Why you're not wealthy

[editec]

So, according to some here, if everybody had worked as hard and smart of Bill Gates we'd could ALL be Bill Gates?

Seriously now, kids, does that really jibe with what we know about how CAPTIALism works?

CAPITALISM only works when some people have a enough money to invest and most people do not.

Think I'm wrong?

Who would take out the garbage if everybody was rich?

Would there BE employees if everybody was wearthy?

No, there would not be anybody to actually DO THE WORK that it takes to make society function.

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism only works when some people have enough money to invest and most people do not.

The truth about upward mobility in the 21st Century, I suspect.

 

[Sallow]

Well the guy I described basically cleaned up his act once things got rolling. That's not really the point either. And again..I don't have a problem with wealth..indeed some might consider me "wealthy" (I'm not..not for NYC anyway). My problem is the concentration of wealth and it's negative effect on society in general. After centuries of Monarchies and Aristocracies; it should be in the DNA of Americans to have some disdain for royalty..of any sort.

That's entirely anothe issue: Is wealth disparity bad? Let's assume it is for a moment. Don't you have to figure out WHY it's happening first? If the reason some are wealthy and some are poor were a matter of blind luck, if for instance there was a lottery when everyone hit 25 where money was just passed out to live on the rest of your life and you could either get 50 milion dollars or 50 thousand dollars, I'd say we indeed have a problem.....

......but that isn't how it works. If this is a problem people are really interested in then one has to weigh all of the possible causes for that problem and you objectively have to acknowledge that one possible reason as to why few people are wealthy and many are not is because the few made weatlh accumulation a goal and priorty and the many did not. There are other factors of course, like socio-economic background. I certainly acknowldege we aren't all born with the same advantages. You don't control the starting point. You do control the end. And yes some are wealthy from inheritence. But by in large I believe it is the choices of individuals that caused this disparity. Not some invisible hand holding people down despite their best efforts. I believe that because it is observable day in and day out. If wealth accumulation is a goal that requires certain actions then a hell of a lot of people aren't doing it the right way.

My whole point is here is I just don't get the whining about the rich (and I know you aren't). If wealth was something that was just suppossed to happen to people then maybe some would have a point. But if you want money than making money needs to be your goal and priority. If you haven't taken the appropriate actions to do that, you have no reason to wonder why you aren't wealthy and no reason to piss and moan about those that are.

Actually..that's not what I think. And the evidence seems to point to a dismantling of the systemic protections meant to keep this disparity from getting out of hand. That's been going on since the late 70s, early 80s and really got ramped up in 2001 or so. If it continues we will begin to look like a third world country because of it.

We had a brief respite with the Clinton administration. But before that I saw shanty towns under the FDR and in city parks..especially in Thompkins Square Park..which had to be tore down by Mayor David Dinkins. But when Clinton came to office..jobs came back..and NYC had a rebirth.

Bloomberg has managed to stem the tide of the Bush years..but only just. NYC is beginning to fray at the edges again.

 

[MikeK]

It depends on how you define wealth. One theory of wealth is that the word is not a measure of money but time. Your wealth is how many months you could go without working and maintain your standard of living, to some.

I wish we could get through one thread without someone throwing out the "It depends on how you define" card.

For christssakes..... define wealth? can I say "Rich" instead?

"Rich" still calls for definition. Compared with some of those poor Appalachian wretches I am "rich." And compared with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Michael Bloomberg, the ordinary millionaire is not "rich."

This is fundamentally an economic question until it is examined closely at which time it becomes an important philosophical issue. Because at this time in America an aristocacy is emerging with levels of nobility predicated on decimal points. And the outcome of this circumstance is certain to have a serious influence on your future and mine.

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

It's certainly true that willingness to to assume risk is important but there are other factors, such as luck, ethics, motivation, opportunity and inclination.

Like you, the latter is why I'm not wealthy. I would like to have more money but I really don't need it and it simply wouldn't be worth the time and effort it would take to get it. For example, I much prefer to do what I'm doing right now than to spend this time trading stocks or selling real estate, or whatever it takes to make more money than I need to be perfectly content. Which I am.

If I ever get rich it will be because I hit the Lottery, which is hardly likely because I never buy lottery tickets.

 

[MikeK]

There is wealth and then there is wealth. Old money is an entirely different wealth from that of the nouveau riche.

Old money and those who have it are about 100 cuts above the nouveau riche. They are more genteel, caring, giving, and unassuming about their wealth. They don't advertise or flaunt their wealth. It's the nouveau riche that we have more exposure to - the snotty, "upwardly mobile," "he who has the most toys wins" types. They put on a good show, but there's not an ounce of humility or sincerity in anything they do and they would stop at nothing to one-up, cheat, screw, or lie about in order to be "better than thou." I know - worked with some of them for a long time and all you want to do is just slap the living shit out them because of their unbridled arrogance.

I've also had a good deal of exposure to the "old money" people. There is a huge difference in attitudes and goals.

Well said. And so true.

 

[Bern80]

Actually..that's not what I think. And the evidence seems to point to a dismantling of the systemic protections meant to keep this disparity from getting out of hand. That's been going on since the late 70s, early 80s and really got ramped up in 2001 or so. If it continues we will begin to look like a third world country because of it.

We had a brief respite with the Clinton administration. But before that I saw shanty towns under the FDR and in city parks..especially in Thompkins Square Park..which had to be tore down by Mayor David Dinkins. But when Clinton came to office..jobs came back..and NYC had a rebirth.

Bloomberg has managed to stem the tide of the Bush years..but only just. NYC is beginning to fray at the edges again.

But WHY? You can't solve a problem without knowing why it happened. And you can not simply dismiss the notion that individuals are blameless for this great disparity in wealth. We often talk about the top 1% of income works. Well have the other 99% even made it a goal to be wealthy. Are they taking the necessary actions to become so. My guess, admittedly based on nothing more than observation, of almost everyone I've ever meat suggests no.

So maybe income disparity is a bad thing, but if the WHY is due to individual choice then the individuals have no one to blame but themselves for it.

 

[Bern80]

So, according to some here, if everybody had worked as hard and smart of Bill Gates we'd could ALL be Bill Gates?

Seriously now, kids, does that really jibe with what we know about how CAPTIALism works?

CAPITALISM only works when some people have a enough money to invest and most people do not.

Think I'm wrong?

Who would take out the garbage if everybody was rich?

Would there BE employees if everybody was wearthy?

No, there would not be anybody to actually DO THE WORK that it takes to make society function.

No, it is not about how hard you work. It's about the goals you set and how you pursue them. It's about how smart you work, not how hard.

Wealth is relative. No everyone can't be rich. Yes the system is dependent on wealth disparity. But the rich certainly don't have to do anything to keep that disparity in place. They know there are penty of people who ether simply lack the motivation or mindset or are just plain content where they are that they really don't have to worry about it.

You have to look at the outcomes you want and the path it takes to get there. My belief is most people think about the path first and not the outcome of that path. The prevaling wisdom for a life path shall we say is get good grades, get into a good college and get a good job. That's the path the bulk of the middle class is told to take. That's fine, just be aware the outcome of that path is going to be probably a decent standard of living. If financial independence and freedom is what you are after, that requires a different path.

 

[Samson]

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

If I ever get rich it will be because I hit the Lottery, which is hardly likely because I never buy lottery tickets.

Yes, buying a ticket might help.

There is an additional component: Culture.

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becomming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

 

[chanel]

So true Samson. I always get a kick out of the expression "the lucky sperm club". "Lucky sperm" is nothing more than good parenting. And yes - some "cultural attitudes" don't place much value on that.

 

[loosecannon]

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

If I ever get rich it will be because I hit the Lottery, which is hardly likely because I never buy lottery tickets.

Yes, buying a ticket might help.

There is an additional component: Culture.

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becomming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

I might add that our appearance, citizenship and ethics also contribute a lot to our outcomes. But the vast majority of what contributes to our wealth is nature and society. All other factors perhaps account for 10% of our wealth as individuals.

There is almost no causative relationship between hard work and wealth as the poorest people on earth are legion and they generally work considerably harder for their wealth than do the wealthy. In fact if you compared wealth:work ratios for the poorest and the wealthiest the second value may be 10,000,000 times larger than the first.

 

[Toro]

We cannot have wealth if we do not have a civil society. Most wealth is actually intangible, existing mainly as concepts and wants. For example, there is no tangible thing as a "dollar." A dollar is an intangible store of value and unit of account. Also, people place a high value on waterfront property, but waterfront property has little actual use to most people (shippers not included) other than the intangible pleasure of looking at it.

Much of our wealth is embedded in trust. We trust that transactions will clear. We trust that the law will be upheld. We would collapse back to the stone age if we didn't trust in a civil society.

 

[loosecannon]

I can't rep you, but stellar post.

 

[midcan5]

In response to the myriad threads I'll just lump together and call them 'naive free market tautology', I thought maybe we ought to change things up a bit and see if we can get some of the inexperienced and unrealistic to change their thinking. But let's try irony.

Most people in the world are not wealthy because it is simply impossible given their circumstances. In a world in which billions of people live on less than two dollars a day, building a communication company is a bit hard or buying the Dallas cowboys impossible.

In a world in which over 5 billion 'working' people earn less than Mexicans - and others from all over the world - cross illegally into the US for menial jobs at below living wage, getting wealthy can be hard. And investing a couple hundred thousand in equities also tough.

In a world - all nations - in which your birth class determines your future education, family assistance, and intelligence, being born into extreme poverty has a few pitfalls. Nutrition and opportunity are just two. Of course had your mother subscribed to the WSJ things would have been different, or she could have read the normal wingnut posts on the internet at the local library and wealth would follow.

In a business climate in which jobs are scare and outsourced, check Nike sometime, being out of work and starting a construction business is a bit tough. But again if you are motivated you could be Bill Gates, all that would be required would be a way-back machine, and the same predatory company policies that crushed so many other software companies. Voila rich.

In a world/nation in which major corporations (fortune 500) control much of business, regulation, and have the wherewithal to either buy or duplicate profitable ideas, you could possibly invent something great. Think of something missing. Realize though, invention often requires money and facilities so you'd better answer the chicken and egg problem first. Which was first: opportunity or money or location or education. Darn this gets complicated. No worry, WSJ solves complexity.

My advice having been with lots of rich people is select upper middle class parents, with connections, and slightly above intelligent. That is if you can't pick uber-wealthy parents and just inherit the farm or Walmart. If you find your parents are poor and uneducated dump them, and find others. Surely they are not motivated parents as wealth is around every corner in America? Just look.

This could also be an excellent litigation growth item. Whine like the tea party that it just isn't fair and you should be rich too. Then sue your parents, but if they are poor this won't help - sue grandparents too! Next support politicians who support business rather than the nation and its people as you don't want environmental concerns, tax policy or fair pay issues to interfere in your wealth. Latest SCOTUS is so far so good too. Next outsource, get tax incentives, and have fancy ads with big names, this works flawlessly.

One you get rich move into a gated community away from the riffraff and support grassroots groups who protest fairness and other moral items that stand in the way of profit. Next blame liberals progressives govment, or regulation on the others being poor. This keeps the peasants happy but mostly busy. Provide them signs and slogans and support your local business think tank and chamber of commerce.

The rich get rich because of their merit.

""How can hedge-fund managers who are pulling down billions sometimes pay a lower tax rate than do their secretaries?" ask the political scientists Jacob S. Hacker (of Yale) and Paul Pierson (University of California, Berkeley) in their deservedly lauded new book, "Winner-Take-All Politics." If you want to cry real tears about the American dream — as opposed to the self-canonizing tears of John Boehner — read this book and weep. The authors’ answer to that question and others amounts to a devastating indictment of both parties." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/opinion/14rich.html?src=me&ref=general


A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE US AND OTHER RICH NATIONS
THE REAGAN YEARS

 

[Bern80]

If I ever get rich it will be because I hit the Lottery, which is hardly likely because I never buy lottery tickets.

Yes, buying a ticket might help.

There is an additional component: Culture.

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becomming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

I might add that our appearance, citizenship and ethics also contribute a lot to our outcomes. But the vast majority of what contributes to our wealth is nature and society. All other factors perhaps account for 10% of our wealth as individuals.

There is almost no causative relationship between hard work and wealth as the poorest people on earth are legion and they generally work considerably harder for their wealth than do the wealthy. In fact if you compared wealth:work ratios for the poorest and the wealthiest the second value may be 10,000,000 times larger than the first.

Again what you're basically saying is that we should all just sit on our asses and hope the luck fairy lands on us. Who we are and what we become has nothing to do with the choices we make? Talk about the ultimate cop out for an underachiever.

No there is no correlation between hard work and wealth. How many times do I have to say it? You need to change how you think about money if you want o accumulate wealth. Attaining wealth is not about how many hours of work you put in. If financial independence is a goal, I would at least hope you would be smart enough to figure out that you probably aren't going to get wealthy working for someone else.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becoming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

That is very true.

My parents had a really hard time during the Great Depression and their experience left them with a very strong mindset. The advice my father pounded into our heads was to get civil service jobs, never invest in anything but U.S. Savings Bonds, avoid debt and, except for a house, never buy what you can't afford to pay for up front.

I've followed his advice and have ended up content and secure with absolutely no regrets and with a strong socialist inclination, which I believe derives from the stories my parents told us about "those years" and how they came about.

I see something very similar happening now.

 

[jillian]

Yes, buying a ticket might help.

There is an additional component: Culture.

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becomming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

I might add that our appearance, citizenship and ethics also contribute a lot to our outcomes. But the vast majority of what contributes to our wealth is nature and society. All other factors perhaps account for 10% of our wealth as individuals.

There is almost no causative relationship between hard work and wealth as the poorest people on earth are legion and they generally work considerably harder for their wealth than do the wealthy. In fact if you compared wealth:work ratios for the poorest and the wealthiest the second value may be 10,000,000 times larger than the first.

Again what you're basically saying is that we should all just sit on our asses and hope the luck fairy lands on us. Who we are and what we become has nothing to do with the choices we make? Talk about the ultimate cop out for an underachiever.

No there is no correlation between hard work and wealth. How many times do I have to say it? You need to change how you think about money if you want o accumulate wealth. Attaining wealth is not about how many hours of work you put in. If financial independence is a goal, I would at least hope you would be smart enough to figure out that you probably aren't going to get wealthy working for someone else.

i don't think that's what he's saying at all. he is merely pointing out that whether someone succeeds or not can be based on a combination of factors and it is not necessarily a function of just wanting it.

i'm sure he'll correct me if i'm misreading him. but i know that you're reading what he wrote through your own personal prism.

 

[Samson]

[...]

I believe there is as much a culture of the wealthy as aculturated poor.

We can "inherit" more than money from our ancestors. We also can inherit their knowedge and skills. The abilities to reduce risk, and increase the chances of becoming wealthy is learned more in a family or community accustomed to practicing them.

That is very true.

My parents had a really hard time during the Great Depression and their experience left them with a very strong mindset. The advice my father pounded into our heads was to get civil service jobs, never invest in anything but U.S. Savings Bonds, avoid debt and, except for a house, never buy what you can't afford to pay for up front.

I've followed his advice and have ended up content and secure with absolutely no regrets and with a strong socialist inclination, which I believe derives from the stories my parents told us about "those years" and how they came about.

I see something very similar happening now.

Indeed, there are no entrepreneurs in my family, and I don't know anyone who would have the vaguest idea how to start a business and maintain it.

But the One Hard and Fast Rule is to maintain as little Debt as possible.

Of course this is entirely contrary to the risk-taker, who will borrow whatever he need to make his dream a reality, gambling that, "if he builds it, then they will come."

 

[Midnight Marauder]

In response to the myriad threads I'll just lump together and call 'evil rich people', I thought maybe we ought to change things up a bit and see if we can get some of the haters to change their thinking.

Why aren't you wealthy? Is it really because all these evil people are holding you down? Or is it because your mindset doesn't really allow for much in the way of wealth accumulation? I would contend it's the later.

I think I'm safe in saying most of us would like more money. But how many of you have made that a goal? How many of you are really working toward that goal by finding ways to increase your cash flow? I bet not many. This is what I mean when I say most people who have accumulated wealth look at money differently than the whiners. If the goal really is wealth accumulation (as oppossed to get a good job, get a good education etc.) then you need to look at all the options. And a simple truth is working hard is only one option and probably the least effective, non sensical of the bunch. Maybe if I work harder I'll make more money. But working harder means more of my time. What is the point of more money with less free time to use it? The wealthy figured this out and realize it's not about working hard for money it's about finding ways for money to work for you. It's not about working hard. It's about working smart.

The problem is we've all been duped. Most of us have grown thinking the way life is suppossed to go is get a good education, get a good job, etc. This bullshit about the rich wanting more and more and more is just that. It isn't just them that wants more. It's everyone. The only difference is they figured it out and other people haven't and the reason they figured it out is because they ditched the conventional wisdom about how life is suppossed to go.

Maybe it's because they're illiterate and can't spell?

Just a thought.

And I'm wealthy.

 

[Bern80]

In response to the myriad threads I'll just lump together and call 'evil rich people', I thought maybe we ought to change things up a bit and see if we can get some of the haters to change their thinking.

Why aren't you wealthy? Is it really because all these evil people are holding you down? Or is it because your mindset doesn't really allow for much in the way of wealth accumulation? I would contend it's the later.

I think I'm safe in saying most of us would like more money. But how many of you have made that a goal? How many of you are really working toward that goal by finding ways to increase your cash flow? I bet not many. This is what I mean when I say most people who have accumulated wealth look at money differently than the whiners. If the goal really is wealth accumulation (as oppossed to get a good job, get a good education etc.) then you need to look at all the options. And a simple truth is working hard is only one option and probably the least effective, non sensical of the bunch. Maybe if I work harder I'll make more money. But working harder means more of my time. What is the point of more money with less free time to use it? The wealthy figured this out and realize it's not about working hard for money it's about finding ways for money to work for you. It's not about working hard. It's about working smart.

The problem is we've all been duped. Most of us have grown thinking the way life is suppossed to go is get a good education, get a good job, etc. This bullshit about the rich wanting more and more and more is just that. It isn't just them that wants more. It's everyone. The only difference is they figured it out and other people haven't and the reason they figured it out is because they ditched the conventional wisdom about how life is suppossed to go.

Maybe it's because they're illiterate and can't spell?

Just a thought.

And I'm wealthy.

When you can show me the study linking wealth attainment with spelling mistakes as a result of typing too fast, get back to me. Deal?

 

[Bern80]

i don't think that's what he's saying at all. he is merely pointing out that whether someone succeeds or not can be based on a combination of factors and it is not necessarily a function of just wanting it.

i'm sure he'll correct me if i'm misreading him. but i know that you're reading what he wrote through your own personal prism.

Of course wanting it isn't enough. I think at the very least we would all like more money. You do have to actually take action. My point the action of working hard is not the one that is going to make you financially independent.