What are the greatest obstacles in the process of making the poor rich?
The greatest obstacle to the rich poor is four:
The hardest thing for the poor is their parents.
II. Horrible homogenization layers
III. Consuming shackles
IV. ENJOYMENT OF VIOLENCE
Parents are the starting point for everyone and the ceiling for the vast majority of people. Most of China’s recent generations have been better off than their parents because their parents have been delayed, and in subsequent generations, we can see the power of my words. The mature society of the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany is very clear, and the vast majority of children cannot outnumber their parents.
I often see parents who do nothing of their own and educate their children, but it seems that children do it on purpose, whatever their parents say, and the children don’t listen. This is a phenomenon worth reflecting on by many parents: the vast majority of parents are unaware that children are imitating themselves. He’ll do whatever you do. Of course, when he’s grown up, he’ll teach his own kids this way, and he’ll head for it, but the kids still think they can’t hear, and then what to do.
That is to say, to rule out low-probability genetic mutation, the child inherited two sets of genes from his or her parents, one in the biological sense, and your child looks like you, with the same pupil color and ear-tip shape as you, which is the biological gene. The other is a sociological gene. Your kids do things the same way you do, think the same way you do. If you don’t have compulsory education, your child ratio is probably a replica of you, which is called social genes.
Compulsory education has changed the social genes of many families and, after all, has been able to follow Newton’s basics and Lu’s knowledge of society and humanity. All knowledge is no longer limited to parents, but their influence on children is almost decisive. That is to say, rich people pass on some of their experiences to their children, poor people pass on many of their methods and ideas to the next generation, and even though many things are wrong to him himself, they pass on them unwittingly, often with the result that parents are nothing but pessimism and discomfort.
For the vast majority of people, there is little useful survival skills to be learned from their parents, because their parents are not well aware of how to strengthen their survival skills, much less how to transmit them to the next generation, and this situation will continue to be inherited through the “social genes”. This is particularly evident in the age of agriculture, when reading is a luxury and cannot be learned as easily as it is now. Families in general do not want to read and learn at all, and experience comes almost from their parents. Only a landowner family like Zhongzhou, the eldest son, can choose a flexible education from among the remaining children, and the next generation will be able to take an entry. By the time one of them is out, the rest of his family will be taken out, for example, after his country became more developed, and his two brothers, Zhang Hua and Zheng Zhu, will be brought out to fight with him. Zhang Hua was killed in battle in the town of the Three Rivers, while another brother, Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zhu Zheng Zheng Zheng Zhu Zheng Zhu Zheng Zheng Zhu Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zheng Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zheng Zhu Zhu Zheng Zhu Zheng Zhu Zheng Zhu Zheng Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu Zhu
The whole of the ancient world followed an evolutionary algorithm, one step at a time, in which every generation was nurtured by merit, and if a person was developed, together they were developed.
One of the biggest breakthroughs in modern society compared to ancient times was compulsory education. Compulsory education originated in Germany and was considered to have been rapidly overstepped by Germany and the United States. In the United Kingdom, after the first industrial revolution, the focus of the Government was on coal mines and textiles, with low technical content, when the United Kingdom used its workers as livestock and used them to replace them with no human resources.
Compulsory education was introduced as early as universal in Germany. The electricity age requires a large number of skilled workers with relevant knowledge. The “cattle education” model in England is out of date because illiterate people can’t run the power. This was followed by a focus on education, followed by a high-quality Germany and the United States of America, which later became the hands of Japan, China and others.
Compulsory education forced children to be sent to school, while patriotic education was possible. In a country like the United States, where children recite their vows every morning, known as “undivided under God”, the sense of national consciousness came out.
Another advantage of compulsory education is to break the social gene. That is what parents know, and it is natural that children have difficulty learning from their parents. Schools are obliged to educate, and children are sent to schools to forcibly indoctrinate the Big Bang, evolutionary theory, molecular biology, etc. In China, the years of compulsory education have created many miracles, and dozens of college students in impoverished villages have changed their fate, breaking the ceiling of their parents and having to say that compulsory education is a great success. However, it is a small number of cases in which access to an ideal university is possible, and a situation has emerged throughout the world where people at all levels come together. It’s not that they’re out of line, but it’s a mathematically proven “homogeneity stratification” mechanism. This phenomenon transcends species, transcends civilizations and exists everywhere.
In other words, if you’re a poor person, you leave your family and you stay out of it, but your social class decides that people around you are generally not very good, and you don’t learn much from them, you have to break this circle if you want to be strong.
In the early stages of society, there was equality, sort of like shaking water and oil and mixing them together over a period of time, but in a moment of silence, it was slowly restored to the separation of oil and water, with clear boundaries between the various sectors. Don’t think that’s unreasonable, the whole world, ancient and modern.
When I went to college, we people in small cities went to the big cities and found out that people in the big cities were actually not much better dressed than we were. I went to the dorms where our classmates lived, and I didn’t think it was as comfortable as the flats in our little county. I feel like a watershed around 2008, with rapid urban-rural fragmentation, with young people in big cities becoming more fashionable and different from the village.
My former university classmates now teach at the university, and once he was impressed by me, saying that he stood at the podium and could see which one of the students was from the big city and which one came from the village like himself. And he found that it had become more apparent in recent years that there were fewer and fewer rural students in universities, and that the whole school was no longer in a state of “artillery”.
In fact, a look at Europe and the United States reveals that Europe and the United States have been developing peacefully for centuries, and that our country has grown from poverty to the present, and that it has not developed much longer than they have. Now we are talking about the middle class, which can spend hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on its children, and education has turned into an arms race. In the future, this situation will only become more and more serious, with “circles” in which different circles live and work together. There are circles where only the status quo can be maintained, and there are circles that need to break up.
It’s like some people live on high floors, just as long as they can’t fall off, and some need to croak up. The problem is that people on the upper floor maintain a high advantage in competition, and the lower the level the less human resources and conditions the harder to climb. This phenomenon exists all over the world, and the more mature the society becomes. In Germany, 5% of the people own almost half of the country’s houses, and most of the rest rent. Leipzig has only 5% of the people who have a house, and the rest of the people rent them.
There was a saying on the Internet that the Germans didn’t want to buy a house, so it wasn’t very expensive. I spent some time in Germany, and then I went again. I asked a German colleague from one of our companies, do you Germans really have such a big deal about real estate consumption? He said that only fools did not like the house and that most Germans could not save money and could not afford it.
In the countries of Europe and the United States, wealthy families have bought school blocks for quality schools from the beginning, then move on to high-quality junior high schools through high-quality primary schools, and then focus on high-quality secondary schools and high-priority universities. Of course, it’s not that high-quality primary school is going to go to famous school, and that’s not what the top privates in Europe and America are going to do, but the odds are going to increase. In contrast, the probability of ordinary people going to school is much lower, and the right to education is just as moving up.
A phenomenon was observed in the court during the period of dawn, when the South was much better than the North in the examination for the science. There are, of course, many reasons for this, such as the fact that the South is less affected by the scourge of war, and that many rich and educated families, which often have thousands of books or even a library building, have been in court for many years, are familiar with the modus operandi of teaching their children. More importantly, from the beginning of Song Dynasty, the economy of the South began to outpace the North, where more resources could be invested in the development of children, whose proportion and number of children studying in the South far exceeded that of the North. The provinces of Fujian and Zhejiang combined have more bookstores than the whole country. The advantages of economic power are fed back to all levels, including education.
In China, from the beginning of Ming Dynasty, there is a somewhat similar pattern of admission, with care in every province, rather than a simple national admission, but within the province, there are still some places that occupy the vast majority of places in the province.
As the economy continues to develop, society evolves over the years, and everywhere it becomes a circle in which you cannot enter, and you cannot do certain things.
For example, children cannot enter some of the good schools, they cannot enter “211” and “985” or they are hard to do, and they cannot enter a better company in the future. I say this is not about trafficking anxiety, it’s about to be an objective reality, or has come.
In ” Rich Daddy, Poor Daddy ” , there is a saying that particularly affects me: the poor and the rich buy luxury goods, and the poor often buy them with their monthly sweat money, which should have been invested or left to their children. The rich buy from the capital they generate. When the poor bought luxury goods, they did make them look rich, but they entered the debt crisis. Monthly wages were used to service debts and to continue loans, and they entered a vicious circle.
Ordinary people spend their wages, while some people with rich vision save their money for something that can bring running water. What brings water is called an asset and then spends the money it brings, because that income is passive.
There is also a large gap between the consumption of the poor and that of the rich. An earlier statement by a top German realtor was particularly interesting, saying that money could not be spent when wealth accumulated. You buy a limo, you appreciate it; you buy a watch, you appreciate it; you buy gold, you appreciate it; you can’t wipe out money through consumption; that’s probably where the rich live. But here’s the problem: it’s easy to say, but it’s hard to do. The basic point is that, slowly over the years, everyone has come to realize how comfortable it would be to buy a couple of houses and sit down as renter. Everyone understands, but how?
First and foremost, the problem is the need for substantial start-up funding. If money is saved slowly, it is estimated that it will have to be saved until the old days before the first payment of the house can be made, as the money is not enough.
For most of the poor, the hardest thing is to have enough money to spend and how to save money for assets. It was said that loans could be made, but in the case of small flows, large leverage was almost death. Even more depressing is the fact that the poor are not creditworthy, cannot borrow money or are too expensive to borrow. It’s not the credit that lives on, it’s the bank’s credit rating. Poor people have low ratings and banks either don’t lend you money or interest is very high.
This is a very good source of inspiration for those who are qualified but whose consumption perception is problematic, but for the real poor it is almost incomprehensible to know that the current lifestyle is getting narrower, but it is still the only way to go, which is probably the most depressing thing in the world.
Of course, there are people who “know the truth, and the objective conditions make it impossible to do it,” but there are still a lot of people who are missing in their minds. One of my fellow students graduated to become village cadres, and he said that the State had allocated funds to poor families, but that many poor families did not make good use of that money, and many went to waste when they arrived. He deplored the fact that some people were poor and lacked opportunities, and that others lacked knowledge, were at stake and could hardly be raised.
The following phrase is very instructive: taken from Barry Schwartz’s “Paradox of Choice” book: If a person is in a state of lack of choice for a long time, the brain subconscious slowly believes that nothing can change the status quo to change his own destiny, and then enters a state of so-called “Learned helplessness” that becomes more negative. Even when circumstances change, organic time is allowed, and no action is taken. When this is serious, it results in reduced immunity and even depression.
When there are many options, the sense of self-control is strong, so that people can maintain a positive dynamic over the long term, which is good for their physical and mental health.
There are, of course, three more problems when there are too many choices: decision-making takes more energy; choices lead to greater risk of error; and mistakes lead to greater psychological frustration.
If you don’t make a choice for a long time, the brain becomes negative. A lot of people say they feel like they’re going to be depressed, but they can actually think about if they’re usually having little to choose about. Life is forcing you to move on. In this state of affairs, a longer period of time would indeed create an increasingly negative state of affairs.
This is also the biggest difference I have witnessed over the years between the strong and the poor, and it is not impossible for the vast majority of normal people who seem to have a sense of life and feel that this is it. Of course, the more powerful people can do, the less the poorer they can do, the less they can do without resources, the less action they can do, and the less they can do, the greater confidence they will be struck by.
I think you can run something of your own, which can be microblogging, which can be headlines, even a few simple videos on a daily basis, and, of course, a more complex project. A reader told me that he had thought deeply about my article the last time he read it, that he had nothing to play, that he had nothing to play, that he had recently started live play, and that he had some little game tricks, like how the Jedi wanted to live, how the P game went, and how the P game went, that he had a wave of interest in becoming a part-time UP owner. He finally knows what to do in amateur time.
That is what I have repeatedly stressed: a person can change his or her plight only if he or she changes from consumer to producer. Because it’s the big brother, it’s the poor. If a person continues to be a consumer, to play other people’s games, to eat other people’s foods, rather than to turn to the end of production, he or she remains in a pit and will never be able to turn over. You gotta let somebody consume your stuff. This is not necessarily about spending, but about spending time. You spend a lot of time on other people’s products, such as a game, an APP that gives you a short time to be happy and wastes time, and it’s worth it to others.
A decision now may not be of much use to a poor person with little resources and no ability to do anything, but it is likely to change your life completely in five years.
If you do one thing, you don’t, you don’t, you don’t do it for a lot of reasons, you don’t have any luck, but if you don’t do anything, it’s really a psychological problem.
Half a day of analysis, it suddenly turns out that if a particularly poor person reads my article, it may not really be useful, but it would be more depressing. Societies are not friendly to the poor, far more than the flaws in the way of thinking, and, more importantly, the less resources are available to the class, the higher the costs of error. Everything in this world needs to be tried at the wrong cost.
Especially in the eyes of the world. For the time being, the best way to do so would be to get the people of the village into the city, integrate into the social division of labour, give those who are motivated and flexible in their minds a chance to find a way out of the country. This is not nonsense. A village in Jiangxi, led by a powerful farmer, produces rice cake and sells it to the whole country, is now rich. It is, of course, a macro-level operation, and for everyone in particular, it requires us to think more and more, to try something low-cost and wrong and with long-term dividends. Now I think the word “man-people entrepreneurship” is so good that if you have the time, you don’t have to be very profitable, very unique, one-nightly, and do it, maybe in five years’ time you’ll feel like your little decision really changed your life.
What are the greatest obstacles in the process of making the poor rich? – The answer from Salt Selection Cope.
I don’t know.
Keep your eyes on the road.
