Does your class determine your philosophical outlook?

[Anon3587x]

The poor are communists, the middle-class are socialists, and the upper-class are capitalists.

The poor are workers, the middle-class are managers, and the upper-class are owners.

The poor take orders, the middle-class receives and redistributes orders, and the upper-class gives orders.
​

​

When I read blogs or talk to people about society, I find it interesting how their opinions are relative to the categorie they fit in above. Our pyramid-like power structures and human prospective's are amazing to me.





​

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[deSeingalt]

Absolutely not, I dont know how would you come up with this conclusion.

 

[Anon3587x]

Absolutely not, I dont know how would you come up with this conclusion.

The poor tend to share everything they have and are accepting of just about anybody. You find the middle-class always involved in big groups and organizations with like minded goals, and the upper-class are capitalists, opportunists and leaders.

Plus, I travel a lot and meet many different kinds of people. I'm starting to see similar patterns.

 

[Rickson9]

It's more closely related to your interest in introspection and self awareness. Most individuals, regardless of class, don't think much about these things.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

It's more closely related to your interest in introspection and self awareness. Most individuals, regardless of class, don't think much about these things.

I bond better with people who have capitalistic mentalities. I believe you can tell a lot about somebody according to their financial ambitions either past or present.

 

[SHHDlove]

I'm not sure about the whole "communist, socialist, capitalist" pyramid, but what I know is that people in different classes think very differently. I sold my company's program with someone who was from the lower class (whereas I came from an upper class family). His mentality was just so different, because he acted and felt like a gear in some unforgiving machine, where he could get fired and he had no idea why. I, on the other hand, knew exactly why or why I wouldn't get fired because I understood the industry and the people there. I tried to get him to calm down, but he never would. He would get so pissed if a meeting didn't go perfectly because he would be worried that that would be the next chance to fire him.

He eventually did get fired, mostly for being a poor salesman and an a**hole, but he didn't know that. For him, it was shocking and upsetting, and most importantly, not his fault (at least in his head).

 

[AlphariusOmegon]

Plus, I travel a lot and meet many different kinds of people. I'm starting to see similar patterns.

I have definitely seen this pattern in a few countries I have visited. The poor have it beaten into their heads from the first day they have to leave school and work that they are on the bottom of the barrel along with everyone else. It creates a mentality perfect for a marxist ideology to take root - when you see your boss eating well everyday and you can expect your children to be malnourished, it's easy to want a revolution that puts you on equal footing.

Being middle class can (note: could potentially) make you a socialist - while you see the benefits of a capitalist system, you also see the benefits of a communal system. A good mixing of the two.

The upper class can certainly value a system that keeps them at the top of the food chain. That's just human nature. If a system is working for you and enabling you to live comfortably, you probably wouldn't see the need for, or reasoning of a different system.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

I'm glad someone understood my reasoning.

Obviously you can't categorize everybody because we are all different; but if you pay attention, you will start to see similar psychological patterns that are great enough to be significant.

 

[AlphariusOmegon]

I think it shows exceptionally well in the 3rd world (developing world, if you wanna be pc). In developed countries, where everyone has heard stories and seen examples of people who have struggled and climbed their way up from the bottom it's a little harder for the rule to hold true.

However, if you're practically born into your station and you've never heard about anyone increasing their lot in life, your thoughts on how others live or should live can be pretty limited.

The question then becomes, how is awareness of this trend beneficial to us as entrepreneurs?

 

[Kak]

I think you hit the nail on the head with the financial ambitions part. I do believe that the social class thing is a small trend but not surefire, look at commies like Warren Buffet and George Soros. Then look at blue collar capitalists in states like texas. There are lots of exceptions to your rule. Most of my extended family are UN ambitous job seekers with some college education. They are middle class, about half of them are more capitalistic and the others are more socialistic. My mom and stepdad are both capitalistic entrepreneurs parents being more in the top of what I'd consider middle class. They are not rich but well off. Like the millionaire's next door.

I am lower middle class making only 40-50k per year but with my own business in order to stay out of the 9-5 5 for 2 trap. It is growing every day. There is not a socialistic cell in my body. I don't complain because at 21 years old and still a full time college student. I'm not going to the stupid job fairs and fighting for a 40-50k position like everyone else I know.

People need to be responsible for their lives and the decisions they make. When I get the heck out of college in may the fun starts because I can actually put my time in. I expect exponential growth over the next 5 years.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[AlphariusOmegon]

I grew up as one of the poor (American poor, which is entirely different many other places in the world). When I was a teenager I definitely leaned heavily toward the communist end of things, "Why should the rich live in comfort while the poor starve?" No one told me I could move up in the world. I'd have to say even now I'd be more in the socialist area than the capitalist. I know I can do amazing things and take care of myself, but I know many others can't or won't, for a number of reasons.

This is a difficult topic to discuss while abiding by the no politics rule. The thing to understand is that many people in the world were like me growing up - no one has ever told them it could be different. In many places the poor are violently oppressed, as if taking fate into your own hands wasn't difficult enough, on top of everything you have to worry about being shot in the street for questioning the way things are. When the system is literally designed to keep you in your place, any option to change your situation can become viable.

I'm going to change my question - How can we market an idea to someone with a distinctly different worldview than ourselves?

 

[Kak]

What I always tell people that think socialism or communism will help the poor that the US has among the best living conditions for the poor. People suffer all the time under communism. Capitalism does not hurt poor people, it just allows ambitious people to reach foreward.

It is very obvious capitalism is always the best economic formula for total prosperity and when the government starts socializing a capitalist economy and socializing little pieces if it, is EXACTLY when the economy begins receeding. Look at HK China, most capitalistic city on earth and also the fastest growing economy. Look at the US going the other way because we are socializing.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

 

[mcjon77]

The poor tend to share everything they have and are accepting of just about anybody.

This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the poor exhibit FAR more hostility to another group of their same social class coming into their territory. The fear is based on the ideas that these "outsiders" will take what little they have.

For example, 3 black doctors move into a neighborhood full of white doctors, guess what happens? Nothing.

Three poor black families move in to a neighborhood full of poor white families and there is likely to be some trouble. It is commonplace to see SERIOUS (many times violent) clashes when one poor ethnic group moves into the area of another poor ethnic group.

There is this complete myth that the poor live in this altruistic world, where everyone in the community gets together to cooperate for the greater good of everyone. It is just factually not true. If anything, the poor are far more isolated amongst themselves that the rich.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the poor exhibit FAR more hostility to another group of their same social class coming into their territory. The fear is based on the ideas that these "outsiders" will take what little they have.

For example, 3 black doctors move into a neighborhood full of white doctors, guess what happens? Nothing.

Three poor black families move in to a neighborhood full of poor white families and there is likely to be some trouble. It is commonplace to see SERIOUS (many times violent) clashes when one poor ethnic group moves into the area of another poor ethnic group.

There is this complete myth that the poor live in this altruistic world, where everyone in the community gets together to cooperate for the greater good of everyone. It is just factually not true. If anything, the poor are far more isolated amongst themselves that the rich.

This brings up a good point.

Can we consider low income family's in the United States or other developed countries 'poor'? In the big scheme of things they're not 'poor' at all. If you go to a third world country the poor people are the happiest and friendliest people you will ever meet (aside from the gang members).

I know I'm generalizing a lot of people, but the best way to summarize those comments I made are, "for the most part".

 

[77startup]

This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the poor exhibit FAR more hostility to another group of their same social class coming into their territory. The fear is based on the ideas that these "outsiders" will take what little they have.

For example, 3 black doctors move into a neighborhood full of white doctors, guess what happens? Nothing.

Three poor black families move in to a neighborhood full of poor white families and there is likely to be some trouble. It is commonplace to see SERIOUS (many times violent) clashes when one poor ethnic group moves into the area of another poor ethnic group.

There is this complete myth that the poor live in this altruistic world, where everyone in the community gets together to cooperate for the greater good of everyone. It is just factually not true. If anything, the poor are far more isolated amongst themselves that the rich.

Growing up poor myself and then eventually making it up to lower middle class by my early teens has shown this lesson to be true. When you're poor you're always in survival mode and being in survival mode by default makes you care much less about other people, especially outsiders. Combine this with the fact that poverty, lack of education, and unhappiness usually go hand in hand and you have a very hostile situation.

 

[liquidglass]

While this goes against the grain of some of the post I will have to say "yes" your class does determine your philosophical outlook. That is not to say your outlook can not change through time and with levels of success, but generally your environment has one of the strongest impacts on your mindset for most of your life unless you chose to change that mindset.

Personally, growing up in a lower middle class home my mindset was set to how most low income families see things. Blaming others for lack of success and feeling like we just didn't have 'luck.' It was poison to any fancy free thoughts of big dreams. I always rejected the negativity associated with it but was never sure how to change my fare in life. As I have become more successful in the last two years (since college mind you) my outlook has radically changed. But unfortunately for many that will never be the case because they will never attempt to change it.

This brings up a good point.

Can we consider low income family's in the United States or other developed countries 'poor'? In the big scheme of things they're not 'poor' at all. If you go to a third world country the poor people are the happiest and friendliest people you will ever meet (aside from the gang members).

I know I'm generalizing a lot of people, but the best way to summarize those comments I made are, "for the most part".

You bring up a very good point here, in a recent stat I read if you have more than $25 to your name you are richer than literally billions of people.

This is absolutely not the case. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the poor exhibit FAR more hostility to another group of their same social class coming into their territory. The fear is based on the ideas that these "outsiders" will take what little they have.

For example, 3 black doctors move into a neighborhood full of white doctors, guess what happens? Nothing.

Three poor black families move in to a neighborhood full of poor white families and there is likely to be some trouble. It is commonplace to see SERIOUS (many times violent) clashes when one poor ethnic group moves into the area of another poor ethnic group.

There is this complete myth that the poor live in this altruistic world, where everyone in the community gets together to cooperate for the greater good of everyone. It is just factually not true. If anything, the poor are far more isolated amongst themselves that the rich.

While I will agree with you that there is more racial discourse among lower classes I will have to disagree with the your basis. I feel that the OP was stating in general lower classes are more accepting of people and the wealthy have a tendency to shy from large numbers of people. This is completely true. Not based on race which in my humble opinion shouldn't be a factor in this generalized equation. Poor people are accepting to people of all mindsets because they don't strive to protect their own mindset. They are open to anything and everything good and bad. Where as the wealthy are very restrictive on what they will allow to be spoken into their life.

Now remember, this is just my differing opinion but in my personal experience as I have generated success I have cut ties with certain people in my life that I would have openly accepted before. It's not that I don't like them and it's not that I don't talk to them. But my dreams, ideas, and my time are precious commodities I restrict from these people. They aren't 'bad' people by any means. But they are negative, complaining, whiners who do nothing but blame others for all their problems and believe that a good idea is something to talk about over a beer and forget the next day. I hope that explains my standpoint a bit more clearly.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

Speaking for myself:

I was all for the 'rich' giving tons of money to the 'poor' before I came to this forum and started studying business.
I'm not associated with either, but I'd say during the past 20 or so months I've transformed from a democratic, liberal outlook, to a more conservative, republican outlook.

The 'survival' comment above is true, but still rather trivial. Poor people lacking the resources and means to do more lucrative activities tend to turn to each other for entertainment and happiness. Poor families are very knit-tight when compared to middle-class, upper-class families. Not only do they have to rely on each other more for entertainment, but also, survival.

You must remember when I say 'poor' I actually mean 'poor'; not 'american poor'.

 

[Kak]

Democratic socialist candidates want nothing more for this country than what is already out there in some European countries. Nothing stands out to me as better than what we have for any social class. On another note if the US goes down the tube Canada has some new found capitalist spirit.

Its my cards suck mentality so I'm screwed and even though yours sucked too and you played them right I deserve some of what you have.

I think Republicans are not the answer either though I vote for them usually. None of them are pureist capitalists they all scolded Rick Perry in the debates for being against social security. SS is possibly one of the biggest socialistic programs ever come up with in the US. I hate it and would totally give up everything I've paid in to just get out. Bush was a pretty socialist Republican. Perry is back tracking to social security is OK now. They are just afraid to take a capitalistic stance.

I think the only pureist candidate for free market capitalism is Ron Paul but no one takes him seriously because he is an old coot.

People should take responsibility for their retirement or continue to work.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

 

[AlphariusOmegon]

If you really want to get at this you have to come up with a definition of poverty and wealthy.

It's safe to say if you're on this forum then you probably would define wealth as the ability to interact with the world on your terms - you live where you want to live, eat what you want to eat, and have access to the things you want. That's what the fastlane is all about!

With that we can define poverty; the poor are stuck living in the world on terms set by someone else, they live where they're told to live, eat what they're told to eat, and can't get access to the things they want to access. There's one clear example of that in undeveloped countries, look at sweatshop workers or plantation workers - they are literally told how they're going to live their lives if they don't want to sleep in the gutter. In the US we have Section 8 housing for poor families who meet certain criteria, they're unable to live where they want to live, they can't eat what they want to eat (many need ebt or wic to get food) and generally can't live life on their terms (if you've ever lived in public housing, you know just how much it sucks).


Also, I did a little research. Half of the population of Hong Kong lives in public housing/government subsidized housing. HK also has a higher rate of poverty than the US. Just something to think about.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kak]

About the HK thing I was considering total overall economic prosperity. Its growing very quickly while our newly more socialistic country is headed into a second recession. Not everyone will take on the entrepreneur attitude just like here. I predict that eventually that city will have better outlook for every class than the US with our capitalism socialism hybrid economy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

 

[77startup]

I guess another huge factor depends on how your parents raised you as well. My father was an immigrant so "Can't" wasn't really apart of our vocabulary even though we were slowlaners. No matter what kinda dream I had my Dad always thought that I could do it, if I fought hard enough and beat the challenge.

Now my mother has the opposite mentality. I love her but she was true sidewalker. She grew up pretty impoverished and even when she became lower-middle middle class she couldn't shake it. She tries her best to support my goals but it's so hard for her that you can literally see her fighting with her own perceptions.

When I brought her one of my first big 9,000 USD checks from my first online business she was convinced it wasn't real.

 

[Anon3587x]

Democracy has a time limit.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.