Naval Ravikant: “The smart and leveraged are getting richer”
“I’ve been saying this for a while, but the leverage in the system is insane,” Naval begins. “Leverage is a force-multiplier for your work. The oldest form of leverage is labor (you have people working with you or for you). Then it was capital (you’re investing money behind a problem). Then it was media (you’re writing a book and people are listening to you and your words are moving many people to do things)… Then code came along. Code is this incredible, permissionless form of leverage where you have robots and data centers cranking away for you. And now the leverage is increasing through AI, agents, robots, supply chains, 3D printing, and all the things you can do to amplify your work.”
Naval reflects on the claim that there will be 1-person, billion-dollar companies and points out that there actually already have been: Minecraft and Bitcoin were both 1-person projects.
“The leverage will just continue to increase, which means non-linear returns.” Naval explains. And he points out that this has important societal implications:
“Society is just not built to handle that. You can see all of the outcry against the rich getting richer and billionaires and all that, but it’s not really that the richer are getting richer. It’s that the smart and leveraged are getting richer. If you’re smart, and you’re highly-leveraged, you’re knowledge-creation power (earning-power is downstream of knowledge) is so much higher than your peers that you may have left behind in college and they just have no idea what’s coming. It’s going to be a kind of crazy time.”
Video source: @zfellows (2025)
The “AI wrapper” hate never made sense to me.
Engineers argue, skeptics complain. Meanwhile:
– Founders keep building
– VCs keep writing checks
– Customers keep paying
Critics aren't seeing the next steps:
i’d argue you’re too easily moved by the choice words. “privilege” and “equality” are selected because they confuse the notion of fairness. another way to frame his statement “if you’re accustomed to succeeding due to hard work, ingenuity, risk/sacrifice, and, sure, some amount of luck, having the outcomes reset so that everyone is rewarded more equally feels unfair.”
is succeeding after making good choices, sacrificing personally, and working hard really “privilege”?
is it oppressive that everyone doesn’t get to the same place?
perhaps the real oppression is the loss of individual liberties when naively egalitarian philosophies mutate into marxism, denying opportunities for individual sacrifice, effort, and achievement to be rewarded.
framed as privilege v equality misses the mark.. equality of opportunity and equality of outcome are v different things. silicon valley’s most successful are the immigrants who found america as one of the only places on earth where an individual with zero baseline privilege can struggle and sacrifice and effortfully succeed. calling them privileged after the fact seems hardly the point. but an easy one to make.
the 5 chapters of secondary selling 🧵
never sell
i didn’t sell… and regret it
sell 10–20%
teach your founders
set up your own SPV & sell to yourself
@Jason & @davemcclure break it down on @twistartups
full episode coming soon on [trading places]
@elonmusk People have been trying for 50 years and that’s the fun of it! Each day you learn something new, and innovate, partner, and compete. Excited for Grok 4 on Azure and looking forward to Grok 5!
Dopamine from information gathering is a dangerous drug. Your entire life will change the moment you stop looking for more information and start acting on the information you already have. Always get your dopamine from action.
Rule Breaker Criteria #1: Top Dog and First Mover in an Important Emerging Industry
The company should be a leader in a new and rapidly growing sector.
Being a first mover often allows the company to establish a strong competitive advantage that's nearly impossible to break.
cloud vs land
code vs kings
internet vs china
memes vs genes
network vs state
mobile vs sessile
digital vs physical
founder vs emperor
technology vs politics
individual vs collective
capitalism vs socialism
bottom-up vs top-down
decentralized vs centralized
internationalism vs nationalism
a guy like soham stacking jobs like tabs while others can’t even get one interview is the internet once again displaying power law dynamics.
in job markets, dating, creator economies, anything internet really, high liquidity concentrates almost all attention on outliers.
this happens in almost every liquid market:
- one guy dates everyone on hinge
- one girl makes $10m on OF while others scrape rent.
when everything is infinitely accessible & abundant, attention becomes the true scarcity. & whoever learns to game the signaling layer, whether it’s resumes, looks/charm, or clout wins, until the next patch hits.