[Catch 22]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Catch 22,)
I think we're all overlooking one major factor here.  You're asking poor people who've never tasted a rich lifestyle before what would happen if they were suddenly rich.  Obviously a lot of people would go all out, they're fantasizing not thinking in reality. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

So why is it that the majority of Tattslotto winners tend to lose their wealth faster than a bullet train?

According to "social laws", all lottery winners should build fortunes of billions and be richer than Bill Gates. After all, Bill Gates wasn't a millionaire when he started Microsoft.

Or according to "social laws", should people like Benjamin Franklin be a shoe shine boy or blacksmith? After all, he was an apprentice when he started out.

Or according to your "social laws", shouldn't Adolf Hitler have remained a poor painter? After all, he had no rich parents, and he wasnt exactly born into politics.

In Australia, 84% of millionaires are self-made. This means they did not inherit their million dollars, they made it by themselves.


Fact is, most people don't have discipline. Why do people take out "car loans"? Unless you live in the wilderness, you can take a train until you afford a car. Or credit cards? I don't see why cash can't handle everything; even Internet selling can accept money orders or bank transfers.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Again you're using maladaptive examples. Lotto winners are by nature obviously not the kind of people that you would base social studies on. These people are a certain kind of people who want money so they can blow it. They obviously aren't very good at business otherwise they wouldn't be in the lotto and they don’t seem to mind spending money on a hopeless cause. Thus winners could be more apt to make poor business decisions and ride on impulse.

A better experiment would be one in which we see what happens to a family below the poverty line when we bump it above the poverty line by say 10k. Those are the kind of results I'd like to see.

All social laws have exceptions to the rule and you anecdotal evidence supports that. There are many self-made millionaires and there are many inherited millionaires. Your Australian stat proves that, I'm a dual Australian American citizen. I know about the high taxes and strong labor laws that keep the rich somewhat in check. That's why so many rich Australians are self-made. Most of the aristocrats were taxed out of that position.

Now please let’s look at issues with using such fragile evidence.