Why Aren't More Guys Here Focused on Getting Rich?

[Cornfed]

Obviously if you have the right parents, right contacts, have won the lottery in terms of job placement and/or are sufficiently lame and jellyfish-like not to be found a threat by our overlords, then it might pay to work on your whorporate career and build up a nest egg. However, only a tiny minority of men will have such an opportunity these days, and as has been stated if you get out of Uni without a place on the ladder already arranged it is pretty much over and done with. Hence most men would do better to work on other stuff such as getting in shape, being in a position to nail skanks, disaster preparedness etc.

[Moretorque]

Who would want it.

[Moretorque]

Who would want it.

[Moretorque]

Who would want it.

[marklambo]

You said that having lots of money attracts women. This is true, but do you want
women to love you for the size of your bank account?

I like it when a woman is attracted to me for who I am, not for my money, and I don't
care if that sounds corny or romantic.

I read a PUA guy once say that if you are a rich guy, and you start dating a girl,
you should never show her your best cars, best apartments, best clothing, etc.

Dress modestly, don't show off any of your wealth, take her to a modest apartment,
so that she falls in love with you, not your wallet.

That just shows you what stupid crap PUA come out with. I've read the same thing from females. Instead of smoking hot females cynically intending to loot his wealth he would have a smaller number of fat heifers cynically intending to loot his wealth. As to wanting females to "love you for you", such a thing is simply not possible. Females are survival-driven robots that focus of what men can do for them, whether it is providing them with resources, enhancing their social status (which they parlay for access to resources) or whatever. That is the world we have always lived in.

I agree. Unless the girl is unattractive, old, fat, or all of the above, she won't love a guy for who he is. She "might" love him for him if he's attractive as a super model but then again, that would only feed into her desire of increasing her social status. It is usually for what the man has or what she thinks he MAY have in the future. If a woman is attractive, a man with good qualities is never going to be enough for her. Ugly women on the other hand are different, are a little more lenient, and would sometimes take a guy for his good heart. But that's only because she really doesn't have as many options as the attractive woman.

If a man is a great person, loving, caring, etc, but if he's broke or not good looking, he'll have a very hard time finding any kind of woman that wants him for his inner qualities. Women always claim they look for this but it's such bullshit. There are plenty of men that cross their paths who would be classified as "great" guys but they always push them away. Maybe things are a little different overseas but it was always this way in our Western society and continues to be.

Yeah, but come on. The same thing holds true for girls as well. If a woman is a nice person, loving, giving and pleasant to be around, but she happens to be fat and ugly and has no money, you think i'm gonna be interested in her? OK, we'll take out the fat part. Other guys will feel the same-- but more mediocre guys will give her a chance, but it's because they have less options.

At least us guys have money/power/fame as more of an equalizing factor. For the girl above, she'd have to be a multi-millionaire before the money starts to come into my head.

And this is only more so in Asia, Latin America and eastern europe-- all about the money.

You can't compare. Women don't have this problem. They can find a man even if they are fat and gross. Look at some of the celebrity wives out there. A lot of them are trolls and yet they still managed to land that rich good looking celebrity. It doesn't work the same for men as it does for women. No comparison.

Maybe you and I won't go for that fat ugly troll but you best believe that there are thousands of other men out there waiting to scoop them up.

[Hero]

You have to be super-rich to score decent looking women in the USA. I'm talking about movie-star rich, or professional-athlete rich, or Donald Trump rich.

I started a thread here recently about my boss, who makes at least $150K per year and is young, good-looking, and an all-around good guy. Yet his wife is a geek that even I wouldn't consider dating.

Bottom line is, the marginal return on labor, measured in p***y, in the USA just isn't worth it. Much better to expend your time and energy on trips to poor countries, where even a middle-class salary will qualify you as rich.

[Teal Lantern]

Heck if Winston made 300K a year, heck even 100K a year in Asia, he'd be swimming in it. No need for him to struggle.
Of course, he WOULD need to spend some of it, on some nice suits and watches, a nice apartment/house and a luxury car. Take the girl out to nice restaurants. Even if he didn't find love, he'd get dates.

In countries like Thailand, the Philippines, Brazil, the Ukraine, etc, women marry guys for money. Trying to find good looking studs is more of a western thing. So why not focus on making more money?

As for the other responses, this is America, land of the entrepreneur. There should be more people on this forum talking about how to make more money and networking.

Stated differently, if Winston was in the top 1% of U.S. income earners, heck even top 5% of U.S. income earners, in Asia, he'd be swimming in it ...

(for the doubters)
http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-In ... Percentile

[fschmidt]

Getting rich is what this forum is supposed to be about:

viewforum.php?f=41

I have been posting my investment ideas there. My last one was about silver. Note how the price of silver has gone up since then. My latest one is about a real estate company. Note how most posts there are complaining about something or other instead of judging the potential return on this investment. The bottom line is that most guys prefer complaining to working.

[celery2010]

Heck if Winston made 300K a year, heck even 100K a year in Asia, he'd be swimming in it. No need for him to struggle.
Of course, he WOULD need to spend some of it, on some nice suits and watches, a nice apartment/house and a luxury car. Take the girl out to nice restaurants. Even if he didn't find love, he'd get dates.

In countries like Thailand, the Philippines, Brazil, the Ukraine, etc, women marry guys for money. Trying to find good looking studs is more of a western thing. So why not focus on making more money?

As for the other responses, this is America, land of the entrepreneur. There should be more people on this forum talking about how to make more money and networking.

Stated differently, if Winston was in the top 1% of U.S. income earners, heck even top 5% of U.S. income earners, in Asia, he'd be swimming in it ...

(for the doubters)
http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-In ... Percentile

Yeah THAT'S what's REPORTED to the IRS. What do people ACTUALLY make? That means that the top 1% is at least that figure, likely much higher.

Plus, that takes into account EVERYONE, unemployed students, the elderly, stay at home mom, young guys in their 20's. Take men age 35-55 and i'd bet that earning 100K is like top 20%, not top 5%. And in higher cost coastal cities, it's more like top 38% or something.

Earning 100K in a high cost coastal city (NY, LA, Boston) or even 80K in a major city (Dallas, Minneapolis, St. Louis) is really just upper middle class or a tad above it.

[celery2010]

Heck if Winston made 300K a year, heck even 100K a year in Asia, he'd be swimming in it. No need for him to struggle.
Of course, he WOULD need to spend some of it, on some nice suits and watches, a nice apartment/house and a luxury car. Take the girl out to nice restaurants. Even if he didn't find love, he'd get dates.

In countries like Thailand, the Philippines, Brazil, the Ukraine, etc, women marry guys for money. Trying to find good looking studs is more of a western thing. So why not focus on making more money?

As for the other responses, this is America, land of the entrepreneur. There should be more people on this forum talking about how to make more money and networking.

Stated differently, if Winston was in the top 1% of U.S. income earners, heck even top 5% of U.S. income earners, in Asia, he'd be swimming in it ...

(for the doubters)
http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-In ... Percentile

If i'm not mistaken, Winston has told us his income is just $1800 a month with this site. Maybe he has other sources of income, i have no idea, but given that he has been living with relatives and not on his own for the last several years, i would guess not.

If he instead focused on getting his income to $7K or $8K a month instead, he could have likely reached his goal, and would be "swimming in it" anywhere in China or SE Asia.

[Teal Lantern]

Yeah THAT'S what's REPORTED to the IRS. What do people ACTUALLY make? That means that the top 1% is at least that figure, likely much higher.

Plus, that takes into account EVERYONE, unemployed students, the elderly, stay at home mom, young guys in their 20's. Take men age 35-55 and i'd bet that earning 100K is like top 20%, not top 5%. And in higher cost coastal cities, it's more like top 38% or something.

Earning 100K in a high cost coastal city (NY, LA, Boston) or even 80K in a major city (Dallas, Minneapolis, St. Louis) is really just upper middle class or a tad above it.

Yes, those numbers are the "floor" values for the % levels. That much is stated in the chart legends.
The point is to show (with a credible source) those income levels are attained by very few people, in absolute numbers or percentage of population.
In the big cities like you mention, there ARE a good number of people making six-figure money.
Many more are making low five-figures or less, though.

Besides, why should he bother going in that direction?
Judging by population growth figures, it's the poor people who are doing most of the screwing, anyway.

[Maverick]

Getting rich is what this forum is supposed to be about:

viewforum.php?f=41

I have been posting my investment ideas there. My last one was about silver. Note how the price of silver has gone up since then. My latest one is about a real estate company. Note how most posts there are complaining about something or other instead of judging the potential return on this investment. The bottom line is that most guys prefer complaining to working.

Dude, you really have to stop with all of these logical arguments. This forum is no place for this.

What you really mean is: everybody on this forum is poor because an invisible flying spaghetti monster is trying to destroy all men and the world.

[Cornfed]

What you really mean is: everybody on this forum is poor because an invisible flying spaghetti monster is trying to destroy all men and the world.

Most people are poor because the elite policy of allowing people to earn reasonable incomes has served its purpose and so they are now taking all the stuff back. Of course this is an ongoing process and at any given stage there will always be some people not yet reduced to poverty … until there aren't. Most of the people here not currently broke will be if you look again at their situation in 5 years time (assuming the concept of wealth as we understand it even still exists then). Divorces, medical expenses, IRS takes them to the cleaners, lawsuits etc. Doesn't matter what the mechanism is - the PTB want their stuff back. If you have money in the bank, either put it into survival preparations or spend it on wine, women and song while you can, because it won't be there for long.

[Maverick]

What you really mean is: everybody on this forum is poor because an invisible flying spaghetti monster is trying to destroy all men and the world.

Most people are poor because the elite policy of allowing people to earn reasonable incomes has served its purpose and so they are now taking all the stuff back. Of course this is an ongoing process and at any given stage there will always be some people not yet reduced to poverty … until there aren't. Most of the people here not currently broke will be if you look again at their situation in 5 years time (assuming the concept of wealth as we understand it even still exists then). Divorces, medical expenses, IRS takes them to the cleaners, lawsuits etc. Doesn't matter what the mechanism is - the PTB want their stuff back. If you have money in the bank, either put it into survival preparations or spend it on wine, women and song while you can, because it won't be there for long.

Do you have sources to back this up? Where are you getting this information from?

[Cornfed]

Do you have sources to back this up? Where are you getting this information from?

Sources for what exactly? The fact that people are poorer than in the past as compared to cost of living, that things cost a lot more than they used to, that the chances of a graduate getting a job in his (or any) field are increasingly slim and that various means of taking people to the cleaners are on the increase are matters of public record you can easily look up and also common knowledge. You may as well ask for the source of the information that concrete is hard.