hopeful hypothesis: pre-industrial-revolution, there wasn& #39;t a straightforward way to turn brains into money, so plenty of smart families were poor/peripheral; by the 1980s, any family that could produce an Edison (or a Gates) was already rich by merit https://twitter.com/benlandautaylor/status/1312110036420710400">https://twitter.com/benlandau...

pessimistic hypothesis: there& #39;s still just as many poor potential Edisons out there, and we& #39;re now just blocking them from contributing

truth probably some of both; what proportions?

potential thought here: many middle/professional class families are def capable of producing smart kids, but have no social ability to create groundbreaking new companies, for [reasons]

labor aristocracy unable to become capital owners

@mattparlmer complains about this a lot

which is also related to the growth of the average company: the places these professional-class people work aren& #39;t the small-business economy, way fewer opportunities to create a new Microsoft than to create a new Bob& #39;s Auto Repair

https://twitter.com/leibenstein/status/1312194332946882560?s=20">https://twitter.com/leibenste...