Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In most cases I think it's the other way around: character reflects wealth. There are lots of exceptions and because they are so obvious they get lots of attention. And I don't necessarily mean extreme wealth, although for every wealthy person who got that way though crime, rent seeking or good choice of parents there are two who did it honourably.
I don't know many engineers, accountants or doctors who are dishonourable (lawyers are in a class, or lack thereof, by themselves). They had to work hard to get where they are and what they have, which is usually a fair amount.
On the other hand I know many, and know of many more poor people who got that way through indolence, slack, addiction or just plain stupidity. Extreme poverty, like in much of Africa and South America, I don't include because it doesn't exist in the US and is beyond my ken.
So looking between the extremes, either of wealth or poverty, I feel there is a fairly strong correlation between wealth and character: hard work, sobriety, law abiding seem fairly well associated with wealth and their opposites with poverty.
Depends on your definition of character. Wealthy people donate less to charity than less wealthy. Is that lack of character? Some wealthy people think poor people are poor by choice and they (wealthy) owe no one anything.
"Character" is broad, narrow, specific and amorphous in definition.
I was self-employed and worked for wealthy people mostly and had fewer problems than the beginning of my career when my clients were middle class.
That's not really true. Some give a higher percentage but they are nowhere close to the total dollars given.
Much of the lower income giving is church related, then you have to see what percentage of the church's donations are used for charitable reasons.
You can't generalize. There are people at every level of the wealth scale who have good character and the same with those who have bad. IMO the people with the worst character are those who generalize about others based on their personal biases. Those people are classist or racist or ageist or some other ist depending on the group they hold assumptions about.
There are many ways to interpret the bible. One biblical take is that to those who are given gifts from the Lord inherit an implicit duty to Shepard or safe guard and make productive his talents. You are not allowed to give away your talents but must employ them productively and yet you are to reward those who work for you adequately or are your agents and you must also make a provision for the poor or strangers who are willing to work for their meals.
To me a guy like Truett Cathy or Donald Trump epitomizes the biblical idea of the innate character of the wealthy. Both men continued to labor productively and employ their talents yet rewarded those who labored for them (and were exceedingly generous in their private life - something I do not see as necessarily biblical but not necessarily negative)
I think wealth is an of an indicator self control (moreso than income). For the upper class IDK cause they could have inherited it or got lucky, but given middle to upper middle class incomes, the wealth left over shows how good a person is at pushing off present rewards for future ones.
Well it really depends. Upbringing, lifestyle and IMO (a huge part) your inner being have a lot to do in shaping what kind of person you become. Being rich or poor has no bearing on you being miserable happy or a bad person
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.