That's semi-true. Most my friends do the same except they go into debt and if they fail, they declare bankruptcy. Not the same call option but close. BTW, something of note here and I've pointed this out before, but Mormons have the highest income per capita of any group of people in the US. Yes, including Jews. They work like there is no tomorrow. It's embedded in their character at a very early age. Take that for what's it's worth.
That's true, and they also have by far the highest number of first generation millionaires per capita.
We all know that inherited wealth means more than money and while he certainly had access to plenty of that, he also had the connections and opportunities presented to him that most will never see. In the marathon of life his starting line was at about the 25 mile mark, so let's not pretend he's some poor old farm boy who done real good. Yes, he has worked harder than most that come from privilege and he certainly has spread around the money to his chosen charities. As stated, kudo's to him for that, and I've also stated that his money, religion, tax rate, etc. are of no concern to me. My post was in reference to what we're learning from these debates, which is absolutely nothing that we didn't already know about him, or the rest of the field. Specifics are what I'm interested in learning, and these guys have come up with nothing of substance. It's a mud slinging contest, nothing more.
That's a very good point. It's always easier to take a risk when you have a good fallback position. It doesn't take away from what he did, but it does make it easier than for someone who doesn't have this luxury. Again, it just adds context rather than necessarily diminishes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, but Mormon and Jews have (systemic) connection in their group in the USA , true? So if their (call option) is not in the money , they have more money to pay a premium to play this game again. I am not saying that is bad. I am sayin this is advantage
Obviously you don't understand the purpose of debates. It's not about laying out a detailed plan for anything. It's about scrutinizing each other's experience and track record. It's called a vetting process. The right does it, the left does it. Once each party has vetted their candidate, they can lay out specifics in the general. Of course we know from history that rarely does a candidate ever follow through on that stuff, but it's there if you want to listen to it.