Jesse Livermore was able to multiply his money quickly. After he went bust for 'not following' his rules, he got back quick, with roughly +150% each week. It can be done, and consistently. However, a low drawdown system is needed to allow use of heavy leverage. Other ways are possible but Livermore was good at sniffing out jackpots.
That's the truth. It's to do with being content with less and also having a goal of "sitting on the beach" and not achieving more financially. Similarly when I was a teen, the idea of buying a sports car was extremely motivating, now that I can afford one, the idea has no attraction.
This was I believe in the 70s, i.e., 50 years ago. What's the 30K equivalent today? If I recall correctly, Michael Marcus wasn't a day trader, but more of a swing trader or even position trader. Another key distinction is that he traded for a company. Not his own money. I also remember another quote from that interview: "His wife left him, but he was too busy to notice." I think this quote pretty much sums up how you (can) get rich from trading.
the point is that this requires being relentless and being wired for this line of work. There’s no such thing as “what’s your number.”
I think Marcus was a trend follower. In the 70s and 80s the markets were trendy, relatively simple breakout methods and M/A crossover methods would have made a killing. The Turtle breakout method would have easily turned 30K into millions (over 10 or 20 years) Would have returned 100% a year on average, if traded at say 2% risk per trade. But performance for the system degraded in the early 90s The Turtle method was to trade 20 and 50 day breakouts with a tight ish stop. If markets were trendy like they were in the 70s and 80s, due to inflation, the system made a killing. As it caught enough big trends to pay for the false breakouts. Those days are long gone. The OP will have to come up with his own system that can make 100% a year over the next 10 years..
All talk about turning a few thousands into millions is just nonsense. We do occasionally hear about people who have done it but that's because they are exceptional and that's newsworthy. But the objective itself is firstly out of reach and secondly unnecessary. Decide what you mean by getting rich. Maybe a salary twice the annual average would do. It would do for me.
For a single man living like a miser allow you to save decently even on double average salary. A bit harder for people in other situations.