital investment.
Why didn't you start SpaceX? As far as I know you're an aeronautical engineer, so why didn't you do something bigger than the D languge?
The same answer might apply to anyone else who you ask that question.
If you know you can always go live with your rich family, then the cost of failure is pretty close to 0, so you can repeatedly take big risks until one of them pays off.
Worst case? You end up a trust-fund brat.