₦airaland Forum

IbeOkehie:
As I narrated, Allstate offered to cover the damage. They also told me that my premiums will rise because I was getting a long term customer discount. And I decided to shop around.

I found out that I'm paying much cheaper premiums than I would get with other companies. Which is why I've stayed with them and even bought shares in the company.

This discussion isn't about lemon cars and warranties. It's about home insurance. People who buy home insurance aren't suckers, sometimes it's required by mortgage agreements or the law.

Again, the insurance company offered to cover the damage. It's important to get the facts right at least.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

The term you are looking for is sunk cost fallacy

raumdeuter:
Premiums received from others not from that particular patient as she hadnt paid up to 200k which the insurance paid

That's how insurance in meant to work, doh, or you'd not bother getting any and just pay for your own damage.

budaatum:
Come check out UK's healthcare. It would make you see the good the human race can achieve when it stops relying on luck and places its trust in the sweat off their collective brows.

The factors that play into healthcare are complex.

For example, very few people understand that the USA is subsidizing all the worlds healthcare systems.

Nothing in this world is free.

budaatum:
Sorry, but I only need to look at myself to know that being racist is not "Humans are NATURALLY".

You are programmed (miseducated) to be racist just as you can be educated to not be racist, and tribalist for that matter. And I hope you bear this in mind so you may program your children accordingly.

Nobody ever admits they love their own kind more than others. You mention children. Humans generally spend lots of resources on their own children even though there's other more deserving or needy children elsewhere that could use some of those resources. Are parents programmed to love their kids?

Racism is driven by EXACTLY the same instincts that make humans love their own children MORE than children of other people. Do you have children? Then you should understand. All things equal, you will do more for your cousin than you would for a stranger you meet at school. It's the instinct of all living things to preserve their genes and you're no different.

All humans are racist. There's nothing to debate.

Liberalism, socialism and such ideology is all about trying to destroy human nature, which is impossible. It feels good, it makes for good virtue signaling, but it never works.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

raumdeuter:
You know the healthcare in the UK you got, Its the UK people who pay for it with increased taxes are Americans willing to pay more in taxes? No they want others to carry the extra tax burden usually those who they believe earn more than them Everyones tax solution is to always tax those who they believe are earning higher. Hardly them.

I think you'd find there isn't much difference in UK and USA income tax rates as it is, and I'd argue we get more for our UK tax than USA people get.

"Taxing those who they believe are earning higher", is your own understanding of everyone's tax solution. You must have not heard the call for high earners to pay their fair amount of tax instead of evading tax.

IbeOkehie:
The factors that play into healthcare are complex.

For example, very few people understand that the USA is subsidizing all the worlds healthcare systems.

You will need to provide evidence for the bold, because apart from American Bill Gates whom some say is selling mosquitoes in Nigeria, I don't see any country America subsidises their healthcare when they can't even subsidise that of their own citizens.

IbeOkehie:
Nobody ever admits they love their own kind more than others. You mention children. Humans generally spend lots of resources on their own children even though there's other more deserving or needy children elsewhere that could use some of those resources. Are parents programmed to love their kids?

You inconsistency is disturbing.

If humans are naturally racist and "love their own kind more than others", how the heck would you go about explaining the lack of racism that, as you claim, makes America subsidise "all the worlds healthcare systems". Do Americans love other races than their own perhaps?

IbeOkehie:
Racism is driven by EXACTLY the same instincts that make humans love their own children MORE than children of other people. Do you have children? Then you should understand. All things equal, you will do more for your cousin than you would for a stranger you meet at school.

I have gone to the bother of posting the definition of racism below so you can perhaps understand that not loving or spending as much on other people's children as much as I love and spend on my own children is not the same thing as racism.

You hopefully would not claim I have an ism because I love my husband more than I love you, or love pounded yam more than ẹba.

budaatum:
That's how insurance in meant to work, doh, or you'd not bother getting any and just pay for your own damage.

So if the insurance was paying 200k for everyone how long will they go bankrupt. Reality dictates that some people will get denied

budaatum:
I think you'd find there isn't much difference in UK and USA income tax rates as it is, and I'd argue we get more for our UK tax than USA people get.

"Taxing those who they believe are earning higher", is your own understanding of everyone's tax solution. You must have not heard the call for high earners to pay their fair amount of tax instead of evading tax.

This is inaccurate because the top 1% pay the bulk of the income tax of the country. The top 1% pays about 40% of income tax while the bottom 50% pay about 5%

The top earners already contribute a disproportionate part to the wallet. We have a progressive tax where you pay more as you earn more. Its actually unfair to those who earn more to pay more than others.

Should we give a flat tax a try to everyone from poorest to richest pay a flat percentage? I am sure you will say no. You want some people to pay more and not you?

raumdeuter:
So if the insurance was paying 200k for everyone how long will they go bankrupt. Reality dictates that some people will get denied

The whole point of insurance if I recall is that the total payouts are less than a 10th or 5th of the premiums. Everyone is not going to get $200,000 cases at the same time unless there is a major incident. Which is why you have clauses about acts of God and terrorists attacks.

insurance is based on the statistical improbability of the events occurring.

GloriousGbola:
The whole point of insurance if I recall is that the total payouts are less than a 10th or 5th of the premiums. Everyone is not going to get $200,000 cases at the same time unless there is a major incident. Which is why you have clauses about acts of God and terrorists attacks.

insurance is based on the statistical improbability of the events occurring.

Insurance model even in public options bank on more people not using it as much as others. If everyone is to use at the same rate and maxing things out, All insurance companies will fold up in a few months

If you disagree, and think insurance are scamming you, you can opt out of insurance save up your premiums and offer to pay cash for treatments. The only reason why you are able to pay $5k a year for insurance and have your $20k treatment covered is because someone is not using as much from the pool of funds

raumdeuter:
So if the insurance was paying 200k for everyone how long will they go bankrupt. Reality dictates that some people will get denied

No one is asking any insurance company to pay everyone 200k! And you saying the above just wants to make me give up on you. Next you be claiming we are asking insurance fraudsters to be paid 200k too.

There are some serious calculations that go in to determining an individuals risk of needing to get paid insurance, and that risk is reflected in the premiums you are charged and is why a non-smoker pays less for health insurance than a smoker pays and is also why the smoker gets a lot less coverage too.

Whatever you might think insurers are, stupid is not one of them.

Refs:
Scottish Widows: A Lesson In Statistics

Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind

raumdeuter:
You want some people to pay more and not you?

I already pay more than many, not being a low earner per se, and I will be mandated to pay more if and when my income increases, so your comment above is just silly.

If you want to live in a good well functioning society, you'd accept that those who have more will necessarily pay more or you'd end with a country like Nigeria where we farm malaria in gutters outside our homes because we refuse to be progressive where tax is concerned and therefore can't afford cleaning.

raumdeuter:
This is inaccurate because the top 1% pay the bulk of the income tax of the country. The top 1% pays about 40% of income tax while the bottom 50% pay about 5%

The top earners already contribute a disproportionate part to the wallet. We have a progressive tax where you pay more as you earn more. Its actually unfair to those who earn more to pay more than others.

Should we give a flat tax a try to everyone from poorest to richest pay a flat percentage? I am sure you will say no. You want some people to pay more and not you?

Actually you know the game. Nigerian Banks for instance play the game very well. Low salary, high allowance, so low taxes for high earners. Great until you are exiting early and your severance is based on your taxable income.

budaatum:
You will need to provide evidence for the bold, because apart from American Bill Gates whom some say is selling mosquitoes in Nigeria, I don't see any country America subsidises their healthcare when they can't even subsidise that of their own citizens.

Well we have to agree on some basics first.

1) the greed for profit drives innovation & discovery.

2) when people put their money at risk, they expect a profit above inflation AND greater than they would get from a simple interest account or lending it to government, as in Treasury Bills. Without this reward for risk, there would be very little investment.


If you agree to the above, you can continue reading. If you don't agree, please don't bother reading on, the discussion ends here and that's very OK, we all can't agree.

Now let's say a UK drug company like Astra Zeneca has $100million to invest. They can

a) Invest it RISK FREE in treasury bills and make 2.5%, guaranteed.

b) invest in research and discover and bring a new drug to market.

Let's say they discover new drug Kakabra which is a cure for cancer. They want to make a profit above inflation + 2.5% treasury rate. As humans, they also want to maximize profit.

So they set the price of Kakabra @ $50,000 per treatment course. This is where the subsidy begins.

In the modern world today, all these European and even other countries have guaranteed healthcare for all.

Left to a free market, these systems will naturally generate UNLIMITED EXPENDITURE. So as with all government subsidized systems, they MUST have price controls.

So the UK government will REGULATE the price of Kakabra and say they will pay only $2000 per dose.

What does Aztra Zeneca do? They agree. Why? Because the UK government has monopoly power over the healthcare market and thus they have no choice. More importantly and direct to our discussion, because they and EVERY OTHER DRUG COMPANY have a final destination for recouping cost of investment and getting profit - the USA where government allows them to set their own prices.

So Astra Zeneca will come to the USA and set their price at $250,000 per dose in order to get the profits the UK government has effectively stolen from them.

That is how the USA is subsidizing the world healthcare system. It applies to drugs, medical equipment and much more. This is real.

A liberal critic will now say, well the USA government must also control prices for the benefit of its citizens. At this point, we must refer to the initial basic agreements of this discussion. If you read this far, you must have agreed that -

1) the greed for profit drives innovation & discovery.

2) when people put their money at risk, they expect a profit above inflation AND greater than they would get from a simple interest account or lending it to government, as in Treasury Bills. Without this reward for risk, there would be very little investment.

If Astra Zeneca didn't have the option of making their profits from the USA, they wouldn't have invested in producing Kakabra. The investments by these greedy drug companies is the reason we have so many miracle drugs today that improve lives all over the world.

And it doesn't end there. We all know that government guaranteed healthcare is expensive and imposes high taxation. One of the ways European governments get the money is by abandoning their obligations to defend themselves, they spend their defense budgets on free healthcare and other welfare goodies. It's the United States that funds the defense of Europe.

Immediately Donald Trump won the election, the German government collapsed because they knew they would have to fund the Ukraine War alone and some of their Ministers refused approve borrowing or increasing taxes to pay for it. This was the explicit reason for the fall of the government, that alone tells a lot.

It's alright though. Life isn't fair.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

budaatum:
No one is asking any insurance company to pay everyone 200k! And you saying the above just wants to make me give up on you. Next you be claiming we are asking insurance fraudsters to be paid 200k too.

There are some serious calculations that go in to determining an individuals risk of needing to get paid insurance, and that risk is reflected in the premiums you are charged and is why a non-smoker pays less for health insurance than a smoker pays and is also why the smoker gets a lot less coverage too.

Whatever you might think insurers are, stupid is not one of them.

Refs:
Scottish Widows: A Lesson In Statistics

Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind

Insurance are not stupid which is why some people get denied. They have to be profitable to keep being in business

budaatum:
I already pay more than many, not being a low earner per se, and I will be mandated to pay more if and when my income increases, so your comment above is just silly.

If you want to live in a good well functioning society, you'd accept that those who have more will necessarily pay more or you'd end with a country like Nigeria where we farm malaria in gutters outside our homes because we refuse to be progressive where tax is concerned and therefore can't afford cleaning.

So you dont want to pay more but want to point at others to pay more? If you think there is a benefit higher earners get, you can also become one so you get it too

Why wait until you are mandated? You believe all these, then go ahead and do it, Pay more

I live in a functioning society actually the greatest country in the world, the envy of others. And we are doing great as is

Gerrard59:
So could you recommend a better system or the kind of reforms you would love to see? Where have they been implemented and how were the results?

Companies in their annual report calculate how much of their profits are shared with top executives and how much, if at all, with workers. And the tax code is enacted accordingly denying favorable tax treatment to a company unless a company has a worker inclusive profit-sharing mechanism in place.

That‘s just one example of how a government could possibly enforce a fairer system where extreme wealth concentration and exploitation are curbed.

IbeOkehie:
Well we have to agree on some basics first.

1) the greed for profit drives innovation & discovery.

2) when people put their money at risk, they expect a profit above inflation AND greater than they would get from a simple interest account or lending it to government, as in Treasury Bills. Without this reward for risk, there would be very little investment.

This incentive to make maximum profit is why companies, billionaires gamble their money into research discovery which makes life better for everyone. In your example for one Kabakra that succeeds, like 10 have already failed at different levels of clinical trials and who takes the loss? The investors. But they keep pouring money into it with the hope that one day they will get a breakthrough recoup all the losses and more

raumdeuter:
This incentive to make maximum profit is why companies, billionaires gamble their money into research discovery which makes life better for everyone. In your example for one Kabakra that succeeds, like 10 have already failed at different levels of clinical trials and who takes the loss? The investors. But they keep pouring money into it with the hope that one day they will get a breakthrough recoup all the losses and more

But they don't get their profits in Europe or Asia, they get it from the USA. This is one of the ways the USA bears untold burdens for the world and all we get in return is accusations of racism, imperialism and what not. Some of which is true, but in my opinion the good done by the USA vastly overwhelms the bad. Even the simple fact of its existence as the most diverse free market democracy is priceless because it shows the world what is possible.

Without the USA most European and Japanese pharma companies wouldn't survive in their own subsidized healthcare systems.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

IbeOkehie:
Well we have to agree on some basics first.

1) the greed for profit drives innovation & discovery.

I disagree! There is quite a lot of innovation that has been driven by the desire to improve the lot of the human race.

Marie Curie, for instance, did not get sick from radioactivity because of greed for profit. Even NASA did not spend billions to go to the moon because of greed for profit, but for bragging rights.

IbeOkehie:
2) when people put their money at risk, they expect a profit above inflation AND greater than they would get from a simple interest account or lending it to government, as in Treasury Bills. Without this reward for risk, there would be very little investment.

This, however, is somewhat true. If there is no investment, your money will just be worthless paper under your mattress or you'd consume it.

IbeOkehie:
Now let's say a UK drug company like Astra Zeneca has $100million to invest. They can

a) Invest it RISK FREE in treasury bills and make 2.5%, guaranteed.

b) invest in research and discover and bring a new drug to market.

Or c) buy their own shares to inflate their share price to increase the CEOs pay, as has been done by many companies lately.

Ref:
https://wolfstreet.com/2020/03/31/estimates-about-the-collapse-of-share-buybacks-begin-to-emerge/

IbeOkehie:
Let's say they discover new drug Kakabra which is a cure for cancer. They want to make a profit above inflation + 2.5% treasury rate. As humans, they also want to maximize profit.

So they set the price of Kakabra @ $50,000 per treatment course. This is where the subsidy begins.

The only reason Astra Zeneca would set its price of Kakabra @ $50,000 per treatment course is because individuals don't mostly need to pay for it because they have insurance. If individuals needed to pay for Kakabra @ $50,000 per treatment course, Astra Zeneca would sell less Kabara and make less profit!

IbeOkehie:
In the modern world today, all these European and even other countries have guaranteed healthcare for all.

Left to a free market, these systems will naturally generate UNLIMITED EXPENDITURE. So as with all government subsidized systems, they MUST have price controls.

Do you not know that insurance companies will not pay Kakabra @ $50,000 per treatment course, but will negotiate a much lower price because they buy in bulk, and that this is them controlling price too?

Insurance companies might even find ways to refuse to pay for Kakabra for some patients just as they refuse to pay you when you needed them to, which is another form of controlling their expenditure on Kakabra.

IbeOkehie:
What does Aztra Zeneca do? They agree. Why? Because they and EVERY OTHER DRUG COMPANY has a final destination for recouping cost of investment and getting profit - the USA where government allows them to set their own prices. So Astra Zeneca will come to the USA and set their price at $250,000 per dose in order to get the profits the UK government has effectively stolen from them.

Smart UK then, to let Astra Zeneca rob Peter in USA to pay for Paul's healthcare in UK. And stupid of Peter in USA for allowing their tax money to pay for Paul's healthcare in UK instead of their money paying for their own healthcare.

Kind of proves the point, I suppose, that we are not asking for tax increases, but that tax money be spent right.

Astra Zeneca, I bet you, would also ensure they pay less tax in USA than anywhere else, and thereby maximise their exploitation of Peter in the name of their profit, which some of us are here against.

IbeOkehie:
That is how the USA is subsidizing the world healthcare system.

If you say USA citizens, I might be inclined to agree. Unfortunately, poor USA Peter dies because he is paying for UK Paul to live, and if I were racist, as in, only selfishly concerned about myself, then, yippee, but since I'm not, poor robbed dead Peter.

USA is not subsidising anywheres healthcare system, in my opinion. They are just letting themselves be exploited by dodgy Astra Zeneca.

Intelligent humans beings would innovate a healthcare system so they can not exploit America, but the selfish individualism and greed for profit in America would not encourage this I guess, just as many there oppose the feeding of poor kids and justified the use of unpaid labour of people with darker skin than their's.

Maeve7:
Companies in their annual report calculate how much of their profits are shared with top executives and how much, if at all, with workers. And the tax code is enacted accordingly denying favorable tax treatment to a company unless a company has a worker inclusive profit-sharing mechanism in place.

That‘s just one example of how a government could possibly enforce a fairer system where extreme wealth concentration and exploitation are curbed.

No law in the USA prevents workers from buying shares in their company which would entitle them to a share of profits. This is significant - nobody prevents anyone from buying shares in any company. Why should there be a law forcing owners to share profits with non-owners?

Sweden is a widely admired country. Their dirty secret is that they're one of the most capitalist and free market oriented nations in the world, even more than the USA. Sweden used to be very socialist though, back in the 1970's they had this kind of law to reward workers and it caused disaster. Thereafter they abolished it and instituted free market reforms that made them prosperous as they are today. Sweden doesn't even have minimum wage laws.

American liberals love Sweden but don't care to know what Sweden does.

Just force owners to give workers profits. Very funny. How about the workers go start their own business? Comrade Come & Chop. Nonsense.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

raumdeuter:
So you dont want to pay more but want to point at others to pay more?

Let me repeat myself in bold for you in case you did not see it the first time!

budaatum:
I already pay more than many, not being a low earner per se, and I will be mandated to pay more if and when my income increases, so your comment above is just silly.

raumdeuter:
Why wait until you are mandated? You believe all these, then go ahead and do it, Pay more

I already do. Its called giving to charity and causes that concern me, and that does not include my Nigerian tax, which this year is record high.

raumdeuter:
I live in a functioning society actually the greatest country in the world, the envy of others. And we are doing great as is

Love the fact you quote Biden's 400 page speech.

www.youtube.com/live/3qNcEsWMuKQ?si=HiSfRqlvfM7_uWqw

Pity I think you can always be a better country, but then which country can't?

budaatum:
I disagree! There is quite a lot of innovation that has been driven by the desire to improve the lot of the human race.

Marie Curie, for instance, did not get sick from radioactivity because of greed for profit. Even NASA did not spend billions to go to the moon because of greed for profit, but for bragging rights.

1) Do you know of any Black African that has made that kind of sacrifice or done anything similar to what Marie Curie did?

2) The trip to the moon was actually about showcasing military technology as part of the arms race with the Soviet Union.

raumdeuter:
I live in a functioning society actually the greatest country in the world, the envy of others. And we are doing great as is

The ENVY is poisonous. The way people hate the USA is surreal.

Good Luck to Nigerians.

Gerrard59:
Typical rebuttal when presented with a coherent statement. I have stated it, I provided links from liberal-leaning media houses. You are not more liberal than the Economist Magazine or BBC. I am suspicious of black people who claim to be liberal as black people are generally conservative in every part of the world.

The gender pay does not exist. Period! Facts don't have to care about your lovey-dovey feelings! If the pay gap exists, employ ONLY women and pay them big big money. BLord in Nigeria does it. The free market permits it. Our resident Math Field Medalist who predicted the victory of Lamar Harrisong

We've done this dance before, just not investing/wasting my time.
You are suspicious of black people who claim to be liberal? Lol. What an insane statement.
You do understand what conservatism is right?
Without liberals black people would still be in chains.
As I said, you write some rather ridiculous things.

IbeOkehie:


1) Do you know of any Black African that has made that kind of sacrifice or done anything similar to what Marie Curie did?

Do you think what Mandela did is not similar to what Marie Curie did, or that what Martin Luther King did was for greed for profit?

But of course you'd argue they were not chemists, or something equally ridiculous you'd try to hide behind an emoji, so here's some history for you so you can take more pride in your race.

https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/what-we-do/blog/black-women-in-chemistry/

IbeOkehie:
No law in the USA prevents workers from buying shares in their company which would entitle them to a share of profits. This is significant - nobody prevents anyone from buying shares in any company. Why should there be a law forcing owners to share profits with non-owners?

Sweden is a widely admired country. Their dirty secret is that they're one of the most capitalist and free market oriented nations in the world, even more than the USA. Sweden used to be very socialist though, back in the 1970's they had this kind of law to reward workers and it caused disaster. Thereafter they abolished it and instituted free market reforms that made them prosperous as they are today. Sweden doesn't even have minimum wage laws.

American liberals love Sweden but don't care to know what Sweden does.

Just force owners to give workers profits. Very funny. How about the workers go start their own business?

Good Luck to Nigeria.

If I ask you now, what you had for breakfast, your answer will be stocks. How will someone who barely makes it from paycheck to paycheck invest in stocks? The same people who struggle to cover basic life expenses?

Care to share what your strategy is in investing in stocks? I want to minimize my risk and would like to hear your expert opinion on which stocks I should invest in.

IbeOkehie:
No law in the USA prevents workers from buying shares in their company which would entitle them to a share of profits. This is significant - nobody prevents anyone from buying shares in any company. Why should there be a law forcing owners to share profits with non-owners?

Sweden is a widely admired country. Their dirty secret is that they're one of the most capitalist and free market oriented nations in the world, even more than the USA. Sweden used to be very socialist though, back in the 1970's they had this kind of law to reward workers and it caused disaster. Thereafter they abolished it and instituted free market reforms that made them prosperous as they are today. Sweden doesn't even have minimum wage laws.

American liberals love Sweden but don't care to know what Sweden does.

Just force owners to give workers profits. Very funny. How about the workers go start their own business? Comrade Come & Chop. Nonsense.

Good Luck to Nigeria.

Most people advocating these sharing of resources of others, They eat daily, they know some people have not eaten in their city and havent offered their meals to them

They live in big houses, they havent invited homeless into their homes

But they want those rich owners who took risks most of us dont want to take, to share their profit with them. It sounds suspiciously envious. If you really believe it, share the little you have with others, open your own company and share the way you preached. But no. It is not me, Its those who are richer than me. Bring them down

I am not rich or close to being a billionaire, most likely will never be but I wont hate them because they do a lot of good to the world which I am a beneficiary of

raumdeuter:
Most people advocating these sharing of resources of others, They eat daily, they know some people have not eaten in their city and havent offered their meals to them

They live in big houses, they havent invited homeless into their homes

But they want those rich owners who took risks most of us dont want to take, to share their profit with them. It sounds suspiciously envious. If you really believe it, share the little you have with others, open your own company and share the way you preached. But no. It is not me, Its those who are richer than me. Bring them down

I am not rich or close to being a billionaire, most likely will never be but I wont hate them because they do a lot of good to the world which I am a beneficiary of

You assume too much. Yet, you still haven’t been able to explain how the Shell company CEO‘s job is harder and riskier than that of someone who does the drilling. And how the former deserves to earn 344 times the amount the latter makes. Stick to the topic or build an altar to worship Elon Musk for all I care.

raumdeuter:
But they want those rich owners who took risks most of us dont want to take, to share their profit with them.

This is just plain dumb but you'd never take my word for it.

IbeOkehie, explain to raumdeuter how the company you buy shares in shares their profit with you please.

He might understand it coming from you.

GloriousGbola:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/31/small-business-entrepreneurs-success-parents



salute to the 'self made entrepreneurs' who started from their parents garage

i read a story years back about how dangote had a gambling problem in his youth. he was given seed money to start a business. he blew the money. he was given money again. he blew it again. then on hajj in mecca, his uncle forced him to swear he would never gamble again. today dangote is nigeria /africa's richest man. but he got three chances in addition to resources at his disposal

elon musk was literally bailed out by the us government

femi otedola was given unfair concessions by obj that enabled him to sell diesel below market rate. people hailed him a business genuis at the time. after obj yardua shut it all down and otedola almost went bankrupt. he was saved by yarduas death and his subsequent attache to gej

another major energy guy's mother's connections aided their startup significantly. once established, his mother had assets within the company and everyone gave her a wide berth. one time one jjc newly employed auditor who had not been properly briefed visited the mothers site. only to get a call from his HOD to get his arse back to the office

i used to think steve jobs is the only true entrepreneur as he built apple twice, but then i found that it was actually a soft loan from his old friend bill gates that pushed the company through in the 1990s/2000s before they found viability again

https://wccftech.com/microsoft-invested-150-million-in-apple-27-years-ago-today-on-august-6/

This.
Check out the book "Outlier", it talks about some of these people and how they attained success.
Usually some connection or seed money from some wealthy parent/family.
Like Trump saying he made himself when he got a ton of money from his father.
It always amazes me the way people on this forum talk of these people or how they minimize the impact of connections and contacts that a lot of people will never have.

raumdeuter:
Like Nursing aide or janitor will ask why Neurosurgein gets paid more than him

When running the business, I will finish my regular job and resume at the business when my work colleagues were heading to happy hour. I didn't have a weekend, While my staff were home chilling with their family. My entire weekend I will be at the business doing paper work to govt, planning for the week, sorting payroll. One time I got a new place, had to renovate. I was working with the Hispanic construction guys full time, Painting oh, carrying stuff, One time the bathroom got blocked na me get "snake" from home depot to fix it. By the end of that day you cant tell the difference between me the CEO and Hector the painter.
The paycheck from my regular job I was pouring into the business

So assuming the business turned around now, someone who never missed his weekend or sleep will ask why I am taking 300 times

Like I said if e easy go do am

You had a full time job, a family, a 2nd company on the side, yet averaged 4 hours per day on this site since 2006? Ok oh.
The utter nonsense you write.

Maeve7:
1) If I ask you now, what you had for breakfast, your answer will be stocks.

2) How will someone who barely makes it from paycheck to paycheck invest in stocks? The same people who struggle to cover basic life expenses?

3) Care to share what your strategy is in investing in stocks? I want to minimize my risk and would like to hear your expert opinion on which stocks I should invest in.

1) Where did this come from? Wow!

2) Investment is about DELAYED GRATIFICATION.

The USA has tax laws that incentivize long term investing for everyone.

With good planning and thrift, most Americans can afford $100 per month. Just taking lunch to work instead of buying from restaurant can save $30 per month. Smokers spend an average of $4K per year or something like that, many of them are low wage workers.

Most Nigerian immigrants working low skill, low wage jobs in the USA send at least $1200 per year to their families in Nigeria, so most Americans can definitely afford it.

This is why family is especially important, well informed parents can do this for their children and when they get to working age, they can continue with it. It's the same thing as buying a house, at the start it seems like a waste but the gains accumulate over time.

3) I'm no expert on anything. Consult an investment advisor.

Good Luck to Nigerians.

IjeBos:
You had a full time job, a family, a 2nd company on the side, yet averaged 4 hours per day on this site since 2006? Ok oh.
The utter nonsense you write.

Is it hard for you to ignore my post? Cos when I descend on you again you will be crying all over like a toddler