3 ms·

The first rule is to inherent the money. The second is to be born into a network that benefits you and doesn't punish you arbitrarily. The third rule is to prof

The first rule is to inherent the money. The second is to be born into a network that benefits you and doesn't punish you arbitrarily. The third rule is to profit from a strong public infrastructure, and then once you've achieved enough wealth, work tirelessly to defund it through tax cuts. This guy's a mug. And anyone who thinks financial security for one is something that can be done independent of a community is full of it, or a hustler protecting previously accrued assets.

lbotos 9y ago
>And anyone who thinks financial security for one is something that can be done independent of a community is full of it, or a hustler protecting previously accrued assets. ??? So you are saying the people who make money, and are frugal, would not be able to get to "financial security"? I'm a sample size of 1, but I seem to be doing just that "on my own". You seem extra jaded here. What am I missing?
- SandersAK 9y ago
  I don't think financial security is as tied to your independent actions as you seem to think. No matter how frugal you are, the best option for financial security is investing in the infrastructure and community you live in. I don't know how much money you have, but if you or your family had a life-long expensive disease, can you say that given the current medical coverage offered at the current prices, you would be financially secure? It's not a criticism to your ability to save or manage your money. Please dont' take it that way :)
  - mfoy_ 9y ago
    You're trying to make this article more of a social policy commentary than it is. Having a "life-long expensive disease" is like the inverse of Rule #12, where you've already lost the lottery. Now, this wouldn't even be a problem in Canada, but it'd be pretty moot to put in a rule about that. The point is, this article isn't "these are the ingredients for being rich", it's "What reasonable guidelines can you follow to maintain any wealth that you manage to accrue?" The context was "rich people went bankrupt, whaaaaat?" and the article is "well, they must have violated one or more of the following rules in a big way!"

lbotos 9y ago

>And anyone who thinks financial security for one is something that can be done independent of a community is full of it, or a hustler protecting previously accrued assets. ??? So you are saying the people who make money, and are frugal, would not be able to get to "financial security"? I'm a sample size of 1, but I seem to be doing just that "on my own". You seem extra jaded here. What am I missing?

SandersAK 9y ago
I don't think financial security is as tied to your independent actions as you seem to think. No matter how frugal you are, the best option for financial security is investing in the infrastructure and community you live in. I don't know how much money you have, but if you or your family had a life-long expensive disease, can you say that given the current medical coverage offered at the current prices, you would be financially secure? It's not a criticism to your ability to save or manage your money. Please dont' take it that way :)
- mfoy_ 9y ago
  You're trying to make this article more of a social policy commentary than it is. Having a "life-long expensive disease" is like the inverse of Rule #12, where you've already lost the lottery. Now, this wouldn't even be a problem in Canada, but it'd be pretty moot to put in a rule about that. The point is, this article isn't "these are the ingredients for being rich", it's "What reasonable guidelines can you follow to maintain any wealth that you manage to accrue?" The context was "rich people went bankrupt, whaaaaat?" and the article is "well, they must have violated one or more of the following rules in a big way!"