That is of course the correct answer. Smart people are like most people, they don't care about being rich.

Came here to say exactly this!

Most smart people do not care about becoming rich. Some of them do. But most of them do not. Most smart people I have met care about honing their skills and becoming better at what they do which is exactly what led them to being smart in the first place. Moreover not all kinds of smartness translate to more $$. The market rewards only certain kinds of smartness (computer skills, law skills, medical skills, etc.)

I agree with this, but as I get older I realise what a mistake it was to be this way. Wealth is an enabler that helps us meet our goals, however high minded, and give us the freedom to do things the way we want. It gives us the ability to make our own mistakes instead of implementing others’.

Those who know this and are able to optimise for it will have a sustainable advantage over everyone else, creating a virtuous cycle.

Funny you say that.

I'm in my mid-to-late 20's and quit my job in early 2020 (just before COVID!) to start my own business.

I've landed on my feet completely - making about as much per quarter selling used video games[1] as I was per year as a software engineer, with a feasible and straightforward plan to double that before the end of 2022.

However, seeing the the numbers going the way they are, I've started to wonder if I'm perhaps optimising too much in this direction at the cost of other aspects of my life.

I'm not arguing that the pursuit of wealth is a waste of time or anything like that, but for someone who doesn't quite have Elon Musk-tier ambitions the cost-benefit analysis starts to weigh less favourably towards money the easier it gets to acquire.

[1] For what it's worth, if you are smart, have strong technical skills and want to make money, I personally advise against starting a business that is "high tech" or "cool". Gaining domain expertise in a low-tech but scaleable area, then optimising it into the stratosphere is relatively low-risk and potentially ridiculously high-reward.

It does seem likely that most smart people aren't optimising for wealth. I know a lot of smart people who spend their entire income, and it is just difficult for someone to be wealthy and spend all their income at the same time. Wealth requires surplus.

But even for smart people trying to optimise their wealth - it isn't at all clear that smartness is something to be rewarded. A reasonably competent, hardworking small business owner can be quite wealthy. I would expect them to be of above average intelligence. But I've basically never paid someone because they are intelligent, so it isn't obvious why the market would save the best reward for them.

If I was hiring a tutor I wouldn't necessarily hire the most intelligent person I know. There are a lot of factors to consider.

Agree! A lot of smart people aren't trying to get rich. I bet many nobel prize winners aren't rich, while many of them are smart.

Lol actually they are rich.

"The winners of the 2021 Nobel Prizes will receive a gold medal and 10 million Swedish kronor ($1.14 million). The prize money comes from an endowment left behind by the prize’s creator, Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel, who died in 1895."

Source https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/10/08/2021-no...

This isn't much money in the USA. The rule of thumb is to save 10 times your income if you want to retire by age 67. Given that an academic is at perhaps $100K salary a year, that would mean it would not even be enough to cover retirement since after taxes it would probably be less than $700K. In many parts to the USA, e.g., parts of California, that's not even enough to buy a modest home. It depends on where you live to assume that's enough to be considered even close to rich. About 10% of Americans have a net worth of over $1M.

https://spendmenot.com/blog/what-percentage-of-americans-are...

10% @ 1mil sounds extremely high being that the median income is 31,133 USD(2019). Not sure I buy it, especially since the article claims this excludes home equity.

A quick Google suggests that the top 10% of (individual) earners in 2019 took home at least 116k (almost 4x the median!).

Seems totally believable to me.

Earning $1.14 million for a whole life's work is peanuts when you compare it to bay area salaries where someone working for FANG can earn that much in half a year or less just by writing microservices.

So, no, Nobel prize winners are not necessarily rich when you compare them with lawyers, doctors, and software engineers of California.

Compared to most people in academia they are stinking-rich !

"whole life's work"

Yea sorry they don't always "win" it at the END of their careers !

"compare it to bay area salaries where someone working for FANG can earn that much in half a year or less just by writing microservices."

Guess you can say that about many careers just depends which you industry you compare it to ! Gardening,R&B Popstar,Maid,Teacher,Hollywood Actor,Tutor.

Everyone around me in academic neuroscience seems pretty smart and is most certainly not optimizing for net worth. I'm guessing many in tech don't interact with that type of individual often, though many exceptions undoubtedly exist.