SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
MIT Tech Review reports on a new study which used computer model to analyze wealth distribution in society. It concludes that the majority of riches do not result from talent, intelligence or hard work - but luck. Those who succeed most in modern society are born well and experience several 'lucky events' which they exploit, but are of mediocre talent. The study's abstract states that the model has potential for encouraging investment in the genuinely gifted, and summarizes:
"...if it is true that some degree of talent is necessary to be successful in life, almost never the most talented people reach the highest peaks of success, being overtaken by mediocre but sensibly luckier individuals. As to our knowledge, this counterintuitive result - although implicitly suggested between the lines in a vast literature - is quantified here for the first time."
(Score: 5, Informative) by vux984 on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:05AM (24 children)
His point is Trump exemplifies the study; luck not talent got him rich. In fact Trump is so mediocre that someone starting out with his wealth would be wealthier than Trump simply by having put it in a broad fund tracking the stock market and then doing nothing; ie by following the same advice given to folks with zero investing knowledge.
"Spend all your retirement plans on lotto tickets then."
Nobody is suggesting someone can or should decide they're going to be 1 in 10s of million lucky; and then act on that, as if that somehow would work.
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:17AM (23 children)
You're still not getting it. Whether his bets were the smartest bets out there or not is irrelevant. That he grew his wealth massively by his own decisions is what matters. The vast majority of this nation would be broke today if they'd got the same start Trump did. Nobody arguing with me has a clue how to acquire wealth other than via a monthly check. And that pisses them off royally.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:48AM (2 children)
It would matter if that statement were true.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:14PM (1 child)
If you have some means to refute that claim, by all means do so.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 06 2018, @04:53PM
It was not his decision to be born out of a wealthy family.
(Score: 5, Informative) by YeaWhatevs on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:49AM (5 children)
Mmmmm, no. People with large inheritances are lucky, unless somehow you can show there is skill involved with choosing rich parents. They to start out with so much money that even relatively mediocre choices result still add up to a whole lot better returns in absolute terms compared to a poor person making better choices.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:16PM (4 children)
Says the person who's never tried it. Care to continue your armchair quarterbacking? It really is cracking me up.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 05 2018, @05:03PM (3 children)
Back atcha fuckface
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 05 2018, @05:38PM (2 children)
You really went for the old "I'm rubber, you're glue" response? Jesus, man... Learn to troll.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 05 2018, @08:56PM (1 child)
It is funny how you think I was trolling, but I was not surprised since you fail basic language comprehension as repeatedly demonstrated throughout this thread. Your brain has a [personal beliefs] override that short circuits your critical thinking skills.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:38AM
So, you're saying "No, you are!" is an intelligent response in a debate between people who are not under the age of eight years old? Interesting. Sad but interesting.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by vux984 on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:51AM (9 children)
I think your not getting it. You wrote:
"The vast majority of this nation would be broke today if they'd got the same start Trump did."
I'm saying: No; they wouldn't be. As long as they did ANYTHING remotely sensible, they'd be in the same ballpark. If all they did was follow the simplest, most basic investing advice they could get.
Trump's 'decision making' ability really didn't amount to anything special; he could have closed his eyes and bought new york real estate by throwing darts at listings and he'd have done as well. If he'd thrown it at any number of major market tracking funds selected by darts, he'd have done as well. Anything that grows with inflation would be fine. Basically, with his start; as long as he didn't do something catastrophically STUPID he'd be in the same ballpark he is now.
To his credit he didn't do anything catastrophically stupid, but that's damning with faint praise.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2018, @04:40AM (1 child)
There are many who win more than a million dollars in the lottery and end up broke. Maybe that is because lottery players tend to have bad judgement, but it does give some support to the point that many could have had Trump's head start and ended up with less instead of more.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:14PM
Lottery winners get broke because they are an anomaly in their original social circle, they don't have support network in their new social stratum (as dictated by their new "net worth"), so they just fall off quickly. It's just that they are targeted by everyone.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:12AM (5 children)
We don't have to guess what would happen.
The actual result is that most windfall winners (not just lotteries) flame out badly. They don't follow said basic invest advice and they're surrounded by a toxic culture that chews them up.
Merely preserving wealth would be a big improvement over just luck.
Second, I'm dubious about the valuation of stock market index funds. Such Profit calculators [soylentnews.org] are notoriously inaccurate.
(Score: 3, Informative) by vux984 on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:38AM (2 children)
That's a good point; it's also the case that wealthy families lose their wealth within a couple generations too. The same 70% in fact.
"70% of Rich Families Lose Their Wealth by the Second Generation"
http://time.com/money/3925308/rich-families-lose-wealth/ [time.com]
That's why I didn't go so far as to claim the 'vast majority' would do any better than Trump. I only disputed that trump was in any way very exceptional. He's in the 30% that held onto it. Ok, so I concede he did better than the majority would; and I guess that's an achievement... but it's really not much of one.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 04 2018, @03:10PM (1 child)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by vux984 on Sunday March 04 2018, @07:32PM
And you'd be right to do so. I suspect that the people who actually earned it will have setup enough wealth management infrastructure and taught their offspring enough to take care of things for a while, and it takes a full generation for that to fall apart. vs lottery winners who have no wealth management and no skills so they mostly fall apart immediately.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by khallow on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:43AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 05 2018, @05:54PM
As someone who lives entirely on the returns from a stock market index fund I built up over 15 years (by saving almost everything I made), I find them very valuable. One look at history will tell you that they're one of the safest investments you can make, and quite profitable as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2018, @08:16AM
Or at least an honorary one.
SAGITTARIUS (Nov 22 - Dec 21)
You are optimistic and enthusiastic. You have a reckless
tendency to rely on luck since you lack talent. The majority
of Sagittarians are drunks or dope fiends or both. People
laugh at you a great deal.
Sounds about right to me.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Monday March 05 2018, @07:38PM (2 children)
I think you're a smart guy but this is pretty much the definition of a bad businessman in the circles trump runs in. Consistently failing to gauge opportunity cost.
He can't lose unless he gets expensive or incapacitating bad habits which is a major concern for the retarded rich.
This may very well be why he doesn't drink. His parents knew he was a retard and drilled into his head that he not get addicted to drugs or alcohol and all their help came with strings attached.
Since he was on daddybux well into adulthood he was spared despite his pleasure-seeking addictive personality.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:41AM (1 child)
Good or bad relative to other businessman is irrelevant. What's relevant is that he could have easily lost everything he was given but instead grew it. Really, bringing Trump into the conversation at all was nothing but an attempt at a distraction.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Tuesday March 06 2018, @05:29PM
Opportunity Cost is not irrelevant. Rich people budget opportunity the way that normal people might budget actual money.
I'll agree that talking about Trump is tiresome. But Trump and Bush are both great examples of how far luck will bring you, particularly in today's America.
This discussion itself is a great example of your poor fortune not to be born into a wealthy family that raised you to manage a fortune from birth. Even though you might be relatively wealthy you were probably raised on financial folk-wisdom.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Wednesday March 07 2018, @10:11PM
That's hilarious from a guy who says opportunity cost is irrelevant. Trump could have dumped his cash in an index fund and spent the rest of his life getting his asshole licked by supermodels. That's that baseline for a guy like trump and he failed.
100% of the people in this thread could learn at least that much about growing wealth in 15 minutes and it's the sort of knowledge you impart on your child when you want to hand them millions of dollars.
You're really revealing YOU don't know anything about growing wealth because this shit is so basic I literally learned it 2 weeks in to my very 1st business class. You can provide some extenuating "buts" but calling it irrelevant is a clear tell you talk a bunch of shit but don't have a clue.