A Declaration for Capitalism


Part I

A bit of conventional wisdom echoed between traditionalists is “don’t do a job for the money.” This dictates that you shouldn’t chase a career for a paycheck that’s a means to short, material boosts of happiness facilitated by addictive consumerism. The advice implies you should only be pursuing a career for the intellectual stimulation, where the cash is merely a side effect.

The advice is misguiding. The goal of a job should be wealth creation, either for yourself or for your organization. I don’t think the “beware: money!” advice is bad in itself, but it’s taken too literally. The idealist philosophy gets in the way of building a profitable business, which is often a painful endeavor. Convincing yourself money doesn’t matter is the easiest way to justify a failure.

Part II

George Soros cringes when he’s called a hedge fund manager, financier, speculator, trader, banker, entrepreneur and probably even an investor. Soros, above all, is a philosopher who applies his world views to capitalistic endeavors.1

This illustrates my bigger point: Soros prefers the title of a philosopher because he enjoys the implications of philosophizing more so than money managing. For example, take his view of credit default swaps, referred to as “buy[ing] insurance on someone else’s life and then hav[ing] a license to kill them.” If you talk to any trader on Wall Street, they call it a hedge, not a death certificate like Soros.

Soros does what he does–his craft–for wealth creation. His profit and loss statement is the major measure of success. He is, after all, a top-tier investor. However, he uses his interest in philosophy to make investing sound and feel, specifically to him, like a glorified hobby.

Part III

If you really would do a job for free, the job is either completely worthless or someone smarter than you is absorbing the value creation. Every time I hear someone say, specifically an eager young person, that “they aren’t doing it for the money,” I hear someone being foolishly naive about business and avoiding the ultimate judgment of a potential failure. Money is the market’s way of signaling value. If you aren’t making any, or slated to make any, you’re doing it wrong.2

I’d be willing to bet the most popular jobs are those most difficult to measure, simply because they make hiding behind failure easy. I blame the marketers, simply because they are the easiest target. They’ve convinced a whole class of aspiring creatives that you can base a career on building relationships, community evangelizing and blogging. These descriptions may sound productive in text, but they are skills people say they are good at because there is not an easy way to measure financial results. They aren’t quantifiable, measurable or testable. These skills are valuable if you can determine their ROI (and the talented, versatile marketers can), but if you can’t measure, you’re just overhead.3

Part IV

The more I dive into my career, craft, path, journey or whatever you want to call it, the more I realize that I’m absolutely doing it for the money. I love what I’m doing, no doubt, but I inevitably know that the measure of success will be judged by how much wealth I create for my organization and its stakeholders. Going into business without the intent to make money is like crossing a busy highway without looking both ways.

Do it all for the money. Not necessarily to spend it–but to make it and measure it. Long-term wealth creation proves economic tangibility. To pursue anything else besides money will put you out of business.

  • HackerNews
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  1. Like Soros, Charlie Munger was keen on “philosophizing,” rather than just “investing,” even though he did the latter. Many entrepreneurs, especially Marc Andreessen, live by his almanac. []
  2. An interview strategy relevant to this point would be to proclaim you will make an organization more money than they are slated to pay you. From the employer’s stand point, this is obviously their the goal. []
  3. Stock traders are a good example of the ultimately measurable career, although the majority of the ones I know hate their job. It’s possible that too close of an association between P&L and the job can be mentally counter-productive. []

Related Essays


Post Tags: , ,

Comments ( View Comments )

[...] jump post-Wall Street to entrepreneurship-land was a selfish decision: I wanted to take the wheel. No bullshit, no acting and no playing dress up. I wanted to be in control, good or bad, of my [...]

Delusionally Elevated | alex j. mann (.com) added these pithy words on Jun 28 10 at 8:02 pm

Reminds me of PG's claim that to make a lot of money you need two things: measurement and leverage.

defines added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 9:21 am

Nice point – if you're skills can't be measured, you're just overhead.

Lesson for people: find ways to estimate your value creation.

Great post – this deserves to be four separate ones.

ruang added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 9:57 am

Thanks.

I considered it, but the conclusions were more digestible in short form. There may easily be a part two.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 11:12 am

Absolutely. And, the desire / need to make money (which often lacks).

alexjmann added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 11:13 am

I would say: “do for the money, everything that you wouldn't mind if it makes you money.”

I want to make money with everything, but not with my blog (so far, at least). Am I doing it wrong?

I like your advice, but I still think it's healthy to do something for fun, even if others are making money of it. Not that you're saying this, but I wouldn't want more misguided advice.

Carlos Miceli added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 5:38 pm

The goal of the post wasn't to state this: “You should do everything for
money.”

That's foolish, greedy and annoying.

The goal of the post was to state this: “Anything you are doing for a
career, job or money-making hobby, you should strive to create as much
wealth as possible.”

The latter is often forgotten or purposely avoided.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 6:01 pm

Now we're talking.

Carlos Miceli added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 6:02 pm

ok captain obvious. the world today runs on global trade capitalism. its foundation firmly set in the invention of money thousands of years ago. so, obviously, to be successfull by “today's” standards, you need wealth which can only be accrued with money.

i'm the idealist and i don't like money for everything it stands for. i can see a world full of wealth AND creation without money at all (your defenitions of wealth and creation are severly limited)

so, sorry to be the hater, but please label the opponents of your rant correctly. your arguements would not stand the light of day against a real idealist. this is just an excuse to preach to the quire of people who are trying to compensate for their human conscience while still entering “today's” rat-race…

p.s. i would pick this apart more thoroughly but i am too busy “creating wealth”

unbounded added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 8:20 pm

“the idealist”/”the hater”–

I know you're too busy creating wealth, but why do you put “today” in quotes?

lucasnathan added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 9:21 pm

I would say: “do for the money, everything that you wouldn't mind if it makes you money.”

I want to make money with everything, but not with my blog (so far, at least). Am I doing it wrong?

I like your advice, but I still think it's healthy to do something for fun, even if others are making money of it. Not that you're saying this, but I wouldn't want more misguided advice.

Carlos Miceli added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 10:38 pm

The goal of the post wasn't to state this: “You should do everything for
money.”

That's foolish, greedy and annoying.

The goal of the post was to state this: “Anything you are doing for a
career, job or money-making hobby, you should strive to create as much
wealth as possible.”

The latter is often forgotten or purposely avoided.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 11:01 pm

Now we're talking.

Carlos Miceli added these pithy words on Feb 09 10 at 11:02 pm

ok captain obvious. the world today runs on global trade capitalism. its foundation firmly set in the invention of money thousands of years ago. so, obviously, to be successfull by “today's” standards, you need wealth which can only be accrued with money.

i'm the idealist and i don't like money for everything it stands for. i can see a world full of wealth AND creation without money at all (your defenitions of wealth and creation are severly limited)

so, sorry to be the hater, but please label the opponents of your rant correctly. your arguements would not stand the light of day against a real idealist. this is just an excuse to preach to the quire of people who are trying to compensate for their human conscience while still entering “today's” rat-race…

p.s. i would pick this apart more thoroughly but i am too busy “creating wealth”

unbounded added these pithy words on Feb 10 10 at 1:20 am

“the idealist”/”the hater”–

I know you're too busy creating wealth, but why do you put “today” in quotes?

lucasnathan added these pithy words on Feb 10 10 at 2:21 am

Finally got around to reading your declaration. few points:

I think I get your main point: money is a good signal for success. this works for you and I, as we both work for businesses that will ultimately measure success based on profitability.

but plenty of people do not work in such jobs (and perhaps you assumed this point). I would never criticize an artist for taking a non-paying job, as much of their work and career milestones will be valued as non-monetary. And their careers have absurdly belated cash flows–with money coming much later life. Their monetary signal will come long after they realized their success.

I recall seeing the subway ads for the creative union, arguing that artists debase themselves by providing speculative/free work. Your thoughts?

Matt Daniels added these pithy words on Feb 15 10 at 11:24 pm

The “struggling artist” argument was whispering in my ear the entire time I
wrote this. Sure, it's an exception. But, art, rightfully so, is damn hard
to sell.

In his book, Hugh MacLeod discusses a theory that artists should keep their
day jobs until they “make it” as artists.

So, to that point, my thoughts are this:

The whole “struggling artist” thing is a bunch of bullshit. It's from the
movies. Part of being a successful artist is being creative enough to
monetize your craft.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Feb 15 10 at 11:53 pm

http://sivers.org/the-mob

Seems to be somewhat at odds with what you're saying. Thoughts?

Tyler Prete added these pithy words on Mar 08 10 at 7:29 pm

I find it in line with my thesis. What's important to consider, relevant to Derek's piece, is that everyone has a different measure of “enough.” While Derek is encouraging profitability with a measure of “enough” that satisfies the intangibles, I'm encouraging the extension of that line. Like most things I write, it's what works for me at this point in my life.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Mar 08 10 at 11:26 pm

http://sivers.org/the-mob

Seems to be somewhat at odds with what you're saying. Thoughts?

Tyler Prete added these pithy words on Mar 09 10 at 12:29 am

I find it in line with my thesis. What's important to consider, relevant to Derek's piece, is that everyone has a different measure of “enough.” While Derek is encouraging profitability with a measure of “enough” that satisfies the intangibles, I'm encouraging the extension of that line. Like most things I write, it's what works for me at this point in my life.

alexjmann added these pithy words on Mar 09 10 at 4:26 am

Add a Comment


XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

blog comments powered by Disqus