> Not if you have no capital -- You still have to eat and be housed and that costs a lot if you don't have family wealth or other income streams, even with a good salary.
That's exactly their point; this exact same logic can be applied to VCs, too.
Do you mean to the employees of VCs? LPs do have capital, that's why they're LPs.
For the employees, the sentiment that you should bet on the sales pitch "I won't get you fired" over "I will make you wealthy beyond measure" still holds.
The LPs pay 2% management fee so the employees make some money regardless of the outcome, just like startup founders want to make some money even if the startup fails.
There are VCs, and there are LPs. VCs do the work of finding investments and setting up funds; LPs provide the money and wait for it to grow.
Of course, from a startup perspective, both really just look like VCs. But in reality, the people working at VCs but who are not LPs are not usually rich.
That's exactly their point; this exact same logic can be applied to VCs, too.