Title is a bit misleading, 3/4 of the arguments against being a founder in the article are conditions that may not apply.
1. Reliance on a co-founder is stressful 2. VC vs founder risk profile 3. Don't dropout to found a company
I think these all apply more to the "get rich quick" approach and sure, I agree that is a bit of a moonshot.
But instead of writing off founding, why not look at ways to mitigate risk? Complete an education, spend some years working in an industry, or start a bootstrapped company in a niche that you learn from the industry. Or any combination of those that fits your risk profile.
And have an exit plan in mind, for either the success story or the failure. That solves the sense of self- a calculated business plan that didn't work out does not have to be devestating.
Yes, I always think working in business for a while is useful because you see so many inefficiencies that give you ideas. Like the guys that made millions on ski resort management software. Who knew that was even a thing!?
1. Reliance on a co-founder is stressful 2. VC vs founder risk profile 3. Don't dropout to found a company
I think these all apply more to the "get rich quick" approach and sure, I agree that is a bit of a moonshot.
But instead of writing off founding, why not look at ways to mitigate risk? Complete an education, spend some years working in an industry, or start a bootstrapped company in a niche that you learn from the industry. Or any combination of those that fits your risk profile.
And have an exit plan in mind, for either the success story or the failure. That solves the sense of self- a calculated business plan that didn't work out does not have to be devestating.