3 ms·

For the vast majority of human history the obvious answer was “some people are born into money”, not “99.99999999% of the population just don’t care as much abo

For the vast majority of human history the obvious answer was “some people are born into money”, not “99.99999999% of the population just don’t care as much about getting rich as those few incredibly wealthy lords who will kill anyone who gets in their way”. :) So many of these answers seem to presume that wealth and success are things that pretty much anyone can just reach out and take if they really wanted to.

naming_the_user 2y ago
Yes, but it is not currently the "vast majority of human history". The main issue I think though with discussing things like this on an Internet site is that the world is not homogeneous. In order to have a reasonable discussion we have to exclude obvious edge cases like how there is luck involved in not being born in North Korea.
- binary132 2y ago
  Do you genuinely believe that we have equality of opportunity even in “first-world” nations when nearly all of the institutional operational access is monopolized by families and other private social networks? The exceptions to the rule seem smaller than the odds of being born in North Korea. Most people do not have equal access to wealth opportunities. So no, it’s not at all “random chance”, unless your idea of “random chance” is “born into the Trump family”. :)
  - naming_the_user 2y ago
    Equality? No, of course not. I don't believe that at all, with equal application of effort/skill it is far easier to "make it" if, for example, you are born in San Francisco to well connected, wealthy parents. I consider this to be self evident and I wouldn't take seriously the opinion of anyone who would claim otherwise. There are also effects _on the individual themselves_ like e.g. it's more likely that a person will be more intelligent if they have good nutrition throughout pregnancy and early childhood. However, not withstanding that, I also don't believe that luck is a barrier to success apart from at the absolute top levels. The analogy I would give is with athletics. You won't take Olympic gold without top tier genetics. But without training you won't even be able to run 10km. And to be "rich" in this world you don't need to be in the Olympics. You just need to be competitive. It really depends on what we are talking about. I can point to many, many examples of people both in my personal life and famous people who I do not know personally who have been successful by any reasonable standard, both groups of which it is trivial to see to those close to them have not merely been lucky.
    - binary132 2y ago
      Yeah, I think it probably comes down to different definitions of “rich”. I mean like “USD 50+ million net worth”. A lot of people can be quite successful if they play their cards right and have a good bit of luck. Hardly anyone will be among “the rich” without access to private networks.
PorterBHall 2y ago
There’s also the embedded presumption that being rich is a superior state. I think there’s plenty of evidence that being poor is physically, emotionally, and spiritually exhausting, but that doesn’t mean that being rich is renewing. I know some proper who have become quite wealthy and have seen the ways money changes them. It’s hard for the mind to justify overabundance in a world of need, so we must rationalize our fortunes as ‘deserved’ for being ‘smart.’ Another way to live is to strive for enough. Enough to help others, to take care of most any emergency, enough to take breaks now and then and be with people you love.

naming_the_user 2y ago

Yes, but it is not currently the "vast majority of human history". The main issue I think though with discussing things like this on an Internet site is that the world is not homogeneous. In order to have a reasonable discussion we have to exclude obvious edge cases like how there is luck involved in not being born in North Korea.

binary132 2y ago
Do you genuinely believe that we have equality of opportunity even in “first-world” nations when nearly all of the institutional operational access is monopolized by families and other private social networks? The exceptions to the rule seem smaller than the odds of being born in North Korea. Most people do not have equal access to wealth opportunities. So no, it’s not at all “random chance”, unless your idea of “random chance” is “born into the Trump family”. :)
- naming_the_user 2y ago
  Equality? No, of course not. I don't believe that at all, with equal application of effort/skill it is far easier to "make it" if, for example, you are born in San Francisco to well connected, wealthy parents. I consider this to be self evident and I wouldn't take seriously the opinion of anyone who would claim otherwise. There are also effects _on the individual themselves_ like e.g. it's more likely that a person will be more intelligent if they have good nutrition throughout pregnancy and early childhood. However, not withstanding that, I also don't believe that luck is a barrier to success apart from at the absolute top levels. The analogy I would give is with athletics. You won't take Olympic gold without top tier genetics. But without training you won't even be able to run 10km. And to be "rich" in this world you don't need to be in the Olympics. You just need to be competitive. It really depends on what we are talking about. I can point to many, many examples of people both in my personal life and famous people who I do not know personally who have been successful by any reasonable standard, both groups of which it is trivial to see to those close to them have not merely been lucky.
  - binary132 2y ago
    Yeah, I think it probably comes down to different definitions of “rich”. I mean like “USD 50+ million net worth”. A lot of people can be quite successful if they play their cards right and have a good bit of luck. Hardly anyone will be among “the rich” without access to private networks.

PorterBHall 2y ago

There’s also the embedded presumption that being rich is a superior state. I think there’s plenty of evidence that being poor is physically, emotionally, and spiritually exhausting, but that doesn’t mean that being rich is renewing. I know some proper who have become quite wealthy and have seen the ways money changes them. It’s hard for the mind to justify overabundance in a world of need, so we must rationalize our fortunes as ‘deserved’ for being ‘smart.’ Another way to live is to strive for enough. Enough to help others, to take care of most any emergency, enough to take breaks now and then and be with people you love.