Why? It is still relevant.
No, Because the financial situation for the. Nation has changed in 13 years.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why? It is still relevant.
My claim is not that 80% of millionaires started off poor, my claim is that they were not rich.Your link doesn't state that they started poor, nor does it state that the poor are likely to become rich if they want to. Do you have anything else?
No other economic system has done more to lift more people out of poverty than the Market EconomyThe poor.
13 year old research that is still revelant today. Look at the worlds richest; how many of them had parents that were billionaires?It's also 13 year old research
What's wrong with being a billionaire?Absolutely
True! While some things have changed, this has not. However; here is another link only a couple months old that confirms the same thing.No, Because the financial situation for the. Nation has changed in 13 years.
So how do you account for the fact that 80% of today's millionaires are first generation rich? Also, as pointed out by the article you provided, living paycheck to paycheck is not an indicator of being poor, often it's just a matter of spending too much.That I am not sure is actually occuring, the poor having mobility, given that the price of consumer goods has skyrocketed in the last 50 years of trickle down attempts, and the wages we are paid stagnated in 1980s.
"Around 64% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck."
So how do you account for the fact that 80% of today's millionaires are first generation rich?
The link I provided on post #184 was only 2 months old! How more recent do you need it to be?Would you care to show how you arrived at these numbers? From hopefully a more recent survey?
With 7% of the US population millionaires, everybody is not struggling. Sometimes when we are struggling, we assume everybody is in the same boat as we are in.As far as my link, I was only showing that wealth means little, everyone is struggling.
Didn't see that link but I do now. Apologies.The link I provided on post #184 was only 2 months old! How more recent do you need it to be?
With 7% of the US population millionaires, everybody is not struggling. Sometimes when we are struggling, we assume everybody is in the same boat as we are in.
As eluded to by your previous link, just because someone is struggling, does not mean they are poor; sometimes it's just a matter of spending too much; and just because someone is poor doesn't mean they are struggling; sometimes it's just a matter of living within your means. But then; with people insisting on raising minimum wages, it shouldn't be a surprise prices are going through the roof.Soaring food and gas prices mean almost 1 in 2 Americans say they're struggling financially, survey finds
Most people are paying more for basic necessities as rising inflation pushes up the cost of living in recent months, Monmouth University survey finds.www.businessinsider.com
Seems a moot point what one is earning.
My claim is not that 80% of millionaires started off poor, my claim is that they were not rich.
No other economic system has done more to lift more people out of poverty than the Market Economy
Capitalism Is Good for the Poor
Nothing has done more to lift humanity out of poverty than the market economy.fee.org
I will stand by that.Have you changed your mind? You were talking about how even the son of a poor man has a good chance of becoming rich. Are you going stand by that or not?
No; it does not mean that.Meaning you agree that being poor makes one a loser in a capitalist society?
Can I show you this clip?I will stand by that.
No; it does not mean that.
I will stand by that.
No; it does not mean that.
NO! Having children when you cannot afford them is not advisable.Can I show you this clip?
A handsome man who looks amazing in that suit, cannot buy it because he has to sacrifice himself for the sake of his children.
Children will suffer and feel guilty and grow up sad and demotivated.
Making children is not advisable.
History is full or examples of people who were once poor, eventually becoming rich. Now I’m not claiming the poor are likely to become rich, I’m just saying I believe their chances are good.you said the poor are the losers in capitalism.Then substantiate the claim that poor people have a good chance to become rich. Your previous link simply doesn't.
You said the poor are the losers in capitalism. I provided example of the poor getting out of poverty due to capitalism. The fact that this often happens refutes your claim IMOThen why are you talking about people getting out of poverty? How does it relate to what I said?
What do you mean by "affording kids"?NO! Having children when you cannot afford them is not advisable.
Capitalism is irrelevant when resources are limited.You said the poor are the losers in capitalism. I provided example of the poor getting out of poverty due to capitalism. The fact that this often happens refutes your claim IMO
If you don't have the finances, and time necessary to raise a child in a way they deserve, you shouldn't have them.What do you mean by "affording kids"?