Up or down

[ACPlayer]

The GM thread and the society fails this man thread prompts this question.

In today's America an average (GED, working class, family man with two kids and a household income of $50K) person is more likely to become rich or file for bankruptcy?

Is this an important question or a who cares?

[bills217]

I would say a person in these circumstances is very unlikely to become rich by U.S. standards, although they are wealthy beyond belief by worldwide standards.

Don't really see the importance, though.

tooo many variables here to give a correct answer(is the guy motivated, hows his spending.......)but in most cases much more likely to become rich than file for bankruptcy

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]

tooo many variables here to give a correct answer(is the guy motivated, hows his spending.......)but in most cases much more likely to become rich than file for bankruptcy

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems highly unlikely. How many people without much education or skills and who already have stable families do you think strike it rich?

I'm sure its a lot less than the number who file for chapter seven.

i have 2 friends that are highly motivated with kids and make nothing right now(both of their families are poor too) but one is in law school about to graduate and the other just got his first job as a chiropractor, in the US there are no excuses for not becoming successful.

[BadBoyBenny]

First of all, it depends on what you consider rich. But according to most American definitions of rich, the average person is more likely to go bankrupt. However, the opportunity is there for that person to become rich. As another poster pointed out, that person is already rich on a worlwide standard.


Anyway, if the average person was likely to become rich, then the word rich would no longer have the same meaning, so I think it is a moot question.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
i have 2 friends that are highly motivated with kids and make nothing right now(both of their families are poor too) but one is in law school about to graduate and the other just got his first job as a chiropractor, in the US there are no excuses for not becoming successful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the orginal question was not about "excuses for not becoming successful" but rather an empirical comparison of bankruptcies versus success stories, and since neither of your examples seem likely to fall into the category the OP was talking about, I'm not sure what your point is.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
Since the orginal question was not about "excuses for not becoming successful" but rather an empirical comparison of bankruptcies versus success stories

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to be "rich" to be a success? I like the technique of comparing a well-defined failure condition with a vague, easily-redefined-as-needed victory condition with a huge grey area in between. That's some useful dialogue right there, and no way there's any ulterior motive!

[ACPlayer]

You know what EV means.

For those who still dont get it -- we are not talking about the opportunity to become rich -- we are talking about the relative likelihood across the population.

I think it is an interesting question, specially if the likelihood of become bankrupt is growing relative to the likelihood of becoming "rich".

I suspect (but dont have hard data) that with the health care issues, the abundance of debt, and the likelihood for this average person to be outsourced, the numbers may be troubling -- to some.

The opportunity to get "rich" in America is still better than the same opportunity in Asia and Africa.

[whiskeytown]

I don't see rich -

I don't even see how a guy with a wife, two kids, on 50K a year could even really buy a house or build up a nest egg - wages aren't rising with inflation and cost of living increases are almost non-existant.

Maybe in Bumfuck, WY, but not in any major city I'm aware of in the United States, which is where most 50K/yr jobs are located.

RB

[BadBoyBenny]

Maybe Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Charlotte or Detroit?

[ QUOTE ]
The GM thread and the society fails this man thread prompts this question.

In today's America an average (GED, working class, family man with two kids and a household income of $50K) person is more likely to become rich or file for bankruptcy?

Is this an important question or a who cares?

[/ QUOTE ]

I always love discussions about money and how difficult it is for the ‘average’ household with X kids to get by. This is usually followed by discussions about how bad the economy is, how companies are greedy corporate whores, how politicians are corrupt ect… Many of these points do contain some merit.

Here we are talking about the average working class family man with 2 kids making 50k in a big city environment. Is he going to go bankrupt?

Replace the work ‘kids’ with the word ‘Porches.’ How much sympathy does a guy who is making $50k and having trouble paying the bill garner if he has 2 Porches in the garage?

Not much. Why? Because if he can’t pay his bills he shouldn’t have two Porches. Everyone understands that. Yet nobody balks at the fact that the person has two children (which are more expensive than Porches!) Kids are just like any other possession. It’s not your God given right to have as many as you want, just like you don’t have a right to own more cars than you can afford. Heck, parents are already being subsidized (tax breaks, school tax being paid for by non-child owning property owners…) yet never think about that when they complain about their bills.

So, I think the important question here is not if the ‘average person’ described in this post is more likely to go bankrupt or become rich. I think the more interesting issue revolves around why this average person feels the need/right to have children he can’t afford, and why society accepts this belief.

Why do they have this belief?

Because society accepts it.

Why does society accept it?

I have no idea.

[vulturesrow]

Great post, maybe we should implement means testing before allowing people to have children?

[sirio11]

[ QUOTE ]
Kids are just like any other possession

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong

[ QUOTE ]
It’s not your God given right to have as many as you want

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong

[ QUOTE ]
just like you don’t have a right to own more cars than you can afford

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong

[ QUOTE ]
Heck, parents are already being subsidized (tax breaks, school tax being paid for by non-child owning property owners…) yet never think about that when they complain about their bills.


[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong

People do have the right to have as many children as they like. And they have right to ask the rest of society to pick up the slack if their kid doesn't fit into their budget. I just suggest that their tubes be tied before we meet that request.