Heard today at work

[xxx22]

Had an interesting conversation with my colleagues today about our future ambitions -one of them announced - it's much more lucrative/safer to climb the corporate ladder than to build a business nowadays as it's become too difficult, that opinion was pretty much widely accepted by everyone else, I do, however, wonder about your opinions.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Parks]

Hmmm what's more risky? Being independent on yourself and knowing what to expect of tomorrow? Or being dependent on someone else that can drop you from their company at any time.

You've read the 3 of MJ's books, how can you even question this? Lucrative no. Safer? Very hard for me to see it that way.

 

[Shono]

Hmmm what's more risky? Being independent on yourself and knowing what to expect of tomorrow? Or being dependent on someone else that can drop you from their company at any time.

You've read the 3 of MJ's books, how can you even question this? Lucrative no. Safer? Very hard for me to see it that way.

Also, listening to 'colleagues' at your job is like listening to a crab in a bucket on why to stay in the bucket. The script is like fight club, don't talk about it. Trying to explain it to safety addicted slowlaners is like trying to explain the excitement of skydiving to a bird.

 

[iivalky]

Had an interesting conversation with my colleagues today about our future ambitions -one of them announced - it's much more lucrative/safer to climb the corporate ladder than to build a business nowadays as it's become too difficult, that opinion was pretty much widely accepted by everyone else, I do, however, wonder about your opinions.

I'd personally disagree. Nowadays, I would argue that businesses are much easier to start, especially with the rise of the internet. To me it sounds like your colleagues are basing their opinions off of their own fears on taking risks. Have they even tried to start a single business before? Where are they getting their stats from? Unfortunately they sound like they may be trapped in the rat-race. And no, climbing the corporate ladder is certainly not more lucrative than starting a successful business. To put it in perspective, ownership of a 10 unit building, fully rented for $1,000/m (net) each will get you somewhere near $100,000 per year. This simply is a 10 unit building that you could probably buy for under $1.5m. That's more than the average American family's income, mostly passive once it's paid for. Even if a job did somehow pay more, Golden handcuffs are still handcuffs anyways.

I hope this helps and I wish you the best!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[andrewraenewton]

I supposed that it depends on the person. If you're the sidewalk type of person, then yes, that might be your best option. But, if you can actually sacrifice what it takes to build a business, then I'd say that it's less risky to build a business.

There isn't much security or faith that can be placed in large corporations. Just ask everyone who worked at sears that witnessed their pension plans evaporate while executives took bonus.

 

[Patryk.]

Thats an example of confirmation bias. Try asking on any business forum what is better and I am sure the businesses wins there. As a business owner you are like a predator - knowing about human psychology can help a lot.

Personally I would tell you the same story what the coworkers said (unless I found you a soul mate with I can cooperate) and I would continue to work on my side project without telling you anything lol Just work Joe, you will be fine!

"You've read the 3 of MJ's books, how can you even question this?" - You should question everything. If you don't you are a sheep. Be a critical thinker everywhere - often time you will be the only one capable of critical thinking.

You are always dependent on something. Maybe the better idea is to make other dependent on you - the way it is impossible to lose a job and fail at business no matter what.

And businesses are the only way I know to at least have a chance to compete with rich kids.

 

[loop101]

Had an interesting conversation with my colleagues today about our future ambitions -one of them announced - it's much more lucrative/safer to climb the corporate ladder than to build a business nowadays as it's become too difficult, that opinion was pretty much widely accepted by everyone else, I do, however, wonder about your opinions.

You should read MJ's books instead of asking people to summarize them for you.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Isaac Odongo]

Everyone isn't the best. Everyone isn't excellent. The masses are the rats. Climbing the corporate if ever it makes anyone happy may in that case be sensible. Freedom is not in climbing the corporate ladder.

 

[Subsonic]

Had an interesting conversation with my colleagues today about our future ambitions -one of them announced - it's much more lucrative/safer to climb the corporate ladder than to build a business nowadays as it's become too difficult, that opinion was pretty much widely accepted by everyone else, I do, however, wonder about your opinions.

For some people a job is the better option. A small minority of workers earn a shitload of money. Also you need to see that people idea of "lucrative or rich" is very tied to what they know. For me rich is having over 10 Million in net worth and over 10k a month after tax as "passive" income.
For others rich is earning 75k a year because they have never seen or consumed content from people that make good money.

 

[Kevin88660]

Had an interesting conversation with my colleagues today about our future ambitions -one of them announced - it's much more lucrative/safer to climb the corporate ladder than to build a business nowadays as it's become too difficult, that opinion was pretty much widely accepted by everyone else, I do, however, wonder about your opinions.

Value, Risk Appetite, knowledge and Mindset.

If they are really happy with what they have they are probably right.

Everything is a matter of perspective. In a feudal society, the only way to escape bondage is to organize a peasant rebellion. Downside if having you and your family members facing public execution.

For the first time in history, seeking upward mobility in life has so little downside.

To me it becomes stupid to NOT take some form of calculated risk.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[DistressedDenim]

If you aren't a risk taker or you don't mind being a sheep, sure. Myself, I'll take the risk of losing it all for the chance of beating the game, which isn't even a chance at a 9-5.

 

[xxx22]

I really expected better - I got told in this thread to not question anything and read the books, bollocks to you, I read all the books and I agree with most of it, notably I thought the example of a doctor that was hired based on recommendations is particularly weak and a shortcut, most countries have national health service, the entire point is that the medics are not there for profit and you cannot pick and choose and the service will provide standard levels of performance, having 'Scripted' doctors and nurses saves lives, MJ books glance over this - that part was bad in my opinion and didn't convince me (99.999% was good), I am in a moderately successful career so are my peers, we tend to have some entrepreneurial connections - be it relatives or friends, this ain't a LaLa land:- MJ books whilst good do tend to oversimplify some issues and again Great Rat Escape oversimplifies things, Trottmans would have bounced back way earlier off the back of the fact that a) you can find a different employer and they tend to pay you better b) with years your seniority tends to go up and so does the remuneration, this never featured in the GRE, that's another shortcut and who knows if they'd have had their FTE at all, one other person said that as entrepreneur they were a hunter and would lie to you to keep you in the Rat Race- what a pathetic statement, completely against the spirit of helping other people and a stupid hunter comment reminds me of the chasing cats analogy.

 

[Kevin88660]

I really expected better - I got told in this thread to not question anything and read the books, bollocks to you, I read all the books and I agree with most of it, notably I thought the example of a doctor that was hired based on recommendations is particularly weak and a shortcut, most countries have national health service, the entire point is that the medics are not there for profit and you cannot pick and choose and the service will provide standard levels of performance, having 'Scripted' doctors and nurses saves lives, MJ books glance over this - that part was bad in my opinion and didn't convince me (99.999% was good), I am in a moderately successful career so are my peers, we tend to have some entrepreneurial connections - be it relatives or friends, this ain't a LaLa land:- MJ books whilst good do tend to oversimplify some issues and again Great Rat Escape oversimplifies things, Trottmans would have bounced back way earlier off the back of the fact that a) you can find a different employer and they tend to pay you better b) with years your seniority tends to go up and so does the remuneration, this never featured in the GRE, that's another shortcut and who knows if they'd have had their FTE at all, one other person said that as entrepreneur they were a hunter and would lie to you to keep you in the Rat Race- what a pathetic statement, completely against the spirit of helping other people and a stupid hunter comment reminds me of the chasing cats analogy.

If you are good paying job and you are very satisfied with your job then indeed there is no need for you to risk into other paths. No one says that you have to.

In your example you have to wait. Not everyone wants to wait.

There is no employment contract that guarantees that your wage go up with experience. You are extrapolating from the past experience and the future is not really as certain as it is.

In developed countries most public sector jobs are financed by unsustainable national debt. When the debt bomb explodes there will be restructuring.

In this rate hike cycle we seen massive tech companies laying off. Why? My guy instinct is that the companies are no where as profitable as they seem to appear and have been relying either by waves of VC investment of secondary market shares buy back to look good.

Most of the jobs that seemingly have good pay and work life balance are probably well positioned in an unsustainable bubble. Just look at how Elon Musk fired most of the Twitter staffs to make the company sustainable.

When there is a restructuring the highest paid employee gets fired first. And usually these are the people with highest personal family liability because they live their lives under the assumption that things will always be this way. These also are the people who will struggle to find the jobs that match their original positions.

Just some points for you to consider.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[loop101]

(never mind)