ER - the Rational Response to a world going crazy

[retire@40]

I agree with this perspective.  However, I'm going to take things a step further.  Although it's probably very un-PC for me to say this, a substantial chunk of the poverty and misery experienced by people -- whether in this country or around the world -- is partially due to poor choices by the "victims" themselves.  There's no question that people are taken advantage of by other people, but that doesn't make them "victims" per se.  Rather, every bad experience can be taken as a hard lesson and learned from, instead of lamented.

Everyone on this board has had economic hardships in one form or another, bad bosses, poor work environments, low pay, etc...  Did we look to the Government or other people to solve our problems?  For the most part, I'm assuming we didn't.  Perhaps we took advantage of temporary assistance, but that was only until we got back on our feet.  We certainly didn't live on food stamps, welfare, etc...for years, and simultaneously complain about the lack of jobs.  If jobs were not readily available where we lived, we fought like hell to get one of the few that was, or moved to another city where there were jobs.  Likewise, when money was tight, we tightened our belts instead of racking up credit card debt to maintain a lifestyle that we couldn't or could no longer afford.

Perhaps Darwin's theory of evolution applies to human society as well as the animal kingdom?

I agree. If my government protects me from foreign invaders and domestic guerillas, I would say it's done the bulk of it's job, and for the most part, I can take care of the rest.

Too many people complain about what they don't have, what the government doesn't do for them, and endless reasons why they can't better themselves. It's mostly due to laziness and a lack of respect for themselves.

 

[brewer12345]

I agree with this perspective.  However, I'm going to take things a step further.  Although it's probably very un-PC for me to say this, a substantial chunk of the poverty and misery experienced by people -- whether in this country or around the world -- is partially due to poor choices by the "victims" themselves.  There's no question that people are taken advantage of by other people, but that doesn't make them "victims" per se.  Rather, every bad experience can be taken as a hard lesson and learned from, instead of lamented.

Everyone on this board has had economic hardships in one form or another, bad bosses, poor work environments, low pay, etc...  Did we look to the Government or other people to solve our problems?  For the most part, I'm assuming we didn't.  Perhaps we took advantage of temporary assistance, but that was only until we got back on our feet.  We certainly didn't live on food stamps, welfare, etc...for years, and simultaneously complain about the lack of jobs.  If jobs were not readily available where we lived, we fought like hell to get one of the few that was, or moved to another city where there were jobs.  Likewise, when money was tight, we tightened our belts instead of racking up credit card debt to maintain a lifestyle that we couldn't or could no longer afford.

Perhaps Darwin's theory of evolution applies to human society as well as the animal kingdom?

I think you are letting your ego run away with itself here. How about luck? Any reason I had to be born to a caring family that was reasonably well-off in the wealthiest nation in the world? Was it my gumption and ability that allowed me to avoid impregnating a teenage girlfriend, getting involved with dope, not getting shot or stabbed, not getting into a car accident? Probably not.

Yes, many of us made the most of our opportunities, but we had those opportunities to begin with whereas many others did not.

 

[Cut-Throat]

Yes, many of us made the most of our opportunities, but we had those opportunities to begin with whereas many others did not.

Yup, I'm not sure who said it but someone commenting on Bush Sr. (who looks better every day, after watching Jr.)

Said "He woke up on third base and thought he hit a triple!"

 

[HFWR]

Probably running the wrong way...

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

Yup, I'm not sure who said it but someone commenting on Bush Sr. (who looks better every day, after watching Jr.)

Said "He woke up on third base and thought he hit a triple!"

 I was thinking of exactly the same thing.  One time I made a remark to a colleague that I had been lucky to be so successful.  Being a properly dogmatic conservative, he responded that in his view both he and I had worked hard.  Although I didn't argue with him (believe it or not), I thought to myself that I was glad I hadn't had to work as hard as the Mexican guys who had just labored 12 hour days to put a roof on my house in North Carolina's August heat.

But really, the argument seems to be that many people simply make bad decisions.  So -- what is it that enables one person to make good decisions, and another not?

Is the answer is intelligence or upbringing?   I guess that the favored individuals were indeed lucky to be born smart, to good parents, without physical or mental handicap (and usually with white skin), in a rich country, with good schools, and so forth.

HH

 

[sgeeeee]

. . .
Yes, many of us made the most of our opportunities, but we had those opportunities to begin with whereas many others did not.

Yep. I don't begrudge anyone of their good opportunities (finding yourself born on third base), but I am disturbed when they don't recognize their own good fortune and believe that they are better than those who did not get the same advantages.

 

[wabmester]

Is the answer is intelligence or upbringing?

I calculated it once. It's 70% genetic, and 30% environmental. I've got the proof written in the margin of a notebook somewhere....

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

I calculated it once.   It's 70% genetic, and 30% environmental.   I've got the proof written in the margin of a notebook somewhere....

And which one of these is under the control of a child?

HH

 

[Jay_Gatsby]

I think you are letting your ego run away with itself here. How about luck? Any reason I had to be born to a caring family that was reasonably well-off in the wealthiest nation in the world? Was it my gumption and ability that allowed me to avoid impregnating a teenage girlfriend, getting involved with dope, not getting shot or stabbed, not getting into a car accident? Probably not.

Yes, many of us made the most of our opportunities, but we had those opportunities to begin with whereas many others did not.

Ego has little to do with it, unless as CT put it so aptly, you wake up on third base and think you hit a triple. I wasn't adopting the foregoing attitude, but rather emphasizing that "luck" is often self-made. It's true that some people start off with more advantages than others, which is the case in any evolutionary system (see Darwin). However, even those not born with such advantages can meet or even exceed the success of those born with such advantages. Ask any immigrant who comes to America with nothing in his pocket and doesn't speak a word of English. With the right focus and determination, he can have a thriving business within a few years.

As for how your life turned out, much of it was the result of your choices. Perhaps those choices were facilitated by an upbringing that taught you the requisite wisdom to avoid making the wrong ones. On the other hand, it should come as no surprise that even people with the upbringing you had made the wrong ones. Thus, it ultimately comes down to personal decisions about success or failure.

 

[ESRBob]

This discussion is actually starting to parallel reasoning and points of view from some of the eastern religions -- anybody looked into Hinduism/Buddhism's notions of reincarnation, karma, how your actions generate consequences or outcomes etc.?

They would agree more or less with what Gatsby is saying when it comes to how you got where you are today as a result of choices made, lessons learned etc. (adding that being born on third base is because of all the great things you did in previous lives) , but they all come down on Brewer's side in the end, too: it is all grace and blessings and the appropriate response to your good fortune is to have compassion for everyone else and help out any way you can, as often as you can.

Not trying to spoil a good argument, but both these lines of thinking may actually be able to happily coexist.

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

As for how your life turned out, much of it was the result of your choices.  Perhaps those choices were facilitated by an upbringing that taught you the requisite wisdom to avoid making the wrong ones.  On the other hand, it should come as no surprise that even people with the upbringing you had made the wrong ones.  Thus, it ultimately comes down to personal decisions about success or failure.

I see -- but what is it that enables one person to make good choices, but not another person, even with the same upbringing? And what choice did you or I have re our upbringing?

HH

 

[Outtahere]

  I see -- but what is it that enables one person to make good choices, but not another person, even with the same upbringing?  And what choice did you or I have re our upbringing?

HH

That can be shown just by siblings, one ends up doing very well, the other a loser. Same parents and upbringing, why the difference? Did they make different choices in life? I see this in my own family, I've done well, my younger brother is not far behind me but our sister lives paycheck to paycheck and could fall off the edge any day now. She had all the same opportunities we did but never took advantage of them. Why she lives like that baffles me and my parents, I wish I could give them a reason but all we can do is shake our heads and try to steer her in the right direction.

Cj

 

[Jay_Gatsby]

I see -- but what is it that enables one person to make good choices, but not another person, even with the same upbringing? And what choice did you or I have re our upbringing?

HH

This is a fairly complex question that psychologists have yet to figure out. My personal opinion is that it ultimately comes down to a lack of self-discipline. People with the same or similar upbringings know the right decision to make in various situations, but the person who makes the wrong decision gives in to baser impulses and feelings, rather than the rationality encouraged by a positive upbringing.

Take smoking for example. Everyone knows its bad for you. Yet rather than acknowledge this scientific fact (and the economic consequences) teenagers often give into the baser desire of not wanting to seem "uncool" around their friends. The same rationale would apply to drugs, sex, etc... Teenagers know the right decision to make, but choose not to make it time and time again. It's only with the wisdom of years that many realize the error of their ways. Some will never learn.

 

[brewer12345]

Ego has little to do with it, unless as CT put it so aptly, you wake up on third base and think you hit a triple.  I wasn't adopting the foregoing attitude, but rather emphasizing that "luck" is often self-made.  It's true that some people start off with more advantages than others, which is the case in any evolutionary system (see Darwin).  However, even those not born with such advantages can meet or even exceed the success of those born with such advantages.  Ask any immigrant who comes to America with nothing in his pocket and doesn't speak a word of English.  With the right focus and determination, he can have a thriving business within a few years.

As for how your life turned out, much of it was the result of your choices.  Perhaps those choices were facilitated by an upbringing that taught you the requisite wisdom to avoid making the wrong ones.  On the other hand, it should come as no surprise that even people with the upbringing you had made the wrong ones.  Thus, it ultimately comes down to personal decisions about success or failure.

I don't disagree that personal choices affect the outcomes in one's life. Having said that, I believe that the effect of personal choices is massively outweighed by the range of choice a particular individual is confrinted with. You mention immigrants who become wildly successful. Sure, this happens, but what percentage of immigrants becomes wldly successful compared to white, native-born, college educated males who come from an upper middle class background? Are the immigrants who eke out a living doing so because of their personal choices to a greater degree than the average male described above who will have an easy time of being fat and happy (income-wise)? I doubt it.

I'm happy to take credit or responsibility for the outcomes of my decisions. At the same time, I am humbled by the gifts God chose for some reason to rain down on me.

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

My personal opinion is that it ultimately comes down to a lack of self-discipline.  . . .
  Some will never learn.

But here's the thing -- why does one person have self discipline, and another not? Why does one person learn, and another not? It could be that the answer lies in native ability, or in the circumstances of upbringing, or, of course, in some combination. What else could it be? The point is that both of these are out of our control. Substitute the word "tall" for the concept of success. I believe that a lot of the self-congratulatory attitude of "the successful" is completely inappropriate, as would be a self-congratulatory attitude of the tall.

HH

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

One more thing, and I will be quiet. George Vaillant discusses these kinds of questions in depth, and at-length in his book "Aging Well." I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the present thread, and also to those who are generally interested in aging and retirement. IMHO, the book is nothing short of profound.

Vaillant, who is a Harvard MD and Harvard Med prof, was principal investigator of the three great longitudinal studies of aging (one concerned the lives of Harvard men of the class of 192x, another concerned the lives of inner-city Boston white guys of roughly the same vintage, and the third concerned the lives of high-IQ women born in San Francisco around 1900 (the so-called Terman study group)).

He isolates and discusses a number of factors that evidently lead to a good life over the long haul, and a number of factors that seem to have no bearing even though they are popularly thought to.

Great book -- not about vitamin pills and pushups, as the title might suggest.

HH

 

[Martha]

But here's the thing -- why does one person have self discipline, and another not? Why does one person learn, and another not? It could be that the answer lies in native ability, or in the circumstances of upbringing, or, of course, in some combination. What else could it be? The point is that both of these are out of our control. Substitute the word "tall" for the concept of success. I believe that a lot of the self-congratulatory attitude of "the successful" is completely inappropriate, as would be a self-congratulatory attitude of the tall.

HH

This is exactly my position. I know it is a bit irritating to bring up old threads, but we had a thread about declining class mobility in the United States that touched on many of these issues. http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=2862.0

Statements like "bad choices" "lack of discipline" and "lazy" don't help solve society problems and may even persuade me to become a soldier in the class war. I am worried that we have become a country of winners and losers. And don't feel bad for the losers, it's all their own fault. Paying less taxes and putting more money in the winner's pockets is what our country seems to value. This is not the kind of country I want to live in.

Does telling a smoker he lacks motivation or is weak willed help the smoker quit? No, it gets the smoker pissed off at the self righteous prick who tells him he is one of the losers.

I think we can be forward looking. Raise minimum wage. Make it worth keeping a job. Make schools accountable. Intervene early in abusive homes. Treat mental illness. Etc.

 

[retire@40]

Does telling a smoker he lacks motivation or is weak willed help the smoker quit?  No, it gets the smoker pissed off at the self righteous prick who tells him he is one of the losers.

Not too many many posts have me laughing but that one did.

I had tried everything to help my father stop smoking including showing him how much he would have in the bank if he had saved his smoking money for the past 20 years. I even tried wrapping up his cigarettes in many layers of aluminum foil and having him spend time unwrapping every time he wanted a cigarette and wrapping it back the way it was after he took one out. That lasted one day with him.

Finally, after many years of breathing his second-hand smoke at home and in the car, I got so disgusted with him, I told him if his cigarettes had fists, they would beat him in a fight any day of the week. I told him every time he lit up, the cigarettes won and he lost. I told him I was embarrassed to be around him when he had a cigarette in his mouth. In so many words, I did tell him he was weaker than his cigarettes.

The day after that one-sided rant, he left his half-smoked pack in his desk and never touched them again.

 

[greg]

To whom it may concern:

I’ll try to keep it brief. How language works oftentimes: When you call someone ‘stupid,’ you actually make this reality happen. Say you have two children playing Monopoly. Say child A calls child B stupid. Child B hears this new element added to the local play environment. He starts to wonder why Child A said that. His emotions roil up too, agitating him. In the case of the heart, the feeling in B--caused by A saying ‘stupid’---can be so distracting that he can’t focus totally on the game. Instead of focusing 100% mentally on playing and winning Monopoly, he now has a new element of distraction put there by A. He may only use 50% of his mental capacity to play the game as he worries and frets about this new element. Child A makes child B stupid. Life for child A becomes a partial self-fulfilling prophecy. Monopoly life for child B is just tougher. He goes back to first base.

Life in the real world is much more complicated than this simple example, especially among adults who have developed psychological defense mechanisms and layers of sophisticated coping mechanisms. Mothers teach their children not to swear or rile people up for very good reasons. Adding these agitating elements to life just makes life worse. Calmness, ‘coolness under fire,’ usually means in essence that better decisions are made. By agitating poor people, making them worry excessively about where their next meal is coming from or that they are lesser human beings, makes matters worse, just as increased worry about social security or healthcare or one’s pension or foreign warmongering makes one more agitated and less able to think correctly about that situation. Carl Rove knows how self-fulfilling tautologies work too. He learned it from Machiavelli.

Mothers and women for the part know intuitively how to create a better environment for their families and children. They are, for the most part, if you exclude their toiletmongering and shopping obsessions, the better half of the human race. (But don’t tell anyone I said that!)

--Greg

 

[Martha]

Not too many many posts have me laughing but that one did.

I had tried everything to help my father stop smoking including showing him how much he would have in the bank if he had saved his smoking money for the past 20 years. I even tried wrapping up his cigarettes in many layers of aluminum foil and having him spend time unwrapping every time he wanted a cigarette and wrapping it back the way it was after he took one out. That lasted one day with him.

Finally, after many years of breathing his second-hand smoke at home and in the car, I got so disgusted with him, I told him if his cigarettes had fists, they would beat him in a fight any day of the week. I told him every time he lit up, the cigarettes won and he lost. I told him I was embarrassed to be around him when he had a cigarette in his mouth. In so many words, I did tell him he was weaker than his cigarettes.

The day after that one-sided rant, he left his half-smoked pack in his desk and never touched them again.

Tough love may in fact work when there is love.

 

[justin]

You mention immigrants who become wildly successful. Sure, this happens, but what percentage of immigrants becomes wldly successful compared to white, native-born, college educated males who come from an upper middle class background?

You are probably correct in your inference that white, native-born, college educated males who come from an upper middle class background are more successful than immigrants. I'm defining success in the limited terms of income. For the population as a whole, it is interesting to note that foreign born, naturalized US citizens have a higher income (~$47,000) than native born US citizens (~$46000). http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-229.pdf

These new immigrants are doing something to make more money than the rest of us, on average.

To be fair with my data, those immigrants choosing to naturalize and obtain citizenship are probably well motivated and more educated than the immigrant population overall. Therefore, I may have presented a sample (foreign born, naturalized US citizens) that is self-selected and non-random in nature.

 

[brewer12345]

You are probably correct in your inference that white, native-born, college educated males who come from an upper middle class background are more successful than immigrants.  I'm defining success in the limited terms of income.  For the population as a whole, it is interesting to note that foreign born, naturalized US citizens have a higher income (~$47,000) than native born US citizens (~$46000).  http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-229.pdf

These new immigrants are doing something to make more money than the rest of us, on average. 

To be fair with my data, those immigrants choosing to naturalize and obtain citizenship are probably well motivated and more educated than the immigrant population overall.  Therefore, I may have presented a sample (foreign born, naturalized US citizens) that is self-selected and non-random in nature. 

I'll go you one better: these people are likely the absolute cream of the crop and significantly better educated/productive than the average Merkin.

 

[justin]

I'll go you one better: these people are likely the absolute cream of the crop and significantly better educated/productive than the average Merkin.

I'll agree to this: The top 50% of the foreign born, naturalized US citizens are much better educated than the bottom half.

 

[sgeeeee]

I think we all probably find more satisfaction in our own successes if we view them as due to our own merits -- rather than to the luck of the draw. Hitting our own home run feels so much better than comming into the game as a pinch runner, put on third base, and jogging in when the next batter slugs it out of the park.

It's even easier to believe in our own merits when we see people who were born to equivalent or better situations than ourselves, and who did not achieve as much. There is no shortage of losers born into every class. It's not hard to find the anecdotal evidence that you have achieved more than people who started out equal or ahead of you.

And then we can couple the desire to believe in ourselves and the evidence of affluent losers with more anecdotal evidence of people born in ignorance and poverty but find a way to climb out and succeed. There are winners born into every class too.

But the statistics tell a different story. US Bureau of Labor Statistics show that upward mobility is not really very common. Most people end up at approximately the same economic rank as their parents. There are notable exceptions, but it is not common.

If you are born into a rich and powerful family, you can make more mistakes than your poorer peers and still succeed. If you are rich and powerful enough you can get away with snorting cocaine as a youth, avoiding the draft, driving drunk, and performing poorly in school and still become the President of the United States. Any one of these mistakes could crush the opportunities of a typical ghetto born child. There are paths that will lead to success for the ghetto child, but that child is less likely to be exposed to those options, less likely to see role models that have achieved success, suffers greater set-backs if they make a mistake along the road, . . . It is even more of an uphill struggle for the child born into third world poverty, speaking a language of little world-wide importance.

As much as I feel a sense of satisfaction from my own accomplishments, I also recognize how lucky I am. I was born in the richest, most influention country in the world. I was born into a white, middle-class family. I was born with a well-above-average IQ, without physical or learning disabilities. I was born in a stable, loving family environment. My parents (although only high school educated themselves) valued advanced education and instilled in me those values. They also were frugal people who taught me the importance of saving through example. I encountered and got to work with several brilliant and accomplished people in my career field. . . When you consider the entire US or World population, a very small percentage of people had these advantages. I've been very lucky. I cannot claim credit for any of those advantages.

Even with all those advantages, I feel like I had to work at success. I made mistakes that set me back on more than one occasion. If I had had fewer advantages or been saddled with a significant disadvantage in any of the above areas, who knows if I would have been able to accomplish as much. Statistically, we know the answer is that I would not.

 

[Mr._johngalt]

I recall at one of my earlier high school class reunions, I was voted the most successful (don't know how this was determined it was
just announced) person in my class (1962). However, the honor
was tarnished a bit when they followed that up by announcing that
most of the class was quite surprised by it

JG