Maybe naively I believe I grasp some of it, but I don't know, to me it takes maybe a little bit of hubris? I certainly see how parts of the mechanics feel very contradictory. The idea that sticks to me is "people are spending money, so it may as well become my money".
It feels like a weird and maybe bad example, but it feels like sort of a chaotic good version of The Dark Knight Joker. You have the idea of "if you're good at something never do it for free", combined with a more wholesome version of "some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money."
Maybe you just have weird anomalies where you have someone who likes business, like what their work entails, but for whatever reason aren't drawn as much to some of the other trappings.
I think the assumption being the baseline is that the interest follows the money.
It feels like a weird and maybe bad example, but it feels like sort of a chaotic good version of The Dark Knight Joker. You have the idea of "if you're good at something never do it for free", combined with a more wholesome version of "some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money."
Maybe you just have weird anomalies where you have someone who likes business, like what their work entails, but for whatever reason aren't drawn as much to some of the other trappings. I think the assumption being the baseline is that the interest follows the money.