Are poor people evil?

[yadreamin]

It's the people who don't have a lot, who give away a lot, who make the world a lot richer. Because they are giving a spirit, they are giving to really make things better- by giving an example to everyone else.

I have just read these exact words in the last few days geoffw and l must admit l read and re read them many times over and then l realised what was being said.

Its not necessarily what you give, its what you do give.

There is a vast number of people in the world who give because it makes them feel better [in a selfish way] some give because they feel they should, some give because they like to be seen giving, many give only to get something back, or to be owed something.
Its only a very small number of people in the world who do truly give.
If you have ever been lucky enough to have recieved from one of these wonderful people you will know what l mean.
Then again you probably have and just haven,t noticed it, because its not always wrapped in bright coloured paper with ribbons on it.
Now thats my deep and meaningfull for the night.
cheers yadreamin

 

[GIDDO]

I also disagree, you make your own luck!

How about being a refugee from a war-striken country where half of your relatives and friends are dead, loosing your home and all your belongings and coming into a country where you can't speak the language and have absolutely NO money!! That's MY background!!!!

So, turning that around to a point where I graduated with 3 uni degrees, then retired at 33 on passive income from properties was not LUCK, believe me it was a CHOICE!!!!!

The amount of government assistance I and my family recieved was NONE and in the mean time there were people that had the privilige of being born here and had a home to live in, but despite all these privelages they still needed austudy assistance to get them through uni!

Sorry to disagree but, if you CHOOSE to be a victim, you'll always be one!

It appears i have touched a nerve here Xenia. Well you have touched one of my nerves too. I am a great admirer of what you have acheived and the person you are, you are tremendous and I like you -
BUT you are wrong. Not everyone chooses to be a victim.
You are implying that where a person is born and into what circunstances they are born means nothing i.e. all success or failure is dictated by the individual's innate attitudes.
(innate meaning not subject to environmental influences)

We ARE lucky to be in this country. (either born here or come here later)

I wager that none of us would have done quite as well if we had been born in many other places in the world.

Certainly the ease and affluence here does poison the minds of many, as generations progress, but we are all still lucky that the opportunities are available if we can find a way to get off our a...

You have succeeded because you got off your acre and applied yourself.

But what if the opportunities had not been there?
Not everywhere has the opprtunities presented here.

Yes you do make your own luck, but only if the ingredients are there.

By saying that people make their own luck, you are making an unwarranted generalisation.

Robert Kiyosaki has acquired a rich and priveleged man's mindset IMHO.

We are lucky to be here.

Regards from a 5th generation Australian, who also started with No Money, a grade 10 education, and an attitude grateful for my country's attributes (which I still have)

Regards and grumpiness from

 

[Springtime]

When I read this thread and see some opposing viewpoints, I am reminded of a questions that have always plauged me; Is wealth created or simply accumulated? Is the total amount of wealth in the world finite? Where does wealth come from?

If wealth can truly be created and is potentially infinite then one could argue that Bill Gates is one of the most prodigously commendable individuals who ever lived since he created distributed all this prosperity throughout the world.
If wealth is finite then one could argue that Bill Gates could have done far more for the world by simply accumulating only enough money for himself to subsist.

We are so used to measuring wealth on the one dimensional scale of currency, but perhaps there are all different kinds of wealth/captial/assets, some of which are finite some which are not, and some in between some which are more easily created than others.

What kind of asset is property?

 

[thefirstbruce]

Giddo, I agree with your sentiments. It would be impossible to get rich on passive property investing in some remote island in Indonesia where the locals are subsistence farmers and fisherman, without attracting foreign capital.

To get rich with passive PI requires that there are others around with the money to pay you more than what you paid..... It is a pity so many people who 'make it' don't get that.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

poor - Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Dalai Lama

rich - Bush, Osama, The Roman Catholic Church

Mark

 

[JamesGG]

poor - Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Dalai Lama

rich - Bush, Osama, The Roman Catholic Church

Mark

Hiya,


Poor: Martyn Bryant, Mr Baldy

Rich: Buffet, Gates


Mark, what's your point?!

James.


PS - Xenia, for whatever it's worth, I am a big believer in creating your own luck. Yes, it would be difficult to create wealth in a small Indonesian island. So go elsewhere. People who consistently play the victim and complain about their lot in life without doing anything about it really, really, get my back up. Bruce, I am usually a big fan of your posts, but to discredit Xenia's acheivements like that really isn't fair, IMHO.

PPS - It's been a long week. Tact does not hold forefront in my thinking today.

 

[littlevixen]

Being poor is fine. It's only evil when you try to bring others down to your level in terms of criticism, negativity, jealousy or disapproval. If anybody is poor and doesn't like it, they can change their way of life and attitude (or at least try).

On the other hand, being rich is fine too. It's only evil when you use it to destroy, disadvantage, manipulate people (too excessively of course cause to create some wealth faster, you do need some vulnerable people out there to rent from you or sell their shares in a panic)

That's my 3c for a Friday arvo, tgif

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Hiya,


Poor: Martyn Bryant, Mr Baldy

Rich: Buffet, Gates


Mark, what's your point?!

James.

James, my point is that 'Poor people are evil' is as ridiculous a claim as saying that *for example* 'black people are lazy, stupid and worthless'. Stereotyping people based on race, religion, creed or net worth is arrogance, pure and simple.

Mark

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

PS - Xenia, for whatever it's worth, I am a big believer in creating your own luck. Yes, it would be difficult to create wealth in a small Indonesian island. So go elsewhere. People who consistently play the victim and complain about their lot in life without doing anything about it really, really, get my back up. Bruce, I am usually a big fan of your posts, but to discredit Xenia's acheivements like that really isn't fair, IMHO.

PPS - It's been a long week. Tact does not hold forefront in my thinking today.

Hi James,

While I agree with your point to a degree, it's really not that black and white. Farmers in Indonesia, sweatshop workers in China, factory workers in Guatemala - they can't simply just 'go elsewhere'. They work to eek out the barest existence for themselves and their families.

The opportunities that we have in Australia are an impossible dream for the majority of the world's people. Not a rosy picture, but it's absolute fact. Xenia has done really really well to have achieved what she has achieved - her attitude and outlook are awesome and there are many people (myself included) who could learn a lot from her perspective.

But to say that making changes in your life is as simple as 'getting up and going elsewhere' is just flat out not even the slightest possibility for most people on our planet. So while what you say is very accurate for the people on this forum, it's simply not true for the fella trying to make a living on that island in Indonesia.

Mark

 

[rj]

What is evil anyway?

This thread blows....

RJ

 

[alexlee]

What is evil anyway?

This thread blows....

RJ

It's terrible when the world doesn't revolve around you, isn't it, RJ?

Go get some sleep, man.

 

[Aceyducey]

But to say that making changes in your life is as simple as 'getting up and going elsewhere' is just flat out not even the slightest possibility for most people on our planet.

You're certainly correct there Mark!

For many people making changes in their life has been simpler.

Simply 'getting up'.

There are many self-made millionnaires in Indonesia, China and other countries we consider desperately poor.

In fact many of them have more millionnaires than Australia.

Purely a factor of chance? statistics? population?

Not to the individuals concerned.

For them it has been attitude, knowledge and hard work that has achieved those results.

I guess it all comes down to a belief - whether you believe that wealth is a result of the application of human endeavour, or that it's a byproduct of state policy.

Personally I cheer for the humans every time.

Of course not everyone can achieve great wealth - however almost everyone has the capacity to attempt to improve their position.

And everyone can redefine their own goals and attitudes in order to achieve success and happiness.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Acey,

You can't be serious right? Are you saying that the dirt poor guy who makes not even enough money to give his family a roof over their heads and put some decent food on the table has a choice?

Your claims absolutely ignore the corruption and greed of the rich in countries like Indonesia. Where wealthy landowners and businessmen openly pay off government officials in order to keep control and to keep 99% of the population in a permanent subsistence economy.

As an example - I read an interesting article about Disney's factorys in Haiti about 7(?) years ago now in New International. The story focussed on a man who worked at one of the factories making a whopping $10 a week. Incidentally, $5 of that $10 went to pay rent for the iron shack he and his family lived in. The other $5 was used to pay for everything else. Everything else being food, clothing, education etc. You go and tell the guy he has a 'choice'.

What about the sweatshop worker in China/Indo/Guatemala making 20 cents an hour who literally sleeps right next to their work station at the factory because they can't afford to leave the factory to go home because they need that time to work to make some moeny to live? Go and tell them they have a choice.

It amazes me how easily some people here fall into the La La Land beilef that 'anyone' has a choice.

Mark

 

[rodimus]

In ancient tongue, they used words like "evil' and 'good' with abstract meanings (related meaning, not literal). It is not what we define "evil" in our literal sense.

The word "Evil" is used when they are describing people who do not know about the world of Good(God - beauty, plenty, wealth, abundance, joy, health), and anything opposed to the nature of Good is called "Evil".

Therefore the word is linked to states where the doer relates himself to the world in a form of ignorance(ignorance of Good-the world of God, a God which provides evrything). Evil in this context does not mean intention of evil (to harm others, although a byproduct of ignorance may cause a person to harm/cheat others, since they do not "see" ("knowing") the abundance, justice, good of the Universe).

But read the scripture and you will see the word Righteousness and Good is always recommended to conquer evil. BUt this righteousness is again an abstract meaning. A person was considered "righteosness" if he held steadfast to the Truth of good/abundance. Note that the word righteousness also meant being congruent to one's goal of good. If a man wanted Good in his life, but did not have the faith, he was considered not righteous, therefore 'evil'.

SO we see that 'evil' was linked to ignorance of good, and also linked to not having faith(holding steadfast) in the idea of Good(god).

 

[Aceyducey]

Acey,

You can't be serious right? Are you saying that the dirt poor guy who makes not even enough money to give his family a roof over their heads and put some decent food on the table has a choice?

You bet I am Mark.

I've spent a lot of time in various poor countries such as Indonesia, Nepal and Vietnam and one of the central things I've learnt through the experience is that there's a heck of a lot of dirt poor guys (and even more dirt poor women) who can make dramatic changes to their lives when they make the choice to.

The ones in lala land are those in western nations who angst 'O they have no hope, everything is so bad there' from their ivory middle-class towers but then do absolutely nothing to either:

a) Spend time in poor countries and learn about the people.
b) Support programs designed to help people help themselves - as opposed to hand-out programs.

Strong statements I know, but something I've learnt through experience is that it's the people who are negative and anti who are generally least likely to be providing valid support to help people help themselves.

It's those who believe that differences can be made that actually make them.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[Peter Parker]

Some logic

Some definitions from the Concise OED:

Evil a & n 1. Bad, harmful 2. Evil thing, harm

Poor a not having means to procure comforts or necessaries of life; ill-supplied, deficient, unproductive.

Bad a & adv worthless, inferior, deficient or poor quality.

These definitions are not without overlap with a clear relations between them in the sequence bad, evil, poor.

However when the sequence is reversed (as in this thread's stupid and pointless title) and we are using a more limited meaning of the word poor (ie relating to money) then the syllogicism cannot necessarily be accepted as being logical.

This is because one only needs to find a single poor person (who is not evil) to disprove the question. And I suspect that this would be very easy indeed.

Thus the easiest to defend (and most accurate) answer to the question is 'not necessarily'.

Other possible responses include a simple 'no'. But producing evidence of a poor person who has done evil would disprove this as well.

Then there would be those who might agree to a lesser assumption involving words such as 'propensity' and 'likelihood'. However this draws us into never-ending semantic arguments over what is poor and what is evil as well as opinions as to what constitutes virtue (the opposite of evil), rank, class nobility and power.

Peter

 

[Beach Bum]

My opinion of RK has always been that he'll say/print anything for a feel good effect on his audience to make money. Unlike many of you I don't see the fuss about his books either. (being what this thread started about)

I don't believe for a second that you can judge a person by their bank account. The "evil" people of this world are the ones that try.
There are just as many "evil" people with lots of money than without. Money is not a factor. Actually it makes people worse than what they really are (RK once again), creates that lazy attitude the Acey mentioned.

As for luck, I too am a big believer of making your own, working smart & hard etc, but a rising tide will lift all boats (not just yours Xenia) and we just had one hell of a tide come through, but beware of the receding waters as they can be just as strong.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

You bet I am Mark.

I've spent a lot of time in various poor countries such as Indonesia, Nepal and Vietnam and one of the central things I've learnt through the experience is that there's a heck of a lot of dirt poor guys (and even more dirt poor women) who can make dramatic changes to their lives when they make the choice to.

The ones in lala land are those in western nations who angst 'O they have no hope, everything is so bad there' from their ivory middle-class towers but then do absolutely nothing to either:

a) Spend time in poor countries and learn about the people.
b) Support programs designed to help people help themselves - as opposed to hand-out programs.

Strong statements I know, but something I've learnt through experience is that it's the people who are negative and anti who are generally least likely to be providing valid support to help people help themselves.

It's those who believe that differences can be made that actually make them.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

Acey,

Excellent points there - and I agree with you about Westerners in their ivory towers who think giving a few bucks a year or a month somehow makes a difference. But I think we'll need to agree to disagree on some of the points raised.

I dunno, maybe some of my points didn't come across as I wanted them to - but that's okay. The main point I'm trying to make is that everyone could make choices for themselves - if those choices weren't taken away from them.

Read a book called 'Confessions of an Economic Hit Man' one day - you might see the world for what it really is behind the scenes - from a guy who has been there and did that.

Also, read a book called 'The Best Democracy Money Can Buy' by Greg Palast. Particularly Chapter 4: Sell the Lexus, Burn The Olive Tree: Globalization and it's Discontents'. Some very very interesting reading, particularly in that chapter. Then come back to me and tell me that the poor have a choice.

I'm not some burned out hippie that cries crocodile tears while happily sitting in my fancy house watching telly getting angry about how I can't do anything, I actually know what I'm talking about and have the proof to back it up.

Mark

 

[rj]

Go get some sleep, man.

Care to tuck me in?

RJ

 

[thefirstbruce]

James, I have a lot of respect for you too, as I do Xenia and the contributions she has made, and for any hard work or insight she has applied to feather her nest. I try to respect and maintain a sense of goodwill to all on Somersoft, as it will be a better forum if all aspire to that than resort to sarcasm, gross generalizations, and the subtle, elitist put down.

Yes I was strong in challenging Xenia, just as strong as she was in her perspective's skew. However, I stand by a few points:

- I have advocated before on Somersoft, that passive property investing is not the pinnacle of intelligent investing, and does comparatively little for Australia's wealth. I agree with some Left leaning commentators (even though I am right of centre on most issues) and Ian MacFarlane, that investors were largely responsible for driving property prices up in the last boom. Like MacFarlane, I believe the lower affordability of homes in Australia is right this moment having far reaching negative consequences on Australia. I believe there is a direct and strong causal inverse relationship between housing affordability and the birth rate. The demographic changes occurring in most Western nations are not being taken as seriously as they should.

- I'd rather see people investing their money in commerce rather then ramping up the price of property. Australia's future lies not in beach houses with 23% capital gain evey year for 34 years. It lies in being world competitive in providing the goods and services the world wants, but more cost efficiently.

- Philosophically, you won't find anyone who has explored more than me, and taken to heart, that we are all responsible for our own progress. I have researched the literature on the roots of wealth consciousness intensively. In that research James, which has included a lot of travel and meetings with remarkable men, I eventually learnt that the spin the Self Help and Motivational Industry puts on the pursuit of wealth is 'off the mark'. Many would have you believe that you can get anything in the world you want, if you make it a goal and apply all your being to getting it. This just isn't so James. But many will not realize this until they experience it themselves. I believe you can get what God/Life wants you to have. You can have a go at getting what he doesn't want you to have, but the price you pay will be higher than you anticipated.


In many respects, the belief that all can become wealthy, is as misguided as the belief that all can retain a healthy youthful countenance....you can try, and you'll be healthier for it, but you aren't going to retain youth indefinitely.......and many are going to express genetic predispositions to disease.

Our society is quite neurotic and living naively in denial about the course of human life. We are bombarded with images of the young and healthy...and we shun and suppress anything to do with aging. As a physiotherapist, everyday I have to deal with intelligent people who are totally in denial about their body aging. Blindly swallowing the motivational message is not the path to wisdom or wealth.

I believe success is not measured by your asset holdings. It is measured first and foremost by peace of mind, which comes from being true to your highest aspirations and promptings. Then it is measured by health, friends, your reputation in your community, by the legacy you leave behind you, by the minds that you inspire to carrry on as you did after you have gone.

I measure it by aspiring to become a greater expression of love and wisdom. But I accept that there will always be others greater and lesser at this. It is a mistake for me to compare myself to them, as it is rare that one knows how much effort someone has made to be where they are currently, no matter how humble that position.

But in saying this, I am not advocating that God demands the man of character be poor. My view is that wealth and health be pursued with the "righteousness" that Rodimus so correctly explains. A man I respected once explained righteousness, as the right use of God's Law, and evil as ignorance or deliberate transgression of that law.

I believe that when one aligns their consciousness with that of aspiring to be a higher expression of love and wisdom, especially in a spiritual sense, then one will find as much wealth and piece of mind, as will make them happy.