Betty Sue makes $286,000 per month on Etsy. She started with nothing, and now she’s filthy rich.
Come on, man. The chances of that happening to the average person are close to zero. Stories like this give people unrealistic expectations.
Betty Sue makes $286,000 per month on Etsy. She started with nothing, and now she’s filthy rich.
Come on, man. The chances of that happening to the average person are close to zero. Stories like this give people unrealistic expectations.
By highlighting singular instances of a sharp rapid success story; people can be shown a mirage-like image which encourages others to follow suit.
If by following the formula it works, then there should be an explosion of successful entrepreneurs in the market. This is untrue otherwise the market distribution would look unlike how it currently is (probably more mid class, less low income class, higher top income bracket).
The reality is that most of the time (>60% I’d approximate), replicating “rags-to-riches” strategies does not produce the same successes as the exhibited highlights. Sometimes a person stumbled onto gold, and by putting a spotlight on that instance you’re showcasing only the business ventures that happened to pay off, sometimes it’s skill, perhaps a combination of both, other times pure RNG🎲.
Ex: Sharktank, from the start you only see a fraction of the people that can even afford to start ventures show up as a contestant, just how many are able to get an investment, and what are the chances that they’d succeed without an investor, publisher, starting funds, etc?
To me “rags to riches” are a prime example of a combination/parallel of a couple of things:
If rags to riches worked, I and many others would be millionaires if not billionaires.
Personally I don’t trust the systems that these stories are built on and displayed as. I think the shows are entertaining but only that and nothing more.
I will remember survivorship bias. If hard work led to success, then a poor person working three jobs should be rich. I’ve noticed that a lot of these stories are closer to “from rich to richer.” Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard because his family could support his “hobby.” He didn’t have to work three jobs to pay rent, but he is set up as a rags-to-riches story, using elbow grease and grit to become the mogul he is.
The just world fallacy is another one worth remembering, in the context of your post, but also generally.
Also
You got George Monbiot’s quote almost exactly word for word:
Lastly, you’re right, but it’s important to remember what he does have, and why - privilege, and lots of it (being a white man from a rich background, with a supportive family to boot? They all put his starting points miles ahead of most others), which he is given by white supremacist patriarchal capitalism, which is why he (and many others, even without the billions, privilege is one hell of a drug) will never work to end those systems and work towards creating a world where everyone has equitable access and opportunity.