Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Showerthoughts_Mod t1_je0n0b3 wrote

This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.

Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"

(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)

Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.

1

ktElwood t1_je0pdet wrote

Surprised?

In germany 80% of the best paid managers in industry were born to the 3% top wealth households at the time.

Yep they also got qualifications. But their parents also had the right names in their book by the telephone..

176

unscannablezoot t1_je11do4 wrote

Yes because the very richest inherited their wealth, or had parents with incredible wealth who funded their success.

5

CharsKimble t1_je1htfn wrote

TIL Gates got his wealth from the $20k loan from his parents and not, you know, creating Microsoft suite.

7

PM_Me_OCs t1_je1jb0c wrote

Sometimes I wonder when this cash grabbing rat race will cave in on itself. Probably not today, tomorrow, next year, five years or maybe even ten years. But one day, it'll happen.

12

Enorats t1_je1sw7r wrote

It is indeed essential that you are capable of performing the job I need done if you want me to hire you to do the job I need done.

If you want to go start your own business, then by all means. You don't need to prove to yourself that you're capable. You probably will have to prove to your customers and business partners that you are though.

3

Metelex t1_je1un7g wrote

Human connections are essential. Qualifications are a baseline.

194

beobabski t1_je1yojs wrote

Qualifications are just IQ tests in disguise.

You need enough intelligence to know how to try, but not so much that you get analysis paralysis.

−2

myourmomshot t1_je21b6k wrote

They probably did have to go through the motions of being qualified for what they do just everything was right there for em, their parents knew the right people and never had to shop around and make mistakes but hey, survival of the fittest or smartest or….. grimiest? I’m broke because I value doing nothing more than money, it’s a life choice just like suckn dick, if anything you should be mad at your parents for bringing you into a race that they couldn’t prepare you for🤷🏻‍♂️ I’m losing too, buck up champ

−1

random1888wagred t1_je24hap wrote

None of the richest maybe, but some of the most successful in their fields - medicine, science, engineering etc. they all had degrees, their degrees were essential, and they got their success as a result. Success is more than money

82

Choice_Improvement34 t1_je27x7f wrote

None? Did Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates not use a lot of their qualifications to build their businesses

4

rofllobsters t1_je2dhb7 wrote

All the internet did was show how much shittier the world was than people new

−1

ChronoFish t1_je2epqo wrote

>, but none of the very richest people got their wealth from theirs

There are lots of heirs no doubt... But there are lots of people who elevated themselves.

Opera Winfrey, abused and molested runaway... Now worth $2.5B

Leonardo Del Vecchio, sunglasses manufacturer....started by working in an auto parts factory.... Now worth $25B

Kenny Troutt paid his way through college by selling insurance. Then he started Excel Communication which he later sold for $3B.

Sheldon Adelson, son of a cab driver, made his fortune with vending machines. Eventually becoming the CEO of Vegas Sands. He left his family $29B.

John Paul DeJoria sold his first products (Paul Mitchell hair products) door to door ... Started with a $700 loan... Now worth $2.9B

J.K. Rowling was single mother struggling to pay rent before her Harry Potter novels put her on track for $60 Million net worth.

There are lots of examples of people who had nothing at the start turn their ideas and desires into a large net worth.

26

Roguemutantbrain t1_je2esw8 wrote

Replying to Enorats (#2,426,634)

Kind of a boomer take. Yeah of course if you can’t do the job, then you shouldn’t be hired for it. But the current job environment often wants 3-5 year’s experience for entry level positions that are mostly learned in the fly anyways.

4

mortimus9 t1_je2k0vr wrote

Who would determine the “qualifications” needed to be a millionaire?

1

SuspiciousElephant28 t1_je2m0n9 wrote

Not true. A**holes get cut off. Even the super rich know unchecked wealth can ruin people. Most wealthy people go to school. Unfortunately you don’t need qualifications for power. Power is the real problem. Look at all the politicians with power. Zero qualifications.

1

SuspiciousElephant28 t1_je2ml7j wrote

The wealthy rarely leave their money to family and if they do it’s a small percentage. The problem is power you don’t need any real qualifications for that.

0

Downtown_Tomato5600 t1_je2ocs0 wrote

Rich doesnt always equate success. Depends what your goal and priorities are. If your goal in life is to just to be rich, then yeah, most likely dont need a degree. If your goal in life is to contribute to science, medicine, technology, education, engineering, construction etc qualifications are essential.

1

erlo68 t1_je2pony wrote

Well, you don't get rich with honest work. Quite contradictory even, you get more money by working less physically.

6

quiplaam t1_je2t06w wrote

Replying to Choice_Improvement34 (#2,429,178)

No. They both started their businesses without any real qualifications in college, and then grew that business without finishing their qualification. I think op is wrong, qualifications and the skills you learn gaining them is valuable. For every Elon musk or prince Harry, there are 10,000 Susan from accountings who, because of their degree, have a much better life than then would have otherwise.

7

brickpaul65 t1_je2t7z1 wrote

Replying to ChronoFish (#2,430,350)

Shhh....maybe they were reassuring themselves they have really have massive talent and it is random chance that they have not achieved what they define success as...nevermind, this was silly take on how success is achieved and you gave multiple examples. Well done.

5

Alspelpha t1_je2yw3r wrote

Replying to CillGuy (#2,433,991)

Not working with enough money. Endeavors with copious resources are more likely to succeed, thus multiplying the money. Also, it means you have more attempts/time to get it right.

11

dewayneestes t1_je2zes7 wrote

Replying to Alspelpha (#2,434,261)

The best Star Wars movie was the one with the tightest budget. Tight budgets make people more creative and efficient at problem solving because they make trade offs as opposed to just throwing everything in regardless of cost.

3

Sharpshooter188 t1_je2zvly wrote

Not surprised. At least here in the US. Coworker/manager in a different dept. Has a BA and is about to get a masters. Along with his gf. They still cant afford rent eith what they are making. he a maintenance crew manager. Shes uuuh..I think shes earning credits via working a nursing home or something.

They might be able to buy a home later in life. But hes 5 yrs behind me (Im 39) and his gf is 24. So shell be able to enjoy a basic home. Specialty in a field doesnt always = great pay.

0

hacksoncode t1_je37ujv wrote

Replying to unscannablezoot (#2,421,905)

Not so much, really... it only takes a couple of generations to divide that up so that the "very richest" are the ones that, themselves, started companies that became worth billions.

Only 3 of the top 100 billionaires inherited their wealth (Walton family). There are 22 "families" on that list... the individual members largely wouldn't hit the list (and those "families" are ones where they together built the family business, not through inheritence).

It is true, though, that many top billionaires were supported by their rich-but-not-top-echelon families in starting their businesses.

6

Friendly-Pressure-62 t1_je384me wrote

I think of success as a formula: FxC+ExR. F is family and determines your starting point. Wealthy families can invest in you. C is for competence. It has to be a marketable skill set. A useful education multiplies your starting point. E is for effort. Effort is only additive, not a multiplier. You can only work so hard. R is for risk. Do you own the thing generating income and loss? Qualifications are only a portion of the formula.

−1

hacksoncode t1_je38cfm wrote

Qualifications are essential if you aren't one of the very richest people nor extremely lucky.

19

NottACalebFan t1_je38t4o wrote

That's incredibly reductionist and misleading.

Most people become rich by being good at a job or skill that makes them essential, either easy to be hired or hard to get fired. After that, the majority of people gain weath over time until they erase all non essential debt (house or insurance payments), and then have enough on hand savings in order to diversify their income sources.

In other words, although the majority of stockholders don't actually possess the skills to run a company they have invested in, they didn't just get born with a $1,000,000 in Microsoft. They invested after they became financially self supporting.

A very few (less than 10%) actually have generational wealth. The majority of others (I believe it's around 70-80% though i can't remember the actial number) get rich by working steadily and paying off their debts.

2

OutrageousStrength91 t1_je3akne wrote

What are you talking about? Elon Musk was totally qualified to inherit a diamond mine.

−2

Lilpu55yberekt69 t1_je3fznh wrote

Qualifications are massively helpful when you’re starting a company and looking for your first investors/clients. They aren’t entirely necessary though if your product is good enough.

If you want someone else to hire you, having an old, respected academic or industrial organization vouch for you is helpful.

3

beforeusernames t1_je3ivnn wrote

The fuck does op even mean by “qualifications”? Like, “credentials”?

1

69duck420 t1_je3jgae wrote

Replying to CillGuy (#2,434,326)

No you don't understand, at some point of wealth, no matter how incompetent your money will make you more money. Look at Elon musk, he literally failed upwards into being the world's richest man.

−4

CillGuy t1_je3n6eh wrote

Replying to 69duck420 (#2,438,364)

Not only is that still wrong, but your point about Musk is wrong as well. I highly recommend looking at this from a logical standpoint instead of the way you are now; you seem very attached and blinded by your hatred of wealth and/or a few selected wealthy people.

4

bewsh123 t1_je3z9a5 wrote

Yeah, you could win lottery… which is essentially what self made billionaires did. Right product at the right time and had a bit of luck taking off.

Qualifications are the safe bet to a comfortable life, but likely won’t make you mega rich on their own.

3

OfficialJamesMay t1_je3zpe6 wrote

If your family didn't own an emerald mine in apartheid South Africa, congratulations, you're in the working class, you need qualifications.

1

ideasplace t1_je42395 wrote

Qualifications are necessary for them to select and grade the people needed to do their work for them.

1

Spawn7586 t1_je469sz wrote

Replying to dewayneestes (#2,434,371)

Still, most of the movies with tight budgets will fail (and you'll probably never even see them). Exactly like one can come from a poor neighborhood and become famous while the rest of the neighborhood stays in poverty.

There's a good Veritasium video about success and how polarizing it is, basically if one person out of 100 (doing the same things) succeed, doesn't mean that what he/she did was the formula of success. Maybe he/she was lucky, but we will still say that doing those steps provide a chance to succeed even though it was merely by chance.

Statistically speaking, people coming from wealthy families will achieve success simply 'cause even if you do nothing more than safe investments you'll still get more profits... You also get access to better schools and in return you'll get access to better jobs and so on so forth

1

porgy_tirebiter t1_je47pcd wrote

If you aren’t born with access to money, the odds are very very very much not in your favor that you will be one of the very richest people.

You do have a realistic shot at being comfortably wealthy, and for that you need qualifications.

1

NemoXX7 t1_je48tes wrote

In South Africa we have a saying, "It's not about what you know, but rather who you know."

1

ajc89 t1_je49kc6 wrote

Replying to CillGuy (#2,438,936)

I think this kind of comment is very ironic. You aren't looking at the situation logically, because it scares you to acknowledge the world is very far from fair and that people who are worshipped as saviors of humanity are actually just dudes.

1

unscannablezoot t1_je49yrl wrote

Replying to hacksoncode (#2,436,162)

Okay so my point still stands and you've pretty much added nothing other than rich people after a few generations will not be rich.

Also your statistic about only 3 on the top 100 inherited their wealth is wrong.

1

DicknosePrickGoblin t1_je4ezyy wrote

Replying to ChronoFish (#2,430,350)

Rich people love to portray them as self made hard workers but they always leave key aspects of their succes out of the story. OP talks about qualifications, what are Oprah's?, italian man is the Luxottica guy right?, how is an auto part factory worker qualified for selling sunglasses?, are you aware of the shady practices he used to get there? A casino owner, really? Some bigot that struck gold writing crappy books for children?

0

_tyjsph_ t1_je4l0qh wrote

Replying to CillGuy (#2,433,991)

you have a better chance of becoming a pop star when your dad can book you a hollywood studio session with shellback and pay every radio station in 100 miles to play your song versus putting your self produced garageband song on soundcloud though

1

ChronoFish t1_je4lkpm wrote

Replying to DicknosePrickGoblin (#2,443,136)

Redditors love to villainize those who have been hyper successful. They will question the need for the success, the definition of success, the character of those who became successful (whether relevant or not), the unfairness of their situation (even when pointed out that no... This person didn't start with a silver spoon in their mouth)... And when all else fails, talk about how their success is "on the backs of other people", even when they are responsible for employing 100,000s of people directly and millions through the micro-economies that surround their business. And if the person has been successful not once, but multiple times, then it's because they are a fraud.

What is about success that redditors hate? I don't get it.

There are few people who have perfect character. That doesn't change their humble beggings. Coming from relatively rich family doesn't guarantee success, and certainly doesn't make becoming super wealthy easy. There is no need to worship those who make it big, but equally there is no need to discredit them.

If it were easy everyone would do it. It's not easy, and by extension not everyone is doing it.

We can learn lessons from those who have made it big.

  1. Work hard and smart
  2. Look for opportunities, and take advantage of them
  3. Ignore those who say you can't because of where you come from
  4. Who/where you are today doesn't dictate who/where you will be

These are obvious and it's not a "guide to riches" ... That's not the point... Self made millionaires/billionaires plot their own path, aren't satisfied with the status quo, and look for ways to change things to their vision.

The "selfmade" doesn't mean no one else was involved. It means they were not guided or had things handed to them. They didn't become billionaires by someone literally handing them a lottery ticket.

If it's easy, then do it. And if you say "I can't because..." this is exactly what separates you from the hyper successful.

3

readysetdylan t1_je4sxcs wrote

i find this to be a very subjective and likely inaccurate blanket statement

1

Lord_Sirrush t1_je4t8w6 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,439,224)

Soo engineer here. There is a good reason for that. I have met quite a few PhDs that can't make the transition from academics to work. I have probably watched 5 million dollars worth of gear get destroyed over the years due to new grad PhDs with our common sense. Some you can throw in a padded room to feed math to and get some theories that can be refined, some become real assets to your team and an over all force multiplier, others just go back to acidemia to teach new PhDs without common sense.

PhD is the shortcut to success but that doesn't mean you still don't have to walk the path. You just start one rung up the ladder and you get promoted in half the time( or meet experience requirements faster when applying for new jobs).

1

TheUnweeber t1_je54v25 wrote

Replying to Limp-Judge-623 (#2,442,242)

He's not right, but he's not wrong. There is no solution in complaining about it, only in doing something about it - and often, that's harder than it looks.

Even so, you'll make infinitely more of a difference if you do than if you complain.

People are kind of lazy. They want to push conflict back to the point where it's inevitable, and they "have to," rather than making the changes that need to be done now - mostly inside their own hearts. ..not that they can help it - you are who you are until you change, and what it takes to change is different for each person.

2

doggmapeete t1_je56f9u wrote

Replying to ChronoFish (#2,430,350)

There are many examples as you lay out but the vast majority of billionaires came from money. Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg all came from wealthy families. For every Carnegie there dozens if not hundreds of JP Morgans. I think a good metaphor is a bow and arrows. The wealthier your family the better the bow and the more arrows you’re given to shoot a bullseye. Oprah had a busted ass bow and one arrow and somehow managed to hit it. Elon Musk had a fancy bow with dozens of arrows. He could shoot and miss until he made it.

2

Putrid-Reputation-68 t1_je598wa wrote

I've never paid any mind to qualifications. If you really want a job and you have relevant skills- go ahead and apply for it. Sometimes hiring managers don't even know who they're looking for.

1

Acidelephant t1_je73cvd wrote

Replying to Metelex (#2,426,884)

Billionaires are anomalies to begin with, at least the self made ones, so hard to categorize them with any sort of norm. And yea those who had a good amount of wealth to start are using family connections

3

Realistic_Ad3795 t1_je78xq5 wrote

That's not very true.

While the wealthiest people may have gotten help at the beginning with a loan or something, they most certainly did something with it and needed the qualifications to do it.

0

Realistic_Ad3795 t1_jeah4si wrote

Replying to doggmapeete (#2,472,483)

Opportunities still need to be converted. And in many cases, the opportunity had little to do with the success. Zuckerberg is a good example of that. I would say Gates, as well.

They might have been well off just on status, but they are billionaires because of what THEY did.

1

doggmapeete t1_jeastbc wrote

Replying to Realistic_Ad3795 (#2,490,134)

Gates’ dad was a big finance attorney in Seattle. Definitely opened doors for him and helped get him access to capital.

Yes you need to do the work, but fundamentally you have a lot more room for error and have access to people and opportunities others simply don’t.

Zuckerberg got into Harvard. That set off his Facebook adventure. Would be a billionaire without the Harvard connections? Would he have gone to Harvard without wealthy parents.

I grew up poor surrounded by wealthy people. Now I’m not poor and I see the vast difference in services, opportunities and experiences that my kids have that I didn’t that will ultimately set them up much better than I was.

1