I’m skeptical that most people can “just make it” during bad economic times

[Hardkill]

I agree with the motivational idea that people should not mentally disqualify themselves just because the economy is bad.

That part is useful.

But I’m skeptical of the stronger claim that most people can become financially successful in any economy if they simply work hard enough, get creative enough, or think like entrepreneurs.

Because that does not scale.

Yes, some people made wealth during the Great Depression.

Yes, some entrepreneurs made money during the 2008 crash.

Yes, some highly resourceful individuals can find opportunity even in terrible conditions.

But “some people can win” is not the same as “most people can win.”

That distinction matters.

A bad economy does not mean opportunity disappears completely.

But it does mean opportunity becomes scarcer, more competitive, more unequal, and harder to access.

If consumers are broke, credit is tight, wages are falling, businesses are failing, and people are afraid to spend money, then creativity alone cannot magically create enough profitable opportunities for most people.

Even if everyone became ambitious.

Even if everyone worked harder.

Even if everyone tried to do something different.

Even if everyone became more entrepreneurial.

You would still run into the same bottleneck:

Not enough demand.
Not enough capital.
Not enough access.
Not enough stability.
Not enough purchasing power.

That is why I’m skeptical of turning individual success stories into a universal economic philosophy.

The fact that an outlier succeeded during a recession does not prove that most people could have done the same.

It proves that outliers exist.

And outliers are not a theory of mass prosperity.

If most people could become financially successful in any economy through sheer ambition and creativity, then why did societies need major reforms like the Progressive Era, the New Deal, the Great Society, financial regulation, labor protections, social insurance, stimulus programs, and public investment?

Those reforms existed because markets do not automatically give most people a free and fair shot.

The economy has to be governed.

It has to be stabilized.

It has to be structured so that ordinary people’s effort can actually turn into real opportunity.

So yes, I believe in personal agency.

I believe in ambition.

I believe in creativity.

I believe in not using the economy as an excuse to give up.

But I do not believe that most people can simply “hustle” their way into financial success during bad economic times.

The better distinction is this:

A bad economy still contains opportunities for some people.
But it is not necessarily structured in favor of most people.

That is the difference between individual possibility and broad-based prosperity.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Nobody is owed a success. People should stay poor if they are not able to provide sufficient value. But this is something socwokies will never comprehend

[Hardkill]

On 5/9/2026 at 8:29 AM, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Nobody is owed a success. People should stay poor if they are not able to provide sufficient value. But this is something socwokies will never comprehend

Are you a conservative or a Republican?

[LordFall]

On 5/9/2026 at 9:29 AM, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Nobody is owed a success. People should stay poor if they are not able to provide sufficient value. But this is something socwokies will never comprehend

You don't seem to understand economics much. You need stable economics to provide value otherwise it devolves into more violent kinds of entrepreneurship like they do in Latin america and Africa. 

The economy is rigged and manipulated so not everyone can make it and have a surplus of capital. It needs to be overhauled. 

[hyruga]

In my opinion, the job market have definitely shifted in the past few decades. Things are no longer as rosy as before for the average Joe.

Sure, you can find some people who make it online but these people tend to stand out and they are the top 0.01%.

In the past, it was easy to get a job. And then it became harder and harder.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

On 11. 5. 2026 at 10:23 PM, LordFall said:

You need stable economics to provide value otherwise it devolves into more violent kinds of entrepreneurship like they do in Latin america and Africa. 

There can never be "stable" "economics", that's just a pure fantasy. Can you provide me with examples of "stable" economies? There's never ever been such a thing in an entire human history

And what has this got to do with Africa and Latin America? Please enlighten me since you seem to be such an expert on the topic of "economics"

On 11. 5. 2026 at 10:23 PM, LordFall said:

The economy is rigged and manipulated so not everyone can make it and have a surplus of capital. It needs to be overhauled. 

Economy has always been manipulated. Nobody owes anyone opportunities. I thought this topic was posted into a career/life purpose section and not in a society/politics section. Yall can go talk about your commie stuff there LOL

On 11. 5. 2026 at 9:59 PM, Hardkill said:

Are you a conservative or a Republican?

Not really, but definitely I represent the forces of evil nontheless just because I don't care to pretend like I'm some Jesus of Nazareth, giving people free stuff and appeasing the masses in general LOL and using other people's money to do so. I could never be a politician

[Optimized Life]

On 09/05/2026 at 4:29 PM, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Nobody is owed a success. People should stay poor if they are not able to provide sufficient value. But this is something socwokies will never comprehend

I'm not against this idea in principle however most wealth is not made by providing value, its made by being as ruthless as possible, positioning, networking, and often actual criminality or scamming in order to get ahead. The other way it can be made is just by literally swimming in liquidity, which isn't illegal or bad, its just not exactly providing value, swimming in liquidity just means being positioned in the right industries with the right people (where the true money is constantly circulating), or literally "swimming in it" e.g casinos, forex, cryptocurrency(during 2017-21), insider trading, banking, recruitment, insurance, real estate, land ect. 

But because wealth via genuine talent or value provision is so rare i always respect (and congratulate) when i actually see it, e.g I've always respected great musicians so much because to me they are arguably the most value individuals on the planet. If there's anyone i can inmediately pinpoint who has definitely provided me direct lifelong value and got me through some shit then it is a musician.

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Optimized Life

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

@Optimized Life Nope, you got it all twisted, you mostly get wealthy by providing genuine value to society, and sure there's always positioning, connections or sonetimes even crime involved in some cases, but it is nearly impossible to get rich without providing value or at least perceived value. Just because it's impossible for vast majority of people to provide the kind of value that would make them rich, or that it's getting harder and harder to provide that value or that the system is rigged in favour of rich people (which it always has been and probably will be), does not mean that they provide no value. Socwokies and vast majority of people could never

I personally think "musicians" are massively overrated but sure, they are providing some sort of subjective value. I personally put objective value much higher than any subjective value and seems like humanity in general would agree, since there's only ever been a handfull of billionaire musicians, they're not that important. But people obviously forget what's the hierarchy of importance really like once they don't have to worry about the more objective stuff so much, we get the space to glaze all these celebrities and other schmucks

[Leo Gura]

Most people cannot because success is not for most people.

The work, creativity, and ambition required to create success is beyond like 80% of the population. They are just not serious enough to do it.

That is why most people work lame, mindless 9-5 jobs. Then you are at the mercy of your boss and the economy.

Edited 6 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Optimized Life]

Quote

Nope, you got it all twisted, you mostly get wealthy by providing genuine value to society

Hmm maybe depends how we are defining value and how expansive we are with that

Dont forget crime is a vast and huge industry worth trillions. 

Btw its not actually a simple dichotomy. 

in a sense you are right because, even the mafia boss is providing huge value to someone. 

Maybe i am being too tight with my definition of value 

Selling and trafficking drugs effectively is extremely valuable. 

In this sense most people are providing value. 

 

[LordFall]

14 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

There can never be "stable" "economics", that's just a pure fantasy. Can you provide me with examples of "stable" economies? There's never ever been such a thing in an entire human history

And what has this got to do with Africa and Latin America? Please enlighten me since you seem to be such an expert on the topic of "economics"

Economy has always been manipulated. Nobody owes anyone opportunities. I thought this topic was posted into a career/life purpose section and not in a society/politics section. Yall can go talk about your commie stuff there LOL

Sure you owe it to your fellow human being to cooperate with them if you can. Most western economies have been stable and growing since WW2, only now experiencing major contractions. Africa and Latin America have less rigid rule of law where a certain percentage of young men go into organized crime instead of legitimate career options. 

There are plenty of anti competitive practices that once take hold at scale prevent people from making a living even if they can provide enough value. The days before labor laws are a good example where the average worker had to work 12 hour days to survive and children were a part of the economy as well. Doesn't take a communist to be pro people and pro worker. 

[hyruga]

Of course, it depends on the socio-economical level of the place they live in. 

For example, there are people who barely can find clean food or water in some parts of Africa. For these people, just getting food for the day is a success.

Things have gotten worse in many parts of the world. People cannot find jobs in parts of America and drug use is rampant. When society gets downgraded, the chance of success also gets lowered.

However, that's not to say everywhere in the world is getting worse. Some countries like India or Philippines benefit more as remote jobs are outsourced to them (capital outflow to them).