Net worth for people aged 30–33 in the U.S.

Boise, Portland, rural Kentucky, Central PA, one dude in Michigan, etc.

great deal until (most of them) lost their jobs or had spouses that lost jobs.

a few ran into culture shock they couldn't get past. my friends in Idaho got a shock, lol.

Kentucky dude is still there, tho. visited him, PITA to get there. great property, and thankfully he can still pull remote gigs.

The financially optimal move is to make your money in a HCOL area and then move to a LCOL area

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4611-Esper-Ln-324-Austin-...

I'm somewhat familiar with the area as I like to go to events at Circuit of the Americas often.

It's out there. There's really not much close nearby other than more houses. It's not like there's a lot of outdoorsy stuff, almost all the land around there is owned by private entities, almost no public park lands so it doesn't even have the "but at least there's nature!" aspect to it.

Expect at least half an hour drive each way to go to anything "Austin", in good traffic.

But, I do have to hand it to Austin, a part of why it's cheap is because of their aggressive construction.

The fact that it has a yard at all is something. Countless people never have one in their lives. Plus it’s a perk not a necessity.

This is how the two party system evolved to sustain the status quo. When people are mad about something, divide the people into two parties and have them each demand a different solution while demonizing the solution of the other party, so that their votes cancel out and then nothing changes.

Extra points if you can get them to demand something unnecessarily polarizing, disproportionate or simplistic when there are better solutions available, because then you can get them to fight against the moderates too.

Notice also that when you point this out to a partisan, they have a tendency to violently agree and then immediately mischaracterize the problem as being that the other party is bad and wrong and the solution is to have everybody do their party's thing.

Power rarely voluntarily relinquishes power.

> I can't think of an instance where it worked well.

Worked pretty well for most of the ex Warsaw pact.

> The French Revolution, and the Communist revolutions were all disasters.

What came prior was also a disaster, except it was a disaster for regular people and the unelected Monarchs didn't feel the pain.

What exactly were people supposed to do? Wait patiently for their autocratic rulers to stop acting like autocrats?

> The slave revolt in Haiti has produced long-term poor results compared to the Dominican Republic.

This shows a complete ignorance of historical fact. French Haiti was 90% enslaved, Spanish Santo Domingo was majority free people. It simply isn't a comparable situation.

Again, what were Haitians supposed to do? Sit around being beaten, raped, and worked to death hoping that the slaveowners eventually see the error of their ways?

I got pretty lucky with one of the (EdTech) startups I was early employee at giving me shares and it grew from nothing to over 1 million active paid subscriptions. Also, I joined a crypto project which rose to $4 billion valuation (joined at like $300 million valuation) but I was only able to get about $30k out of that in spite of hard hustling and leading one of the most important teams. Literally I put pressure on them to get a raise for 1 year and eventually had to quit to show I was serious.

I self-taught myself coding at 14 and have been working non-stop including nights and weekends and saving everything I could.

My net worth now is only $80k liquid at 36 years old. $130k if you include my illiquid retirement fund. So to me, $70k at 33 on a median income looks incredible. I'm not based in the US though. Maybe it's easier over there.

THEN it will go quite far

quite far to teach you you have been played out of your youth and now you are poor

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/04/nx-s1-5760948/high-housing-co...

https://eyeonhousing.org/2025/04/house-sharing-is-not-just-f...

no, not really

What I mean by an emerging industry is one that requires little capital and has few entrenched players—in the end, an industry where new entrants can compete with small initial capital. That's how I'd redefine it.

Because in the IT boom era, there were many technological opportunities. The boss who hired me was one example. But in the case of industrial robot manufacturing, the existing hardware supply chain is, by and large, the one investing.

In the end, what I want to say comes down to this: there are fewer industries open to new entrants.

Because in the IT boom and the construction boom, there were markets that needed less capital than you'd think in the early days. In subcontracting, for instance, you could enter with relatively little capital. But in today's technologically advanced industries, initial capital requirements are far higher. So in the past, even within the same category of industry, there clearly existed sub-markets you could participate in with comparatively little initial capital.

For example, in the old IT industry, my seniors 20 years ago said it took surprisingly little capital. But today's market isn't like that. I think this is a problem that arises as industries become more advanced.

There's a paper I read some time ago arguing that as an industry becomes more advanced, the knowledge and resources required to make a product increase.[1] [1]https://www.nber.org/papers/w27787

And that prediction would have been dead wrong for much of the past 4 decades, except for the post pandemic inflation surge, but that's the exception that proves the rule. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

The Dow, the Dow right now

Is over fifty thou

I don't know why you're laughing

That's what we should be talking abou

The Dow, the Dow right now

S&P is almost seven thou

The American people need to know this,

Need to know, how is the Dow?

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?