What I meant was not so much a statement about a parent's influence on a child's entrepreneurial ambitions, but more so that the author's dismissal of a person's inherent qualities would seem laughable to someone that has experience interacting with young children.
I have no way of knowing or proving what is or isn't "genetic". However, there are absolutely proto-entrepreneurial traits, a sort of hustler mentality that is blindingly obvious to see that some kids seem just "have it" and others don't. I would argue that this disposition is identifiable as early as two years old. Does that come from money? I would need much more evidence than the referenced study to believe that.
I think my major gripe comes from the way the article attempts to base this conclusion on the NBER paper. The paper measures material outcomes and rightfully correlates them with the financial opportunities of the participants. This says nothing about the personality traits that make someone an entrepreneur.
"Prosperity" implies that the problem is folks smart enough to not have children beyond the means to raise them into a similar or better lifestyle.
I prefer "Precarity" induced fertility collapse. Down here in the mud I guess I have a different view with my 1 child and wife with a heart condition who would likely die from a 2nd pregnancy.
Corollary: My income from living a well meaning life is not sufficient to have children. Having children while working for a non-profit in 2025 means living in precarity. While my individual choices have a negligible impact on the direction of the world or society at large, my low income would actively stunt my children and any hope that they might have the resources, support, influence, or opportunity to bring about systemic change.
Also, I refuse to consider any type of violence in my organizing even though that is precisely the escalation in tactics and extremism that the "evil" parts of the world have moved to.
I am prey. Please eat me.
If you do not fight the system the way I want I will pout and die faster in response. Because suicide is the ultimate form of control and emotional manipulation and that's all I really care about.
They apparently got back together. Trump recently said of their relationship:
"I like Elon. I've always liked Elon." and "He's a nice guy. And he's a very capable guy. I've always liked him. He had a bad spell. He had a bad period. He had a bad moment. It was a stupid moment in his life. Very stupid. I'm sure he'd tell you that. But I like Elon and I suspect I'll always like him."
I hope you are right, but my understanding is that the high headcount in engineering could, in large part, be offset by American tax exemptions for engineering salaries and that this exemption is being actively sunset.
However, I wonder how long it takes company policies to catch up with the reality of that reversion. How many are still operating as though it was never reverted?
Not only that, but the process described is how you train a junior dev.
There, at least, the wasted time results in the training of a human being who can become sophisticated enough to become a trusted independent implementer in a relatively short duration
Actually, it's ironically an excellent Freudian slip considering "wreak" doesn't just mean to make happen, it means to make happen in a violent, or wild, malevolent way - appropriate for the reeking actions of the Supreme Court who are definitely wreaking havoc!
>> "Selection: The woolen process begins with the selection of the highest quality imported and domestic fleeces. Each bail is sampled and checked for quality, providing the base of making the finest woolen products."
While it may be true that entrepreneurship means being overly absent in your child's life I think MOST parents are TOO present in their child's life.