Difference between Rich and Poor

Free4Life11 said:
There it goes again. Just because someone doesn't rake in a crap ton of money doesn't mean they aren't "qualified" to give advice. Is there some certification test now?


I'm not getting the offense.

Call me clueless. :confused3

If someone is doing better at you at "anything" (sports, singing, piano playing, cross stitching, investing--WHATEVER!!!!)--wouldn't they be someone qualified to provide you advice.

Nothing is forcing you to take said advice--but why wouldn't you listen to someone who may be a notch above you?

If it is someone who can save money--I don't care who they are or how much they make--they are a notch above me and I wouldn't be throwing a fit over it.

And lets not confuse irresponsible rich (MC Hammer and bankruptcy) to those who earn there money and allow their money to work for them instead of them working for the money (Bill Gates).

That's the key point in "The Millionaire Next Door". Live below your means and let your money work for you.

It means nothing more nothing less and that you shouldn't fantasize about the appearances of the "haves" (not that you do personally)--you know the whole not keepin' up with the Joneses' thing.

I am by no stretch of the financial imagination rich and by no means qualified to give advice (We could use a lot of it though :teeth: )..but for goodness sakes, I didn't witness the snobbery of the OP that many here are witnessing and I don't think it was intended at all.
 
pearlieq said:
ARGH!!! :crazy:

I'm not picking on the poster I quoted, but sometimes it drives me crazy that we need to qualify, qualify, qualify in order to get a point across on the DIS. I feel like I need to include a tiny-print disclaimer at the bottom of all of my posts! :teeth:

OF COURSE I didn't mean that you should just gratuitously delay having kids even though you're secure. I'm just saying that the longer a woman can delay having kids, the more chance she will have to establish herself financially, therefore mitigating the risk of having kids.

Sorry, but we can only read what you wrote! And there are people out there who share your opinion, so I wasn't willfully trying to misunderstand you. Yes, it is frustrating to have to qualify what you say but when you're communicating in a forum where people don't know you and can't read your body language sometimes it's necessary.
 
Work smarter, not harder. That's the key to everything. And observe as much as you can so you don't make and continue to remake the same decisions.

People don't get rich because they work hard. They work smart and figure out how to do it better for themselves and their families. That's why education is the key. Be mentally nimble and constantly vigilant for a better opportunity. Plan. And most of all, never stop dreaming.
 
Free4Life11 said:
There it goes again. Just because someone doesn't rake in a crap ton of money doesn't mean they aren't "qualified" to give advice. Is there some certification test now?

Uh, yes. It's called a bank statement. He with the most zero's has tangible, credible, empirical evidence that his/her advice produces results. :rolleyes: Who on earth would take financial advice from someone who is unqualified? Maybe advice on what NOT to do.

Would you go to a marriage counselor who has been divorced 3 times? Me either!

Plus, I'd like to know what "rich" is.
 
gina2000 said:
Work smarter, not harder. That's the key to everything. And observe as much as you can so you don't make and continue to remake the same decisions.

People don't get rich because they work hard. They work smart and figure out how to do it better for themselves and their families. That's why education is the key. Be mentally nimble and constantly vigilant for a better opportunity. Plan. And most of all, never stop dreaming.

Excellent. I could'nt agree more! :yay:
 
georgia4now said:
Uh, yes. It's called a bank statement. He with the most zero's has tangible, credible, empirical evidence that his/her advice produces results. :rolleyes: Who on earth would take financial advice from someone who is unqualified? Maybe advice on what NOT to do.
Unless all those zeros came from an inheritance or a lottery win. I know people in both those instances ... no financial wisdom was involved. Purely a relative who died and dumb luck at the party store. ;)

The lotto guy was my parents' neighbor. The year after he won, he returned to the "old neighborhood" with $30K in fireworks for the 4th of July that the cops wouldn't let him set off. Gee, I'd *definitely* take financial advice from HIM!! :rotfl:

Not everything is clear-cut ... a lot of money doesn't necessarily guarantee that the person didn anything to deserve it. It wouldn't hurt to keep that in mind with the tone this thread has taken.
 
DiznEeyore said:
Unless all those zeros came from an inheritance or a lottery win. I know people in both those instances ... no financial wisdom was involved. Purely a relative who died and dumb luck at the party store. ;)

Of course. I couldnt care less about advice from Paris Hilton! :rotfl2:
 
There was a discussion on another MB a while back about the difference between "broke" and "poor". Both mean, of course, living with the absence of cash (or at least extra cash) but the posters on that thread put another spin on the difference between the two words that I've been thinking about for a long time.

The idea was this: one might be "broke" and have a serious shortage of funds that might be temporary or long-term. The "broke", though, aren't truly "poor" because they have the cultural capital to understand their situation and take steps to rectify it. Cultural capital in this case is education, a social network, the ability to move within the majority cuture wherever they are living, knowledge of how to apply for student loans and other credit, knowledge of how to use banks, and basic life skills like cooking and obtaining necessary licenses and insurances. Alternately, in the absence of these things, a "broke" person has the emotional and mental ability to acquire them.

So, a "broke" person with such cultural capital has the potential, with much hard work and luck, to become less broke over time and possibly even "rich".


BUT, according to this definition, a "poor" person experiences not only an absence of immediate cash, but also a lack of cultural capital to use to obtain any even over time. A poor person doesn't know how to, say, fill out a student loan form, or even where to get one or who to ask for help. A poor person may not know his or her rights with regards to housing, education and healthcare and may spend so much time just surviving day to day. In this definition, "poor" is so intractable from generation to generation that lifeskills like cooking (even when kitchen facilities are available in sub-standard living conditions) and how to just handle the paperwork involved in moving ahead aren't passed on because they aren't there in the first place.


So that's it. And the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to me. A broke person may not have much more than paycheck-to-paycheck, but he or she has a job, has available credit and loans, knows how to use a bank, has access to information (internet, for example) and can handle basic functions to try and get ahead. It may never work out that way - for I know it doesn't for everyone - but the possibility is there. A broke person may not always be broke, if luck, hardword and good decisions are experienced along the way.

Working through it, of course, but this is where I am right now. And, of course, these things aren't absolute. A broke family may well not make it and have kids to grow up to be broke and/or poor. A poor family might very well manage to work up to broke and beyond. I find the concept of the importance of cultural capital very interesting.
 
mjbaby said:
...a "poor" person experiences not only an absence of immediate cash, but also a lack of cultural capital to use to obtain any even over time. A poor person doesn't know how to, say, fill out a student loan form, or even where to get one or who to ask for help. A poor person may not know his or her rights with regards to housing, education and healthcare and may spend so much time just surviving day to day.

QUOTE]

That's very interesting, but it kind of sounds like just another excuse to me. Maybe would should start a program to help those who are deficit in cultural capital...oh wait, we do: Grade school, middle school, high school, TV, radio, and newspaper advertisements for trade and technical schools, MTV public service announcements, welfare-to-work programs, charities, churches, etc.

I realize that you are studying the subject (very cool) so don't think I'm trying to flame you. I'm really glad you posted on the topic! :)
 
georgia4now said:
Maybe would should start a program to help those who are deficit in cultural capital...oh wait, we do: Grade school, middle school, high school, TV, radio, and newspaper advertisements for trade and technical schools, MTV public service announcements, welfare-to-work programs, charities, churches, etc.


But that's just the thing. By this way of thinking that I posted about, the people who don't have money and still "get" these messages (by "get" I mean understand, not just encounter them) aren't "poor", they're "broke". The poor folk are those that may well encounter things like MTV PSAs but they don't make much sense because they're not "of" the cultural for which they're presented. "In" the culture, but not "of" it, you know? That's why true poverty is so intractable - the tools and messages designed to end it don't find the people who really do fall between the cracks.

Now. This means that there really are an awful lot of folk out there who might say they're "poor" but are actually "broke" through a combination of bad luck and bad choices. But this truth does not mean that there are not truly poor people out there - many, *tragically* many of them - whose background for generations have offered them NOTHING in the way of skills to figure out how to get out of it.

I think a lot of broke and formerly broke people might find themselves on an internet message board, but I think there'd be many fewer poor or formerly poor folk doing so, for this definition of poor that I'm working on would disclude the education or time required to learn to operate a computer, knowledge - let alone money - of how to acquire a computer, and the credit and personal documentation required to obtain internet access.

Oh, there are libraries you say? True. How many branches are in *truly* poor (not broke) neighborhoods? Of them, how many are as well resourced as their more affluence counterparts?
 
mjbaby said:
But that's just the thing. By this way of thinking that I posted about, the people who don't have money and still "get" these messages (by "get" I mean understand, not just encounter them) aren't "poor", they're "broke". The poor folk are those that may well encounter things like MTV PSAs but they don't make much sense because they're not "of" the cultural for which they're presented. "In" the culture, but not "of" it, you know? That's why true poverty is so intractable - the tools and messages designed to end it don't find the people who really do fall between the cracks.

Now. This means that there really are an awful lot of folk out there who might say they're "poor" but are actually "broke" through a combination of bad luck and bad choices. But this truth does not mean that there are not truly poor people out there - many, *tragically* many of them - whose background for generations have offered them NOTHING in the way of skills to figure out how to get out of it.

I think a lot of broke and formerly broke people might find themselves on an internet message board, but I think there'd be many fewer poor or formerly poor folk doing so, for this definition of poor that I'm working on would disclude the education or time required to learn to operate a computer, knowledge - let alone money - of how to acquire a computer, and the credit and personal documentation required to obtain internet access.

Oh, there are libraries you say? True. How many branches are in *truly* poor (not broke) neighborhoods? Of them, how many are as well resourced as their more affluence counterparts?

Ok, I see your point. I guess my reference of "poor" is derived mostly from the folks I know in parts of Panama and Brazil. I've seen these people living in 1 room houses at the base of a mountain waiting for the next mud slide to wipe out thier family. I usually reserve my sympathy for these people, since I honestly see no way for them to better themselves. I guess I take a micro approach to "poverty' in the U.S. (adults, NOT kids) and say yes, there are poor people in terrible circumstances, however, barring mental or physical disabilities, nothing is stopping *you* from bettering yourself. You CAN go to school if you want to, you CAN get a crappy job, work hard, get promoted, and make a good life for yourself in the future if you want.

I am trying to hire a sample coordinator at work, and we can't find people to show up 5 days in a row. We've gone from paying $9 per hour to $14, and I'm still having a hard time recruiting people who dont ask me if they can have a day off DURING THE INTERVIEW.

I may be a little callused, but I come by it honest! I really do respect your opinion though, and I see a lot of truth to your hypothesis. :thumbsup2
 
My dad is a Dallas Homicide detective. He and my brother (Dallas Police officer too) worked the convention center after Hurricane Katrina. Many (not all) of the evacuees were taking their money that was given to them to get by and crossing the street to buy drugs and alcohol. ALOT were selling the clothes that were donated to them. Then the hiring process to clean up New Orleans came around. They were offering $10/hr to anyone who would take the offer to clean up the state and city that they were from. Next to nobody took the offer.

Then we have illegal jumping the border and risking their life to just to make money to support their family. Many would be lucky to make $10/week in Mexico.

I try my best not to judge. But I have hard time really calling people poor in the US. I think many are broke even in the higher income brackets. I am still learning myself and hopefully when I am old I will know enough to pass down to my grandchildren. Right now I am still trying to figure out rich and poor myself.
 
Carrie Ellis said:
My dad is a Dallas Homicide detective. He and my brother (Dallas Police officer too) worked the convention center after Hurricane Katrina. Many (not all) of the evacuees were taking their money that was given to them to get by and crossing the street to buy drugs and alcohol. ALOT were selling the clothes that were donated to them. Then the hiring process to clean up New Orleans came around. They were offering $10/hr to anyone who would take the offer to clean up the state and city that they were from. Next to nobody took the offer.

Then we have illegal jumping the border and risking their life to just to make money to support their family. Many would be lucky to make $10/week in Mexico.

I try my best not to judge. But I have hard time really calling people poor in the US. I think many are broke even in the higher income brackets. I am still learning myself and hopefully when I am old I will know enough to pass down to my grandchildren. Right now I am still trying to figure out rich and poor myself.

I agree. Maybe this post should be titled "The difference between the rich, the poor, and those who routinely make bad decisions and pass a legacy of of ignorance and entitlement down to thier children".

Other than children who suffer from abuse or neglect from a parent, I would argue that (on a world stage) there is no true poverty in America.

Ok, bring on the flames.

popcorn::
 
Motivation and dedication to make a change in ones life are required to escape from either classification.

Twenty five years ago, I befriended a girl my age, similar family background, similar financial situation at the time (beyond broke, but not poor).

We had our respective sons at the same time, went back to college at the same time, etc. The difference is that she tried every get rich quick scheme that came along, and declined jobs which would have given her long term stability and benefits over jobs that paid $1 an hour more but were with unstable start up companies or jobs she knew she wouldn't like but went for the money.

I looked at a long term future and at employment that would give me room for advancement and good benefits, even if it meant a few dollars a week less in my pocket.

Fast forward twenty five years. She's living in a grossly substandard rental, working as a cashier at a gas station mini-mart, driving an eight year old car with a loan with an 18% interest rate because her credit is trashed, and in a bad marriage that she's had the opportunity to leave but hasn't. She's got no savings, no retirement, and no prospects. And she's still jumping at get rich quick schemes.

I've got a beautiful home, a brand new car, and want for nothing--well, maybe a cabana boy, but don't tell my DH :rotfl: . And Because I saved and looked at the future, I was able to take a massive pay cut for a job I enjoy going to most of the time.

The difference between us was that I was highly motivated to be successful, and to be financially secure, and was willing to work, even two jobs at a time, to get what I wanted. I worked 60-70 hours a week, learning, networking, and often doing grunt work type projects that I knew were high profile such as volunteering on the employee picnic committee on my own time.

My friend refused jobs that she felt were "under her" even though she would have learned new skills to take to other jobs, and chose to collect unemployment and even welfare instead.

We both began with equal opportunities. I chose to proactively chase my dreams, she sat back and waited for them to come to her.

Anne
 
LuluLovesDisney said:
Here's a favorite quote:

"Failure means giving up what you want most for what you want at the moment."

I think about this when I want to eat high calorie foods (Do I want this cookie, or do I want to lose weight?) when I want to procrastinate (Do I want to DIS now and be up until 4 am grading papers?) when I want to spend money (Do I want these shoes, or would I rather put that into my Disney fund or my savings?) I really think that's the main point of the article- not who's better than whom, but how we all can become better off.

I think this is a very good way to look at situations. I think I will have to adopt this method. Thanks! :thumbsup2
 
Lisa loves Pooh said:
I'm not getting the offense.

Call me clueless. :confused3

If someone is doing better at you at "anything" (sports, singing, piano playing, cross stitching, investing--WHATEVER!!!!)--wouldn't they be someone qualified to provide you advice.

I am not saying they aren't qualified. What I am saying is that, their being qualified DOESN'T make others un-qualified which is what was implied.

Basic financial principles are not rocket science or magical. Live below your means, save before spending, don't live on credit, etc. Just because someone doesn't have a lot of money doesn't mean they aren't following those principles.

georgia4now said:
Uh, yes. It's called a bank statement. He with the most zero's has tangible, credible, empirical evidence that his/her advice produces results. :rolleyes: Who on earth would take financial advice from someone who is unqualified? Maybe advice on what NOT to do. .

Like I said, financial advice isn't rocket science. No I don't have a lot of money in my bank account. But it's because I don't have a high paying job at the moment.

Really my point is just that, someone might not have a lot of money at the moment but that doesn't make them an idiot. Maybe they are currently working towards a degree or looking for a better job. Just don't judge people based on the size of their bank account.
 
georgia4now said:
Other than children who suffer from abuse or neglect from a parent, I would argue that (on a world stage) there is no true poverty in America.

I will agree with that to some extent in that priorities are complete out of whack in this country. I'll say more later but have to run at the moment.
 
georgia4now said:
I agree. Maybe this post should be titled "The difference between the rich, the poor, and those who routinely make bad decisions and pass a legacy of of ignorance and entitlement down to thier children".

Other than children who suffer from abuse or neglect from a parent, I would argue that (on a world stage) there is no true poverty in America.

Ok, bring on the flames.

popcorn::

No flames, but you may want to read this:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0827/p02s02-usec.html

Pembroke Township, mired in poverty, looks like a 19th-century relic. Can a state initiative bail it out?

By Andrew Buchanan

A visit to this rural area 60 miles south of Chicago is a journey back in time - but it's hardly a sentimental one.
Pembroke is one of the poorest areas in the state. More than 90 percent black, it's a pocket of the country where some residents live in shacks without electricity and running water.

"Look at that," John Howard says driving down one of township's back roads, pointing to two young girls spending a steamy afternoon in front of their dilapidated home. "That was me 50 years ago."

Mr. Howard, who grew up here and now runs a day-care and vocational training center, next points to a ditch beside the road where he and other neighborhood children would seek relief in the mucky water. There is little else for children to do today in Pembroke.

The state has a plan to revitalize Pembroke Township: Gov. Rod Blagojevich visited last month to announce an initiative. But the plan involves little new money, relying instead on partnerships among state agencies, community groups, and the private sector to accomplish goals that include making government services more accessible, constructing affordable housing, improving the sewage and water systems, and cleaning up the old tires that dot the area.

"We can't allow any part of our state to be living in the 19th century," governor Blagojevich said.

The township's 2,800 people have a average annual income of $9,642, and more than half of households with children under 5 are below the poverty line.

Indeed, images here hark back sometimes 100 years: Two women till a field as a shirtless man rides by on a rusted tractor. Many live in mobile homes that appear ready to fall in on themselves. There are no gas lines in the area; those who can't afford propane burn old car batteries for heat in winter.

Many residents are skeptical of the state's plan."I've been here all my life and I've seen them come and go with promises," says James Taylor, who runs the local newspaper. "We have hope and faith that the governor's on the up-and-up. More hope than faith."

Tracey Scruggs, a spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Human Services, says she understands such doubts. "I would certainly be skeptical, too, if you look at history," she says. "But we're there for the long haul. We don't intend to pull out until the work is done."

Kent Redfield, a professor of political studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield, gives Blagojevich credit for creativity. "There's no money for any kind of massive infrastructure project or building an industrial park," he says. "It certainly is an interesting experiment to say, let's bring all these state resources here and get better coordination."

The car Mr. Taylor's in pulls onto a flawless stretch of blacktop. "This is the nicest road around," he says. "The road to nowhere."

In fact, the road abruptly ends amid a huge clearing of overturned dirt and brush. It was built as an access road for construction vehicles working on a new women's prison. The last governor, George Ryan, visited with much fanfare to announce the project, saying it would be an economic boost for the area.

Blagojevich killed the project to save money during a time of fiscal crisis. On this afternoon, a couple of trucks sit by the roadside and the site is still except for a small mound of brush that is on fire.

"There were no blacks working on it, anyway," Taylor says. "That was a facade." Taylor believes it would be naive not to think race is a factor in Pembroke's isolation and poverty. He says whites who run all the area's big businesses benefit from the township's isolation because Pembroke residents must go elsewhere to buy gas, groceries, or even to do laundry.

Yet despite Pembroke's troubles, people display a stubborn pride. Many moved here decades ago to escape Chicago's congestion or racism in the South. Howard's mother, Louise, has been here since the early 1950s. She still believes Pembroke has potential. "Some -day, somehow ... somebody's going to take a good look at Pembroke and it's going to be a part of Illinois."
 
Also, you can read "There Are No Children Here" about growing up in Cabrini Green, or visit many Native American reservations (the ones that don't have casinos). Very rural areas and inner cities still can have a lot of poverty. What America offers is more opportunity to get out of that poverty than most third world countries - but its going to take a combination of skill and luck to grab it.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top