• Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    In gates’ case it was a father with enough money he could attend one of the few schools that he could have access to a computer and a program to learn IT. While ALSO having an investment banker uncle who was willing to invest millions into his company early on.

  • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    “I built this company by myself, from the ground up, my own blood sweat and tears, no help from anyone, and a $20 million dollar gift from my daddy”

      • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        How much did you get from your dad? I know my dad has nothing to give me, mainly because of those guys that were able to get a hand out pulling the ladder up behind them.

        In this country even being sent to college is a privilege, you are either gifted it from your parents or you are an indentured servant for your student loans/tuition. A handout from your parents is a handout from your parents, no matter the amount.

        It’s nothing to be ashamed of. Everyone needs help every now and then. Just don’t label yourself “selfmade” when you are not.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, anyone who claims to be self-made is just showing a lack of perspective. I got an inheritance from my grandparents and college tuition from my parents, but that’s really a rounding error. I was raised in a supportive home where my physical, emotional, and academic needs were met. My extended family is about as drama free as they come. I’m tall and usually well liked, so I wasn’t picked on at school. When I came out as gay, my parents were supportive. I had access to a computer as a kid, where I developed a knack for programming that developed into a career. Point is, there are so many boosts or drags that a person can experience in their life, even look purely at money is too simplistic.

      • velox_vulnus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Not an economist, but a lousy CS grad, so my rambling may be incorrect. But honestly, I have no words for your genius. More specifically, the lack of it.

        • you ignored inflation around the 1970s
        • you did not take into account the cost of living
        • you also conveniently ignored the lifestyle choices

        Inflation has caused the cumulative price increase of 488.65% in the US from 1975 to 2023-almost-2024. $200,000 in 1975 is around $1,177,295.17 in today’s time.

        $20 million is just an exaggeration for the light-hearted joke @snekerpimp@lemmy.world made, it’s not that deep.

        Source: Inflation calculator

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    On a related note, there are also studies showing that luck as opposed to skill is the dominant factor in success. A person who has average skills but enjoys having good a good start in life, who has access to good connections, education, and so on, will have a far better chance of becoming successful than an exceptional person who doesn’t get these benefits.

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-role-of-luck-in-life-success-is-far-greater-than-we-realized/

    • JDubbleu@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve recently experienced this myself and it’s insane. I grew up in what appears (at least to me) to be an average middle class life. I lived at home during college and commuted to my local community college, then state school to get my 4 year degree in CS

      I grinded my ass off during college to get a good internship which led me to getting a $220k a year job at AWS with 0 connections. That one position was my lucky break that sent me into a world of connections I couldn’t even fathom.

      As a result of that job I moved to the bay area and made a bunch of friends both in and out of my field. Through that I’ve met VCs, mentors, recruiters, and many others who I could get a job interview through just by asking. I’ve also gotten a few other people jobs through direct referral. Don’t get me wrong they still have to interview and perform well, but getting short listed for interviews is incredibly powerful.

      I recently got a new job, full remote, amazing benefits, and higher salary than AWS (slightly less total comp) through a friend of a friend. Despite the tech market being awful I went from asking for a referral to signing an offer in 6 weeks with only 1.5 YOE. I’m no one special either, I just knew the right people to get interviews and then studied my ass off to pass them. Most people capable of passing wouldn’t even get an interview because it’s a numbers game.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s crazy to think about isn’t it. So much of your career ends up being just dumb luck of meeting the right people, and ending up in jobs where you make useful connections. And I have friends who are hands down smarter than I am, who ended up with crappier jobs because their dumb luck took a slightly different turn. I’ve come to realize that this whole notion of meritocracy under capitalism is pure nonsense. You do have to put in work into your career, but getting the right opportunity is what really matters.

        There are plenty of people who are smart and ambitious, but only a few ever end making it. And then it’s easy to look back and to start attributing your success to having worked hard, and being smart, and so on. The reality is that you just won the lottery.

        • JDubbleu@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think it’s both. I’ve always subscribed to the idea that you create your own luck in a way. As in, working hard will allow you more “lucky” opportunities, but it doesn’t guarantee them. There are certainly people who will never get lucky despite working hard, and there are those who will fall upwards despite doing the bare minimum. As long as you make a comfortable living I wouldn’t stress over it, and try to help those who are less lucky around you when you can.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            6 months ago

            I look at this as a systemic problem, sort of like a rigged game. The dice is loaded in favor of people who have more opportunities, and statistically they’re the ones who end up being successful. I think we should strive to have social systems that afford good opportunities to everyone, so you don’t have to win the birth lottery to have a good chance at success. I feel that I’m one of the lucky people who make a comfortable living, but I don’t think it should be a privilege.

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      “I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops”.

  • LetterboxPancake@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    6 months ago

    “If you don’t want to be poor, why weren’t you just born into a rich family? I have no respect for your bad choices pre life!”

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      “Because you are poor you are unworthy*. Because you are unworthy you don’t deserve support.”

      ( * replace by favorite slur)

      And because they don’t get any support, people remain poor, thereby closing the circular reasoning.

  • BeefPiano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    6 months ago

    Steve Jobs adoptive father was a machinist and a car salesman without a college degree.

  • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    76
    ·
    6 months ago

    Lololol these guys are all from upper middle class. And on the low side of that. Y’all just want to be pissed.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Upper middle class middle class with families and connections who had spare money to invest and just far enough along that they had the kids were raised with the drive to gather even more wealth. If they had been more wealthy they wouldn’t have the drive, if they were less well off then they wouldn’t have the advantages to make that drive happen.

      “With money” doesn’t mean all the money. It means plenty of money. Gates loves to tell the story about how he started his company in his father’s garage. That was a three car garage because they could afford a large house with a lot of extra space Bill could use for free while starting his business.

      The parents could afford to send them to prestigious schools where they made connections.

      The parents had money. Recognizing this is not jealousy, it is a reason to acknowledge that massive wealth does not come from effort alone.

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Since there is a ton of variation on cost of living and other factors by region, I just go by rough percentages because anything more is too complex to generalize. So the following is my view, which can be applied nationally or within a state/region as the outcome is basically the same. Keep in mind that after basic expenses are paid and someone can afford to invest their long term investments and other wealth are generally not included in their income despite their actual wealth continuing to increase allowing them access to loans and other monetary options that the middle class just doesn’t have.

          So how I see it by income:
          Upper class as top 10%
          Upper middle class would be 75%-90%
          Middle class 25%-75%

          Sure, people in California won’t have the same monthly costs at 100k+ income to someone in the midwest, but the person in California who owns a home is building up a lot more wealth and options for loans/mortgages in higher amounts than someone in the midwest with a cheaper home. Renting is a different thing, but upper middle class and above have the option to buy and increase their wealth and puts them even further above middle class and below that aren’t able to do the same or aren’t able to save on top of the house payments.

          What do you consider upper class?

          • HubertManne@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            ah. se I would go with what you have but upper middle class would be 65%-75% or something and 75%-85% would be like lower upper class or such (I would use the quintiles really) and to get away from money I would consider upper class to be anyone who owns a large home with no mortage (or they are keeping their mortgage optionally), same with cars, has their retirment fully funded, paid for their kids to go to any college they wanted to and has additional money to invest in kida ideas or has money for leasure vehicles/property or vacations every year. even in the 80’s

          • Tremble@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Ok so looking at real numbers I don’t think your sentiment is correct. I’ll take other numbers too but I am seeing the median income is around 70k annual.

            But then I am seeing it costs around 61k just to rent a one bedroom apartment.

            Are you seriously suggesting that about half of the “middle class” could not even afford to rent a one bedroom apartment?

            (I got my numbers just from quick google searches fyi I tried to post pics but it did the endless scrolling bug)