[newt]

I stopped after the first paragraph: If you wanted to get rich, how would you do it? I think your best bet would be to start or join a startup. That's been a reliable way to get rich for hundreds of years.

Come on. Startups are long shots, a gamble, definitely not a reliable bet. Most startups fail ( http://hubpages.com/hub/why-startups-fail ) and very few are massive successes. It's the rock-star model of getting rich - many try, few succeed.

Was a "venture-backed trading voyages of the Middle Ages" a "reliable way to get rich" ? There were pirates, the danger of sinking the ship in storms or on rocks, scurvy, unpredictable conditions at the other end of the voyage etc... basically it's high risk, high reward.

[codeslush]

Perhaps it would be a good idea to read the entire essay before passing judgement. Indeed, you'll find your point is addressed in the very essay you stopped reading.

[newt]

Contradicting yourself is not the same as addressing a point.

[chc]

Stopping after one paragraph is not the same thing as reading an essay thoroughly enough to form anything but superficial criticism.

[billswift]

Do you know of a reliable way to get rich? If so, then what are you doing here? I read it not as saying startups were reliable, just that they were the least unreliable means of a particular end - getting rich.

[newt]

I read it not as saying startups were reliable

well, I read it as "your best bet would be to start or join a startup. That's been a reliable way to get rich for hundreds of year"

I read it that way because that's what it says.

Do you know of a reliable way to get rich?

Now you're just changing the subject.