frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Is It Your Fault If You Are Poor

Debate Information

I say no the people who are rich often have rich parents
Modified
  1. Live Poll

    Is It Your Fault If You Are Poor

    12 votes
    1. yes
      50.00%
    2. no
      50.00%



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • funpersonfunperson 66 Pts   -  
    Sometimes: if you are abled, and you're not applying yourself, of course it's your fault. There are many reasons somebody can be pushed, even born, into poverty. If rich people often have rich parents, how did the parents get rich?
    Zombieguy1987searApplesauce
  • Zombieguy1987Zombieguy1987 471 Pts   -  
    It depends.

    Sometimes you're born into a poor family.

    But there are people who were born into a middle class or rich family who didn't get a job, or get into a good college to get something better than working at McDonalds. There's too many variables to say how they became poor
    AlofRI
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    Rich people almost always squander their inheritance. 
    Indeed, 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy.



    OTOH most wealthy people earned their money.
    Recently, PNC Wealth Management conducted a survey of people with more than $500,000 free to invest as they like, a fair definition of “wealthy,” and possibly “millionaire” once you begin including home equity and other assets. Only 6% of those surveyed earned their money from inheritance alone. 69% earned their wealth mostly by trading time and effort for money, or by “working.”
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybuilder/2012/04/20/most-wealthy-individuals-earned-not-inherited-their-wealth-2/#5a5767c31bac
    Zombieguy1987
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -  
    There have been people who managed to make billions when starting as extremely poor, and there have been people who inherited billions only to waste them all on entertainment and go broke. It certainly is not as simple as "If you are poor, then you must have been doing everything wrong", but at the same time it is a matter of fact that anyone can become rich if they do things right.

    The problem is, many people who want to become rich do not understand what it takes to become rich. They want to become rich while not changing their lazy lifestyle. They will work their job, then come home and complain about the lack of money, while watching Netflix or playing games. The thing is though, to become rich, you have to seriously alter your approach; you have to study the market, to gain new skills, to become an expert at something, to try different business ideas. Simply going to work every day and hoping that one day a eureka moment or a chance encounter will happen is not going to cut it. Earning big money is a hard work, and any rich person will tell you so.

    So they will blame other rich people, such as their boss, for "not paying them enough" or "not doing their fair share". Tough fact about life, however, is that nobody owes them anything; nobody owes them"enough payment", and it is up to you to earn it. And once the responsibility for one's failures is shifted to someone else, it is all over: they are no longer able to do anything about their situation, because their situation no longer depends on them.

    I should not be the talker, since at the moment I myself am a bit broke. But the difference from most people is:
    1. I realize that I am broke because of my life choices.
    2. I constantly try new ideas to generate new income.
    Will I become rich eventually? I think I got the right approach for it. Of course, everything in life is a product of chance, so nobody can tell for sure. But even if I never become right, I will know that I did what I could about it - rather than blaming someone else while procrastinating.

    I have a business idea for which I am saving money every week, trying every source of extra income I can find, while studying the market and the economical laws. Once I accumulate a certain amount, I will invest it into the business that promises significant investment return. Maybe it will not work; then I will try a different business idea. And again and again, until something works.

    You have to be stubborn in life to achieve serious success. You have to be the guy/girl who keeps banging in the wall until the wall gives in. If you are discouraged from even trying after experiencing one or two financial meltdowns, then you have not got what it takes to be successful, and in that case, indeed, you have no one but yourself to blame for you being poor.
    Zombieguy1987kevin_burkeutkarshsinghZeusAres42
  • YeshuaBoughtYeshuaBought 669 Pts   -  
    It depends on the person and their situation.
    Zombieguy1987AlofRIkevin_burke
  • cheesycheesecheesycheese 79 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    Rich people almost always squander their inheritance. 
    Indeed, 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy.



    OTOH most wealthy people earned their money.
    Recently, PNC Wealth Management conducted a survey of people with more than $500,000 free to invest as they like, a fair definition of “wealthy,” and possibly “millionaire” once you begin including home equity and other assets. Only 6% of those surveyed earned their money from inheritance alone. 69% earned their wealth mostly by trading time and effort for money, or by “working.”
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybuilder/2012/04/20/most-wealthy-individuals-earned-not-inherited-their-wealth-2/#5a5767c31bac
    the problem is that rich people often overestimate their contribution to their wealth
    Zombieguy1987searPlaffelvohfenCYDdharta
  • arh_1002arh_1002 7 Pts   -  
    This is a tricky question because in America there is equal opportunity, but this doesn't always mean equal outcome. Because there are many cases in this country where people born into poor families become rich while there are many cases of people born into rich families who become poor. Everyone in this country has the right to "make it big" that is one of the principles that America was founded on. Your choices throughout your life usually affect the outcome. I say usually because there are cases where a rich individual who made good life choices will become poor because of something that they couldn't control. 
  • searsear 109 Pts   -  
    Woody Allen observed that his success is in large part due to our culture. That his talents as an actor & director would have been of little if any value if he'd been to a native American tribe 600 years ago.

    Reductio ad absurdum: what contribution to society can we expect from a quadriplegic?
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -   edited February 2019
    @cheesycheese

    It's not really a simple yes/no question... But I'll say this : "it's always easier to begin with something than with nothing." 

    The "fault" if it exists, can be found in the vast inequality of starting positions. Something could probably be done about that with enough will. But after that? We're on our own, in an existential sense... Life is not fair, the universe is actively trying to kill us all at any moment and we know it will unavoidably succeed, our existence but an insignificantly brief and futile absurdity...

    Yeah, I'm a party guy...  B)
    AlofRI
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    @sear
    Reductio ad absurdum: what contribution to society can we expect from a quadriplegic?
    Well, I don't know but considering this one gave us a universe with no god.. 
    Who knows what they're capable of!

    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • searsear 109 Pts   -  
    Hawking is an excellent example of a financially independent (self-sustaining) profoundly handicapped person.

     BUT !!

     a) His towering intellect is not only rare among our entire population. It's exceptionally rare among the profoundly physically handicapped.

     b) It's unwise to judge such thing based on the 0.01%
     It's the 99.99% that deserves our primary attention.
    And the topic is:

    Is It Your Fault If You Are Poor

    Was it Hawking's "fault" he's in a wheelchair?
    I wouldn't call it a moral failing. But I gather it is a genetic defect, and thus in that sense is indeed Hawking's "fault". But by that standard, so is his genius.

  • ModifiedModified 2 Pts   -  

    Depends

    Someone may be poor due to family background, which is understandable.

    However, if they have the opportunity to climb out of poverty but choose to ignore it, then they have only themselves to blame.

    On the whole, it is better to assume that the majority of those in poverty were born in such conditions than to blame them for not taking apt action.

  • searsear 109 Pts   -  
    Yes M.
    And we often do assume individuals are as wealthy as they can manage to be. Some may be.

     BUT !!

    It is not universal.
    And the obvious example of that are clergymen that take an oath of poverty.

    In my region of New York there are a few Mennonites. While some of them operate automobiles, some of them use horse & buggy. It's a mistake to view the world as simple.
    It never was.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -  

    It's not really a simple yes/no question... But I'll say this : "it's always easier to begin with something than with nothing." 
    I beg to disagree. I started out with barely anything more than clothes on my back - and that hardened me, taught me a lot of things people who start with something never really learn. I learned how to claw my way out of the most desperate situations.

    On the other hand, a lot of people who have inherited a lot of wealth, or received a lot of support from their parents early on, quickly wasted it all on luxury items, and useless degrees. They will be in deep debt to the end of their lives, and having been deprived of the experience of having nearly nothing was definitely one of the main contributors there.

    As for Hawking, it is not his fault that he ended up fixed to his wheelchair - but it would be his fault if, instead of pushing forward and going for an extraordinary career in physics, he just gave up and lived off welfare while doing nothing with his life. You cannot control your circumstances always, but you always can control what you do about them.
    Zombieguy1987
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -   edited February 2019
    @MayCaesar

    You misunderstood my statement. "it's always easier to begin with something than with nothing." 

    It says absolutely nothing about how or why  you are where you are now, or where you'll end.
    It says absolutely nothing about results, faults, laziness, success, failure, luck, bad luck or anything else...

    It's plain and simple, no second level, no hidden meaning... It is to be taken at face value. 

    Still disagree??
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -  
    @Plaffelvohfen

    My objection still holds. It really depends on the person, but to many starting with something may be quite a bit more complicated, than starting with nothing. When you have nothing, then you do not have to be afraid of losing anything. But when you have something, then you become used to having something, you are afraid to invest what you have into your future - and your life ends up being much harder. At least this is the case for many people. Not for everyone, but for many, if not the most.

    I know that my life became much harder once I accumulated some belongings. Before that, everything was straightforward: I did not have much, I did not have to take care and maintain all of my things, I did not have to worry about having to move, for example (I just packed my bags and moved instantly). I often miss those simpler times, when my mind was free of any worry and responsibility.

    Now, if you take some robot that is master at generating wealth, then, indeed, that robot will have a much easier time starting with something, than with nothing. But humans are not robots, and it is a point very essential to this discussion. What is "easier" for an objectively more efficient individual, is not necessarily "easier" for a regular human being.
    Zombieguy1987
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    You're still not taking it at face value... "it's always easier to begin with something than with nothing."

    Are you saying that starting a project (whatever it may be) with absolutely nothing, is as easy as starting one with at least something, anything?? In the absolute? 

    Are you saying advantages mean nothing?? Why then, are people always looking for some in every aspect of their lives? Looking for and using advantages to further ones goals, isn't it what the game is all about? What does competition or concurrence mean if advantages are worthless?? When we look for opportunities, isn't it to gain an advantage (whatever it may be) to better our conditions?

    I'm still saying nothing about anything else then this, taken at face value, in the absolute : "it's always easier to begin with something, than with nothing."
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -   edited February 2019
    @Plaffelvohfen

    Regarding a project, it depends. I have had projects that were based on someone's code, and that code was so poorly written, I would give up after a couple of days tinkering with it and write my own code. So in this case having no code at all would have saved me a lot of time and energy.

    Advantages mean a lot, but there are many types of advantages, and they are only beneficial if you can make a good use of them. Due to the peculiarities of human psychology, often having an advantage can in practice set us back. 
    That said, an advantage that you have earned through hard work usually is very beneficial. Advantages that are a product of chance, on the other hand, can have pretty dramatic negative effects. Think about giving a monkey a grenade as an example of that.

    I think what you really are trying to say is that if you have something, then you have more opportunities than if you have nothing. And this is something I definitely would agree with. But this is very different from the matter of what is easier. There is a strong correlation between the two, but it is far from being absolute.
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar
    I think what you really are trying to say is that if you have something, then you have more opportunities than if you have nothing.

    Well, it's true that it's hard to picture how having cholera could make anything easier, ok, I see where we might tweak it a little more...

    How about "It's more advantageous to begin with opportunities than without." ?

    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -  
    @Plaffelvohfen

    Questionable. Having more opportunities often makes people lost in their choices. For example, procrastination is based exactly on that, having too many choices and not knowing where to start - and it is one of the most damaging habits one may have in their lives.

    The world is quite a bit more complicated than "the more you have, the better off you are". It is not about what you have, what you start with and so on. It is about what you do with what you have.

    If two people do exactly the same, then the one who started out with more will end up with more. But in the real world, this is not how things work, and what you start with, what you have and so on shapes what you do - often making you act against your own interest.
    PlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987
  • searsear 109 Pts   -  
    Clarification:
    "As for Hawking, it is not his fault that he ended up fixed to his wheelchair" MC

    It's clearly not a MORAL failing. But Hawking was wheelchair bound by genetic defect. Whose genes do you blame, if not Hawking's?
    If we blame his own, how can we deny it's his fault?

    Plaffelvohfen
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    @sear

    You're saying we are responsible for our own genetic??? It would mean one could take credit for having blue eyes? For being Caucasian, African or Asian, tall or short?? Really???
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -   edited February 2019
    @sear

    Unless we learn something about the world we never knew before, such as, say, that we all live in a self-induced simulation, prior to running which we select what genes we are going to have - you will have a really hard time making an argument for holding Hawking responsible for his genes.

    But many in Hawking's stead would give up on life, resign themselves to the idea that their condition will never allow them to achieve anything of substance, and glue themselves to the screen of their monitor at home. Most do that, and there is very little of life left in them.
    Hawking did not. His university mates have said that, once he heard of his doctor's prediction that he has no more than a couple of years left to live, he said, "Oh well, let us see how much I can accomplish in these two years then". As a result, he defied all the predictions and went on to live for many more decades, and what a life he had!

    Hawking is pretty much a perfect illustration of the fact that it does not matter what your initial conditions are, what you have, who your daddy was, and so on. The only thing that matters is what you are willing to do to achieve your dreams. If your will is strong enough, then even starting with nothing you can conquer stars. And if it is lousy, then, no matter what you start with, you will end up a walking shell of a person.

    In fact, it may be even more than that. Would Hawking have achieved everything he did in science were it not for his condition? If he had not been pushed hard towards accomplishing a lot quickly early in life, would he become one of the best physicists in human history, or would he be a generic researcher with some decent ideas and that is it? I do not know, but I do know that life events shape one's character, and it is very much possible that it is not despite his condition that Hawking accomplished what he did, but because of it.
    Zombieguy1987Plaffelvohfen
  • searsear 109 Pts   -  
    Pv
    Completely.

    MC
    Thanks.
    Zombieguy1987Plaffelvohfen
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5968 Pts   -  
    Mark Zuckerberg vowed to donate 99% of his wealth to charity organisations. One could ask, "Why are you not giving that money to your children instead?" Yet to someone who is familiar with the concept of financial responsibility, this question would sound insane.

    If you know personally any family of self-made millionaires - observe what they teach their children. Observe how they condition them, what they expect of them. It is VERY rare, if not unprecedented, for a self-made millionaire to drop gold nuggets on their children. What happens instead is they teach their children how to earn money. 

    I know a family of millionaires from Australia. Their daughter wanted to get a car when she hit the adult age. She came to her father to talk about it. Her father said, "Great! You want to buy a car? Well, go ahead and buy it! But I cannot give you a loan, because I am not a bank." So she went and worked two jobs over the winter holidays (in Australia, winter holidays are long, while summer ones are short) - and earned enough money for the car.

    My family is not millionaires, but they still understand this concept. When I bought a car, my mother gave me a loan which I have to return with interest. Nobody gave me free stuff; they made me work for it.

    ---

    This is the difference between the mindsets of poor and rich people. The former have nothing, do nothing and expect others to take care of them. The latter instead rely on themselves and make their dreams come true by hard work.

    It is one thing to be momentarily rich over sudden luck. It is completely different thing to be consistently rich and to have your wealth grow exponentially over time. You have to work for the latter, there is no way around it. And while the richest people out there can automatise the majority of this process and delegate the money production to their hirees, they cannot just sit back with a cigar in their mouth and enjoy life. They will be beaten to the ground by the competitors and lose everything.

    The only exception I can think of is something like this: a person who randomly received a lot of wealth, yet does not need much from life. Like someone who won $10,000,000 in a lottery and still lives in a shabby apartment, spending a few thousands a month and wanting for nothing more.

    But is such a person really rich? Money, after all, does not mean much if you do not do anything with it. If you have banked $10,000,000 and just let it sit in your basement, then it is as good as colored paper.

    ---

    Look at the life of any consistently poor person. Do you see any patterns? Look at a random cashier in a grocery store, 60 years old. What has she done with her life? What does she do when she gets home in the evening? Does she open a book on business, banking, physics, programming or whatever else? Or does she just turn her TV on, lays down on the couch and complains to her husband about how hard and hopeless life is?

    Well, here is your answer. You will always be poor if you do nothing and hope that wealth suddenly drops on you. BUT if you are willing to work hard, if you are okay with sacrificing temporary comfort in exchange of long-term happiness, if you can throw away your "want"s and focus on getting your "need"s - then it would take an enormous amount of bad luck and poor choices for you to remain poor forever. Not saying it is absolutely impossible, but it is not something you should count on.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch