Hmmm… I think you could squeeze in tax-evasion and money-laundering.
You first need something to evade or launder.
The youngest billionaire becomes one after inheriting a fortune.
If that’s not pulling yourself up by the bootstraps, well then I don’t know what is.
Thing is, you obviously can become reasonably wealthy by following the first chart, if you’re talented and 1 in 10 thousand lucky, whereas the second chart has a significant success rate.
The mega rich are too weak-willed to concede they’ve essentially hit a 1 in 60 million Powerball. Winning the lottery warrants glee, not pride.
Billionaires all exploit the working class—or at the very least they all inherently rely on its occurrence, without exception.
I’d add a third slice to the second pie: steal your way there.
I’d add a third slice to the second pie: steal your way there.
That is expliotation of working class
To make the odds in your favor even worse, all your competitors have an existing fortune and ARE exploiting the workforce. Good luck 👍
The „merciless exploitation of the working class” is not how they get rich, but how they keep their wealth. If you’re poor, you can’t really exploit the working class. It’s basically just birth lottery with a really really small section for the people with luck and/or hard work.
If you’re poor, you can’t really exploit the working class.
Tell that to the po-lice
If you’re poor, you can’t really exploit the working class.
Scammers from across the planet have entered the chat.
If you’re poor, you can’t really exploit the working class.
Of course you can. It’s called turning to crime. Most pimps, low level drug dealers, etc, aren’t rich.
You just listed service industry workers
Not to forget the third category: dumb luck
It’s the right half! (Dumb people getting rich without head start is incredibly rare)
deleted by creator
Behind the Bastards covers a few of them. IIRC Dr. Oz grew up poor and went to medical school on scholarship.
He’s not fuck you money rich like Bezos or Musk, both of which lucked into the birth lottery.
Though tbf, Oz got rich by scamming people out of their money with endorsing supplements that don’t work.
Becoming a surgeon and serial scammer sounds like he lacked morals not intelligence.
morals are a flaw on an individual level and only remotely beneficial in the context of greater society, intelligence is something you can never have enough of.
I agree there should only be two categories, but I think “birth lottery” should be a subset of “dumb luck,” not the other way around.
I cannot think of many dumb people who got rich by themselves. Unless they win the actual lottery instead of the birth lottery
“Dumb luck” doesn’t imply the person is dumb, just that the quality of their decision-making had no bearing on their success. Even geniuses can have dumb luck.
Unless they win the actual lottery
Not only overwhelming most of lotteries winnings, while looking good to us bareass paupers, are pittance compared to wealth of people who are rich, but also people winning lotteries lack the foundations rich need to remains rich (second chart) and usually lose everything pretty fast.
That’s what’s the original says. It was made back in 2011
Why change it?
Probably because luck actually plays little role in being rich. Without luck those born rich will still be rich. With luck those born poor will still be poor.
Both?
Read a study earlier that stated that the majority of high corporate execs are most likely psychopaths
Are you sure it wasn’t sociopath? It does take a certain amount of decision-making lacking empathy or remorse.
I think it’s the other way around: only psychopaths can become corporate execs
