[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

It's almost as if you can't boil objective truth about the human condition into an unassailable, one-sentence statement.

If you think that's the problem here, I disagree.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

ITT: People try desperately to pretend having money can't affect people's personalities in a negative manner, despite the whole history of humanity.

Next, you guys will tell me you don't believe being poor makes you dumber.

Everything affects people's personalities both positively and negatively. This includes wealth and a lack thereof. According to your logic, taking a wealthy person and making them less wealthy should make them nicer people. I'm not sure you'd find many psychologists or social psychologists that would agree with you.

Wealth has no more of an impact than any other aspect of a person's life (i.e. their environment) in positive and negative ways (in terms of their dickishness). To single out wealth singly as a negative causative factor is disingenuous and ignores a hundreds years worth of psychology and social psychology.

In other words, haters gonna hate.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

If you think that's the problem here, I disagree.

What do you think the problem here is?

[osiris]

All I know is that money solves a lot of problems. Sure it creates a few new ones, but if you keep your proverbial (or otherwise) nose clean, you can do some real good in the world. Haters will always hate but let's be honest here, poverty sucks.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

ITT: People try desperately to pretend having money can't affect people's personalities in a negative manner, despite the whole history of humanity.

Next, you guys will tell me you don't believe being poor makes you dumber.

Pretend? I didn't say it doesn't. Having wealth amplifies who and what you are, because you no longer feel bound by financial restrictions anymore. Assholes become bigger assholes, gracious and giving people become even more of the same, reclusive people practically disappear from society altogether. Wealth amplifies, it doesn't transform. By far the absolute worst wealthy folks are Progressive hipster types, because they become condescending and judgemental on a scale that defies belief and makes them unbearable to be around (aka. "Hollywood Rich").

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by osiris 

All I know is that money solves a lot of problems. Sure it creates a few new ones, but if you keep your proverbial (or otherwise) nose clean, you can do some real good in the world. Haters will always hate but let's be honest here, poverty sucks.

That's a fact. Money doesn't buy real happiness, but you can buy bliss, and that's almost as good. One thing you learn fast, if you're lucky, is you can't trust many people after becoming rich, they don't care about you, only what you can do for them. I know one thing, it must truly suck to be born into wealth, because it would be nearly impossible to know who cares about you and not just your money.

Even then... I've been in both places in my life, and yeah, I'd take having money over not, every single time.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Thorzdad 

At least where I live, the BMW drivers can't compare to the Suburban and Dodge Ram drivers for sheer, unadulterated dickishness.

Ain't it the truth! Interestingly, the more diskish Suburban drivers around here are all female. The worst? Very petite women driving the hugest Suburban/Tahoe/Escalade they could find. I think it has to do with the (incorrect and irrational) thought that driving such a huge vehicle makes them "safer," when it actually makes them more dangerous to the rest of us while not doing much to protect them.

Maybe if they could actually drive instead of just "pointing the vehicle" as they actually do....

[residentEvil]

"...pointing the vehicle..."

that's awesome. multiple thumbs up!

[BadKosh]

Yep! There's a big difference between steering and driving. (using turn signals, yielding correctly, courtesy on the road etc) This excludes most all taxi drivers in DC from being drivers.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Everything affects people's personalities both positively and negatively.

See, there you go. You're downplaying the impact of money by relegating it to under 'everything.' What you're not acknowledging is some things have greater effects than others. Money seems to be one of them.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

According to your logic, taking a wealthy person and making them less wealthy should make them nicer people.

Flat-out wrong. I'm not presenting logic. I'm presenting the results of the study in the OP. Your making a secondary hypothesis, based on the results of study.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Wealth has no more of an impact than any other aspect of a person's life (i.e. their environment) in positive and negative ways (in terms of their dickishness).

I disagree with the notion that all environmental factors have equal impact on a person's life. The way your parents treat you vs. your teachers, for example, would not have equal outcomes. Do you disagree with that?

Money is one of the central concerns of adulthood. It determines a good deal of what we can and can't do. It's only logical it would have a greater say in shaping our behavior.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

Pretend? I didn't say it doesn't. Having wealth amplifies who and what you are, because you no longer feel bound by financial restrictions anymore. Assholes become bigger assholes, gracious and giving people become even more of the same, reclusive people practically disappear from society altogether. Wealth amplifies, it doesn't transform. By far the absolute worst wealthy folks are Progressive hipster types, because they become condescending and judgemental on a scale that defies belief and makes them unbearable to be around (aka. "Hollywood Rich").

What the study showed:

Vohs says even just thinking about money invokes a "self-sufficient mindset" reflecting the fact money is all about transactions with strangers and calculating your best interest. You don't typically use money with your nearest and dearest. As a result money can make us more determined and focused but it also makes us less sensitive to the needs and feelings of others.

That's not 'amplifying' personalities. That's straight-up modifying them in a similar manner.

[subego]

But the Vohs test had the exact same results with rich people and poor people.

Her test didn't show having money made you a dick, it's thinking about money which makes you a dick.


Maybe the thread title should have been "Thinking About Being Rich Makes You Scum", eh?

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

That's not 'amplifying' personalities.

Sure it is. Let me see if I can better explain this... The people who are generally the "best" business people are what we colloquially refer to as assholes, because it takes a particular Type-A personality to be really successful in anything, and part of that entails being selfish (along with being extremely focused and resourceful). Non-selfish people seldom become wealthy (unless it's via inheritance or mere chance), and the more success they achieve, the more those particular traits are amplified.

It's like trying to say that professional athletics turns people into dicks. Well, no, but more-often-than-not it takes a "dick" to be focused and ego-driven enough to reach the top of their sport. That pro QB who's an asshole (the vast majority of them) was an asshole in college, and in high school (probably even in pee-wee leagues). My nephew is a very good athlete (pitcher), but he doesn't have the competitive drive to go to the next level and beyond, frankly speaking, he's just too nice. He won't brush anyone back when they're crowding the plate, despite having the control to place a pitch anywhere he wants.

TLDR summation: Becoming wealthy doesn't make you into "scum", it's just a lot easier for that type of personality to accrue wealth.

Alright serious question:

How rich is too rich (as in "the rich are scum" rich)? Like say you have a steady income; forbid that something really serious happens to you (like, a medical operation, which can be $100K), or say that you are really young and may have to have an early-in-life procedure that is also expensive and not covered. How do you adequately balance it all without being "too rich"?

[subego]

Originally Posted by And.reg 

Alright serious question:

How rich is too rich (as in "the rich are scum" rich)? Like say you have a steady income; forbid that something really serious happens to you (like, a medical operation, which can be $100K), or say that you are really young and may have to have an early-in-life procedure that is also expensive and not covered. How do you adequately balance it all without being "too rich"?

It honestly depends on what you do with it.

If Gates follows through on giving away $30+ billion? $30+ billion isn't too rich in my book.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

But the Vohs test had the exact same results with rich people and poor people.

That's true.

Originally Posted by subego 

Her test didn't show having money made you a dick, it's thinking about money which makes you a dick.

That's also true. But, stay with me now, who thinks about money more?

Originally Posted by subego 

Maybe the thread title should have been "Thinking About Being Rich Makes You Scum", eh?

The thread title is tongue in cheek. And if you think the opposition is to the thread title, no one would be bringing up cars and such.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

Sure it is. Let me see if I can better explain this... The people who are generally the "best" business people are what we colloquially refer to as assholes, because it takes a particular Type-A personality to be really successful in anything, and part of that entails being selfish (along with being extremely focused and resourceful). Non-selfish people seldom become wealthy (unless it's via inheritance or mere chance), and the more success they achieve, the more those particular traits are amplified.

...

TLDR summation: Becoming wealthy doesn't make you into "scum", it's just a lot easier for that type of personality to accrue wealth.

This has nothing to do with the article. Their study wasn't measuring the personalities of rich people. It was studying the effects of money (or concern thereof) on people in general.

TLDR You're arguing a different point than what I'm making.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by And.reg 

How rich is too rich (as in "the rich are scum" rich)?

No idea. It can be as subjective as objective. For example: "Owning more than one house too rich." What if the second house is rented out for income? What about someone who owns only one house, but that house is worth more than 5 other houses combined?

Its a god damned mess, and that's before the arguments about freedom come in.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

That's also true. But, stay with me now, who thinks about money more?

This isn't as cut and dried as it would appear.

The more money you have, the more circumstances in which you can use it without thinking.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

This isn't as cut and dried as it would appear.

The more money you have, the more circumstances in which you can use it without thinking.

I agree it is not cut and dry. However from what some our more... flush members tell us, once you got dat money, you don't rest on your laurels. You work on keeping it and getting more.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I agree it is not cut and dry. However from what some our more... flush members tell us, once you got dat money, you don't rest on your laurels. You work on keeping it and getting more.

But the why and wherefore changes.

The "nice" rich people I know keep going because they care about their employees, who have come to rely on them for their livelihood, likewise, they get to give it away.

This gets them thinking about money again, which will probably swing them over to the dick side, but there's still a fundamental difference in character between these types and the people who need to make money for its own sake.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

But the why and wherefore changes.

The "nice" rich people I know keep going because they care about their employees, who have come to rely on them for their livelihood, likewise, they get to give it away.

This gets them thinking about money again, which will probably swing them over to the dick side, but there's still a fundamental difference in character between these types and the people who need to make money for its own sake.

If you're saying there's room for further better study, I agree.

If you're saying your anecdotal evidence trumps this study, I disagree.

[subego]

All my anecdotal evidence was meant to show is there's an alternate mechanism which exists.

Just as your anecdotal evidence was meant to show the mechanism you speak of exists as well.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

All my anecdotal evidence was meant to show is there's an alternate mechanism which exists.

If you're saying the purported effect of money isn't absolute, duh. That's not what this has been about.

Originally Posted by subego 

Just as your anecdotal evidence was meant to show the mechanism you speak of exists as well.

What's my anecdotal evidence?

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

This has nothing to do with the article. Their study wasn't measuring the personalities of rich people. It was studying the effects of money (or concern thereof) on people in general.

TLDR You're arguing a different point than what I'm making.

I don't see that you're making a point at all, just that you're upset that some aren't taking the study at face value.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

See, there you go. You're downplaying the impact of money by relegating it to under 'everything.' What you're not acknowledging is some things have greater effects than others. Money seems to be one of them.

It seems to be one of them because you're biased, and fall victim (just like the rest of humanity) to several psychological phenomena that makes you correlate "different" with "bad". (this isn't a dig on you, I am just as susceptible alongside everyone).

Flat-out wrong. I'm not presenting logic. I'm presenting the results of the study in the OP. Your making a secondary hypothesis, based on the results of study.

Can you point to the flaw in my logic? If money is a causative factor of being a dick, then removing that input would reduce the dickery. Either it's a causative factor or its not, you can't have it both ways.

I disagree with the notion that all environmental factors have equal impact on a person's life. The way your parents treat you vs. your teachers, for example, would not have equal outcomes. Do you disagree with that?

I would absolutely agree with that. I would also argue that one's relative wealth to the people around them is a much bigger driving factor in their social behavior than the money itself - both of which are small in comparison to the two scenarios you cited, as a person's behavioral patterns are formed during childhood years where any legitimate comprehension of wealth is impossible.

Money is one of the central concerns of adulthood.

The foundations of our personalities are formed long before that. Nurture and all that. You don't change when you hit 18 and have to go it alone - you adapt to your environment using the personality your formed from birth up to puberty.

It determines a good deal of what we can and can't do. It's only logical it would have a greater say in shaping our behavior.

I absolutely agree that it's a vehicle that allows us to do more things good and bad. Perhaps its amplifies behaviors in this regard, which would make dicks seem like bigger dicks and saints seem like bigger saints, because they're able to "do more". This would equally explain the study results without a conclusion that is incongruent with generally accepted psychological and sociological paradigms.

What the study showed:

That's not 'amplifying' personalities. That's straight-up modifying them in a similar manner.

I don't think that one sponsored study from Europe is enough to outweigh a hundred years of psychology, and what actually drives a person's behaviors (as far as our best psychologists can postulate). Not to mention that conclusion is making a pretty big leap into causative vs correlative relationships. Regardless of the form of value, humans evolved to think this way going back to our hunter gatherer days, where small groups of people competed with other small groups of people for limited resources. We were literally wired to and evolved to conserve resources against those individuals that we don't consider intimately close, or part of our "inner pack". Also, the conclusion in the quote isn't data driven, though the data does support the conclusion it does not rule out a plethora of other conclusions to be gathered from the data, especially when you factor in the most widely accepted psychological and social psychological advances.

Does it have an effect? Absolutely because it affects the environment that we grow up in. That environment isn't shaped by money itself, it's shaped by how our parents decided to use that money or lack thereof. Through those parents actions, the children learn. The mere presence of money as any kind of behavioral modifier is dwarfed by what role models during the formative years actually do with that money, which is a wholly different topic.

Also, poor areas have always shown a higher correlation with crime and violence (the ultimate form of dickery). Why would the correlation of crime to wealth be inverse if money made you a dick? Poor areas, using this reasoning, should be among the friendliest in the world, especially if you go to 3rd world countries that are literally dirt poor. This is obviously not the reality that we live in, therefore the conclusion is neglecting one (or more than likely a bajillion) lurking variables.



Dakar, you have more money than about 98% of the people on the planet. Do you feel like you're in the top 2 percentile of dicks accordingly? I don't think you are, infact despite your prickly facade you have a pretty big heart and a great moral compass. I cite you as evidence against the cited study

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by subego 

Maybe the thread title should have been "Thinking About Being Rich Makes You Scum", eh?

I think you're onto something. Its thinking about being rich whether its because you already are and you are very pleased about it, or because you desperately want to be.

[el chupacabra]

Some food for thought... Since middle class americans are considered really rich by a global standard, does that make them meaner, or scum, compared to people in poorer countries?
.. If we were to have americans draw a circle on a paper.....
Edit: just saw snowi basically already ask that

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

What's my anecdotal evidence?

"However from what some our more... flush members tell us, once you got dat money, you don't rest on your laurels. You work on keeping it and getting more."

[mattyb]

To be successful you have to be selfish, or else you never achieve. And once you get to your highest level, then you have to be unselfish. Stay reachable. Stay in touch. Don't isolate.
- Michael Jordan

Is this only applicable in sports teams? Does someone like Buffet really think this way? Is Gates having more success vacinating people or while he was making billions at MS?

Of course we'll go off at a tangent trying to argue over what successful is, while I think that money is a part of the measure, it isn't a large part.

[el chupacabra]

Towards the bottom of this article it even acknowledges many of the studies methods are faulty, and says that some other studies have shown the rich to be more benevolent than the average person.

The car example...

- who is more likely to stop for pedestrians, the rich or the poor?
Drivers are legally obliged to stop if someone wishes to cross. And, as a Lexus blithely slips through in front of him, Piff explains what his researchers found.
"None of the drivers of the least expensive cars broke the law, while close to 50% of our most expensive car drivers broke the law,"

This sounds like an anecdotal experiment. This experiment assumes rich people are more likely to drive expensive cars. My anecdotal evidence has shown me that most expensive cars such as Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Audi are driven by middle class, trying to play rich... Unless our researcher has 6 digit priced cars passing in front of him I don't know how he can decide these people are all rich.

It wouldn't surprise me if rich people acted this way, I just think the experiment is flawed. He has partially concluded that the rich are mean & their morality is breaking down, because they didn't stop for pedestrians. He could have instead concluded that the rich are impatient, ambitious, which is a good thing and likely one of the factors that helped make them rich. He could have concluded that they have less respect for government laws, which has nothing to do with morality; as the rich definitely didn't get where they are by playing by any official or unofficial rules of society. But again you'd first have to prove the traffic cutting you off were rich people...

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by mattyb 

To be successful you have to be selfish, or else you never achieve. And once you get to your highest level, then you have to be unselfish. Stay reachable. Stay in touch. Don't isolate.
- Michael Jordan

I'm not going to disagree with his statement (or even comment on it at all) - just reiterating that Michael Jordan was and is one of the biggest a**holes in the history of sports. I mean, just a maniac with a near-homicidal drive to completely destroy anyone in his path or anyone who might hinder him from winning - teammates, peers, friends, even family.

[el chupacabra]

Originally Posted by mattyb 

Of course we'll go off at a tangent trying to argue over what successful is, while I think that money is a part of the measure, it isn't a large part.

I'll bite the tangent. Is someone happy where they are (Most people aren't happy but will never admit it)? Yes=successful. IOW if someone is able to reach the goals they set for themselves; achieve the lifestyle they dream of, in the time they wanted, and are happy with the goals they set for themselves, they are successful. These goals may change through life but it doesn't change the idea.

People who complain about how others are impeding their success by not being charitable enough in providing benefits, safety nets, medical care, wage-floors, and other superficial free stuff (that shouldn't even exist) to the complainer don't sound very successful to me. They wanted all that stuff but their goals didn't include a way to get that stuff other than expecting and depending on some other rich entity to give it to them (what if there were no rich entities to give it to them?). These may be some of the same people who say money doesn't buy happiness and isn't important. Meanwhile, to me, they seem like bitter people... even though almost every American you ask will say "Im happy" if asked directly. There are definitely some very poor, very happy people out there, but they are much rarer than the number of people who wont turn down riches if offered to them.

Is this only applicable in sports teams? Does someone like Buffet really think this way? Is Gates having more success vaccinating people or while he was making billions at MS?

I would think Bill gates has had a blast through most the stages of his life. He's still a billionaire while vaccinating people. I think Gates has reached his goals and is very fulfilled.

For me my goal was always to make riches so I could have a controlled private sector funding of certain charitable projects; not dependent on the charity of others. My goal wont be reached until Im doing this to the extent Ive been reaching for. So I can understand Gates in this manner. At least for me the charitable part is the primary goal, the rest is just the avenue to get there, and Ill do any number of things to get there...