Entrepreneurship -- is it a genetic tolerance for risk or family money? Quartz argues for the money angle. "When basic needs are met, it’s easier to be creative; when you know you have a safety net, you are more willing to take risks." So, you didn't build that?

It's funny 'cause it's true:

https://twitter.com/HardDriveMag/status/1184151955083612160

Cozy with the crazies

https://mobile.twitter.com/JaniceDean/status/1194038167550283782

Sorry Conan, but the Quartz article is a pile of bullcrap. Here are some business formation statistics from the census.

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/research-matters/2018/02/bfs.html

Entrepreneurship is NOT on the rise. The initial premise of the Quartz article is wrong.

It is right that increasingly new business owners are from wealthy families. This is for one simple reason. It is pretty much impossible to raise capital from traditional sources. After 2010 when Sarbox and Dodd-Frank were passed it became untenable for new companies to raise capital from banks and the stock market. Banks were required by regulators to lend to much less risky groups. So new companies were cut off. As for the stock market, the reporting costs went up tremendously. For a large company adding one or two people to manage the new reporting requirements weren't a significant cost. But for small companies the new costs typically were greater than the capital they could raise. Hence the falling number of IPOs. Instead new companies are increasingly privately owned and initially funded by personal contacts of the founder. That families are a major personal contact should be no surprise.

So no, entrepreneurship isn't genetic. It also isn't "When basic needs are met, it’s easier to be creative; when you know you have a safety net, you are more willing to take risks." Instead it is like Willie Sutton said, 'because that is where the money is'.

Sorry for the rant. But as someone who has actually gone through the process and knows many other people who have also done so seeing Ms Groth spout such garbage pisses me off a little.

I only shared it as a discussion point, Ben. While it has some valid points, it oversimplifies things, in favor of the big success stories while ignoring smaller scale entrepreneurs. Yes, access to investment capital is important, but plenty of entrepreneurs are making do on a small scale without it. Check out your local food truck, real estate agent, or craft show.

Yes food trucks and real estate agents exist. But they existed long ago and probably will continue to exist well into the future. But small manufacturing groups have significantly dropped. The Quartz article is correct that the demographics of founders of new companies has shifted in the direction of children of wealthy families. That isn't because there are more rich kids starting companies but instead because other companies just aren't being formed like they used to.

This has a significant effect on the US economy as a whole. Trump can be credited with reducing the regulatory burden on US business and improving the GDP growth rate from the Obama era 1-2% to 2-3%. But that is still low for the US. 5% used to be normal. That missing 2% of GDP growth came from small businesses that still aren't being formed.

The president isn't a dictator. There are limits to what any president can do. Without action from Congress we won't see that growth come back.

Saw this and thought of Darth's foolishness from yesterday.

> They can't afford to ignore
> non-cultists. They're motivated
> to save you from yourself.

Who you callin' "they" and who you callin' "you," Punk?

Note that the "Oh my God" woman from 13 seconds quickly withdraws and is not seen in the concluding chapters.

Been in a lot of rentals lately, and This is true.

And do you remember how much of a squirrelly-butt pain Winamp was?

Is?

Ah, it was a scam.