JA Westenberg2d ago

The passive income movement was a fantasy about not having to give a shit. This is a terrible foundation for pretty much anything.

https://www.joanwestenberg.com/the-passive-income-trap-ate-a-generation-of-entrepreneurs/

The "Passive Income" trap ate a generation of entrepreneurs

I had coffee last year with a guy - I won't use his real name - who told me he was "building a business." I asked what it did. Dropshipping jade face rollers. I made him say it twice. Jade face rollers. He'd found them on Alibaba for $1.20

Westenberg.
Show threadDaniel Brotherston2d ago

@Daojoan I think most people are seduced by "passive income" not as in they don't want to contribute, but instead as a form of security. If income is passive, then you cannot be fired.

It of course isn't true, but I suspect this is the underlying motivation for most.

Or well, it would be for me, maybe I'm weird, but I do think I'm still pretty human.

Show threadshadows2d ago
@danbrotherston @Daojoan that’s how I feel about it, but most passive income seems exploitative, whether you’re tricking people into buying a product that they don’t need and/or exploiting cheap labor to build/maintain the product.
Show threadCassandrich1d ago
@shadows @danbrotherston @Daojoan Not just most. It's inherently exploitative. It's the fundamental premise of capitalism, that "owning" something grants you entitlement to profits generated by other people's labor and/or gullibility, regardless of whether you even did anything related to making something of value.
Show threadDaniel Brotherston
@dalias @shadows @Daojoan residuals are passive income but are not based on the premise ownership its based on creator ship.
12:13pmWeb
Show threadCassandrich9h ago
@danbrotherston @shadows @Daojoan If that were true you wouldn't be able to sell them.
Show threadDaniel Brotherston9h ago
@dalias @shadows @Daojoan just because you can sell it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist because you created something vs own it.