Why are there rich people and poor people? (for a 4 year old)

[Dr. Zaus]

HI,

I'm reading my 4 year old son "the hobbit" and at one point it mentioned that "even the poor people had money".

So my son wanted to know "Why are there rich people and poor people?"



While the answer is complex, it seemed easy to say:

"Sometimes it's because people work hard at doing things lots of people don't want to do, but which people with money want more people to do: so they are rich.

Other times people don't work hard at all but their parents were rich or lucky: so they are rich.

Other times people work hard but they are unlucky: so they are poor.

And sometimes times people want to do something lots of other people are already doing, and which people with money don't want more people doing: so they are poor"



Which he responded to with

"I like reading the book" (which gave me pause to reflect on the low pay of english professors)

That said, I've recently read David Wong's article on quotes like: "We do not accept that ours will ever be a nation of haves and have-nots; we must always be a nation of haves and soon-to-haves."

Where he explains:

"It's like setting a jar of moonshine on the floor of a boxcar full of 10 hobos and saying, 'Now fight for it!' Sure, in the bloody aftermath you can say to each of the losers, 'Hey, you could have had it if you'd fought harder!; and that's true on an individual level. But not collectively -- you knew goddamned well that nine hobos weren't getting any hooch that night. So why are you acting like it's their fault that only one of them is drunk?".



So what do you think, how would you explain the existence of rich and poor people to a reasonably intelligent 4 year old?

 

[silicon]

I would explain it this way....rich people can be born to this life just as poor people can be born to a life of poverty. Sometimes it is only circumstance that will decide the rich and the poor. But that never prevents anyone from trying to improve their lot thru, hard work, education and associating with successful individuals. Often a person can become too cynical or to proud to move to a better position in life. So while the USA provides the most chance in life for those looking to climb the ladder there are many countries where you are locked into the a specific lot in life.

 

[dmcowen674]

Why are there rich people and poor people? (for a 4 year old

So what do you think, how would you explain the existence of rich and poor people to a reasonably intelligent 4 year old?

Most likely in his lifetime he will be part of an American Revolution against the rich:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

 

[silicon]

Most likely in his lifetime he will be part of an American Revolution against the rich:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

not if you are one of them and came by the wealth honestly.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Most likely in his lifetime he will be part of an American Revolution against the rich:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

not if you are one of them and came by the wealth honestly.

Bahhhahahaha you made a funny

 

[Zaap]

^ Introduce McOwned to your 4 year old. At least he'll know why there's self-made poor people.

 

[Matt1970]

Tell him life isn't always fair.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Most likely in his lifetime he will be part of an American Revolution against the rich:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution



Bahhhahahaha you made a funny

DM: while I'm never going to be "rich" I'll likely retire with more than a few million and my
Children will never go hungry or homeless like I did.

I would like to think that doctors, nurses, professors, and public-sector workers of most kinds, while lucky, also come to their wealth through honest means.

 

[dmcowen674]

DM: while I'm never going to be "rich" I'll likely retire with more than a few million

Newsflash - If you are retiring with "more than a few million" then you are the rich.

No wonder you don't know what to tell your kid.

 

[Matt1970]

DM: while I'm never going to be "rich" I'll likely retire with more than a few million and my
Children will never go hungry or homeless like I did.

I would like to think that doctors, nurses, professors, and public-sector workers of most kinds, while lucky, also come to their wealth through honest means.

I think you are confusing McOwned with bshole.

 

[MovingTarget]

I think your answer was appropriate, OP. I would hope that one day our talking heads and political types could understand what you just explained to your 4 year old instead of parroting a few lines from Atlas Shrugged. uke;

 

[DucatiMonster696]

There is a big difference between telling a kid that "Life should be fair" versus "Life isn't fair".

The latter can setup false expectations and unrealistic desires for outcomes not in line with reality. The former bluntly points to the reality of the world around us. Of which also falls in line with the idea that not everyone is the same, nor should they be the same, etc because that is a world no one would like to live in period. In fact that world would be place where all differences and the different outcomes those differences produce would be choked out of humanity with an iron fist in the interest of "Fairness", i.e. a desire for the equality of outcomes no matter what action is taken or not taken by a individual.

 

[trenchfoot]

My take: In this particular instance, since the dawn of time to present, the survival instinct has driven a very select chosen few to believe that in order to survive, one must prosper by taking those things that are needed to survive from as many others as possible. Their demise guarantees the survival of the ones that can take the most, until there is no more to be taken because there are no others to take from.

Greed is the highest manifestation of the survival instinct, honed to perfection by nature as it adapted itself to the emergence of the civilization of man.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

My take: In this particular instance, since the dawn of time to present, the survival instinct has driven a very select chosen few to believe that in order to survive, one must prosper by taking those things that are needed to survive from as many others as possible. Their demise guarantees the survival of the ones that can take the most, until there is no more to be taken because there are no others to take from.

Greed is the highest manifestation of the survival instinct, honed to perfection by nature as it adapted itself to the emergence of the civilization of man.

Actually, while one may be driven to take as much as one wants or desires a person cannot do so without first meeting the needs and desires of others in a society of individuals to achieve their goals.I.e. no one lives in a vacuum, even the most "greediest"/ambitious of persons still has to contend with and work with others to achieve their goals to be able to get what they want so greed or ambition is always tempered by the fact that without providing something of value for someone else, you won't get very far just on the desire to attain things or achieve certain goals. So there is a natural spontaneous order that occurs within all societies that balances out too much greed or ambition along with a desire of to envision selflessness or apathy in its extreme.

 

[Spungo]

Tell him life isn't always fair.

It took me a long time to understand what people meant by this. It doesn't mean you're screwed no matter what you do. The true meaning of this phrase is that you're expected to cheat. Everyone else is cheating, so the only way to make the game fair is to cheat. Example: using steroids isn't cheating if everyone is using steroids. A movie phrase with a very similar meaning is "You should have killed me when you had the chance." The movie phrase is talking about fairness. You don't kill me, I don't kill you. That would be fair, but life isn't fair. You should have killed me when you had the chance.


Explaining rich and poor is very simple. Rich people get paid more. Why do they get paid more? There are millions of reasons. Some work harder, some of them get paid because they have friends and connections, some people invest their money (stocks and business), some people lend their money to others and charge interest (bonds). Some people are paid more because fewer people are capable of doing that job. Everyone can cook fries but not everyone can teach university level mathematics. Bill Gates is mostly rich through hard work. Putin is probably rich due to corruption, as are most of our own politicians. Politicians regularly do insider trading. They'll know ahead of time that a piece of legislation is a giant handout to a certain company or industry, and they front run that trade. They will also retire and work as "consultants" at the companies they gave tax money to.

You could always go the direction of modern economics and try telling him that capital is not the source of wealth. Don't save your money, don't buy stocks, don't buy bonds, don't start your own business. Use all of your money to buy cheap crap from China and somehow you'll magically get rich.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

It took me a long time to understand what people meant by this. It doesn't mean you're screwed no matter what you do. The true meaning of this phrase is that you're expected to cheat. Everyone else is cheating, so the only way to make the game fair is to cheat. Example: using steroids isn't cheating if everyone is using steroids. A movie phrase with a very similar meaning is "You should have killed me when you had the chance." The movie phrase is talking about fairness. You don't kill me, I don't kill you. That would be fair, but life isn't fair. You should have killed me when you had the chance.

You are right and, you are dead wrong. You're right in that the perspective of gaming the system is rampant in the youts of today and, many of the posters in these forums. However, you are dead wrong in that it is ever right, acceptable or, the best way to succeed. If the only thing that matters is acquiring wealth, the most efficient way is to steal it from those who have wealth. Cheating to try and level the playing field is foolish, a waste of resources and, takes too long.

 

[Matt1970]

It took me a long time to understand what people meant by this. It doesn't mean you're screwed no matter what you do. The true meaning of this phrase is that you're expected to cheat. Everyone else is cheating, so the only way to make the game fair is to cheat. Example: using steroids isn't cheating if everyone is using steroids. A movie phrase with a very similar meaning is "You should have killed me when you had the chance." The movie phrase is talking about fairness. You don't kill me, I don't kill you. That would be fair, but life isn't fair. You should have killed me when you had the chance.


Explaining rich and poor is very simple. Rich people get paid more. Why do they get paid more? There are millions of reasons. Some work harder, some of them get paid because they have friends and connections, some people invest their money (stocks and business), some people lend their money to others and charge interest (bonds). Some people are paid more because fewer people are capable of doing that job. Everyone can cook fries but not everyone can teach university level mathematics. Bill Gates is mostly rich through hard work. Putin is probably rich due to corruption, as are most of our own politicians. Politicians regularly do insider trading. They'll know ahead of time that a piece of legislation is a giant handout to a certain company or industry, and they front run that trade. They will also retire and work as "consultants" at the companies they gave tax money to.

You could always go the direction of modern economics and try telling him that capital is not the source of wealth. Don't save your money, don't buy stocks, don't buy bonds, don't start your own business. Use all of your money to buy cheap crap from China and somehow you'll magically get rich.

Cheating is for those who cannot accept the fact that the same effort will not always produce the same results. Or for those who don't want to put in the same effort but want the same outcome.

 

[MongGrel]

Tell him most rich people are born with it, go to Ivy League colleges, and use it to make more money and buy people to make them more money.

Then you'd have to explain the whole system thing I guess.

Some people that are working out of the box get the pre mentioned rich people to loan them money for a cut.

Is kinda like a legal mafia thing.

Rodney Dangerfield's First Economics Class

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM

 

[MongGrel]

not if you are one of them and came by the wealth honestly.

You seem a bit delusional.

 

[shira]

HI,

I'm reading my 4 year old son "the hobbit" and at one point it mentioned that "even the poor people had money".

So my son wanted to know "Why are there rich people and poor people?"



While the answer is complex, it seemed easy to say:

"Sometimes it's because people work hard at doing things lots of people don't want to do, but which people with money want more people to do: so they are rich.

Other times people don't work hard at all but their parents were rich or lucky: so they are rich.

Other times people work hard but they are unlucky: so they are poor.

And sometimes times people want to do something lots of other people are already doing, and which people with money don't want more people doing: so they are poor"



Which he responded to with

"I like reading the book" (which gave me pause to reflect on the low pay of english professors)

That said, I've recently read David Wong's article on quotes like: "We do not accept that ours will ever be a nation of haves and have-nots; we must always be a nation of haves and soon-to-haves."

Where he explains:

"It's like setting a jar of moonshine on the floor of a boxcar full of 10 hobos and saying, 'Now fight for it!' Sure, in the bloody aftermath you can say to each of the losers, 'Hey, you could have had it if you'd fought harder!; and that's true on an individual level. But not collectively -- you knew goddamned well that nine hobos weren't getting any hooch that night. So why are you acting like it's their fault that only one of them is drunk?".



So what do you think, how would you explain the existence of rich and poor people to a reasonably intelligent 4 year old?

Because men who have no money have unprotected sex with women who have no money.

 

[sandorski]

Your answer seems good. Although probably a little too complicated for most 4 year olds, but that's kind of unavoidable for such a complex issue. Too many people would have given a platitude, like they Worked for it. Which can often be true, but it implies that the Poor didn't Work just as hard.

 

[HeXen]

I would explain it this way....rich people can be born to this life just as poor people can be born to a life of poverty. Sometimes it is only circumstance that will decide the rich and the poor. But that never prevents anyone from trying to improve their lot thru, hard work, education and associating with successful individuals. Often a person can become too cynical or to proud to move to a better position in life. So while the USA provides the most chance in life for those looking to climb the ladder there are many countries where you are locked into the a specific lot in life.

Then you don't understand how much lack of opportunities there really are out there. It's impossible for every single American to be wealthy no matter how hard each and every person tries. Some people have master degrees and work in low wage positions. I even worked with one guy that had a Masters in engineering..he never gave up but now he teaches jumping out of planes and doing utility work for Cable companies.

If everyone wanted to be a doctor for example then we'd be in a fucked up place.

 

[trenchfoot]

Actually, while one may be driven to take as much as one wants or desires a person cannot do so without first meeting the needs and desires of others in a society of individuals to achieve their goals.I.e. no one lives in a vacuum, even the most "greediest"/ambitious of persons still has to contend with and work with others to achieve their goals to be able to get what they want so greed or ambition is always tempered by the fact that without providing something of value for someone else, you won't get very far just on the desire to attain things or achieve certain goals. So there is a natural spontaneous order that occurs within all societies that balances out too much greed or ambition along with a desire of to envision selflessness or apathy in its extreme.

I agree with much of what you have to say.

I framed my commentary with the end result of the need to survive in mind, sans every other less instinctive urges we have acquired over time.

I do recognize the instinct for humans to survive as a species and acknowledge a lot of the consequences that go with it. That being said, the apex humans, the ones with the urge to divide and conquer, the ones with the need to commit genocide, the ones with the need to hoard as much treasure as possible, the ones that have insatiable greed as their primary instinct to survive, they are the ones who, in the first world become "rich" and separate themselves from the ones who they predate upon to satisfy their instinct to survive.

Yes, they do need others to survive, but they live not for the survival of the species, they live for the survival of themselves, species be damned. A civilized form of cannibalism as it were.

In their world, harmony within the species require that they must rise above all others and dictate control, the tighter the control, the better. Our form of gov't allows for this. It sets up the ever eternal battle between a true representative form of government and a government representative of the "chosen few". Guess who's winning that war?

As we've seen in our nation as well as other democracies like ours, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is prioritized by order of wealth, not by order of equality and the overall prosperity of the society, of whom the "rich" must exploit to "survive".

Again, greed is the primary motivator, the primal survival instinct that overwhelms all others for this "select few" that are wired that way. Being able to control the resources of, and resultantly, the destiny of the ones they need to prosper from is their interpretation of what harmonious existence for the survival of the species is.

It's what determines who are rich and who are poor and why there "has" to be the distinction between the two.

Capitalism at its finest. Self-determination at its most defined/refined level at this present stage of our evolution.

 

[Spungo]

Then you don't understand how much lack of opportunities there really are out there. It's impossible for every single American to be wealthy no matter how hard each and every person tries. Some people have master degrees and work in low wage positions. I even worked with one guy that had a Masters in engineering..he never gave up but now he teaches jumping out of planes and doing utility work for Cable companies.

Widespread prosperity would theoretically be possible if we lived in a fair world, but we don't. In a fair world, you could do what you do best, people would pay you for the services you provide, and you could prosper. There would still be inequality, but we would be wealthier overall. We still have poor people today, but today's poor people are much richer than even the richest people 200 years ago, and it's because we're more productive these days. We have so much food that poor people have plenty of food. We have so much electricity and gasoline that poor can afford it. Poor people even have refrigerators, televisions, and air conditioning. If those things were rare, only rich people would have them. Things trickle down to lower classes when they become abundant and cheap, like cell phones. Rich people had cell phones since the 1980s. Regular people like us only started getting them after the year 2000 because that's how long it took for the price to come down. The way to improve the wealth of poor people is to increase the productivity of everyone. Allow people to do what they do best. Allow people to be productive. Allow the price of everything to fall.

Unfortunately, humans are mostly evil, so we end up having a completely rigged system where it's extremely hard to achieve anything without breaking multiple laws. The system is designed to keep productivity and wealth as low as possible. You like styling and cutting hair? Cutting hair in your apartment is illegal. Cutting hair in your house is illegal. Cutting hair in your back yard is illegal. Cutting hair without a license is illegal. Cutting hair without first registering a business is illegal. Accepting cash payments for cutting hair and not reporting it as business income is illegal. This system is intended to keep poor people down. If you're a poor kid who is very skilled at styling hair, there's no way to capitalize on your skills. You're not allowed to accept money until you jump through tons of government hoops. The result is that you're not allowed to be productive. You're not allowed to add value to society. You're not allowed to prosper.

There are millions of examples of this. Right now you can't buy a Tesla brand car in New Jersey. Why? Because the system is completely rigged. The companies that are not Tesla made Tesla sales illegal by bribing politicians.
Right now Uber is having legal troubles because it's against the law to drive people around without a taxi license. If you drive your friend to the airport, it's the against the law to accept any kind of payment for the service provided.
Prostitution has a similar weirdness to it. An attractive young woman can make a very significant amount of money as a call girl, and that could be the ticket out of poverty, but it's illegal. Being a call girl or a boy toy is legal unless you accept money. You can't make a business out of something you're good at. Why? Because law makers are evil.
UFC events never happen in New York. Why? It's because UFC is not a unionized organization, so the local unions bribed politicians to not allow UFC events in that state. As a result, UFC is not allowed to add value to New York's economy.

The roads around here get slippery in winter, so my friend wanted to charge money to pull people out of ditches. He already owns a truck with winch and there's plenty of demand for this service, so why not capitalize on it? He looked into it and decided it wasn't worth the hassle. If he were doing this in addition to his regular job, he would be adding wealth to the system. He would reduce the wait times for being pulled out of the ditch. He would lower the cost of being pulled out of the ditch. The government tries as hard as possible to make everyone as unproductive as possible, so now he watches TV and plays games in the evening instead of helping people out of the ditch.

 

[Appledrop]

...

good post I agree with what you wrote entirely