> A little off topic but I noticed whenever these financial literacy threads come up - the only people whose point of view I care about are those who had been p

> A little off topic but I noticed whenever these financial literacy threads come up - the only people whose point of view I care about are those who had been poor and found ways out of it. Those are the people who "figured it out" and I want people to know what they know. So I can't precisely say I'm part of this group, but I'm definitely associated with it. My parents divorced early, and living with one, for several years, involved food insecurity while living with the other involved being at the 90th percentile of HH income (though not wealth). I'm now on my own, and while I wouldn't say I've 'figured it out', I'm in a position where if I never saved another dollar I'd at least be able to retire by 40. I've seen three broad categories of children who end up successful with money. In order of pain of childhood: 1. Children of parents who are successful, who then replicate the model their parents used. This is a buddy of mine who is a doctor because his dad is a doctor and he liked what he saw growing up. 2. Children of parents who are successful to a limited point, and instill in their child the need to adopt a better model to live a better life. This is the child-of-immigrants experience that you allude to. I had a friend in college, for example, who's dad paid for her tuition but hadn't seen a dentist in 20 years. His basic message to her was: "You can work 60 hours a week like I do, and this is the best you can get. If you want to do better then do well in school." 3. Children whose parent or parents are destructively unsuccessful: addicts, criminals, etc. In this case the operative thinking is "I'll do anything to avoid this outcome". I'd predominately put myself in this category. I'd guess that if you polled most successful people, they'd predominately come from 2 or 3 rather than 1. And I think this effect occurs because a life spent following the path of least resistance (at least in an American context) seems to end poorly for most people. Divorce is common, and financially most people don't end up with enough money to support themselves in old age (and Social Security is of dubious ability to continue to do so). As a result, when you're looking for successful people you're looking for people who have been catalyzed out of the "normal path" or path of least resistance. Sometimes it's the presence of an obviously better alternative as in (1), but most of the time it's a really painful association with the normal path as in (2) or (3), which then motivates them to seek out something different.