Does luck determine success? (an interesting read) (17)
Condense that for me babe, ya know Im blonde.
------ This thread is Archived ------
bubbles69: Condense that for me babe, ya know Im blonde.
Are the rich lucky or are the poor unlucky?
Hey, that's as short as I could get it
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: Are the rich lucky or are the poor unlucky? Hey, that's as short as I could get it
Short enough..............
Answer.................... Yes, maybe, or maybe not.
------ This thread is Archived ------
bubbles69: Short enough..............
Answer.................... Yes, maybe, or maybe not.
Answer.................... Yes, maybe, or maybe not.
I might agree.....I'm not sure
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: I might agree.....I'm not sure
I'll agree with whatever you think best.
------ This thread is Archived ------
bubbles69: I'll agree with whatever you think best.
Well, I can't decide.... Maybe I should take a poll?
My god this is stressful!
------ This thread is Archived ------
I think it's a combination, of both opportunity and hard work.
What could be better, than to have them both?
I think, i need to work a little bit harder, if i want to be rich by 30.
What could be better, than to have them both?
I think, i need to work a little bit harder, if i want to be rich by 30.
------ This thread is Archived ------
lusciousmile: I think it's a combination, of both opportunity and hard work.What could be better, than to have them both? I think, i need to work a little bit harder, if i want to be rich by 30.
Good answer...
I've heard different descriptions: Luck equals effort plus opportunity. But then making one self available to opportunities could be a key too.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Slightly off the OP.. but just a comment as I had this discussion with a collegue this evening.. who leans more to the right and is politically connected.. I lean more to the left..
Capitalism has its merits which can't be denied.. when wealth is generated by private industry and development and construction are at their peak, the benefit of that wealth DOES trickle down, it does tend to create jobs and and increase in state revenue which is at the disposal of the state to benefit public services, which in turn facilitate growth and so on.. HOWEVER.... this on its own falls short of what society needs.. for e.g. there will always be a portion of society who for whatever reason are non-productive, say e.g. mentally ill, disabled, uneducated and unskilled etc.. to ignore the needs of this portion of society brings spells discontent even disaster in the long term... those that fall outside the scope of potential enrichment tend to become entrapped in their circumstances if society does not intervene.. a capitalist government is run by money alone, and in this climate are generally resistent to any increase in tax.. which is fine for the majority but unfortunately if certain social issues are not addressed they will create MORE expenditure in the long term.. for most disadvantaged kids for example.. their future prospects do not extend beyond social welfare and prison.. these COST money folks.... lots of it.. its a bit like saving a dime.. spending a dollar.. it doesn't make sense.. and quite apart from the money issue.... wouldn't we all like to feel a little safer?? this is not going to happen as long as society puts money before people
As for luck.. yes there can be an element of it sure.. but opportunity is sure as hell not going to come knocking on ur door and drag u out of bed
Capitalism has its merits which can't be denied.. when wealth is generated by private industry and development and construction are at their peak, the benefit of that wealth DOES trickle down, it does tend to create jobs and and increase in state revenue which is at the disposal of the state to benefit public services, which in turn facilitate growth and so on.. HOWEVER.... this on its own falls short of what society needs.. for e.g. there will always be a portion of society who for whatever reason are non-productive, say e.g. mentally ill, disabled, uneducated and unskilled etc.. to ignore the needs of this portion of society brings spells discontent even disaster in the long term... those that fall outside the scope of potential enrichment tend to become entrapped in their circumstances if society does not intervene.. a capitalist government is run by money alone, and in this climate are generally resistent to any increase in tax.. which is fine for the majority but unfortunately if certain social issues are not addressed they will create MORE expenditure in the long term.. for most disadvantaged kids for example.. their future prospects do not extend beyond social welfare and prison.. these COST money folks.... lots of it.. its a bit like saving a dime.. spending a dollar.. it doesn't make sense.. and quite apart from the money issue.... wouldn't we all like to feel a little safer?? this is not going to happen as long as society puts money before people
As for luck.. yes there can be an element of it sure.. but opportunity is sure as hell not going to come knocking on ur door and drag u out of bed
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: Good answer...
I've heard different descriptions: Luck equals effort plus opportunity. But then making one self available to opportunities could be a key too.
I've heard different descriptions: Luck equals effort plus opportunity. But then making one self available to opportunities could be a key too.
To avail oneself to these opportunities, could require certain resources not available.
Yes, luck does equal effort and opportunity, and neither can be fully sufficient without the other. But, hey....Ben affleck has made it, with only one of them.
Are we really comparing small European nations, to the US.? Population alone, can inhibit success.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Does luck determine success?
I suppose there is a little of that needed. As far as welfare states go, I have no problem with a hand up, but the hand out stuff has got to go.
I suppose there is a little of that needed. As far as welfare states go, I have no problem with a hand up, but the hand out stuff has got to go.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I think that you have got to be very careful with drawing conclusions from figures like this, for example Europe particularly the Northern countries pay out a lot more than the U.S. to the individual on welfare, so without crunching these numbers this conclusion may be inaccurate.
He points out Denmark but fails to point out Brazil as interesting. I would feel there is a bias here. It would take more careful analysis to prove such a bias but makes interesting reading nonetheless.
Who was it said "Lies, Lies and dammed statistics"
Although an extremely useful tool when dealing with anything, I always feel that we have to be very careful that there is not a spin (Intentional or Unintentional) put on them.
He points out Denmark but fails to point out Brazil as interesting. I would feel there is a bias here. It would take more careful analysis to prove such a bias but makes interesting reading nonetheless.
Who was it said "Lies, Lies and dammed statistics"
Although an extremely useful tool when dealing with anything, I always feel that we have to be very careful that there is not a spin (Intentional or Unintentional) put on them.
------ This thread is Archived ------
tampa1: Does luck determine success?
I suppose there is a little of that needed. As far as welfare states go, I have no problem with a hand up, but the hand out stuff has got to go.
I suppose there is a little of that needed. As far as welfare states go, I have no problem with a hand up, but the hand out stuff has got to go.
That graph was really interesting....just to see how countries view success. If you get the chance, go back and take a look.
------ This thread is Archived ------
patrickthomas: I think that you have got to be very careful with drawing conclusions from figures like this, for example Europe particularly the Northern countries pay out a lot more than the U.S. to the individual on welfare, so without crunching these numbers this conclusion may be inaccurate.
He points out Denmark but fails to point out Brazil as interesting. I would feel there is a bias here. It would take more careful analysis to prove such a bias but makes interesting reading nonetheless.
Who was it said "Lies, Lies and dammed statistics"
Although an extremely useful tool when dealing with anything, I always feel that we have to be very careful that there is not a spin (Intentional or Unintentional) put on them.
He points out Denmark but fails to point out Brazil as interesting. I would feel there is a bias here. It would take more careful analysis to prove such a bias but makes interesting reading nonetheless.
Who was it said "Lies, Lies and dammed statistics"
Although an extremely useful tool when dealing with anything, I always feel that we have to be very careful that there is not a spin (Intentional or Unintentional) put on them.
I would agree with you, but then I build in the "spin factor" anytime I read articles from certain organizations. Thanks though. Denmark is interesting. It also helps to explain some things on CS.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Now fess up, did anyone look a the graph. I'm thinking not?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: For economists, the economic success of capitalism creates something of a puzzle. When combined with a relatively small government, capitalism is a well-established ticket to improved standards of living. Yet many countries resist. Why?
A flurry of research has shed new light on the question. The fascinating implication of the latest findings is that preexisting social attitudes toward luck may be the crucial determinant of the political path of a society.
The nearby chart is taken from a widely discussed paper by economists Alberto Alesina, Edward Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote. The investigators set out to discover why the U.S. does not have a large welfare state (at least compared with Europe) and uncovered a striking difference between Americans and Europeans. If you ask Americans whether the poor are lazy, 60 percent say yes. If you ask Europeans, only 26 percent say yes.
Consider now a striking pattern that is visible in the chart. The authors found that large welfare states emerge in countries where citizens generally believe that luck determines income. If bad behavior (or laziness) is viewed as a source of poverty, then the welfare state is small. America has avoided the fate of Europe because its citizens disproportionately believe that luck is not that important a determinant of one's circumstances, but hard work is.
This might come as a relief to conservative Americans, who are ever fearful that the Left will succeed in imposing its version of a European welfare state. If Americans are predisposed to believe that high incomes are generally merited, then they will be resistant to change, even if sold by a charismatic salesman like Barack Obama.
A related study by Rafael Di Tella and Robert MacCulloch has found that rampant corruption tends to precede big national swings to the left. This link is itself related to the picture that emerges from the chart. When capitalists succeed because of bribes and corruption, citizens become less convinced that the income distribution reflects merit, and more willing to redistribute.
Recent corporate scandals, and the shameful behavior of the Republican Congress, set the stage for a left-wing backlash that was fully consistent with the historical precedent. It takes more than luck to maintain a free society. If we are to avoid acquiring a welfare state the size of Europe's, we must be vigilant defenders of the rule of law and merciless punishers of the corrupt among us.
Courtesy of AEI
Go to: to see how various countries graph out. Of course where Denmark lands is interesting!
(This will fall into the CS basement fast.)
A flurry of research has shed new light on the question. The fascinating implication of the latest findings is that preexisting social attitudes toward luck may be the crucial determinant of the political path of a society.
The nearby chart is taken from a widely discussed paper by economists Alberto Alesina, Edward Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote. The investigators set out to discover why the U.S. does not have a large welfare state (at least compared with Europe) and uncovered a striking difference between Americans and Europeans. If you ask Americans whether the poor are lazy, 60 percent say yes. If you ask Europeans, only 26 percent say yes.
Consider now a striking pattern that is visible in the chart. The authors found that large welfare states emerge in countries where citizens generally believe that luck determines income. If bad behavior (or laziness) is viewed as a source of poverty, then the welfare state is small. America has avoided the fate of Europe because its citizens disproportionately believe that luck is not that important a determinant of one's circumstances, but hard work is.
This might come as a relief to conservative Americans, who are ever fearful that the Left will succeed in imposing its version of a European welfare state. If Americans are predisposed to believe that high incomes are generally merited, then they will be resistant to change, even if sold by a charismatic salesman like Barack Obama.
A related study by Rafael Di Tella and Robert MacCulloch has found that rampant corruption tends to precede big national swings to the left. This link is itself related to the picture that emerges from the chart. When capitalists succeed because of bribes and corruption, citizens become less convinced that the income distribution reflects merit, and more willing to redistribute.
Recent corporate scandals, and the shameful behavior of the Republican Congress, set the stage for a left-wing backlash that was fully consistent with the historical precedent. It takes more than luck to maintain a free society. If we are to avoid acquiring a welfare state the size of Europe's, we must be vigilant defenders of the rule of law and merciless punishers of the corrupt among us.
Courtesy of AEI
Go to: to see how various countries graph out. Of course where Denmark lands is interesting!
(This will fall into the CS basement fast.)
something to tink abuot
as well of whta the goverment role is in a capitalist country
it fall fast, people on dating sites will avoid serious topics
(i did not say every one in a dating site)
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
s*xual skills
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
Democrats destroyed America
Ladies
Kultur-multur
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
beauty of the heart
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
663 Views
16 Comments
Created: Apr 2008
Last Viewed: Apr 10
Last Commented: Jul 2008
0 Likes
Related Forums
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- s*xual skills
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- Gal / sdarlagg passed away on April 10, 2024
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
- Democrats destroyed America
- Ladies
- Kultur-multur
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- beauty of the heart
A flurry of research has shed new light on the question. The fascinating implication of the latest findings is that preexisting social attitudes toward luck may be the crucial determinant of the political path of a society.
The nearby chart is taken from a widely discussed paper by economists Alberto Alesina, Edward Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote. The investigators set out to discover why the U.S. does not have a large welfare state (at least compared with Europe) and uncovered a striking difference between Americans and Europeans. If you ask Americans whether the poor are lazy, 60 percent say yes. If you ask Europeans, only 26 percent say yes.
Consider now a striking pattern that is visible in the chart. The authors found that large welfare states emerge in countries where citizens generally believe that luck determines income. If bad behavior (or laziness) is viewed as a source of poverty, then the welfare state is small. America has avoided the fate of Europe because its citizens disproportionately believe that luck is not that important a determinant of one's circumstances, but hard work is.
This might come as a relief to conservative Americans, who are ever fearful that the Left will succeed in imposing its version of a European welfare state. If Americans are predisposed to believe that high incomes are generally merited, then they will be resistant to change, even if sold by a charismatic salesman like Barack Obama.
A related study by Rafael Di Tella and Robert MacCulloch has found that rampant corruption tends to precede big national swings to the left. This link is itself related to the picture that emerges from the chart. When capitalists succeed because of bribes and corruption, citizens become less convinced that the income distribution reflects merit, and more willing to redistribute.
Recent corporate scandals, and the shameful behavior of the Republican Congress, set the stage for a left-wing backlash that was fully consistent with the historical precedent. It takes more than luck to maintain a free society. If we are to avoid acquiring a welfare state the size of Europe's, we must be vigilant defenders of the rule of law and merciless punishers of the corrupt among us.
Courtesy of AEI
Go to:
(This will fall into the CS basement fast.)