TEDx: Why the Rich are Getting Richer by Robert Kiyosaki (Rich Dad Poor Dad)

[JEDI]

TEDx Talk (2016):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abMQhaMdQu0

tax cuts: the biggest tax cuts goes to the top one-tenth of a percent
lack of Financial education in public schools


yeah the book has some lies about his past but the overall premise is
poor thinking: go to school and get a high-paying job. ie: Be an employee.
Rich thinking: be an entrepreneur, acquiring assets

poor dad always said ‘I can’t afford it.'
Rich dad: how can I afford it?
etc...

But this isn't about the book.
it's about his view of why the Rich are getting Richer.
"What can I do about it? I’m just a little guy."
and more importantly, he answers that question.

 

[evident]

Was always a fan of his original book, really inspired me when i was in my early 20sbut yeah his seminars and lying about his past makes me skeptical now

 

[shortylickens]

I read it. Helped me understand basic finance and economics from a layman's point of view. But I've never been able to invest and succeed.
Got a session with a financial counselor when I was 18. He told me to put money into a "safe" mutual fund. I did.
Lost 5 grand, just about every dollar I invested. I've been paranoid about where to put my money ever since. Never had enough to buy real estate or anything good. Dont know what I'm supposed to do.

 

[JEDI]

I read it. Helped me understand basic finance and economics from a layman's point of view. But I've never been able to invest and succeed.
Got a session with a financial counselor when I was 18. He told me to put money into a "safe" mutual fund. I did.
Lost 5 grand, just about every dollar I invested. I've been paranoid about where to put my money ever since. Never had enough to buy real estate or anything good. Dont know what I'm supposed to do.

sounds like your mutual fund is the opposite of safe.

safe = Vanguard's Target fund. (or fidelity's equivalent Freedom fund.)
if you made more than $5.5k in 2017, start a ROTH acct at either of the above 2 institutions.
and put the max allowed by ROTH ($5.5k) into the Target/Freedom fund

 

[JSt0rm]

interesting. Thanks for posting.

 

[TheVrolok]

Marked for later

 

[mect]

The title of the TED talk is completely misleading. He talks about how to get rich, he barely touches on why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (other than one or two slides on how screwed up the tax system is). You can't build an economy based entirely on entrepreneurs, so encouraging people to acquire assets is meaningless for addressing income inequality. The economy needs employees.

 

[Zorba]

The title of the TED talk is completely misleading. He talks about how to get rich, he barely touches on why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (other than one or two slides on how screwed up the tax system is). You can't build an economy based entirely on entrepreneurs, so encouraging people to acquire assets is meaningless for addressing income inequality. The economy needs employees.

Not to mention there are plenty of very rich people that have been employees their whole life. And the vast majority of entrepreneurs will fail or make a normal middle class income.

 

[fleshconsumed]

The title of the TED talk is completely misleading. He talks about how to get rich, he barely touches on why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (other than one or two slides on how screwed up the tax system is). You can't build an economy based entirely on entrepreneurs, so encouraging people to acquire assets is meaningless for addressing income inequality. The economy needs employees.

Yeah, this talk is mostly a sales pitch for his books.

 

[Ventanni]

TEDx talks are often book publication/branding platforms, so this doesn't surprise me.

The title of the TED talk is completely misleading. He talks about how to get rich, he barely touches on why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (other than one or two slides on how screwed up the tax system is). You can't build an economy based entirely on entrepreneurs, so encouraging people to acquire assets is meaningless for addressing income inequality. The economy needs employees.

Economies are built solely on entrepreneurship. I guarantee you that there are tens of thousands of entrepreneur types working as employees in the market place who are only employees because they lack the knowledge of how to navigate the do's and don't's of the business how-to legal system. Empowering these individuals would most certainly fuel real growth. That doesn't mean that employees aren't important. It's just that entrepreneurs build business, employees run them.

 

[IronWing]

Economies are built solely on entrepreneurship. I guarantee you that there are tens of thousands of entrepreneur types working as employees in the market place who are only employees because they lack the knowledge of how to navigate the do's and don't's of the business how-to legal system need health insurance. Empowering these individuals would most certainly fuel real growth. That doesn't mean that employees aren't important. It's just that entrepreneurs build business, employees run them.

Fixed that for you. Otherwise, I agree. Fix our healthcare funding and unleash an entrepreneurial wave.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, this talk is mostly a sales pitch for his books.

He's a "motivational speaker" pitching how to get ahead within the system by using his products. It's like Amway, real estate flipping seminars & videos or Trump U, for that matter.

It will work for some small % of individuals but obviously not for everybody.

 

[mect]

TEDx talks are often book publication/branding platforms, so this doesn't surprise me.



Economies are built solely on entrepreneurship. I guarantee you that there are tens of thousands of entrepreneur types working as employees in the market place who are only employees because they lack the knowledge of how to navigate the do's and don't's of the business how-to legal system. Empowering these individuals would most certainly fuel real growth. That doesn't mean that employees aren't important. It's just that entrepreneurs build business, employees run them.

10s of thousands is a pittance in terms of percentage of the total population. I'm not arguing that entrepreneurship isn't a vital component of the economy, but thinking that it is a way to address income inequality is ludicrous.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Economies are built solely on entrepreneurship.

Enterprise is a method to use labor, not the other way around. Entrepreneurship has no value without labor. Labor on the other hand still has value without entrepreneurs. So the idea that economies are built solely on entrepreneurship is fantasy at best, and a classist propaganda intended to undermine the collective power of the labor force at worst.

 

[Viper GTS]

I cannot take anything that dumbass says seriously after reading his views on gold. I read his original document ages ago (15+ years probably) but summarized here:

http://www.kitco.com/news/2017-06-0...ch-Own-Gold-Rich-Dad-Poor-Dad-s-Kiyosaki.html

[EDIT]I think this was it:

https://richdadcashflow.wordpress.com/2009/05/07/rich-dad-gold/

I started just ignoring his bullshit after that.[/EDIT]

Viper GTS

 

[Jhhnn]

Enterprise is a method to use labor, not the other way around. Entrepreneurship has no value without labor. Labor on the other hand still has value without entrepreneurs. So the idea that economies are built solely on entrepreneurship is fantasy at best, and a classist propaganda intended to undermine the collective power of the labor force at worst.

It's a subtle form of divide & conquer. I mean, you'l never get ahead if you have to drag all these other people along with you, right? So make it all about Me rather than We. FYGM, baby. Oh, and cut taxes for billionaires so that you'll be able to enjoy low rates when you join the club.

 

[Ventanni]

10s of thousands is a pittance in terms of percentage of the total population. I'm not arguing that entrepreneurship isn't a vital component of the economy, but thinking that it is a way to address income inequality is ludicrous.

Entrepreneurs make up a very small minority of the overall working population. Even a 1% increase in the ratio differences can change an economy for sure.

You're right though, it's just a part of income equality. I'm not saying its the sole solution by any means, but enabling entrepreneurship puts a demand on the type of employees that entrepreneur needs for their business. If there's enough demand, then there's a premium for that employee. Yay for employees. An example of this might be the gazillions of microbreweries that have popped up here in the US, and some of the specialty employees one would need to consistently brew good beer.

Another major factor of income equality comes with participation though. Going to get real and raw, but not racist, so hear me out. A lot of black vs white income equality is driven by participation rates within investment opportunities like stocks, bonds, 401k's, mutual funds, etc. In the same way that more people would be entrepreneurs if they knew how to navigate business laws, we might see less of wealth gap if all populations had equal participation rates in available wealth building tools.

My heart is for the complete empowerment of all people regardless of race, sex, or personality type (employee or entrepreneur).

 

[Ventanni]

Fixed that for you. Otherwise, I agree. Fix our healthcare funding and unleash an entrepreneurial wave.

Haha, yeah that too.

I'm a firm believer though that our health care costs will only drop when Americans as a whole start eating healthier. That means "voting" at the grocery store and not at the ballot box.

 

[mect]

Entrepreneurs make up a very small minority of the overall working population. Even a 1% increase in the ratio differences can change an economy for sure.

You're right though, it's just a part of income equality. I'm not saying its the sole solution by any means, but enabling entrepreneurship puts a demand on the type of employees that entrepreneur needs for their business. If there's enough demand, then there's a premium for that employee. Yay for employees. An example of this might be the gazillions of microbreweries that have popped up here in the US, and some of the specialty employees one would need to consistently brew good beer.

Another major factor of income equality comes with participation though. Going to get real and raw, but not racist, so hear me out. A lot of black vs white income equality is driven by participation rates within investment opportunities like stocks, bonds, 401k's, mutual funds, etc. In the same way that more people would be entrepreneurs if they knew how to navigate business laws, we might see less of wealth gap if all populations had equal participation rates in available wealth building tools.

My heart is for the complete empowerment of all people regardless of race, sex, or personality type (employee or entrepreneur).

Change the economy, sure, but I'd say the data clearly shows there is very little correlation between the strength of the economy and income distribution. Its pretty well established that all of the extra money being injected into the economy is still going to the top earners. Consider for example your employees at the microbreweries that are popping up. These people are making between $20-40k per year. That isn't making a dent in income inequality.

 

[Michael]

Rich people get rich faster because they have a higher amount invested and compounding makes the number bigger faster. Any tax cut gives them more absolute dollars. It is simple math, not rocket science.

Michael

 

[1prophet]

Rich people get rich faster because they have a higher amount invested and compounding makes the number bigger faster. Any tax cut gives them more absolute dollars. It is simple math, not rocket science.

Michael

It's more than just simple math, the self made ones usually have a self discipline, perseverance and delayed gratification mentality that is lacking in the general population and to them what appears to many as insurmountable obstacles are just challenges on the way to bigger things.

“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.”

― Henry Ford

as for Robert Kiyosaki a pictures is worth a thousand words.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox...pute_says_everything_about_the_shadiness.html

Most personal finance gurus preach sacrifice. They’re scolds, suggesting readers give up pleasures small (lattes) and large (houses they can’t afford) in the interest of saving up money and, almost always, putting it in the stock market where it will grow automatically till the day they retire and actually need it.

Not Kiyosaki. He didn’t believe sacrifice would much help anyone, not in the age of inequality, which he talked about in a quite forthright way years before it was generally acknowledged in polite company. (“The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer”—Kiyosaki, on the Larry King Show, 2006.)

You need to think like a rich person—like the “rich dad” whom Kiyosaki claimed had mentored him. (“Poor dad” was Kiyosaki’s own father.) Cash flow, baby. Invest in multiple businesses and homes, preferably with someone else’s money. He claimed readers could find investments that “have returns of 100 percent to infinity. Investments that for $5,000 are soon turned into $1 million or more.” In another book, he suggested it was easy to short stocks with a margin account in which you had no money on deposit. (Would someone try this and write back? I’ll write a column about you, I swear.)

All this made business journalists and personal-finance types mad as hell, because in their view, Kiyosaki offered dodgy advice and appeared immune to exposés, not to mention the occasional blast from Suze Orman. Instead, PBS affiliates aired a special featuring him during pledge week. (Viewers got so angry that PBS’s ombudsman wrote a blog post summarizing their complaints.)



It was all going so well that in 2005, Rich Global—Kiyosaki’s company—and the Learning Annex entered into an agreement to jointly offer seminars based on the Rich Dad brand. You know, classes where people could learn the secrets of Kiyosaki from teachers. But a few months later, Kiyosaki and co-author Lechter decided to go with another outfit then known as the Whitney Education Group.

But Zanker felt they already had an agreement, and eventually, the Learning Annex sued. Ultimately, Rich Global was ordered to pay the seminar company almost $24 million. That’s when Rich Global filed for bankruptcy, claiming only $1.8 million in assets even though, according to the Wall Street Journal, the company earned $45 million in royalty payments from Rich Dad seminars between 2007 and 2010.

In the meantime, Lechter and Kiyosaki also fell out. She also took to the courts, claiming that Kiyosaki “executed a plan to willfully destroy the joint venture, while simultaneously and purposely diverting opportunities belonging to the joint venture to one or more entities owned exclusively by them." That roughly translates to “moved money around so he didn’t have to pay me my fair share.” The suit ultimately ended with an out-of-court settlement and Lechter receiving a negotiated $10 million payday.

 

[Bitek]

I cannot take anything that dumbass says seriously after reading his views on gold. I read his original document ages ago (15+ years probably) but summarized here:

http://www.kitco.com/news/2017-06-0...ch-Own-Gold-Rich-Dad-Poor-Dad-s-Kiyosaki.html

[EDIT]I think this was it:

https://richdadcashflow.wordpress.com/2009/05/07/rich-dad-gold/

I started just ignoring his bullshit after that.[/EDIT]

Viper GTS

Jesus Christ he rambles. Even skimming it was almost TLDR. Read enough to get the gist, so agreed.

 

[Bitek]

Not to mention there are plenty of very rich people that have been employees their whole life. And the vast majority of entrepreneurs will fail or make a normal middle class income.

Average SMB owner makes $70k/yr, carries loads of risk of failure, poor options for health insurance, and typically works long irregular hours with limited vacation time.

Meanwhile a good salaried position has benefits, good salary, vacation time and regular hours.

Sometimes it's not always about being rich. Gotta have time to enjoy life.

Owning a business can be very rewarding, but not always.

 

[Alpha One Seven]

TEDx Talk (2016):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abMQhaMdQu0

tax cuts: the biggest tax cuts goes to the top one-tenth of a percent
lack of Financial education in public schools


yeah the book has some lies about his past but the overall premise is
poor thinking: go to school and get a high-paying job. ie: Be an employee.
Rich thinking: be an entrepreneur, acquiring assets

poor dad always said ‘I can’t afford it.'
Rich dad: how can I afford it?
etc...

But this isn't about the book.
it's about his view of why the Rich are getting Richer.
"What can I do about it? I’m just a little guy."
and more importantly, he answers that question.

Simply, the larger the investment, the greater the return. Invest $1,000,000.00 in nVidia or invest $100.00, which will yield more cash after a year?

 

[SMOGZINN]

It's more than just simple math, the self made ones usually have a self discipline, perseverance and delayed gratification mentality that is lacking in the general population and to them what appears to many as insurmountable obstacles are just challenges on the way to bigger things.

But more importantly, they had these traits and also got exceptionally lucky. Having self discipline, perseverance, and a delayed gratification mentality is no where near enough to become wealthy.

Simply, the larger the investment, the greater the return. Invest $1,000,000.00 in nVidia or invest $100.00, which will yield more cash after a year?

There is also the small matter that fees eat away so much at small investing that it is not really worth doing. The idea that you can get rich by investing a $100 a month is a myth. You will lose almost all the gains in fees, and if you save it up to invest once or twice a year you lose out on a large amount of compounded interest.