Slashdot Mirror
Start-Ups Aren't Cool Anymore (theatlantic.com)
A lack of personal savings, competition from abroad, and the threat of another economic downturn make it harder for Millennials to thrive as entrepreneurs. From a story: Research suggests entrepreneurial activity has declined among Millennials. The share of people under 30 who own a business has fallen to almost a quarter-century low, according to a 2015 Wall Street Journal analysis of Federal Reserve data. A survey of 1,200 Millennials conducted in 2016 by the Economic Innovation Group found that more Millennials believed they could have a successful career by staying at one company and attempting to climb the ladder than by founding a new one. Two years ago, EIG's president and co-founder, John Lettieri, testified before the U.S. Senate, "Millennials are on track to be the least entrepreneurial generation in recent history."
Some of the reasons have been well-documented. The romantic view of entrepreneurship involves angel investors and venture capital funds, but in fact, the ordinary entrepreneur is more likely to fund a start-up using personal savings -- something underemployed Millennials simply could not build as they entered the workforce during or in the immediate wake of the Great Recession. Funding from friends and family is the next most common source, but this personal network could not help much during the most recent economic downturn, when so much home equity was underwater. Student debt worsened the underlying economic problems. According to a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, between 2004 and 2014, the number of student borrowers rose by 89 percent.
Lately, though, it seems that even those who might typically have access to other forms of funding, like venture capital, are having a hard time getting investors' attention. As Matt Krisiloff, a former director at the Y Combinator start-up accelerator in Silicon Valley, tweeted, "Start-ups are a lot less cool than they used to be." Michael Sadler, an economist at the University of Texas at Austin, is concerned about the rising concentration of start-up investment in just a few super-performing regions such as Austin, New York, and Silicon Valley. As with American politics, it appears the geography of U.S. venture capital and economic growth has become increasingly polarized.
Some of the reasons have been well-documented. The romantic view of entrepreneurship involves angel investors and venture capital funds, but in fact, the ordinary entrepreneur is more likely to fund a start-up using personal savings -- something underemployed Millennials simply could not build as they entered the workforce during or in the immediate wake of the Great Recession. Funding from friends and family is the next most common source, but this personal network could not help much during the most recent economic downturn, when so much home equity was underwater. Student debt worsened the underlying economic problems. According to a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, between 2004 and 2014, the number of student borrowers rose by 89 percent.
Lately, though, it seems that even those who might typically have access to other forms of funding, like venture capital, are having a hard time getting investors' attention. As Matt Krisiloff, a former director at the Y Combinator start-up accelerator in Silicon Valley, tweeted, "Start-ups are a lot less cool than they used to be." Michael Sadler, an economist at the University of Texas at Austin, is concerned about the rising concentration of start-up investment in just a few super-performing regions such as Austin, New York, and Silicon Valley. As with American politics, it appears the geography of U.S. venture capital and economic growth has become increasingly polarized.
VC folks like to get a return on their investment and lately, tech hasn't done so well. It's business.
My MOM!
And wont be. Additonally, only an idiot would work for free at a start up. Then again the world is full of gullible mellenials
"Millennials are on track to be the least entrepreneurial generation in recent history."
Great - they might actually do something useful. Most "entrepreneurs" just buy things and re-sell them, or exploit other people's talent to make themselves rich. It's a waste of talent for young people to become "entrepreneurs", which in earlier eras we might just have called "merchants". Time to stop celebrating these people and celebrate people who actually do things, rather than just manage capital and other people's labour.
And for good reason. Someone who has experience with technology and managing people is preferable to young inexperienced corporation owners. It takes more than knowing how to manage one's finances to become a business owner.
They are a high risk and long term investment.
For every Google there are thousand failures all from energetic people who believe that they have the next big thing to change the world. If you are going to invest in a startup vs an established company, you need to get past the flash and focus on the business plan, income, and market share. Opening a Deli next to the new Amazon warehouse may bring in much more money then trying to use the latest AI and other buzzards to add synergy to the creative personal to streamline business processes, and make teens flock to it.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
CONSEQUENCES KEN DOLL
Hearing the endless Stanford techbro war stories on HN just made the whole thing seem obnoxious. Tech entrepreneurship is so self-important and elitist. There are a million different businesses you can start in America that don't require a bunch of connections from Stanford and Yale (but tech is a meritocracy we promise!)
Want to know how to cause an economic downturn? Keep telling everyone that there is going to be an economic downturn.
The article talks about millenials as business owners, but then goes on to talk about "startups" which are not really thie same thing. When people talk about "startups", they are talking about the kinds of business that are funded by Angel investors, VC, and the like, which are formed with the hope of one day becoming a public company or being bought by one. These days, such business are usually in the tech industry or some offshoot thereof.
But the vast majority of small-businesses are just that and always will be. We are talking about things like restaurants, dry cleaners, auto repair shops, and the like. The fact that young people aren't forming small business enterprise has little to do with anything happening in silicon valley or other tech centers.
Thanks for the "general advice" but it's obvious that your lazy commentary was not inspired by your success in running any actual startups or anything related to it, you pathetic blathering idiot lol.
Go back to defending Trump's latest lie, you were more believable lool. Fuck out of here fakedick wanna-be-MBA.
multiple studies have already shown that Millenials are no different than any other generation in how hard they work or what they want. The only major difference is they came of age in the 2008 market crash and that they're saddled with over $1 trillion in student loan debt.
Every generation likes to talk about how lazy the next one is. It's a narrative pushed by our ruling class to keep us at each other's throats while they rob us blind. Along with racism and classism it's a key strategy the ruling class uses to maintain power and wealth inequality while being about 1% of the population. I really wish that here, now, in 2018 with the power of the internet, we could get a majority of people to spot this pattern and start pushing back against it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A common trope is that Millenials are poorer that previous generations. However, they have many things that earlier generations did not:
High-efficiency homes and appliances
Cars with many safety enhancements, lower pollution and better mileage
Better insulated, less polluting, better constructed and safer homes
"Green" energy supplies of fuel and electricity
Much more recycling
New drugs and healthcare technology
Higher spending on schools
Higher safety from crime and terrorism
New government departments and agencies to look out for the public's interests.
It should be pointed out that these benefits don't come for free, which may explain why millenials are poorer in cash terms, but richer overall. This is the choice made by society.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
and the general consolidation of power that's been going on for about 30, 40 years now.
I think it was Zuckerberg that made this point, but the next generation of billionaires will likely live into their 150s and be productive for most of that time. Most of the tech that keeps them living that long will be too expensive for the working class too.
If you think it's hard to keep wealth inequality and the power gap that includes in check now wait until the aristocracy lives 30-50% longer than you and I do.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
CYBERSTALKING HAS CONSEQUENCES and when Ocasio-Cortez is president and passed anti-stalking laws the NSA is going to find you and put you in Gitmo like the Incel freak you are.
Qed
If you're not currently involved in one yourself, you at least know someone else that is/runs their own.
They're a dime a dozen. We're desensitized lol... of course they aren't cool anymore
Yep, more that they see most small businesses are overwhelmed by big chains.
VC may also be taking a dive, but by number of people by far more are involved in those other sorts of businesses.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Even Pelosi and Van Jones have acknowledge the booming economy.
But who wants to navigate the horrors of regulations and government fed liabilities?
Small businesses require local money to be profitable. If the available local wealth is at the whim of large corporations who can wipe out the local economy on a whim and move back and boom it on a while, that gives them a lot of power in destroying or influencing the support businesses around their own.
Your amazon example for instance: All they need to do is undercut the local deli/restaurant with their cafeteria, or make it inconvenient to pop over to the next building to buy food, say by having your belongings investing coming into or going out of the building.
While I agree the small industry should be the lifeblood of America, to a large degree in local economies it has been eclipsed by large businesses, and unless a region still has privately owned farms and to a lesser degree resource extraction (mining, oil, etc.) it is not a self sustaining community and as a result is relying on the 'generosity' of often faceless and foreign multinationals to keep it afloat.
It's not the amount of time a start-up takes, it's the risk. A start up is a long shot. You might get rich, or you might spend years going nowhere. Risks are taken by people who can afford them. Fewer people can now.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Starting a business isn't as simple as pursuing your ideas, you need to maneuver around licenses, zoning, patents, local government, federal governments. Remove the bullshit from creating a business and more people will create them.
An individual or small company should be exempt from patent litigation for example.
That way they don't need to raise a million dollars in capital to start; To Rent a building, hire a lawyer, hire file for X and Y.
Anybody wanna buy some Pets.com stock?
It's not vision that's lacking it's money.
I still need to eat, sleep, pay for rent, etc.
Now on top of this you think I can afford to start a big business?
No. The money isn't there.
I'd gladly work for $30-40K if it meant I could start a decent business (v.s. my expected $80K+), but starting a business these days means making negative pay. Which is dumb no matter how you look at it.
Everyone wants to keep their nest egg secure. Owning a home is a first priority, starting a business comes after. Nobody wants to be out on the street because the business fails.
The lack of ability to safely start a business without the risk of going personally bankrupt and homeless if it fails is a good discouragement towards starting a business.
Startups are great, but they should have a real product, not just the latest fad app. Advice: learn a trade first, whether it's engineering, medicine, law, plumbing, electricity, or science. Then use your experience to start your own company.
Of course, you might be a unicorn with a brilliant idea just out of high school, but don't count on it.
" threat of another economic downturn make it harder for Millennials to thrive as entrepreneurs. "
Not to point out the obvious but economic downturns have a tendency to wreak havoc on everyone, not just Millennials.
( Welcome to the real world btw where things don't always go as expected. )
ACTUALLY starting a business is fucking hard: You risk your OWN money* as well as a shit ton of time, sweat, and (more or less) your family, relationships, prime working years - all for something you "hope" will work.
This is essentially what Marx got *completely* wrong, by positing "capital" just existing ex nihilo, instead of recognizing the massive amount of wealth that was invested in all those businesses that didn't succeed. By discounting the 'red in tooth and claw' investment carnage that happened so that the (current) businesses exist, one hand-waves away essentially the entire justification for why business owners are ENTITLED to make more than the downtrodden wage slaves they employ - it is that disparate result that incentivizes people to take the risk to found businesses in the first place.
But I wouldn't say that Millennials are necessarily perceiving it wrongly; as much as that might make their elders uncomfortable. The fact is that capitalism as is practiced in the US isn't really much like capitalism; it's "capitalist" on the up side, but socialist on the down side. (When in fact, capitalism like evolution ONLY advances by the death of noncompetitive entities.) Why found a business, if every buggy-whip-maker you are putting out of business is only going to go on the federal protective dole ensuring that the poor devils never actually fail?
If there's no ability to eliminate your competitors, there's little incentive to jump into the competition.
*Kickstarter is bullshit - and closer to a religious donation than investment. The idea that people are sinking money is only working by the principal of distributed risk, with the interwebs making the distribution part easier; if you can convince 10 million people to each 'risk' $10 with you, that is in some ways a lower bar than getting a handful of VC funds to each invest $25 million in your idea.
-Styopa
It's never been a worse time to start a new business: your established competitors not only have deeper pockets than you, but they also go out of their way to crush your business before it gets established. The recent trend of startups "existing to get bought out by another company" is just a sad example of perverse incentives.
I did. And I downmodded you because you asked.
Back in the day, you had to set up networks, infrastructure, servers, etc. I bet the startups that made it were the ones that could manage that part, not the ones with the best idea.
Today, you can get all that infrastructure with a quick check to AWS (or competitors). Now you have to have a good idea to compete, not just ability to execute because nearly anyone can execute now. I personally could make an E-Bay competitor in a month, it would cost a lot, but I also doubt I would steal many of eBay's current customers. 20 years ago, I could get VC money if I showed I could set up infrastructure to do so (I personally couldn't). Today, not so impressive (now I can). VCs are more likely looking for good ideas, not people who set up servers/networks.
Not sure if that is a major reason, but I am willing to bet it has some impact.
The article talks about millenials as business owners, but then goes on to talk about "startups" which are not really thie same thing. When people talk about "startups", they are talking about the kinds of business that are funded by Angel investors, VC, and the like, which are formed with the hope of one day becoming a public company or being bought by one. These days, such business are usually in the tech industry or some offshoot thereof.
But the vast majority of small-businesses are just that and always will be. We are talking about things like restaurants, dry cleaners, auto repair shops, and the like. The fact that young people aren't forming small business enterprise has little to do with anything happening in silicon valley or other tech centers.
Excellent point... small businesses are really the engine of the economy and it does seem that the competitive landscape has made it harder to hang a plank and be able to succeed without the protection racket of a big corporation.
Barbie: No means NO. #metoo
It's not just millenials that don't have personal savings. The generation before doesn't either. So now we have 3 generations living in systemic poverty thanks to the greed of the oligarchs. Fuck them. It's not like their party is even over. Startups aren't "cool" anymore, but they are more than happy to unwind all of our oldest institutions and destroy the earth to satisfy their insatiable appetite for ever more and more wealth.
Going somewhat OT but I wonder how many start-ups of back in days were really start-ups? I remember many of these "entrepreneurships" had only one customer (not in first year but year after year) such as Lockheed, Tandem Computers, Rolm, etc.
mfwright@batnet.com
There isn't a single industry that has not consolidated in the last 30 years, and that is not fully controlled by a few major players.
You can still start a company, but the changes of becoming big and successful, or being bought out by one of the powerhouses, have greatly diminished. If you have a novel idea and found a company, the moment you appear to succeed, any of the major players will run with your idea and implement their own version.
The days of the sleeping giant incumbents are over. They are agile giants now, they know the risks, they have seen it, and they are not going to let it happen to them.
Maybe millennials did the sums and realised their hourly pay was somewhat closer to burger-flippers after finishing their 100 hour weeks!
90% of boomer and genx activity is rolling up the ladder behind themselves.
Competitive environments are seen as discriminatory because by their very nature they discriminate against people who achieve less. If your mentality is "everyone deserves a trophy because they tried", and "it's not fair to use one's advantage, whether genetic talent of the fact that parents had time and money to school the child", of course startups are not cool.
...after the dot-com crash nearly 20 years ago, they at the bare minimum will question wether they should invest any capital into comewipemyass.com or anything else the least bit questionable. They have to consider if there would be any demand for a bottom wiping concierge service, or if this service can find anybody to send out to do this task (or anything else questionable), before they write that check and send it off.
Yes, the bar has been raised, and if your idea isn't solid and there is a pretty good chance that your business will go bust in short order, you can forget it.
Until it was way too late. Allen got his diagnosis in 1982 and made it until 2018. He didn't die from the cancer per se, it was septic shock. Better treatments will fix that.
Zuckerberg is young, rich, and got rich when he was young. He's going to have the advantage of several decades more advancement.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
> I personally could make an E-Bay competitor in a month, it would cost a lot, but I also doubt I would steal many of eBay's current customers. 20 years ago, I could get VC money if I showed I could set up infrastructure to do so
Creating similar functionality is easy. I did that 20 years ago.
No VC would be interested in my dinky little eBay clone. Infrastructure isn't special either. You can very easily find people who know how to set up servers and such. You just have to ask a few load balancing questions in the interview to sort out the ones who know how to scale.
What eBay has that is valuable is customers. If you have a million customers and that number is increasing every month, that's what gets investors interested.
The article left out an obvious likely difference between this generation and people 20 years older. It actually sounds like the author may not see it because they themselves are affected. That's the entrepreneural spirit. The article basically listed excuses for why millennials can't start businesses. (Basically because they don't have much money). News flash - a large percentage of immigrants start businesses, and they don't show up with an $200,000 in their pocket. Immigrants very often come to America with nothing but a dream, a hope for the future and a burning desire for a better life. It's that dream coupled with drive to do something to achieve your dreams that characterizes and entrepreneur.
In fact, having money, having cushy job, will *discourage* people from striking out on their own. If you're well-paid by employer and have great benefits, why leave that? It's most often when people are laid off or unable to get a job that they start their own thing.
It's a mixture of WhatsApp and Instagram only it takes the best of both and leaves the rest behind...I have tons of others as well. AppleSoft, SAPFace, CiscGoo...many others.
tech's doing just fine. The way venture capital works is you throw money at 100 businesses, 98 of them fail and you make a killing on the 2 that survive and thrive.
.com boom because it was a whole new technology. That's a once in half a century event. Millennials, like everybody else, would much rather have money in hand, a steady paycheck and several weeks of vacation than some charismatic CEO type giving them free beer in exchange for half the pay and 80 hour work weeks.
The article is saying that Millennials don't want to work for start ups anymore. I don't think they ever did, it's just that the economy's finally recovered enough they've got options. Most start ups pay like crap, give you stock options to make up the difference and then either collapse leaving you with worthless options or do like that "OnLive" company did an fold the company on paper forming a new LLC and invalidating all the existing options.
It's very, very rare that working for a start up pays off. There was a lot of that during the
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
usually have rich parents to fall back on so they can go back and finish their real degree when the start up fails.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Millennials like paychecks, especially when they aren't bouncing.
Creimer posted 100+ videos in a year. Here you are! A sad little fuck still pining away for his attention. Sad. Fucking sad.
"staying at one company"
"climbing the ladder"
what novel fucking concepts today's young people have come up with.
i wonder what they'll come up with next? perhaps a trip to funky town? bell bottoms and platform shoes? velvet elvis?
talk to your grandparents, and kids: your great-grandparents, they'll tell you all about the good ol' days of starting a job at minimum wage after high school, marrying their sweetheart soon after, popping out 2.3 kids and buying a fucking house *on minimum wage* while only *one person* in the household worked. staying at that job for 40 years, and loving it, and never having to worry about health care costs or other skyrocketing bills, or about not having a large enough retirement pension (before you ask 'what the fuck are those?' ask your grandparents that, too) after they retire. after their story is told, ask them why they keep voting to keep this same wonderful life away from you and your own family.
Each generation complains about "kids these days" with no help at all from some conspiracy on the part of the ruling class.
People are just petty. They like to look down on the next generation. It's just how people are.
Well, most people, anyway.
1. Study hard so you understand all the needed topics. Go full Renaissance man on all the topics needed.
2. Read up on emerging science.
3. Have the academic ability, time and wealth to study more.
4. Have the skill to talk about what is emerging. Learn to talk to people and to talk to large numbers of people.
5. The money and location to build on ideas. To buy new equipment needed.
6. To know your own limits and know when to bing in an outside expert to clear a problem.
7. How to create something new.
8. To protect that creativity. Sell the brand to the world.
8.5 Learn how to do a great interview. Have a great translator to help with international languages. Do an interview at 3 am when needed. Be nice to the person doing the interview. Know your topics and be ready for many varied questions about your past, skills, interests and product/service/brand.
9. How to grow with your brand and when to start a new brand.
9.5 When people report problem thank them for the report and tell them how the problem is getting fixed. Fix the problem and thank the person again telling them what was fixed and when.
10. Teach other people how you did something really new and great.
People don't do great:
They are not that smart.
That are not able to talk about their product to random people.
Their nation has strange tax and funding laws. Starting a new business is really difficult in their nation. Laws stop people. They have no money.
They don't protect their product.
They don't seek the best help to get their product ready in time. Average engineers and artists working for big brands are working on the same problems too.
Don't go to failed nations that allow all your great work to be copied by a local brand.
Look into your workers pasts. Are they criminals? Do they have political activist friends, a political past?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
By government fiat, only rich people can raise capital, by paying lawyers a million dollars for permission to raise said capital. Poor people have the same "right". The rich bribed the government to pass these regulations so they don't have to compete with the poor.
As a professor, it was painfully obvious the year that "millennials" started hitting. In order to create fair exams, certain content is repeated for comparison. These provide measures to see if variation in class performance is due to baseline ability, or mistakes in test writing. At the time, we were not sure what was going on, since the millennial phenomena hadn't been described yet. All we did know is that these students were profoundly worse than the years before. They struggled with concepts, gave up when faced with difficult problems, and became irate when you did not drop everything to cater to them, on their schedule. This trend continued for several years.
Worse, there was a growing trend of arrogance that went with this relative lack of ability. Increasingly, students began to confuse the ability to look up something on wikipedia, with actual knowledge and problem solving skill. They were also very dogmatic and intellectually uncurious. If presented with a fact that challenged their preconceptions, they would simply shut down and ignore it. I never thought that exchanging ideas at a university would no longer be in vogue.
So, when stories of this generation began to circulate about this generation being lazy in the workplace with a sense of entitlement, I was in no way shocked. This is what I had seen in my engineering classes. To be clear, I am not saying that I had zero, bright and hardworking students. Some of the best that I had taught were in this era. What I am saying is that the proportion of academic gems to soot was very low.
I would also be remiss not to comment about "being saddled with 1 trillion in college debt." That is classic millennial thought. I.E. a complete and total lack of personal responsibility. No one forced that generation to go to a high priced schools. Every state in the U.S. has a very good public university, which is not all that expensive. This was an option. In fact, it is one that I personally chose, so that I would not have huge, crippling debt. As a generation, millennials were remarkably short sighted and un-analytical about college. It does not take a genius to understand that spending $240,000 at an elite school to earn a degree that leads to jobs that make 30K is simply idiotic. Yet, many of millennials did just that.
No one forced that generation to rack up this debt in trivial non-ecconomcailly viable majors. In fact, because of the internet, millennials had access to far more information about salaries and outcomes than any other generation before it. As a group, millennials simply CHOSE to ignore advice, evidence, and basic math. It is not anyone's fault but their own. Now, they need to live with the consequences of bad judgement.
So, yes, every generation has its triumphs and flaws. Some win major world wars, some travel to the moon, and some even invent the internet. Others, well, I guess their crowning achievement is finding a way to count the number of superficial friends that they have... and wonder why they are considered lesser by those before and after them.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
staring a business might be negative pay, but so is sitting around while no company will employ you. Or worse yet, you could get a job and take it only to lose money because cost of living is more than what the job pays.
They must need more standardized tests. We need to krank up those standardized tests!
Nor is the word cool but that doesn't stop you.
There are no angles in investing - there is only a pure business where you work your ass off for pie in the sky that may never realize. The only one who benefits is owner - which is not you but your Angle Investor!
Typical spoiled kids.
Take away their smartphones and watch them all roll into balls, crying.
Soros-funded troll farm propaganda operators sure do love cyberstalking.
"No one forced that generation to rack up this debt in trivial non-ecconomcailly viable majors."
Hmm... I wonder why your generation didn't rack up so much debt? *cough* public support for higher education *cough* Hmmmmmmmmm...
Hey Commie, who -exactly- is the ruling class you refer to multiple times?
Please provide a few names.
And since it is a conspiracy of -the ruling class- to (lololololol) create silly names each 20 years for the next generation for the purpose of keeping us at each others throats or whatever, are the demographers and journalists who write endlessly about this stuff in on it too?
Tin
Foil
Hat
Communist
Idiot.
Asians and white people can do what you're talking about.
Everyone else is a bottom feeder who lives off of their achievements, and cries racism when you point it out.
that argument about how you rationalize that some people are comfortable and wont leave their job gave me parochial grandfather cancer.
That is to say [citation needed] etc.
Oh so the blue states like mine, California, where the evil af teachers union owns the government has a great education system, great test scores and well educated population.
Bwahaahhaahhaahahhhaahahhaahhhaa
You are an idiot. Probably a result of public education in California.
As a middle aged tech lead I work at a startup with 3 generations of people. My team consists of millineals except for me. They are hard workers but not especially invested in staying at one place. Also they are more middle of the road politically than most of posters on this forum. A lot of what is being said here is more stereotype than the real world.
Tech minded millineals with good skills have many options for employment. That is probably why fewer young people are creating startups. I struggle to bring good employees on board because they have 3 or 4 other offers. There is lots of work and it's easy to get it.
[...] lead to depression and burn-outs because they drink less, smoke less, work harder, take better care of their health and is in many ways much less rebellious than in the past.
fixed that for you.
Todays Millennial lifestyle would have made dystopian sci-fi material not too long ago.
Startups are still great for those that can actually code rather than cut-and-paste garbage.
To the best of my knowledge, they were never cool to someone needing a paycheck.
The biggest problem was that they weren't run like a business (ignoring the questionable billing/payment schedules of large corporations). Payroll wasn't done like payroll. Contractors went unpaid as was any 'person' getting money in the rears.
Lost 2 employees that were dying to go to one. Never understood it. There was a lower chance of being rich, or having a job down the road to being unemployed. Seems kind of dumb to me. One wanted to keep his spot open as a very junior employee . . . the other majorly burned his bridges with everyone above me. The latter was *TOLD* to come and beg for his job back (by his wife) after there was too much overlap between him and an officer's job.
I knew his wife and warned him in advance that if it fell through, it was all him. He called to tell me I was right. :/
Like I said, never was cool.
True
I fear that before too long Europe will get start-ups too, just because America has them.
Your third paragraph is confusing businesses and startups. Immigrants start businesses, but usually something safe that doesn't scale. And many of them fail.
Your fourth paragraph is contradicted by reality, most successful startup founders are from rich backgrounds. Their wealth and connections allows them to gamble on speculative startups.
> Your third paragraph is confusing businesses and startups. Immigrants start businesses, but usually something safe
So if I'm understanding you correctly, you're doing three things here to completely change the question, then asserting an answer that's still false, even after you changes the question. First, you change my words from "start a business" to "launch a start-up". Okay, I'm fine with that. Oxford Dictionary defines start-up as:
--
Start-up
1.1count noun
A newly established business.
âproblems facing start-ups and small firms in rural areasâ(TM)
--
Okay, that's fine. They mean the same thing.
Then in step 2 you redefine English to say that any fairly safe business, any wise business, isn't a newly established business - only wild gambles are start-ups. Sorry, English disagrees with you.
> most successful startup founders are from rich backgrounds
If you had claimed "the top three crazy start-ups that get then most press in Silicon Valley were started by rich people", you might be right. 99.999% of start-ups are not in fact Tesla. As it is, your claim isn't just wrong, it's wildly, ridiculously wrong. Hilariously wrong. For example, the *average* investment by an angel investor is $32,000. Meaning of course the founders needed to find an angel in order to get $30K, because they don't have $30K. SBIC figures show total investment by all investors of less than a million for most start-ups.
He's going to "pastebin" us a taste of our own medicine