saturn7
Politics is an EXCHANGE!!!
What We Get Wrong About Closing the Racial Wealth Gap
https://socialequity.duke.edu/sites.../files/site-images/FINAL COMPLETE REPORT_.pdf
Myth 6: Entrepreneurship will close the racial wealth gap
Entrepreneurship has long been praised as a route to eliminate racial wealth inequality. As an adjunct to Myth 3, entrepreneurship has been identified as a path to the phantasm of black capitalism. For at least three decades, internet wealth gurus, black and white, have told people if they only left salaried employment and struck out on their own, they could get rich like the late 19th century robber barons. The problem has neither been borne out by the evidence, nor has it proven to be accurate advice under current circumstances. Not all of the effects of successful large-scale entrepreneurship are salutary, it can also destabilize communities:
The most successful entrepreneurship is disruptive — a term entrepreneurs these days have donned as a magic mantle: “We have a disruptive business model, a disruptive technology, and will disrupt the market” goes the startup pitch. Amazon 32 has disrupted book stores and other retail chains, Zipcar disrupted car rentals, Netflix is disrupting cinemas and cable companies, Airbnb disrupts hotels, and Bitcoin may disrupt the payment industry. But the meaning of “disruptive” was never meant to be pure and all-positive: its synonyms include “troublemaking,” “disorderly,” “disturbing,” “unsettling,” and “upsetting” (Isenberg 2014).
Not only does successful large-scale entrepreneurship have a disruptive effect on existing businesses, it can accentuate the wealth divide between rich and poor. It often creates some of the worst social outcomes by grossly exacerbating rather than closing the racial wealth gap:
The problem is entrepreneurship, when successful, always leads to local income inequality, at least in the short and medium run, and ironically, the more successful the entrepreneurship, the more extreme the inequality. … But on the negative side, the newly wealthy can now afford to bypass, for example, the local public school system or health care services if they don’t think they are good enough, draining public institutions’ vital resources. The wealth can also dramatically drive up the proximal cost of living: Properties will get reassessed, driving taxes up when neighbors pay millions for the house next door. The cost of some local services may also increase sharply, from cars to high-end restaurants to babysitting (Isenberg 2014).
In addition, Levine and Rubenstein (2017) have shown that the significant edge in entrepreneurship held by white males originates in their serendipitous birth into more affluent families. No better example is available than billionaire Mark Zuckerberg, owner of Facebook, who, while often touted as self-made, in fact according to businessinsider.com purportedly received initial working capital from his professional father in 2004, in exchange for shares in Facebook that are now worth millions. Another good example is billionaire Jeff Bezos, who started Amazon in 1994 with a $300,000 loan from his parents (“Who Is Jeff Bezos?” 2013).
In general, the net effect of entrepreneurship is to recycle an expanding – often an outrageously expanding -- circuit of wealth among members of an upper class of white 33 players. In the 21st century, the number of persons coming from poverty, whether white or black, to enter the ranks of the super-rich via entrepreneurship are infinitesimally small.
When we compile the data even those members of marginalized communities who manage to enter into entrepreneurship largely fail. This is due to a number of factors ranging from under-capitalization, limited market access, or outright theft or destruction.
Blacks are far less likely to own a business, and for blacks that do own a business they have far less equity. Black business literally has been annihilated nearly as often as it has sprouted in America, dating back to the Tulsa Massacre of 1921, the razing of one of the nation’s historically prosperous black communities dubbed at the time as a “Black Wall Street” (Fain 2017).
cont..
https://socialequity.duke.edu/sites.../files/site-images/FINAL COMPLETE REPORT_.pdf
Myth 6: Entrepreneurship will close the racial wealth gap
Entrepreneurship has long been praised as a route to eliminate racial wealth inequality. As an adjunct to Myth 3, entrepreneurship has been identified as a path to the phantasm of black capitalism. For at least three decades, internet wealth gurus, black and white, have told people if they only left salaried employment and struck out on their own, they could get rich like the late 19th century robber barons. The problem has neither been borne out by the evidence, nor has it proven to be accurate advice under current circumstances. Not all of the effects of successful large-scale entrepreneurship are salutary, it can also destabilize communities:
The most successful entrepreneurship is disruptive — a term entrepreneurs these days have donned as a magic mantle: “We have a disruptive business model, a disruptive technology, and will disrupt the market” goes the startup pitch. Amazon 32 has disrupted book stores and other retail chains, Zipcar disrupted car rentals, Netflix is disrupting cinemas and cable companies, Airbnb disrupts hotels, and Bitcoin may disrupt the payment industry. But the meaning of “disruptive” was never meant to be pure and all-positive: its synonyms include “troublemaking,” “disorderly,” “disturbing,” “unsettling,” and “upsetting” (Isenberg 2014).
Not only does successful large-scale entrepreneurship have a disruptive effect on existing businesses, it can accentuate the wealth divide between rich and poor. It often creates some of the worst social outcomes by grossly exacerbating rather than closing the racial wealth gap:
The problem is entrepreneurship, when successful, always leads to local income inequality, at least in the short and medium run, and ironically, the more successful the entrepreneurship, the more extreme the inequality. … But on the negative side, the newly wealthy can now afford to bypass, for example, the local public school system or health care services if they don’t think they are good enough, draining public institutions’ vital resources. The wealth can also dramatically drive up the proximal cost of living: Properties will get reassessed, driving taxes up when neighbors pay millions for the house next door. The cost of some local services may also increase sharply, from cars to high-end restaurants to babysitting (Isenberg 2014).
In addition, Levine and Rubenstein (2017) have shown that the significant edge in entrepreneurship held by white males originates in their serendipitous birth into more affluent families. No better example is available than billionaire Mark Zuckerberg, owner of Facebook, who, while often touted as self-made, in fact according to businessinsider.com purportedly received initial working capital from his professional father in 2004, in exchange for shares in Facebook that are now worth millions. Another good example is billionaire Jeff Bezos, who started Amazon in 1994 with a $300,000 loan from his parents (“Who Is Jeff Bezos?” 2013).
In general, the net effect of entrepreneurship is to recycle an expanding – often an outrageously expanding -- circuit of wealth among members of an upper class of white 33 players. In the 21st century, the number of persons coming from poverty, whether white or black, to enter the ranks of the super-rich via entrepreneurship are infinitesimally small.
When we compile the data even those members of marginalized communities who manage to enter into entrepreneurship largely fail. This is due to a number of factors ranging from under-capitalization, limited market access, or outright theft or destruction.
Blacks are far less likely to own a business, and for blacks that do own a business they have far less equity. Black business literally has been annihilated nearly as often as it has sprouted in America, dating back to the Tulsa Massacre of 1921, the razing of one of the nation’s historically prosperous black communities dubbed at the time as a “Black Wall Street” (Fain 2017).
cont..
They complain about immigrants coming over and building up wealth thru entrepreneurship and you go... Okay, so let's start supporting our businesses like they support theirs-- That's not gonna save us! 
I agree, the black upper-middle class/elite will stop at nothing to squander any chance of actual liberation for marginalized people.
Or are these paid c00ns just promoting this anti-entrepreneurship mentality to Blacks? It's almost like they saying stop trying to become self-employed and just focus on asking for reparations even if you die before reparations come 
