What's the right attitude for a former poor person who is now "rich"?

[mathlete]

I can sort of relate.  Grew up poor in a dysfunctional household and had zero help and had a lot of struggle early on. 

I have good friends who never had to struggle with this, but that doesn't mean everything has been super easy for them.  Most people have difficulties they need to work to get through, poverty is just one of them.

However, I find that I do have less time for people who waste resources they can't afford if they want to get ahead.  I can look at a financial situation and find solutions to the issues easily because I have that experience.  It is frustrating to me that people I care about don't take logical steps and continue to have avoidable financial hardship because of it.  I've learned from experience that a lot of people don't want to do what it takes to have what they want in this arena because current comfort/lifestyle is way more important than future security. 

On the other hand, I recognize there are a lot of things I missed out on by working three jobs and going to school full-time.  I won't get that time back or the energy I put into creating financial security.  My priority is now meaningful relationships with others and creative pursuits.  Would have been good to be able to focus on this earlier though, or to have more of a balance, so I recognize that giving up some future financial security for this can be a good decision.  People who primarily focused on self-development and meaningful relationships with others might have scored higher on the happiness scale and lower on the stress scale than I used to be, despite their lack of financial security.

I see this a lot. The Tortoise and the Hare dichotomy. Successful people sacrificed more early on while unsuccessful people drank whiskey and partied with strippers or whatever the Hare did. I'm not sure how reflective of reality it is though.

I've had W2 employment ever since I was 16. In addition, I worked other odd jobs in school and studied things outside of class that ended up really benefiting my career. If I looked at some of my other college classmates, maybe I looked like the poor tortoise. They had more time for video games and partying on weekdays than I did. But if I compare myself to my coworkers, I see a different story. One where I am the Hare. I worked with dozens of Mexican and Central American immigrants. Now that I'm in the "professional" world, I've lapped them in salary multiple times over. I've never worked as hard as any of those people do every day though. And I've never made financial sacrifices on the order of the magnitude of those who were sending their strong American dollars back to their families on the other side of the border.

If I would have compared myself to my non college bound classmates, I was certainly the Hare. At least I got to party it up on the weekends. For some old friends I had who went into landscaping and construction, alcohol was more of a coping mechanism for long hours of back breaking labor.

[DadJokes]

The talk of IQ has got me thinking... while the members of this forum have higher than average IQ, we just might have lower than average EQ, especially since IQ and EQ we somewhat negatively correlated.

Personally, I doubt it.
A main focus here is happiness and emotional well being. I think this population on average is very very high in both emotional and intellectual intelligence.

I work with a lot of staggeringly brilliant people with low emotional intelligence...I don't see that kind of person typically posting here.

I don't know about being staggeringly brilliant, but I definitely have below average emotional intelligence.

[Laura33]

However, I find that I do have less time for people who waste resources they can't afford if they want to get ahead.  I can look at a financial situation and find solutions to the issues easily because I have that experience.  It is frustrating to me that people I care about don't take logical steps and continue to have avoidable financial hardship because of it.  I've learned from experience that a lot of people don't want to do what it takes to have what they want in this arena because current comfort/lifestyle is way more important than future security.

Not personally directed, but this is the kind of comment I've heard often that makes me think of the blinders we have on based on our own experiences.  I think there is a fair amount of information suggesting that these people may be making what seem to be perfectly logical, rational decisions, based on their own experiences in the world.  E.g., the revised marshmallow study, which suggests that it isn't about impulse control, but rather that poor people make an entirely rational choice to have one marshmallow right now when their experience is that (i) people can't be trusted to provide the promised two marshmallows tomorrow, and (ii) if you don't eat your share right now, it'll likely be gone tomorrow.  Or the studies when I was younger about teen pregnancy:  turns out that when you don't actually have any reason to believe you'll ever be able to get an education/good job/escape your bad neighborhood, why not make a baby that will at least love you and give you some purpose in your life?  And of course those mindsets become self-fulfilling prophecies, as they lead to choice after choice that takes them further away from success.

Fundamentally, the ability to believe that tomorrow may be better and that it's worth the effort to delay gratification/take risks/work your butt off is itself a very particular mindset that not everyone has; it is, in and of itself, an invisible and often unrecognized privilege.  I do believe some of that is innate -- there are always stories about the diamond kid who overcame all because of his hard work and intelligence -- but there is also a lot that is trained into people based on the circumstances in which they grew up.  Generational poverty tends to be generational for a reason.  And that reason is often not because people are "lazy" and unwilling to work hard.

IMO, most people see themselves as logical and believe their decisions are rational.  Therefore, when I see self-defeating decisions, it makes me wonder what experience or circumstances made that person see their decision as logical, when to me it seems just batshit crazy.  What don't I know -- what dots do I need to connect to understand?

[EscapedApe]

But, I wonder - what is the right attitude to have towards those who "have not"?

Don't think of them as "have nots".

Think of them as "saved naughts".

[John Galt incarnate!]

The IQ mention reminds me of a George Carlin quote:  "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

Take out the non PC concept of average/below average intelligence people being "stupid" and yeah, spot on. 

The intelligent class tend to dramatically over estimate the capacity of the average to low-intelligence class. What's worse is that certain cultures tend to assign a lot of virtue to intelligence.
 
Meanwhile, being really not overly smart is far more normal than being particularly bright.

For every Mustachian who can easily decipher the risks and benefits of paying off their mortgage, there's someone who struggles with understanding the basics of multiplication.

To underestimate the profound advantage that intelligence gives someone, is to miss an entire category of privilege that should never be underestimated in terms of its potential impact on outcomes.

Someone said "Life is an IQ test."

Conclusions 9-12 underscore the verities in your post.



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Mainstream Science on Intelligence

 


"Mainstream Science on Intelligence" was a public statement issued by a group of academic researchers in fields associated with intelligence testing that claimed to present those findings widely accepted in the expert community.

It was originally published in the Wall Street Journal on December 13, 1994, as a response to what the authors viewed as the inaccurate and misleading reports made by the media regarding academic consensus on the results of intelligence research in the wake of the appearance of The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray earlier the same year.

 It was drafted by professor of educational psychology Linda Gottfredson, sent to 131 researchers,[1] and signed by 52 university professors described as "experts in intelligence and allied fields", including around one third of the editorial board of the journal Intelligence,[2] in which it was subsequently reprinted in 1997.

The letter to the Wall Street Journal set out 25 conclusions.


9."IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes ... Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance"

10."A high IQ is an advantage because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making"

11."The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life’s settings become more complex"

12."Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in education, training, and complex jobs ... but intelligence is often the most important"

[Metalcat]

^Dude...I literally never understand the point you are trying to make when you quote stuff.

[mm1970]

I've worked my fucking ass off. Period.
I've been given enormous advantages. Period.
These are not competing factors in my path to success.

Yep, they are not mutually exclusive.  I have a difficult time explaining this to my "bootstraps" family members.

Do you think I “enjoy” waking up at 5 a.m. and running 20-30 miles a week while working 60 hrs a week?

Do you think I “enjoy” having my 40 calorie fudge bars for “desert” instead of a nice 1500 calorie bowl of ice cream?

Do you think I “enjoy” turning down the delicious (and free) breakfasts and lunches that my company provides nearly every single day, in turn to have my chicken/veggies, tofu salad’s, etc?

I mean, I do shit like this every day.  In bed by 9, up by 5.  I work out every day, running, lifting.  I eat a healthy diet.  I don't eat cookies or pastries (having problems with gluten makes that a tad easier).  I eat a metric ton of vegetables, and have been "into" nutrition for decades.

Yet, I'm a middle-aged slightly overweight woman (maybe 5 lbs overweight).  I have a lot of friends who look a LOT better than I do - they don't put in HALF the work that I put in.  The point being - you can't fucking look at someone and KNOW that they are lazier than you are.  Everyone is starting from a different place.

[OurTown]

Interesting discussion.  The answer to the question presented is to develop an attitude of gratitude for the circumstances and opportunities that allowed you to succeed (i.e., luck/privilege) and empathy toward persons who have not been as successful as you. If you lack empathy, you're just an asshole.

On the other hand, a conscientious mindset of self improvement and personal responsibility is obviously a necessary precondition for the journey from being poor to becoming rich, barring some unforseen windfall.  People with less than ideal circumstances would be well-served to develop that sort of mindset. 

Another way of looking at this discussion is to consider your own personal thoughts, feelings, speech, actions, and decisions as within your sphere of control, and external factors and circumstances as outside of your sphere of control.  A person who consistently blames the externals for lack of success is never going to succeed because that blame game is non-actionable.  Life is not fair, very true, but you can't make any progress with zero effort.  The flip side is that the successful person who ignores the role of the externals in his own success is more than a little arrogant and self-delusional. 

[John Galt incarnate!]

^Dude...I literally never understand the point you are trying to make when you quote stuff.

If my point is one of agreement, which it usually is, I post the concurring opinions/findings of others as the  basis for my agreement  with the poster.

[mathlete]

Lest this thread start sounding like a death sentence for the average/below average, people without high IQs are not incapable of smart insights or making good decisions.

Most people, regardless of their place on the intelligence spectrum, probably know that saving money is a good thing if you can do it. The problem is that the world is so complex now that following up on this very simple and very good instinct often means having to navigate a minefield of financial products, some helpful, but many more that are pernicious and predatory.

IMO, we need to make it as easy as possible for people to follow through on these good/smart instincts. Personal finance gurus like MMM, Dave Ramsey or Suze Orman are good for this, but they still probably reach a more educated than average audience. An HR rep encouraging employees to contribute to the 401k is another good way to do this.

Some choices/responsibilities need to be taken out of people's hands entirely IMO. Healthcare is the big one. Almost no one can afford healthcare without cost sharing. And even the world's smartest people are incapable of navigating the healthcare market once life-saving or critical care becomes an emotionally leveraged issue.

[former player]

^Dude...I literally never understand the point you are trying to make when you quote stuff.

If my point is one of agreement, which it usually is, I post the concurring opinions/findings of others as the  basis for my agreement  with the poster.

You would get better informed responses to your posts if when you are doing this you started with "I agree with X and here's the evidence that backs them up".

(As is, some of us reserve what intellectual bandwith we have for more immediately discipherable posts.)

[Bloop Bloop]

Not only is it highly likely avg IQ here is >115, I would bet the average level of impulse control measured at age 5 would've been way higher than average for a variety of reasons.  Just these 2 factors alone make it much likelier for forum posters than the average person to amass high levels of wealth.       

Many of us, regardless of wealth or "social class", have probably grown up in family and school environments where we mostly played with the smart kids, learned with the smart kids, eventually competed (in a sense) with the smart kids and now work with the smart kids. We have no knowledge of how the other half lives.

Intelligence is probably the biggest privilege there is. I'd sure as hell prefer to be a smart kid from a poor family than a dumb kid from a rich family. The funny thing is, society at large doesn't like the notion of innate intelligence (I believe that intelligence is partly innate and partly environmental) and in fact even cavils at the notion of an environmental intelligence, so no one really talks about it. It's a great thing if you're smart; you can put down to effort what in part is dictated by your genes. But having said that, I think being intelligent also does correlate with working hard since both of those things correlate with a third factor, which is deferred gratification.

[Cpa Cat]

There's no denying systemic problems that may hold people back, but I find it hard to believe that ALL success is based on "luck" or "privilege."

Has anyone claimed this so far???

It seemed like it to me.

First of all, congrats on a job well done!

Second, you were lucky.   Yes, you worked hard.  Yes, you saved.   You were also lucky.  Lucky you didn't get really ill.   Lucky you weren't injured in an accident.   Because it's unlikely you would be celebrating this today if you had.

Swordguy actually has a really good post about how to express gratitude with day-to-day actions, so I don't want to single him out. But this was definitely a "Congrats, but you were only successful because you didn't get unlucky" post. We don't know that to be true - maybe the OP would have been just as successful if ill or injured.

You had parents that loved you and were willing to give you what they could.  You were also able to work before 18 and save up some coin.  I'm not saying that was the ticket to success on its own but it's a huge step up from people that had neither of those.

Ketchup seems to be saying that the OP was successful because of privilege.

I’ve been in enough bad situations to realize there’s no such thing as free will. You can do everything perfectly and do all the right things and life will still shit on you. You can work hard, have the right mentality, and life will still take it all away.
...
I think someone feeling superior because they did things “against all odds” is only a defense mechanism to allow them to not think too heavily on how much luck actually played into their life and how still totally dependent they are on other people - even if that’s simply the processes that must continue to work within the system that people before you have built.

Undercover indicates that the OP had no choice because free will does not exist and that the OP's success is entirely the result of luck and a system that other people built.

Moral of the story is that class mobility is a myth. Some countries give poor people a salary floor so that they can have at least the basics. But it's super rare to move from poverty to the middle class. And it's not something you did OP. So be respectful of people that are different than you and give financial advice when asked. That's all you can do.

Mozar says that class mobility is a myth and the OP did nothing.

Having the freedom from responsibilities and care duties that allow you to just move is an amazing privilege.

Hula Hoop was actually responding to someone else, but again - it is privilege that allows choice. But in fairness, she follows in a later post to say something that sounds like "not 100%, but almost 100%":

Anyway, as others have said, your success is not due to your hard work and sacrifices alone - it's due to a variety of social-economic factors and a lot of luck as well.

Conservatives and neo-liberals love to go on about HARD WORK so that they don't have to invest in programs that will help poorer people do better and move up.   It also makes them feel good about themselves and justifies their current place in society (see Just World fallacy).

There's a lot to unpack here, but the main point I took from it is that Luck12 is actually kind of offended by the idea that hard work is credited with success.



So - yes. It seems to be that quite a few people responded to say that the OP is successful because of privilege and luck.

The purpose of this particular post was not to flame anyone on invite one of the many people I quoted to respond. None of you need to defend your opinions to me and I won't respond because I don't want to derail the thread. I just wanted to respond to the question that was posed to me: Why did I feel that people were saying that ALL success is based on privilege and/or luck.

[Metalcat]

Lest this thread start sounding like a death sentence for the average/below average, people without high IQs are not incapable of smart insights or making good decisions.

Most people, regardless of their place on the intelligence spectrum, probably know that saving money is a good thing if you can do it. The problem is that the world is so complex now that following up on this very simple and very good instinct often means having to navigate a minefield of financial products, some helpful, but many more that are pernicious and predatory.

IMO, we need to make it as easy as possible for people to follow through on these good/smart instincts. Personal finance gurus like MMM, Dave Ramsey or Suze Orman are good for this, but they still probably reach a more educated than average audience. An HR rep encouraging employees to contribute to the 401k is another good way to do this.

Some choices/responsibilities need to be taken out of people's hands entirely IMO. Healthcare is the big one. Almost no one can afford healthcare without cost sharing. And even the world's smartest people are incapable of navigating the healthcare market once life-saving or critical care becomes an emotionally leveraged issue.

There's a world of difference between acknowledging the role that intelligence plays in terms of professional and financial success and concluding that everyone with average/below average intelligence is doomed.

Above average intelligence tends to be a feature of people who overcome odds that are stacked against them.

However, for every @use2betrix who has overcome incredible challenges thanks to intelligence and incredibly hard work, there are plenty of people who are average to below average intelligence who have accomplished just as much success due to other factors.

The point is that in a lot of the "I pulled myself up from nothing" stories, the impact of intelligence can't be ignored or understated.

[Metalcat]

There's no denying systemic problems that may hold people back, but I find it hard to believe that ALL success is based on "luck" or "privilege."

Has anyone claimed this so far???

It seemed like it to me.

First of all, congrats on a job well done!

Second, you were lucky.   Yes, you worked hard.  Yes, you saved.   You were also lucky.  Lucky you didn't get really ill.   Lucky you weren't injured in an accident.   Because it's unlikely you would be celebrating this today if you had.

Swordguy actually has a really good post about how to express gratitude with day-to-day actions, so I don't want to single him out. But this was definitely a "Congrats, but you were only successful because you didn't get unlucky" post. We don't know that to be true - maybe the OP would have been just as successful if ill or injured.

You had parents that loved you and were willing to give you what they could.  You were also able to work before 18 and save up some coin.  I'm not saying that was the ticket to success on its own but it's a huge step up from people that had neither of those.

Ketchup seems to be saying that the OP was successful because of privilege.

I’ve been in enough bad situations to realize there’s no such thing as free will. You can do everything perfectly and do all the right things and life will still shit on you. You can work hard, have the right mentality, and life will still take it all away.
...
I think someone feeling superior because they did things “against all odds” is only a defense mechanism to allow them to not think too heavily on how much luck actually played into their life and how still totally dependent they are on other people - even if that’s simply the processes that must continue to work within the system that people before you have built.

Undercover indicates that the OP had no choice because free will does not exist and that the OP's success is entirely the result of luck and a system that other people built.

Moral of the story is that class mobility is a myth. Some countries give poor people a salary floor so that they can have at least the basics. But it's super rare to move from poverty to the middle class. And it's not something you did OP. So be respectful of people that are different than you and give financial advice when asked. That's all you can do.

Mozar says that class mobility is a myth and the OP did nothing.

Having the freedom from responsibilities and care duties that allow you to just move is an amazing privilege.

Hula Hoop was actually responding to someone else, but again - it is privilege that allows choice. But in fairness, she follows in a later post to say something that sounds like "not 100%, but almost 100%":

Anyway, as others have said, your success is not due to your hard work and sacrifices alone - it's due to a variety of social-economic factors and a lot of luck as well.

Conservatives and neo-liberals love to go on about HARD WORK so that they don't have to invest in programs that will help poorer people do better and move up.   It also makes them feel good about themselves and justifies their current place in society (see Just World fallacy).

There's a lot to unpack here, but the main point I took from it is that Luck12 is actually kind of offended by the idea that hard work is credited with success.



So - yes. It seems to be that quite a few people responded to say that the OP is successful because of privilege and luck.

The purpose of this particular post was not to flame anyone on invite one of the many people I quoted to respond. None of you need to defend your opinions to me and I won't respond because I don't want to derail the thread. I just wanted to respond to the question that was posed to me: Why did I feel that people were saying that ALL success is based on privilege and/or luck.

I'm reading the same posts you are and not seeing what you are seeing.

[Metalcat]

^Dude...I literally never understand the point you are trying to make when you quote stuff.

If my point is one of agreement, which it usually is, I post the concurring opinions/findings of others as the  basis for my agreement  with the poster.

You would get better informed responses to your posts if when you are doing this you started with "I agree with X and here's the evidence that backs them up".

(As is, some of us reserve what intellectual bandwith we have for more immediately discipherable posts.)

[Confession] Some of us barely read the posts we reply to...

[Laura33]

[snip]

FWIW, I read almost all of those posts very differently than you did.  Generally, when someone says "I did it myself," if you disagree with that assessment, the most common way to respond is to point out all of the factors besides hard work and self-determination that played a role in the success.  It's a "too," not an "instead of" -- yes, you worked hard, but you also got lucky/had various privileges that you aren't acknowledging.

This whole discussion reminds me of President Obama's "you didn't build that" speech, which was intended to point out all of the invisible government contributions that helped successful people get where they are, but which was heard as denying that those successful people deserved any credit for the hard work and sacrifices they put in to achieve that success.

[mathlete]

There's a lot to unpack here, but the main point I took from it is that Luck12 is actually kind of offended by the idea that hard work is credited with success.

I don't know about being offended, but I think hard work is emphasized to a ridiculous extent. Almost everyone in the country, at all ranges of income will tell you that they're a hard worker. And personally, I worked a lot harder when I was making $10,000 a year than I did when I was making $100,000 a year.

So - yes. It seems to be that quite a few people responded to say that the OP is successful because of privilege and luck.

But is anyone saying that it's only because of privilege and luck? That seems to be the relevant question.

[Watchmaker]

[snip]

FWIW, I read almost all of those posts very differently than you did.  Generally, when someone says "I did it myself," if you disagree with that assessment, the most common way to respond is to point out all of the factors besides hard work and self-determination that played a role in the success.  It's a "too," not an "instead of" -- yes, you worked hard, but you also got lucky/had various privileges that you aren't acknowledging.

This whole discussion reminds me of President Obama's "you didn't build that" speech, which was intended to point out all of the invisible government contributions that helped successful people get where they are, but which was heard as denying that those successful people deserved any credit for the hard work and sacrifices they put in to achieve that success.

Yes, I feel like this has to be a case of people reading the word "based" in this sentence differently: "I find it hard to believe that ALL success is based on "luck" or "privilege."

All of the quotes CPA Cat included seemed to me to be saying that effort alone wasn't enough to guarantee success. Even the most gargantuan effort might be undone by bad luck. Surely we all agree on that, right?

[mathlete]

Even the most gargantuan effort might be undone by bad luck. Surely we all agree on that, right?

Absolutely. At the most extreme end, a person is usually incapable of outworking childhood cancer.

[MoneyQuirk]

I would avoid anything they might interpret as talking down to them. They understand (hopefully) that you worked your bum off getting to where you are now.

If you can't find a way to hold a conversation without this, I'd probably just spend less time with them. They probably don't want what you have to offer.

[sabanist]

^ That’s interesting. I have a lawyer friend IRL who came from very similar upbringings to you (he’s a little younger) and he’s the first person I’ve met where we butt heads on lots of things. He feels like everything in life comes down to one’s decisions and that nothing is out of your control if you want it.

I tend to agree.  My life isnt a whoa is me story.  But i was poor, now i'm not.  There are ways to dig yourself out of poverty.  None of them are easy.  And gratification is always delayed. 

[Luck12]

Conservatives and neo-liberals love to go on about HARD WORK so that they don't have to invest in programs that will help poorer people do better and move up.   It also makes them feel good about themselves and justifies their current place in society (see Just World fallacy).

There's a lot to unpack here, but the main point I took from it is that Luck12 is actually kind of offended by the idea that hard work is credited with success.

I'm offended when (as it seems) they ascribe most or all success to hard work when clearly it's just one of several factors.  But that's not surprising because research shows that generally, conservative minds are not as comfortable with nuance/multi-factor explanations as liberal minds. 

[Bloop Bloop]

Conservatives and neo-liberals love to go on about HARD WORK so that they don't have to invest in programs that will help poorer people do better and move up.   It also makes them feel good about themselves and justifies their current place in society (see Just World fallacy).

There's a lot to unpack here, but the main point I took from it is that Luck12 is actually kind of offended by the idea that hard work is credited with success.

I'm offended when (as it seems) they ascribe most or all success to hard work when clearly it's just one of several factors.  But that's not surprising because research shows that generally, conservative minds are not as comfortable with nuance/multi-factor explanations as liberal minds.

Some people have a different understanding of the barriers affecting "poorer people". For example, someone might be poor because of a lack of role models or education. That can be remedied easily enough by better early intervention funding and more school funding. Someone might be poor because he or she makes very bad decisions independent of whatever assistance is provided. That is a lot harder to fix. Or someone might be poor due to both factors. Not everyone will agree on the priority to be given to alleviating these different contributors to socio-economic disadvantage.

[Villanelle]

^ That’s interesting. I have a lawyer friend IRL who came from very similar upbringings to you (he’s a little younger) and he’s the first person I’ve met where we butt heads on lots of things. He feels like everything in life comes down to one’s decisions and that nothing is out of your control if you want it.

I tend to agree.  My life isnt a whoa is me story.  But i was poor, now i'm not.  There are ways to dig yourself out of poverty. None of them are easy.  And gratification is always delayed.

For many (I'd even agree to "most") people, there are ways that will likely dig them out of poverty. 

Those two sentences are not that same.  I get that you don't want to see that there was luck and other good fortune or lack of misfortune involved, but there was.  There always is. 

[Buffaloski Boris]

Personally, I doubt it.
A main focus here is happiness and emotional well being. I think this population on average is very very high in both emotional and intellectual intelligence.

I work with a lot of staggeringly brilliant people with low emotional intelligence...I don't see that kind of person typically posting here.

Current company excepted of course. 😆

[sabanist]

^ That’s interesting. I have a lawyer friend IRL who came from very similar upbringings to you (he’s a little younger) and he’s the first person I’ve met where we butt heads on lots of things. He feels like everything in life comes down to one’s decisions and that nothing is out of your control if you want it.

I tend to agree.  My life isnt a whoa is me story.  But i was poor, now i'm not.  There are ways to dig yourself out of poverty. None of them are easy.  And gratification is always delayed.

For many (I'd even agree to "most") people, there are ways that will likely dig them out of poverty. 

Those two sentences are not that same.  I get that you don't want to see that there was luck and other good fortune or lack of misfortune involved, but there was.  There always is.

Not sure what you are trying to say there  "Oh theyre poor, but they could be poorer or sick, so they are lucky"

I don't know everyones circumstance but i know I was a teenage dad who joined the army to support the family then took advantage of the education and housing benefits to improve my station.  That's available to nearly every young person.  jUst takes some guts and a few years of suck.  No magic there. 

[Metalcat]

Personally, I doubt it.
A main focus here is happiness and emotional well being. I think this population on average is very very high in both emotional and intellectual intelligence.

I work with a lot of staggeringly brilliant people with low emotional intelligence...I don't see that kind of person typically posting here.

Current company excepted of course. 😆

There are exceptions to every rule :P

[Wrenchturner]

The value of a "bootstrapping" argument is that there isn't much of an alternative.  You can argue about the intricacies of privilege or tragedy or good health or bad, but at the end of the day, there is only one path that improves your life: to work to better yourself and the world around you.  It is also true that people respect the delta here more than the absolute position: someone who improves themselves dramatically through terrible odds is more respected than someone who started near the top and got a bit higher.  This is worth thinking about.

The external tragedies like bad government or a lack of social welfare or what have you can be activized to correct, or voted to improve, but generally speaking in the West we do not like Robin Hoods, because we don't like stealing regardless of the material benefit since the collateral damage(Edit: to the greater social morality) is generally seen as more questionable than the suffering of the prospective thief.  I'm open to being convinced wrong on this.  This is a luxury of sorts that stems from non-scarcity thinking, but even in places like the Philippines during a typhoon, people will choose their morality over their immediate proximal well being.  Given a severe enough crisis, I suspect this would break, but it is a snake that eats itself and we all know it deeply.  (Typhoon Kammuri is currently hitting the central Visayas, 200k people have been evacuated.  There has been ONE fatality.  Approximately 21% of Filipinos live below the poverty line).

When it comes to intelligence, it's also true that intelligent people are not necessarily kind, or hard working, or focused properly to generate yields.  Artists are often like this(the last point mostly).  Especially since it's not usually evident if an artist is brilliant until some time after their influence is acknowledged.

I prefer the big five personality model which points to intelligence AND conscientiousness as the largest predictors of success, where conscientiousness is essentially the inclination one has towards working hard.  This is heavily genetic from what I understand. 

But we need boring conscientious people to be excellent facilitators and to keep the wheels going, and we need the artists to take risks to try to produce a better set of wheels, even if they frequently get it wrong or make them square by accident.

If the question is: how do we act in life to build a better world, the general rule is to act faithfully and to work humbly.

[pecunia]

Here's another angle.  It ain't always innate ability or even hard work.  Some folks are just lucky.

For example:  There's a whole bunch of good tunes out there by unknown musicians.  They are both living and playing their blues.

The lucky ones do sometimes get the breaks.  Life isn't always fair.

[Wrenchturner]

Here's another angle.  It ain't always innate ability or even hard work.  Some folks are just lucky.

For example:  There's a whole bunch of good tunes out there by unknown musicians.  They are both living and playing their blues.

The lucky ones do sometimes get the breaks.  Life isn't always fair.

What are the breaks, exactly?  A cocaine addiction?  Spending so much money that the gravy and the chocolate syrup start to taste the same?  Crippling celebrity that breeds mental illness?  No, this is an artifact of what we perceive to be successful. 

To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to: 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there's the rub:
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause—there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.

You have to bear your burdens in life whether you think they are fair or not.  If you don't, you invite something much darker than the suffering attendant on life.

[Villanelle]

^ That’s interesting. I have a lawyer friend IRL who came from very similar upbringings to you (he’s a little younger) and he’s the first person I’ve met where we butt heads on lots of things. He feels like everything in life comes down to one’s decisions and that nothing is out of your control if you want it.

I tend to agree.  My life isnt a whoa is me story.  But i was poor, now i'm not.  There are ways to dig yourself out of poverty. None of them are easy.  And gratification is always delayed.

For many (I'd even agree to "most") people, there are ways that will likely dig them out of poverty. 

Those two sentences are not that same.  I get that you don't want to see that there was luck and other good fortune or lack of misfortune involved, but there was.  There always is.

Not sure what you are trying to say there  "Oh theyre poor, but they could be poorer or sick, so they are lucky"

I don't know everyones circumstance but i know I was a teenage dad who joined the army to support the family then took advantage of the education and housing benefits to improve my station.  That's available to nearly every young person.  jUst takes some guts and a few years of suck.  No magic there.

Well, except if they had childhood asthma.  Or...

What I was trying to say is that yes, there are things for poor people to try, and many of them can try those things.  And among those who do, many of them will succeed.  Some can not try those things, for various reasons.  And some will try them and fail through no account of their own. 

Maybe they break a leg in boot camp.  Or they emotionally crumble, perhaps due to a difficult childhood or maybe just because they are emotionally not equipped for the military. 

Or maybe as 17 year old they got arrested for having some beers with their friends.  A bad decision, sure.  But who among us hasn't made a bad decision of some kind at some point?

There are a millions what-ifs.  And I'm not saying that every person has many or even one of those.  But to discount them entirely, and to attribute that person's success only to  the factors they control, and nothing more?  That's the problem.

It's not--if A, then B, where A=hard work and commitment and B=financial success.  It's-- If A, then maybe B.  If not A, then almost never B. 

[HBFIRE]

For each of us who has an IQ over 115, there's someone out there with an IQ under 85. I often wonder if the people here really grasp what an IQ under 85 is like...really.

Not necessarily, that's not how averages work.

[Metalcat]

For each of us who has an IQ over 115, there's someone out there with an IQ under 85. I often wonder if the people here really grasp what an IQ under 85 is like...really.

Not necessarily, that's not how averages work.

That's roughly how normal distribution bell curves work though.

[LoanShark]

The right attitude?

Gratitude. And compassion.

That’s probably the best attitude for anyone, regardless of situation.

This. Plus not succumbing to some BS victim mentality. Too much of that today.

[Bloop Bloop]

The right attitude?

Gratitude. And compassion.

That’s probably the best attitude for anyone, regardless of situation.

While I think that this is usually a good policy, it has its limits. MMM seems to have little compassion for those he sees as buying clown cars, for example. Each of us can form our own views of what sort of attributes or behaviours we choose to tolerate.

[moof]

My half-sister and I are a testament to the luck vs. hardwork.

We both started out poor with the same brilliant, but otherwise walking disaster of a father.  I lucked out with a good mother, her not so much.

She has a mild learning disability with some dislexia for good measure.  I lucked out with a brain that got me an engineering degree at 19.  She has worked her butt off, but only has an AA and a heap of loans for a failed bachelors that got her a solid but poorly paying pharmacy technician job.  The luck of the draw yields a 3:1 pay disparity.

My kid is happy and healthy, hers is special needs.  My wife is healthy for the most part, her husband has collected quite the colorful medicine cabinet.

I could go on, but suffice it to say that she has worked harder and sacrificed far more for her family and to get ahead in life, yet has little more than a heap of school loans to show for it while I am about to get my second comma.

[expatartist]

The right attitude?

Gratitude. And compassion.

That’s probably the best attitude for anyone, regardless of situation.

Hear, hear!

Gratitude is the fount of happiness.

And equally important...HUMILITY.

Recognize that "there by the grace of God, you go" as other posters have mentioned. You were blessed with good parents who helped out as much as they could. Blessed with a healthy body and a healthy mind. Blessed with cognitive abilities that allowed you to carry a college course load while working to fund your education. Blessed to be born in a country where you could actually access decent education and part-time work. Yes, you worked hard with what you were given, but you were given a lot to work with.

Stay humble.

+1 to all the above

There's so much talent out there that never gets where it should, because of structural inequalities.
I invite a painter over to use my home studio on Sundays. She's talented, paints all day and stays until she's exhausted.
We both have bachelor's degrees in painting, from universities where we were taught in English. We both have parents who managed to stay together when we were growing up. We both paid for school ourselves. We both moved away from our home countries to Hong Kong, seeking opportunities in one of the world's wealthiest cities.

The similarities end there. Our differences have nothing to do with talent and hard work, and everything to do with opportunity.

She works nearly 100 hours/week as a live-in domestic helper for a local family. I work 40 contracted hours for my arts job and am frequently at the studio at all hours because I want to be.
She has left her children with her parents and ex, is forbidden by law to sleep away from her employer's home here, so sleeps next to her employer's children in a trundle bed. I'm child-free and found a(n affordable-for Hong Kong) 3 bedroom flat and use 2 extra rooms to host art exhibitions, events and visiting artists, paid for by my housing allowance.
Even if she lives here decades, her visa will never allow her to immigrate. I will be a Hong Kong Permanent Resident after living here for 7 years.
Her take home pay is about 10% of mine (she still manages to send 2/3 of her salary home), though our education level is no different.

She has no autonomy, is not allowed to be a full person, is regularly stopped by police who ask for her ID. My ass is regularly kissed in Asia because I'm white and am perceived to be wealthy (my salary is about 3.5 x the local average).

She's from the de facto former US colony of the Philippines, and I'm from the USA. That difference has meant everything.

[Hula Hoop]

She's from the de facto former US colony of the Philippines, and I'm from the USA. That difference has meant everything.

Thanks for articulating this so well.  I'm an white immigrant from the US as well.  Mainly due to being from a wealthy country and having white skin I'm treated as a "series A immigrant" whereas many others I know here from the Philippines, various African countries, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Bangladesh are treated as being from "Series B". 

[sabanist]

^ That’s interesting. I have a lawyer friend IRL who came from very similar upbringings to you (he’s a little younger) and he’s the first person I’ve met where we butt heads on lots of things. He feels like everything in life comes down to one’s decisions and that nothing is out of your control if you want it.

I tend to agree.  My life isnt a whoa is me story.  But i was poor, now i'm not.  There are ways to dig yourself out of poverty. None of them are easy.  And gratification is always delayed.

For many (I'd even agree to "most") people, there are ways that will likely dig them out of poverty. 

Those two sentences are not that same.  I get that you don't want to see that there was luck and other good fortune or lack of misfortune involved, but there was.  There always is.

Not sure what you are trying to say there  "Oh theyre poor, but they could be poorer or sick, so they are lucky"

I don't know everyones circumstance but i know I was a teenage dad who joined the army to support the family then took advantage of the education and housing benefits to improve my station.  That's available to nearly every young person.  jUst takes some guts and a few years of suck.  No magic there.

Well, except if they had childhood asthma.  Or...

What I was trying to say is that yes, there are things for poor people to try, and many of them can try those things.  And among those who do, many of them will succeed.  Some can not try those things, for various reasons.  And some will try them and fail through no account of their own. 

Maybe they break a leg in boot camp.  Or they emotionally crumble, perhaps due to a difficult childhood or maybe just because they are emotionally not equipped for the military. 

Or maybe as 17 year old they got arrested for having some beers with their friends.  A bad decision, sure.  But who among us hasn't made a bad decision of some kind at some point?

There are a millions what-ifs.  And I'm not saying that every person has many or even one of those.  But to discount them entirely, and to attribute that person's success only to  the factors they control, and nothing more?  That's the problem.

It's not--if A, then B, where A=hard work and commitment and B=financial success.  It's-- If A, then maybe B.  If not A, then almost never B.

Breaking a leg in bootcamp doesn't get you put out.  you heal, then go back to finish.  If you can't finish, you are then on disability for the rest of your days with full benefits.  So that's a bad example. 

Arrested for beers with friends doesn't disqualify a person. 

Now, arrested for armed robbery, dope (sometimes), or sex assault or something?  no, you will not get in.  That person's behavior is entirely within their control. 

People with some pre existing conditions don't have the option of joining the military.  But they do have other options that are available for young people.  Peace corps, pell grants, apprenticeships. 

Yes you can find some people that have either screwed up so badly they can't recover or some other circumstance that doesn't allow them to seize opportunity.  But those people are a minority.  From my experience, as a person who was poor and lived among poor people, you control your own future.   

[DadJokes]

I think everyone can agree that success is due in some part to luck and some part to hard work. What percentage each plays into success may be up for debate, but there is only one that anyone has control over.

[Wrenchturner]

I think everyone can agree that success is due in some part to luck and some part to hard work. What percentage each plays into success may be up for debate, but there is only one that anyone has control over.

Agreed.

[mathlete]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

[Watchmaker]

I don't know everyones circumstance but i know I was a teenage dad who joined the army to support the family then took advantage of the education and housing benefits to improve my station.  That's available to nearly every young person.  jUst takes some guts and a few years of suck.  No magic there.

Except many people's lives aren't improved by joining the military. Some suffer trauma, some are disabled, some are killed. Others just spend a few years doing work they hate and leave the military no better off than they started.

It worked for you--great. But please consider that your experience may not be universal.

[Villanelle]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

No.  You are supposed to be grateful for this opportunity and take it and then bust your ass at whatever military job you are given, and if you aren't and don't then you are someone who doesn't deserve success.  Haven't you been reading along?  /s

In less "/s", I do think plenty of people who are poor could un-poor themselves.  Of course they could.  And there are issues that are nebulous, like the altered decision making that comes from sustained poverty and can cause what seem like nonsensical decision to those looking in (or looking down).  These conversations can sometimes become, "but what if you are deaf mute with an IQ of 75 and a mother who beats you and fetal alcohol syndrome and...".  I think that happens primarily because there is a sense that some people don't see that privilege and luck *in addition to their own hard work and commitment--thing which are entirely admirable!--went in to getting them there, so the focus becomes on the former instead of the latter. 

You can absolutely fail even with hard work and commitment, and even with good, rational decisions that, on paper, are the right ones.  It takes some measure of luck to get that.  And some people are starting with a head start, either small or large, depending on factors like upbringing, intelligence, EQ, social class, etc.  That doesn't mean they are guaranteed to win the race or even place well, but of course it helps.

If we can acknowledge these things, then having a sincere conversation about what contributes to success, how more people might succeed, etc. becomes much easier and people get far less defensive. 

[Fishindude]

My two cents on the original question ... What's the right attitude for a former poor person who is now "rich"?

At 17 you were hardly poor and now with $1 mil you are doing well but you certainly aren't what many would consider rich either.   It's not like you have a bunch of FU money to burn.
The short answer is don't be a dick.  Just treat others as you would like to be treated and your finances have little to do with that.

[Boofinator]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

The military isn't a "jobs program". It's a "defend the nation program"*. And yes, there are shitloads of other jobs** that add value to society, both private and public, and many of them not requiring more than below-average intelligence.

*Or sometimes a "get revenge program" or "defend the petroleum resources program", but the general idea still holds.

**Or job programs, if you prefer.

[mathlete]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

No.  You are supposed to be grateful for this opportunity and take it and then bust your ass at whatever military job you are given, and if you aren't and don't then you are someone who doesn't deserve success.  Haven't you been reading along?  /s

In less "/s", I do think plenty of people who are poor could un-poor themselves.  Of course they could.  And there are issues that are nebulous, like the altered decision making that comes from sustained poverty and can cause what seem like nonsensical decision to those looking in (or looking down).  These conversations can sometimes become, "but what if you are deaf mute with an IQ of 75 and a mother who beats you and fetal alcohol syndrome and...".  I think that happens primarily because there is a sense that some people don't see that privilege and luck *in addition to their own hard work and commitment--thing which are entirely admirable!--went in to getting them there, so the focus becomes on the former instead of the latter. 

You can absolutely fail even with hard work and commitment, and even with good, rational decisions that, on paper, are the right ones.  It takes some measure of luck to get that.  And some people are starting with a head start, either small or large, depending on factors like upbringing, intelligence, EQ, social class, etc.  That doesn't mean they are guaranteed to win the race or even place well, but of course it helps.

If we can acknowledge these things, then having a sincere conversation about what contributes to success, how more people might succeed, etc. becomes much easier and people get far less defensive.

I agree. Maybe the 75 y/o deaf mother with a baby with FAS isn't the most important person to consider. But it's done in response to, "My parents, both of whom were present in my life, could only afford to give me $300 a month when I became an adult. Why can't other poor people be like me and become a millionaire?"

That's a reductive parody of the OP. I don't think they really said or meant that. But still. I think a lot of people consider themselves formerly poor, but were really doing alright upon further introspection. I saw this a lot growing up with my mother's family. Siblings arguing over who had it worse.

"All I got was your hand-me-downs."
"When I was your age, mom and dad didn't have any money to get me clothes so you're lucky to have my hand-me-downs."

But my maternal grandmother and grandfather were together for their entire lives and provided a stable home for the kids. My grandfather was an educated man. A Navy vet with a graduate degree. I don't want to minimize any struggles they had, because they certainly had struggles. But they were a middle class family. It's wrong to characterize that as poor IMO.

[mathlete]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

The military isn't a "jobs program". It's a "defend the nation program"*. And yes, there are shitloads of other jobs** that add value to society, both private and public, and many of them not requiring more than below-average intelligence.

*Or sometimes a "get revenge program" or "defend the petroleum resources program", but the general idea still holds.

**Or job programs, if you prefer.

I'm responding to the suggestion that young people use the military as a jobs program. I would prefer it if we did not do this.

[Kris]

Can we have a jobs program that isn't the military?

Does anyone else feel that the over-the-top "Support the troops" mania in our country is mostly a cynical ploy by the rich people in power to keep a steady stream of poor-to-middle-class types volunteering out of some sense of valiant patriotism (and to keep their families on board with it) at the same time as feeding lucrative defense contracts to themselves and their buddies?

And of course, the "military as jobs program, get off your asses and sign up you lazy poors" feeds right into that.

I'll say one thing. It seems kind of freakishly easy to play people in this country by using their own ideologies against them.