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.
I like when people post this nonsense...always seems to come from people who couldn't get into these schools within the last 15-20 years.
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood. Where daddy bought Johnny everything including the police to ignore his tickets and arrests. Then he also paid for that stint in rehab
In the end Johnny got that job from his dad. Then his dad pulled strings to work him up the ladder.
The narrative of the bright hard working entrepreneur is a cute one.
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood. Where daddy bought Johnny everything including the police to ignore his tickets and arrests. Then he also paid for that stint in rehab
In the end Johnny got that job from his dad. Then his dad pulled strings to work him up the ladder.
The narrative of the bright hard working entrepreneur is a cute one.
*confused*
What does this have to do with what you I said Ivy League and elite schools?
The inspiration for this thread started because I was curious on how Mitt Romney became so wealthy, so I looked it up and ran across this video on how private equities work (Bain Capital). From what I understand, a lot of his income is "investment income" and it came from capital gains. Since he had a lot of investment income, he could use the corporate tax write-offs, which is why he paid 14%. Compared to people like my parents who made $115k, and paid 22%.
So, if I'm understanding this correctly, is this how the 1% became so rich?
So where do you think your parents income came from? Working for people who took the risk is who. Remember your parents paid 22% on income after deductions also. Now if they had investments making that money they paid tax twice on income .Certainly you sounds like someone wanting tax reform dropping deductions and basing taxes on total compensation at lower level. Very conservative thinking.
2 answers if you ask a rich man he will say--- hard work & clean living
if you ask a poor man he will say---- white and lucky
I'm a poor guy on my way to being a rich guy and I think it's a little hard work and a lot of luck. I grew up in a terrible neighborhood but two things helped me out immensely. First, I was naturally gifted. I was reading at a 10th grade level in 2nd grade. I don't think that had anything to do with me working harder, some people just get things quicker. I never had to work hard for grades except for a few upper level science and math courses in college. Second, I had two parents in the house. This was extremely rare in my neighborhood. having a stable household was the best thing that could have happened to me. My parents had me placed into a gifted school and worked their butt off to expose me to things outside of my neighborhood. I'm about to graduate from one of the best law schools in the country and I had multiple 6 figure offers ranging from 100K to 230K (plus bonuses). So did most of my classmates. They are going to be future CEO's and partners at law firms. Many will be millionaires. Almost all of them came from rich homes and went to the best schools growing up. Did they have to work hard to get here?.... maybe. Will they have to work hard to make their millions?..... depends on your definition of hard work. Were they lucky to be born into the family they were?....... 99% of the time, most definitely.
I'm no expert but I've done some reading and it seems that capital gains are taxed multiple times. Now how fair does that sound? For instance, I buy stock with my money that was already taxed. Then the corporation is taxed on their earnings and then the dividends and profit I gain from selling the stock are taxed. Is that really the gist of it? Seems to me it's like a car, it's taxed every time you sell it!
It also seems to me that folks who have built big portfolios understand the power of compounding. To compound, it takes time and delayed gratification.
I know that people making $100k a year isn't considered wealthy but the people I do know who make that live under their means. They don't go out and buy a Ferrari, $2k suits, etc... However, they do live in nice houses in nice neighborhoods where their kids can go to a good school and be set up for success later in life.
Seems to me that people who are poor, not all of them, but a lot of them like instant material gratification. They have a need to keep up with the Jones', always want the latest and the greatest.
Instead of envying and being jealous of those who are better off than us, why don't we look in the mirror to see what we can do to achieve economic success?
You are comparing aplles to cars. O made her money on her own Mitt got a head start from his WEALTHY father. If you already have access to a million it is easier to make two million
You apparently don't know much about Romney then. He didn't have access to a million at the start. He donated his inherited wealth and started on his own. Yes, he had the benefit of a good education and connections, but that may have happened regardless of his father's wealth.
I'm not downplaying Oprah's success, but we were discussing "hard work". There is no difference between becoming successful the way Romney did and Oprah. She didn't work any harder than he did.
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.
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.
Hark back to a former reformed POTUS,who had problems that 'went away'. Geo W was just an illustration of perhaps what this poster was posing?
