如何創造財富

原文：http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html 

譯者：阮一峯

      若是你想致富，應該怎麼作？我認爲最好的辦法就是本身創業，或者加入創業公司。幾百年來，這一直是致富的可靠途徑。「創業公司」（startup）這個詞誕生於20世紀60年代，可是它與中世紀集資進行的航海冒險活動其實也相差無幾。

      創業公司每每與技術有關，因此「高技術創業公司」這個短語幾乎就是同義重複。創業公司其實就是解決了某個技術難題的小公司。

      許多人對此一無所知，但也發了財。這就好像你不用學習物理學也能成爲一個出色的棒球投球手。可是，我認爲理解這些原理，有助於你取得成功。爲何創業公司必須是小公司？當創業公司不斷變大時，它是否不可避免地失去創新能力？爲何創業公司每每選擇在新技術領域創業？爲何如此之多的創業公司在開發新葯或者計算機軟件，而不是再賣玉米油或者洗衣粉。

      If you want to get rich, how would you do it? I think your best bet would be to start or join a startup. That's been a reliable way to get rich for hundreds of years. the word "startup" dates from the 1960s, but what hanppens in one is very similar to the venture-backed trading voyages of the Middle Ages.

      Startups usually involve technology, so much so that the phrase "high-tech startup" is almost redundant. A startup is a company that takes on a hard technical problem.

      Lots of rich people get rich knowning nothing more than that. You don't have to know physics to be a good pitcher. But I think i could given you an edge to underlying principles. why do startup have to be small? Will a startup inevitably stop being a startup as it grows larger? And why do they so often work on developing new technology? Why are there so many startups selling new drugs or computer software, and none selling corn oil or laundry detergent?

 

一個命題

      從經濟學觀點看，你能夠把創業想象成一個壓縮過程，你的全部工做年份被壓縮成了短短几年。你再也不是低強度地工做四十年，而是以極限強度工做四年。在高技術領域，這種壓縮的回報尤爲豐厚，工做效率越高，額外報酬就越高。

      下面舉一個簡單的例子說明這個經濟學命題。若是你是一個20多歲的優秀黑客，每一年的年薪大約是8萬美圓。這意味着，平均來看，你必須每一年至少爲公司帶來8萬美圓利潤，這樣才能保證公司沒有虧錢。可是，你的真正工做時間其實能夠是公司上班時間的2倍，若是你全神貫注，每小時的產出能夠提升3倍。若是再把大公司裏使人討厭的中間管理層除去（他們常常以主管的身份妨礙你的工做），你的效率能夠再提升2倍。還有一個能夠提升效率的地方：你不用再完成強行指派個你的工做，盡能夠根據本身的願望，作出最能發揮你聰明才智的成果。假定這會把工做效率再增長三倍。將這些因子放在一塊兒作乘法，你的工做效率將是在公司時的36倍。若是一個優秀黑客在大公司裏的身價是每一年8萬美圓，那麼一個勤奮工做、擺脫瑣事幹擾的聰明黑客，他的工做至關於每一年新創造300萬美圓的價值。

      Economically, you can think of a startup as a way to compress your whole working life into a few years. Instead of working at a low intensity for forty years, you work as hard as you possibly can for four. This pays especially well in technology, where you earn a premium for working fast.

     Here is a brief sketch of the economic proposition. If you're a good hacker in your mid twenties, you can get a job paying about $80,000 per year. So on average such a hacker must be able to do at least $80,000 worth of work per year for the company just to break even. You could probably work twice as many hours as a corporate employee, and if you focus you can probably get three times as much done in an hour. [1] You should get another multiple of two, at least, by eliminating the drag of the pointy-haired middle manager who would be your boss in a big company. Then there is one more multiple: how much smarter are you than your job description expects you to be? Suppose another multiple of three. Combine all these multipliers, and I'm claiming you could be 36 times more productive than you're expected to be in a random corporate job. [2] If a fairly good hacker is worth $80,000 a year at a big company, then a smart hacker working very hard without any corporate bullshit to slow him down should be able to do work worth about $3 million a year.