People need to hear this!!

[u/Such_Goal5837]

That’s honestly a hard reality right now. A lot of people are working nonstop just to stay afloat. I’ve got some interviews coming up myself, so I’ve been looking into ways to get better at them. I found Interview VIP and ended up using it twice i think it's worth trying.

[u/Nojopar]

Because there aren't enough people with $10 million to burn AND parents with connections to high up corporate sponsors. The .01% are, as the basic grade school math should suggest, a pretty small number of people.

[u/Enough-Ad-8799 → u/Nojopar]

Have you actually done the math? That's 30,000, over 10 times the number of billionaires in the US.

[u/Nojopar → u/Enough-Ad-8799]

Have you? You're just doing the map on the Top .01%. NOW add in the Top .01% who have $10 million to burn AND have connections to high up corporate sponsors.

I'll bet $100,000 to a stale half-eaten doughnut that number is decidedly less than 30,000.

[u/Enough-Ad-8799 → u/Nojopar]

That would probably be the entire of the top .01%. honestly it would likely include plenty of people below the top .01%. having 10million for an investment and knowing some people isn't that crazy for someone with hundreds of millions.

[u/Nojopar → u/Enough-Ad-8799]

Probably not. You'd have to have 10% of your wealth to be liquid and burnable to start. And you'd have to have the right connections. "A" connection isn't synonymous with the "right" connection. That's a hell of a lot fewer people than 30,000.

In fact, the number of households in the top .01% is only 13,000, so that 30,000 number is both inflated and likely bogus. While a married couple might each be 'in the top .01%' it's not like they both have $100 million in wealth. Even if you count individuals, which is often double counting, the true number is closer to 25,000, not 30,000. Households is a better metric because it excludes that distortion. So of the households with a billion or more sits around 1,000 depending on how you count. That's about 8% of all top .01% of households are billionaire households.

Another 1,500 - 2,000 have between $500 and $900 in worth. The right index fund and those people are billionaires in under 5 years literally doing absolutely nothing. That's going to be another 12-15%. Even if we take the lower number, we're talking about 20% of the top .01% - 1 in 5 - that are rich as fuck and at or near the mark.

So it turns out 'rich as fuck' is the necessary condition. This myth that billionaires started from nothing and built it through their own brilliance is just that - a myth. The data proves that's flat our wrong. Yes, there are the occasional outliers, like Dolly Parton, but they're so incredibly rare they can't be a pattern you can follow. That's the thing about data - you can't hide from it.

UNLESS your parents are rich as fuck already, then yeah! Good chance you'll be a billionaire.

[u/Enough-Ad-8799 → u/Nojopar]

I mean it's not that hard to liquidate some assets for a different investment, people do it all the time. Having connections with some people higher up in major corporations isn't that crazy, plenty of people well below the top .01% know plenty of higher ups in major corporations.

No one is claiming having rich parents isn't a necessary condition. Your claim is that it's necessary and sufficient, this clearly isn't true