<p>Aren’t wealthy folks the people who sponsor our kids’ scholarships, give generously to schools, thus allowing these schools to give generous financial aid, give money to other organizations that support various causes, hire people for their companies, and so on?</p>
<p>I agree with you, sbjdorlo. As a capitalist, I don’t have problems with people wanting to amass wealth. I think the world of CC thinks the only way to do that is by going to a certain handful of schools and joining a certain handful of professions, which is silly, but I don’t have a problem with the concept.</p>
<p>I think a lot of people amass wealth simply because they are very competitive by nature, and happen to enjoy the types of careers that pay well. </p>
<p>There are plenty of people who have amassed wealth this way, yet live modest lifestyles.</p>
<p>Bears repeating–I think one can’t generalize about academic types who pursue “intellectualism”. I know several academics who do have the prestige (MacArthur award recipient, chair at an Ivy, consultant to presidents)–one is down-to-earth, very smart, and incredibly humble. The other is a prestige whore–H and I have an ongoing bet as to how soon into the conversation he’ll drop a “name”. This guy is smart too, but has a huge ego and never shuts up. Of the two, the latter has made quite a bit of money (outside of academia). Mostly, through consulting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While this may be true, it is somewhat laughable to take the tone that all of this is mostly/solely out of a sense of altruistic charity. </p>
<p>Without a critical mass of well-educated people, how would the wealthy folks enjoy their wealth without the schools/colleges to educate their employees, professors, teachers, doctors, pharmacists, engineers, research scientists, IT/computer programmers, police officers, firefighters, military personnel, mechanics, retail/restaurant staff, artists, musicians, fashion designers, airline pilots, public transportation personnel, public service/works staff, etc???</p>
<p>Granted, we could be much more like pre-revolutionary France or Somalia where the little education that exists…if at all were reserved for the aristocracy, clergy, and the wealthiest members of the third estate…but I’m betting not too many wealthy folks would be rushing enthusiastically to live in those places if they knew the history and the potential dangers of being surrounded by so many have-nots who haven’t had the opportunity for a decent education.</p>
<p>Cobrat, I never said wealth and education were mutually exclusive. As I said, aren’t wealthy people the ones giving to their alma mater? This would indicate that these particular folks are educated.</p>
<p>I don’t think we’re that far apart on our thinking, Cobrat, but my thinking is skewed by my Christian faith rather than by political thought. We’re a working class family, dh not being college educated and me being a SAHM.</p>
<p>My son has great potential to earn very good money and he really likes making money and he’s good at it. However, he understands that with money comes great and challenging responsibility. So, I would not encourage him to go into finance or investments unless I saw that he had a very strong and clear purpose for why he was doing what he was doing in relation to God’s kingdom. </p>
<p>Bromfield, I know someone who is headed in that direction; he seems to have been blinded by the lure of prestige. It doesn’t seem any different than the lure of money. </p>
<p>But, we all have our vices.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>However, some may not see the forest from the trees. While most would probably not want to live in a place with a very high Gini coefficient (today’s examples include some countries in Latin America and Africa) where the few rich people have to worry about kidnapping, other crime, unstable politics, being scapegoated, etc., there do seem to be strong pushes from some politicians here for policies that would push the US in that direction, such as eliminating the estate tax on inherited wealth, or eliminating the tax on capital gains, half of which is gained by the top 0.1% (and which is already less taxed than income from labor, which is also subject to Social Security and Medicare tax).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I made my comment because it sounded very similar to the disdainful attitudes towards academics and others in less lucrative professions I’ve overheard at various financial/biglaw firms I’ve worked at as well as the type of “Prosperity Gospel” baloney I keep hearing from a portion of one side of my family, their neighbors/friends, and some fundamentalist organizations which disdains academics and teachers because of their comparatively lesser wealth. </p>
<p>Having more wealth does not and should never command automatic deference/assumptions of superior virtue…something which I’ve seen too much of from senior business executives, lawyers, and “Prosperity Gospel” types.</p>
<p>I don’t see what people have against “pursuit of wealth”. I chose my field taking starting and median career salaries into account. NOT to go around buying anything I want, but to ensure a good and stable future for myself and my family. I want to ideally be able to give my (future) kid(s) everything and be able to afford college education for the next generation. I don’t want to sell my kids short on anything due to lack of finances. I also want to be able to retire comfortably at a reasonable age. I don’t plan on spending rampantly, but saving and investing it. So yes, I am " shamelessly pursuing wealth" not for only myself though. Imo this generation does a lousy job of planning ahead and being prepared for the future. Sure major in whatever you fancy, but have a plan for post college and realize that if you go into a field not in as high demand, you WILL have to make sacrifices later on. If you haven’t thought about retirement saving by your 20s you really should jump on it rather than complain and beg for government handouts later.</p>
<p>For the record, I find my field mildly interesting, and won’t be miserable doing it, but it wasn’t my first choice major by any means.</p>
<p>Sent from my Desire HD using CC App</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with that.</p>
<p>What becomes more bothersome to many is the attempt to change the rules of the game to entrench existing super-wealth and social class across generations through inheritance and favored tax treatment, allowing the inheritors to lobby for more barriers to entry against the next generation of innovators, smart/hard workers, and capitalists whose pursuit of wealth often means competing with the incumbents.</p>
<p>Some people get PhDs because they want to teach. Except for the grading, teaching is a nice job.</p>
<p>“Without a critical mass of well-educated people, how would the wealthy folks enjoy their wealth without the schools/colleges to educate their employees, professors, teachers, doctors, pharmacists, engineers, research scientists, IT/computer programmers, police officers, firefighters, military personnel, mechanics, retail/restaurant staff, artists, musicians, fashion designers, airline pilots, public transportation personnel, public service/works staff, etc???”</p>
<p>I don’t object to HAVING these types enrich my life. But I do object to PAYING for them for the privilege of doing that for me. Can’t we just get all the educated types we need cheap using H1B visas?</p>
<p>OP - Go find a copy of The Millionaire Next Door. Not a Madoff or Blankenship in there. Just a bunch of people providing goods and services to their communities … and acquiring a good deal of wealth while doing that.</p>
<p>This thread just reminded me that i need to print Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs and then discuss it with my 17 and 14.5 year sons this weekend. It explains everything you need to know about, well not everything, but a lot of what you need to know about human behavior. </p>
<p>It turns out EVERYONE from PhD’s to truck drivers to professional athletes likes status.</p>
<p>">>Am I missing something? Am I supposed to feel shame for attempting to accumulate wealth?<<</p>
<p>No, not necessarily. But people are supposed to feel shame if their pursuit of wealth is so over the top that it crosses over into greed."</p>
<p>You are supposed to feel shame if you do not contribute back to the same degree you were afforded opportunity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, that can be a fuzzy line as to when “pursuit of wealth” becomes (undesirable) “greed”.</p>
<p>Others may look at it differently, in that pursuing wealth “ethically” is fine, but “cheating” is not (regardless of the amount of wealth pursued). But then “cheating” (versus “ethical behavior”) may also have definitional problems with fuzzy boundaries. While many people would say that fraud, deception, theft, unfairly changing the ground rules (e.g. by lobbying for legislation to erect barriers of entry against new competitors to your established business), and the like are “cheating”, those acts can also have fuzzy boundaries (as in, is this particular marketing campaign “deceptive”?).</p>
<p>“Am I missing something? Am I supposed to feel shame for attempting to accumulate wealth?”</p>
<p>No, certainly not. Mini suggests that “greed” defines the line between healthy and unhealthy wealth accumulation. Others might use “focus on wealth” as the line. My suggestion would be “injury.” If you start looking at wealth as zero-sum game in which you get wealthy by making other people poor … yeah, I’d call that shameless. And it’s not all that hard to do. But MOST people don’t want to become wealthy that way.</p>
<p>It’s the difference between rent-seeking behavior and creation of wealth. My personal belief is that the wealthy have no obligation to give back - if they want to create and imprint on the world they should feel free. As long as the wealth was gained from non-rent seeking behavior, it doesn’t matter what they do with it. The money will be cycled back into the rest of the economy, inevitably the markets and human psychology (how many dynastic families can you point out? Not many, and fewer every year) ensure it is so.</p>
<p>Gosh. My only post was #35. And I didn’t say anything about “greed” at all.</p>
<p>I have a friend who owns a flower shop in the Hamptons, and she’s plenty happy that there are wealthy people who spend hundreds of thousands on flowers for their homes each year.</p>