Habits of the "rich", habits of the "poor"

[Mac1958]

.

I'm told regularly that "the rich" just got lucky and didn't deserve that and stole that from someone and didn't earn that and didn't build that 'n stuff, but to no surprise, they're also just trying harder.

Percentage of people who wake up at least 3 hours before work:
Rich: 44%
Poor: 3%

Percentage of people who are focused on accomplishing some single goal:
Rich: 80%
Poor: 12%

Percentage of people who write down their goals:
Rich: 67%
Poor: 17%

Percentage of people who maintain a To Do list:
Rich: 81%
Poor: 19%

Percentage of people who network five or more hours each month:
Rich: 79%
Poor: 16%

And my personal favorite:

Percentage of people who read at least 30 minutes or more daily for education or career reasons:
Rich: 88%
Poor: 2%

But I'm sure that's all just coincidence.



Source: Rich Habits, The Daily Success Habits of Wealthy Individuals. Thomas Corley, 2010.
[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Rich-Habits-Success-Wealthy-Individuals/dp/1934938939]Rich Habits - The Daily Success Habits of Wealthy Individuals: Thomas C. Corley: 9781934938935: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Easy, there.

It's not cool to imply that successful people are successful because they have successful habits.

That's the same as implying that some percentage of unsuccessful people might be unsuccessful due to faults of their own, and that's just rude and insensitive.

It's more tolerant to accept that life hands some people good stuff and some people bad stuff, and the purpose of government is to take hold of all the stuff life hands out and make sure everybody gets equal amounts of good and bad stuff.

 

[Mac1958]

Easy, there.

It's not cool to imply that successful people are successful because they have successful habits.

That's the same as implying that some percentage of unsuccessful people might be unsuccessful due to faults of their own, and that's just rude and insensitive.

It's more tolerant to accept that life hands some people good stuff and some people bad stuff, and the purpose of government is to take hold of all the stuff life hands out and make sure everybody gets equal amounts of good and bad stuff.

Garsh, I hope I didn't "offend" anyone!

.

 

[Plasmaball]

um.....

For five years, Tom studied the daily activities of 233 wealthy people and 128 people living in poverty.

wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

 

[bripat9643]

um.....

For five years, Tom studied the daily activities of 233 wealthy people and 128 people living in poverty.

wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

How did he stack the deck? You must be confused because you believe he runs his poll like some ABC News poll that includes far more Democrats than Republicans. The results are posted in terms of percentages of the rich and percentage of the poor, not percentage of the total, so it the relative numbers of rich or poor aren't a factor.

How are the percentages "a joke?"

 

[Mac1958]

um.....

For five years, Tom studied the daily activities of 233 wealthy people and 128 people living in poverty.

wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

Irrelevant if you're extrapolating results into survey data.

But I realize you don't want to believe the results, and that you want to discredit them.

I know, I know, they don't deserve that. It just landed on their laps.



.

 

[Plasmaball]

um.....

For five years, Tom studied the daily activities of 233 wealthy people and 128 people living in poverty.

wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

How did he stack the deck? You must be confused because you believe he runs his poll like some ABC News poll that includes far more Democrats than Republicans. The results are posted in terms of percentages of the rich and percentage of the poor, not percentage of the total, so it the relative numbers of rich or poor aren't a factor.

How are the percentages "a joke?"

well, i understand math is hard so, when you have 233 people vs 128 people, and not an equal number of groups, your info will be skewed.

I know its hard to grasp for you.

 

[Moonglow]

well goody for the rich, may they wallow in their success.....

 

[Plasmaball]

um.....

For five years, Tom studied the daily activities of 233 wealthy people and 128 people living in poverty.

wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

Irrelevant if you're extrapolating results into survey data.

But I realize you don't want to believe the results, and that you want to discredit them.

I know, I know, they don't deserve that. It just landed on their laps.



.

Right.....therefore when ABC does a poll and they poll 400 dems vs 250 Republicans, we can claim its 100% accurate correct?

i mean thats the standard you are using with this link, so hey its cool..just dont go crying when its a poll you dont like from now on.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

um.....



wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

How did he stack the deck? You must be confused because you believe he runs his poll like some ABC News poll that includes far more Democrats than Republicans. The results are posted in terms of percentages of the rich and percentage of the poor, not percentage of the total, so it the relative numbers of rich or poor aren't a factor.

How are the percentages "a joke?"

well, i understand math is hard so, when you have 233 people vs 128 people, and not an equal number of groups, your info will be skewed.

I know its hard to grasp for you.

The one having trouble grasping is you.

If all of your percentages are based on the sample size of the particular sample you're analyzing, then the numbers aren't skewed by the inequity.

The only thing that the inequity implies is that the results for the rich are more accurate to the greater demographic being sampled by virtue of a larger sample size.

Less people in the poverty sample doesn't skew things toward the wealthy, it just means that the results for that sample will have a greater margin of error due to the sample size being a smaller proportion of the actual demographic.

If your understanding of statistics is so simplistic that I have to explain -this- to you, then yes, I can see why you'd say that math is hard.

 

[JoeB131]

I wonder what percentage of "successful" people admit to "Screwing old ladies out of their houses" and "cheating the people who did the actual work".

Don't worry, Mac, keep kissing their asses, some day they'll notice.

 

[Plasmaball]

Less people in the poverty sample doesn't skew things toward the wealthy, it just means that the results for that sample will have a greater margin of error due to the sample size being a smaller proportion of the actual demographic.

your info will be skewed.

no shit....thanks for agreeing with me. But hey you guys enjoy bashing on the poor because you think they are lazy.
Truly one of the more ignorant threads ive seen

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

um.....



wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

Irrelevant if you're extrapolating results into survey data.

But I realize you don't want to believe the results, and that you want to discredit them.

I know, I know, they don't deserve that. It just landed on their laps.



.

Right.....therefore when ABC does a poll and they poll 400 dems vs 250 Republicans, we can claim its 100% accurate correct?

i mean thats the standard you are using with this link, so hey its cool..just dont go crying when its a poll you dont like from now on.

When people complain at the inaccuracy of those ABC polls, its because the results of the polls are discussed as portions of the -whole-, not separate analyses of the particular demographics and their individual samples.

If ABC said, "X percentage of Democrats polled said this, Y percentage of Republicans said that", it would be unbiased analysis, just as saying "X percentage of impoverished people polled said this, Y percentage of rich said this".

ABC doesn't typically do that. They say, "Of those polled, X percentage said this" and they leave out the specifics of those polled. This creates the expectation that the country as a whole falls on similar lines, but that expectation is only met if the sample is proportionately representative of the populace at large, and when you've got 400 dems and 250 repubs, it is -not-. Therefore, when you leave the percentages combined as a whole, you're analyzing your data dishonestly.

Learn a -little- bit about statistics before you start tossing these accusations around.

 

[Plasmaball]

Irrelevant if you're extrapolating results into survey data.

But I realize you don't want to believe the results, and that you want to discredit them.

I know, I know, they don't deserve that. It just landed on their laps.



.

Right.....therefore when ABC does a poll and they poll 400 dems vs 250 Republicans, we can claim its 100% accurate correct?

i mean thats the standard you are using with this link, so hey its cool..just dont go crying when its a poll you dont like from now on.

When people complain at the inaccuracy of those ABC polls, its because the results of the polls are discussed as portions of the -whole-, not separate analyses of the particular demographics and their individual samples.

If ABC said, "X percentage of Democrats polled said this, Y percentage of Republicans said that", it would be unbiased analysis, just as saying "X percentage of impoverished people polled said this, Y percentage of rich said this".

ABC doesn't typically do that. They say, "Of those polled, X percentage said this" and they leave out the specifics of those polled. This creates the expectation that the country as a whole falls on similar lines, but that expectation is only met if the sample is proportionately representative of the populace at large, and when you've got 400 dems and 250 repubs, it is -not-. Therefore, when you leave the percentages combined as a whole, you're analyzing your data dishonestly.

Learn a -little- bit about statistics before you start tossing these accusations around.

no kidding.....Sigh...

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Less people in the poverty sample doesn't skew things toward the wealthy, it just means that the results for that sample will have a greater margin of error due to the sample size being a smaller proportion of the actual demographic.

your info will be skewed.

no shit....thanks for agreeing with me. But hey you guys enjoy bashing on the poor because you think they are lazy.
Truly one of the more ignorant threads ive seen

Lol, way to change the point you were making.

Sorry, but when you said stacking the deck, that implied that the numbers would be skewed in favor of the rich. This is not necessarily the case. I was arguing with the particulars of your argument, which you've conveniently left out of this rebuttal.

If your point was simply that the poor numbers were probably less accurate than the rich numbers, you should've said that. I wouldn't have disagreed.

This, however, was obviously not what you were getting at with your stacked deck bullshit.

Also, it's not about the poor being lazy. Every individual case of poverty has its own individual factors. If, however, you don't wish to acknowledge that one of those factors is a difference in habits and lifestyle, you're being willfully ignorant for the sake of giving people the benefit of the doubt.

Paying for tolerance with intentional ignorance, coincidentally, is not the sort of habit that breeds success.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Right.....therefore when ABC does a poll and they poll 400 dems vs 250 Republicans, we can claim its 100% accurate correct?

i mean thats the standard you are using with this link, so hey its cool..just dont go crying when its a poll you dont like from now on.

When people complain at the inaccuracy of those ABC polls, its because the results of the polls are discussed as portions of the -whole-, not separate analyses of the particular demographics and their individual samples.

If ABC said, "X percentage of Democrats polled said this, Y percentage of Republicans said that", it would be unbiased analysis, just as saying "X percentage of impoverished people polled said this, Y percentage of rich said this".

ABC doesn't typically do that. They say, "Of those polled, X percentage said this" and they leave out the specifics of those polled. This creates the expectation that the country as a whole falls on similar lines, but that expectation is only met if the sample is proportionately representative of the populace at large, and when you've got 400 dems and 250 repubs, it is -not-. Therefore, when you leave the percentages combined as a whole, you're analyzing your data dishonestly.

Learn a -little- bit about statistics before you start tossing these accusations around.

no kidding.....Sigh...

Aww, just a three word, sarcastic comeback? NO specifics?

You're not very convincing.

 

[bripat9643]

um.....



wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

How did he stack the deck? You must be confused because you believe he runs his poll like some ABC News poll that includes far more Democrats than Republicans. The results are posted in terms of percentages of the rich and percentage of the poor, not percentage of the total, so it the relative numbers of rich or poor aren't a factor.

How are the percentages "a joke?"

well, i understand math is hard so, when you have 233 people vs 128 people, and not an equal number of groups, your info will be skewed.

I know its hard to grasp for you.

No it won't. Obviously logic is hard for you. He post the percentage of the rich who followed practice 'A'. He didn't comparing anything to the total for both. The percentage of the rich who get up 3 hours before they go to work should be the same whether you have sampled 100 people or 1000 people. You don't even have to consider how may poor people are sampled.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

How did he stack the deck? You must be confused because you believe he runs his poll like some ABC News poll that includes far more Democrats than Republicans. The results are posted in terms of percentages of the rich and percentage of the poor, not percentage of the total, so it the relative numbers of rich or poor aren't a factor.

How are the percentages "a joke?"

well, i understand math is hard so, when you have 233 people vs 128 people, and not an equal number of groups, your info will be skewed.

I know its hard to grasp for you.

No it won't. Obviously logic is hard for you. He post the percentage of the rich who followed practice 'A'. He didn't comparing anything to the total for both. The percentage of the rich who get up 3 hours before they go to work should be the same whether you have sampled 100 people or 1000 people. You don't even have to consider how may poor people are sampled.

Amazing how someone who has such trouble grasping this very basic, intuitive, and well known aspect of statistical analysis has the nerve to call this thread ignorant, no?

 

[bripat9643]

um.....



wow stack the deck somewhat? I mean besides the percents being a joke for the most part. This is like taking an facebook poll and saying its legit.

Irrelevant if you're extrapolating results into survey data.

But I realize you don't want to believe the results, and that you want to discredit them.

I know, I know, they don't deserve that. It just landed on their laps.



.

Right.....therefore when ABC does a poll and they poll 400 dems vs 250 Republicans, we can claim its 100% accurate correct?

i mean thats the standard you are using with this link, so hey its cool..just dont go crying when its a poll you dont like from now on.

You are truly an idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

I wonder what percentage of "successful" people admit to "Screwing old ladies out of their houses" and "cheating the people who did the actual work".

Don't worry, Mac, keep kissing their asses, some day they'll notice.

The last I heard it was the government screwing old ladies out of their homes over $6.00 in taxes.