Why people are poor? Mental traps set up by the elite
I wrote this question on Linkedin and one response was interesting. My comments following the answer from Bart Leahy will illustrate some reasons why I think most people are poor: because they WANT to stay poor! (However, they have been tricked into thinking a certain way by the elite).
QUESTION: Have you read the mysterious yet powerful book called The Science of Getting Rich? It's a free ebook on the Web. If you read it, what did you think of it?
Note: The book was written by Wallace Wattles. Bob Proctor, the renowned wealth coach, says he's been studying it since 1968, when he first came across it. I stumbled upon it two years ago, and I am still reading it because it contains mysterious yet (or so it feels to me) powerful principles. Wattles is not exactly talking about a science the way we understand it in the West, but a more mystical sort where you bypass the traditional "scientific method" and imagine the final outcome, by using nothing than sheer strength of mind and sincerity of heart. I'm interested in people's opinion because I'm trying to translate this "science" into a technology that would allow people to systematically create wealth. It is fascinating how he mentioned, over 100 years ago, that the way to create wealth won't come from production, as did Rockerfeller and Carnegie, but from "distribution." Assuming that the Internet and FedEx can handle worldwide distribution, is it possible that the only thing that separates people from wealth is a misunderstanding, perhaps culturally inculcated, about the process of creating wealth?
Clarification added 2 days ago:
Eric, to answer your question as to why I recommend the book (which is free on Wikipedia and quite a short read) and what sets it apart from other books, I would say that it talks about a science that could help serious seekers of wealth. This mysterious science is quite UNLIKE the scientific method that we, in the West, have adopted and keep practicing. That is, we use the Socratic method of trying to discover what is false or what is wrong, and we try to correct it or remove the cause of error. In short, we always focus on the negative. Wattles says that by focusing on the super positive, that is, what you really want in life, you can get it faster, sooner (as opposed to people who never realize their dreams at all). Here's my ultimate interpretation of what he's saying: Your world is shaped by your thoughts. But what exactly is shaping your thoughts? Until you know the answer to that, you are not in control of your world, for the simple reason that you are not in control of your thoughts. Most people, in fact, are not in control of their thoughts. As a result, they are not creating anything new. Consequently, not creating anything new means not creating any value or wealth. Therefore, being uncreative, they have to compete against everybody else in a limited-money world. He provides a (very summary) theoretical framework for moving your mindset from a limited world to a world of unlimited wealth (the only limit being your imagination). I've read over 800 books on management, business, philosophy, psychology, and other such non-fiction books including, yikes, all the personal development authors like Brian Tracy, Anthony Robbins, etc. What sets The Science of Getting Rich apart from all those books is that it seems every sentence contains far more knowledge that I can extract or decode in one sitting. Every time I read the book, I understand something further. It stimulates my imagination like no other book.
ANSWER (from Bart Leahy):
I browsed through the Wiki pages. This reads a lot like "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne, which espouses similar principles: to be rich, think rich; control your thoughts; express gratitude; expect that you deserve to be wealthy, etc.
Wattles seems to be a little more advanced than Byrne, who says the same thing over and over again with very little new to add. I have no objection to wealth. I plan to get wealthy myself at some point in my life. To me, there's not much mysterious about it except to do what you love to do, and believe in your abilities and that, given enough striving, the money will come.
I follow the American Protestant work ethic, which includes the need for humility, good works, a firm understanding that all gifts come from God, as well as an acceptance of the fact that "you can't take it with you" when you die. I am a Lutheran, and so cannot speak to the animism of Wattles or the free-floating me-centricity of Byrne. Nevertheless, the new "gospels of wealth" bother me. Many of the books I've seen are very much self-centered justifications for individuals to pursue whatever they want as long as they get what they consider "theirs."
Regardless of what one thinks about figures like Carnegie, Rockefeller, or Ford (or their descendants), each of them took thought to endowing their nation with charitable gifts, libraries, and foundations for the furthering of good works. I see very little of that joyful giving in these books and too often a desperate grasping for more things to please the SELF.
To round off my philosophical take here, I'll just remind any reader that the Bible did not say "Money is the root of all evil," but "The LOVE of money is the root of all evil." I take this to mean that if all of your energies are bent toward obtaining things that satisfy your physical needs and desires here on Earth, there's little energy left for meeting the needs of others. If more individuals were instilled with this sort of ethic--the value of joyful giving--there would be less need for government to confiscate and redistribute wealth to others for us.
===
I agree with Bart that we have to be good human beings and give to others. But I fail to understand or see the connection between one's values or religious beliefs, and wealth creation.
To me, wealth creation comes from knowing fundamental principles about business, economics, management, etc. Wealth creation is a science. You either know it or you don't. It's like 2 + 2 = 4. A child either knows the answer or doesn't.
Same thing with financial freedom. You either know how to achieve it, or you don't. Expounding on one's values or religious beliefs is quite irrelevant. The proof that wealth creation has nothing to do with religious beliefs or cultural values, is that there are all kinds of millionaires: Muslim (Osama bin Laden for instance made $300 million from running companies after he graduated from Saudi Arabian university in economics and public administration), Christian, atheists, etc.
Wealth creation is more mathematical than most people think. Unfortunately, the elite and the ruling class have indoctrinated most people into believing in the "work ethic" and working hard. Working hard for whom? For capitalists and business owners, who are not really working hard. They just create wealth-creation systems comprising equipment, capital and machinery (and, of course, secret or proprietary business processes).
The Internet has broken down two major barriers to wealth: time and distance. I suspect the only remaining barriers to becoming wealthy are barriers in a person's mind. This is why a person has to be super careful and rigorously re-examine HOW he is actually thinking about matters such as wealth and money and value creation.
If you think the right way, becoming wealthy is possible. Whether it's hard or not depends on a wide range of factors that I will discuss later. However, if you think about money and wealth in a narrow-minded way and confuse matters further by mixing religious beliefs and cultural values, then becoming wealthy is impossible.
Only people who have clarity of mind (of the 2 + 2 = 4 variety) have a chance at achieving financial freedom. People who refuse to see that wealth creation is largely a matter of leveraging mathematics and that it has little to do with one's religious beliefs or cultural values, will remain as economic slaves of people who do have mental clarity about wealth.
QUESTION: Have you read the mysterious yet powerful book called The Science of Getting Rich? It's a free ebook on the Web. If you read it, what did you think of it?
Note: The book was written by Wallace Wattles. Bob Proctor, the renowned wealth coach, says he's been studying it since 1968, when he first came across it. I stumbled upon it two years ago, and I am still reading it because it contains mysterious yet (or so it feels to me) powerful principles. Wattles is not exactly talking about a science the way we understand it in the West, but a more mystical sort where you bypass the traditional "scientific method" and imagine the final outcome, by using nothing than sheer strength of mind and sincerity of heart. I'm interested in people's opinion because I'm trying to translate this "science" into a technology that would allow people to systematically create wealth. It is fascinating how he mentioned, over 100 years ago, that the way to create wealth won't come from production, as did Rockerfeller and Carnegie, but from "distribution." Assuming that the Internet and FedEx can handle worldwide distribution, is it possible that the only thing that separates people from wealth is a misunderstanding, perhaps culturally inculcated, about the process of creating wealth?
Clarification added 2 days ago:
Eric, to answer your question as to why I recommend the book (which is free on Wikipedia and quite a short read) and what sets it apart from other books, I would say that it talks about a science that could help serious seekers of wealth. This mysterious science is quite UNLIKE the scientific method that we, in the West, have adopted and keep practicing. That is, we use the Socratic method of trying to discover what is false or what is wrong, and we try to correct it or remove the cause of error. In short, we always focus on the negative. Wattles says that by focusing on the super positive, that is, what you really want in life, you can get it faster, sooner (as opposed to people who never realize their dreams at all). Here's my ultimate interpretation of what he's saying: Your world is shaped by your thoughts. But what exactly is shaping your thoughts? Until you know the answer to that, you are not in control of your world, for the simple reason that you are not in control of your thoughts. Most people, in fact, are not in control of their thoughts. As a result, they are not creating anything new. Consequently, not creating anything new means not creating any value or wealth. Therefore, being uncreative, they have to compete against everybody else in a limited-money world. He provides a (very summary) theoretical framework for moving your mindset from a limited world to a world of unlimited wealth (the only limit being your imagination). I've read over 800 books on management, business, philosophy, psychology, and other such non-fiction books including, yikes, all the personal development authors like Brian Tracy, Anthony Robbins, etc. What sets The Science of Getting Rich apart from all those books is that it seems every sentence contains far more knowledge that I can extract or decode in one sitting. Every time I read the book, I understand something further. It stimulates my imagination like no other book.
ANSWER (from Bart Leahy):
I browsed through the Wiki pages. This reads a lot like "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne, which espouses similar principles: to be rich, think rich; control your thoughts; express gratitude; expect that you deserve to be wealthy, etc.
Wattles seems to be a little more advanced than Byrne, who says the same thing over and over again with very little new to add. I have no objection to wealth. I plan to get wealthy myself at some point in my life. To me, there's not much mysterious about it except to do what you love to do, and believe in your abilities and that, given enough striving, the money will come.
I follow the American Protestant work ethic, which includes the need for humility, good works, a firm understanding that all gifts come from God, as well as an acceptance of the fact that "you can't take it with you" when you die. I am a Lutheran, and so cannot speak to the animism of Wattles or the free-floating me-centricity of Byrne. Nevertheless, the new "gospels of wealth" bother me. Many of the books I've seen are very much self-centered justifications for individuals to pursue whatever they want as long as they get what they consider "theirs."
Regardless of what one thinks about figures like Carnegie, Rockefeller, or Ford (or their descendants), each of them took thought to endowing their nation with charitable gifts, libraries, and foundations for the furthering of good works. I see very little of that joyful giving in these books and too often a desperate grasping for more things to please the SELF.
To round off my philosophical take here, I'll just remind any reader that the Bible did not say "Money is the root of all evil," but "The LOVE of money is the root of all evil." I take this to mean that if all of your energies are bent toward obtaining things that satisfy your physical needs and desires here on Earth, there's little energy left for meeting the needs of others. If more individuals were instilled with this sort of ethic--the value of joyful giving--there would be less need for government to confiscate and redistribute wealth to others for us.
===
I agree with Bart that we have to be good human beings and give to others. But I fail to understand or see the connection between one's values or religious beliefs, and wealth creation.
To me, wealth creation comes from knowing fundamental principles about business, economics, management, etc. Wealth creation is a science. You either know it or you don't. It's like 2 + 2 = 4. A child either knows the answer or doesn't.
Same thing with financial freedom. You either know how to achieve it, or you don't. Expounding on one's values or religious beliefs is quite irrelevant. The proof that wealth creation has nothing to do with religious beliefs or cultural values, is that there are all kinds of millionaires: Muslim (Osama bin Laden for instance made $300 million from running companies after he graduated from Saudi Arabian university in economics and public administration), Christian, atheists, etc.
Wealth creation is more mathematical than most people think. Unfortunately, the elite and the ruling class have indoctrinated most people into believing in the "work ethic" and working hard. Working hard for whom? For capitalists and business owners, who are not really working hard. They just create wealth-creation systems comprising equipment, capital and machinery (and, of course, secret or proprietary business processes).
The Internet has broken down two major barriers to wealth: time and distance. I suspect the only remaining barriers to becoming wealthy are barriers in a person's mind. This is why a person has to be super careful and rigorously re-examine HOW he is actually thinking about matters such as wealth and money and value creation.
If you think the right way, becoming wealthy is possible. Whether it's hard or not depends on a wide range of factors that I will discuss later. However, if you think about money and wealth in a narrow-minded way and confuse matters further by mixing religious beliefs and cultural values, then becoming wealthy is impossible.
Only people who have clarity of mind (of the 2 + 2 = 4 variety) have a chance at achieving financial freedom. People who refuse to see that wealth creation is largely a matter of leveraging mathematics and that it has little to do with one's religious beliefs or cultural values, will remain as economic slaves of people who do have mental clarity about wealth.
posted by Super Peter at 12:24 AM
<< Home