Gordo's insidius reach (oh, did I spell that right?:)

[vetran]

all rubbish

Paternal Grandfather worked for the coop, other Grandfather was an engineer, both came from rags, father in law was a council house boy. All climbed to home owning and propserous middle class.

I have spent time with Britains 'hard working families' they don't have the drive that my parents instilled in me. However I look like the back end of a bus, my only hope with chicks is to become rich.

My parents never bailed me out but I seem to have done allright.

Nature / nurture argument surfaces again. However I reckon if you gave everyone a 'fair share' of money give it ten years and the same people would become rich.

[threaded]

That argument just does not hold, look for example at the Ugandan Asians. Ignore for a moment those that managed to spirit substantial assets out of the country, they obviously remained rich, and only consider those that didn't, i.e. here we have a population group where the die were thrown again. There is no correlation between those that were rich in Uganda and those that became rich in the UK.

[Fungus]

That argument just does not hold, look for example at the Ugandan Asians. Ignore for a moment those that managed to spirit substantial assets out of the country, they obviously remained rich, and only consider those that didn't, i.e. here we have a population group where the die were thrown again. There is no correlation between those that were rich in Uganda and those that became rich in the UK.

Amin allowed them to take very little out of the country though some swallowed diamonds to circumvent that rule. Many I know were piss poor on entering the UK, but they or their offspring have done very well thankyou. It's the cultural attitudes they have that benefit us. Maybe we should import good foreigners and chuck out the white trash.

[threaded]

Yes, most did not have the opportunity to get their assets out, and that is the group I am using as an example that who becomes rich or poor is random.

Most poor people work very hard.

And face it anyone who has been in the contracting game for any period knows the more the client is willing to pay the less you actually have to work. We've even had perfect examples shown on this very board in the last day or so.

[expat]

Noddy, don't you think that the problem has been exacerbated by the fact that we don't make anything? If you have no manufacturing industry you have no hope of creating real sustainable wealth. A country that relies on service industries is really just moving round an ever decreasing pile of cash.

I don't see the difference. Economically speaking, there are 3 ways of coming by wealth:

1. Growing things. Adam Smith regarded agriculture as the only true source of wealth.
2. Finding wealth, things like oil and diamonds that you didn't make, they were there anyway.
3. Selling for more than you bought. Does it matter whether you can bump into what you're selling or not? What's the difference between service and manufacturing industries, from the economics point of view?

[expat]

Most poor people work very hard.

Damn right!

Most of the people here have a self-congratulatory belief in the idea that some people (meaning themselves) are natural deserving money-makers and would make money all over again anyway if they started without.

I suppose it keeps them from looking over their shoulder and seeing the life they might have had, if they hadn't tripped over this gravy train.

[John Galt]

Damn right!

Most of the people here have a self-congratulatory belief in the idea that some people (meaning themselves) are natural deserving money-makers and would make money all over again anyway if they started without.

I suppose it keeps them from looking over their shoulder and seeing the life they might have had, if they hadn't tripped over this gravy train.

If they work that hard why are they still poor?

[expat]

If they work that hard why are they still poor?

Who, the poor? Because they're not paid much.

[threaded]

If they work that hard why are they still poor?

This is where supply and demand comes in. If there is a large supply of particular skills, and lets face it many factory jobs are nothing more than people being used as animate tools, (nice turn of phrase there Aristotle,) then the demand and hence remuneration will be low.

Simplistically the reason why they are poor is that they didn't throw the six required.

You could complicate it up a little by saying they would not recognise a six if shown because of an education setup to hide what a six looks like, and what to do with it when it appears.

[Fungus]

If they work that hard why are they still poor?

At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, low skilled workers can work long hours for low pay because they are easily replaced if they get stroppy. That's why call centres are such poor work environments. If you don't like it, you're out.

In the case of skilled workers such as engineers, experience counts for a lot, and you are more valued by the employer. It is in their interest to keep you happy.

I guess there's nothing stopping the poor from gaining more skills, though it is hard if they have a family to look after, and impossible if they are thick, which some are. My father came from a dirt poor background (ancestors being brickyard labourers, knife grinders and agricultural labourers) but progressed by going to night school.