Question for the wealthiest 10%... how?

gadgetmind

atypical wrote: »

it's considerably more difficult to fly high when you don't have the support of educated professional parents with cash to spare, able to give valuable advice and guidance.

My parents both left school at 14, and TBH cash being scarce was part of the huge amount of valuable advice and guidance I received. I still count my pennies and I still clear my plate!

Sorry if I seem obstinate, but in my book anyone who claims their background held them back is ignoring the fact that an advantaged background is neither necessary nor sufficient.

JohnRo

gadgetmind wrote: »

My parents both left school at 14, and TBH cash being scarce was part of the huge amount of valuable advice and guidance I received. I still count my pennies and I still clear my plate!

Sorry if I seem obstinate, but in my book anyone who claims their background held them back is ignoring the fact that an advantaged background is neither necessary nor sufficient.

Subjectively I agree but it's about obstacles, attitudes and the effort required in overcoming them. The aggregate result is that a wealthier background makes everything that needs to be done to get to the place you want to be, that much easier. imho

bigadaj

gadgetmind wrote: »

My parents both left school at 14, and TBH cash being scarce was part of the huge amount of valuable advice and guidance I received. I still count my pennies and I still clear my plate!

Sorry if I seem obstinate, but in my book anyone who claims their background held them back is ignoring the fact that an advantaged background is neither necessary nor sufficient.

But that is down to your age and specific experience, my background is not dissimilar and I am only a few years younger than you, which is why I can see that social inequality is greater now than when we were growing up. Our parents were pre baby boomer and so had things tough, baby boomers gained most, and then less so for generation x.

The irony is that the Blair measures for supposed equality have led to a greater gap, give everyone a degree and the jobs available only then go to those with parental or similar contacts who can get people employed.

gadgetmind

JohnRo wrote: »

The aggregate result is that a wealthier background makes everything that needs to be done to get to the place you want to be, that much easier. imho

I've seen it work both ways and I'm really not convinced that achieving your full potential (whatever that means!) is any harder now.

For instance, there are many great ways for bright people to directly engage with a global market with very little up front investment. Go back a just a few decades and "working for the man" was pretty much the beginning and end of it.

jamesd

In a way similar to gadgetmind, though not as well, I've done fairly well despite starting in poor circumstances but there's a very, very high good luck component to my current success level, along with a good deal of gaining from my own good works and simple boredom, which combined led to me getting the job that's producing the good results for me. Essentially, unpaid volunteer in some now-ubiquitous good work, which then led to a well paid job in the same field.

In my case, I started out in one of the worst schools in the city, one teacher helped me and I ended up top of the class in two of the next four years and went to high school, so one teacher gets considerable good fortune credit in my life.

High school I basically did well enough for much of the time and was one of two children out of four in an effectively single parent family to go to high school. The other two didn't attend a secondary school at all as children. That led to me being the only person in my extended family of my generation or the prior generation to go to university, and still the only one to graduate if the following generation is included.

It's not impossible to succeed from a very sub-optimal background but it does help to have a better one.

If I continue as I am I'll end up as a millionaire well before state pension age. There's a good chance of doing it in five to ten years from today. Spending far less than I earn - courtesy in part of living for many years on low incomes - and investing well are the keys for me. Not harmed at all by repeated "outstanding" reviews at work over the years. Coming here starting in 2005 and learning about investing helped significantly to increase my knowledge from minimal to fairly good.

jamesd

Significant negative factors for those trying to accumulate wealth: smoking, drinking to excess, gambling, high cost debt. All waste money and the first two significantly shorten life and hence the time available to acquire wealth.

Glen_Clark

atypical wrote: »

You can search sites using 'site:wikipedia.org' then your search term.

Tried that, but still didn't come up :huh:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

racing_blue wrote: »

That's what I'm interested in really, the story.

Professional couple, early 40's, bought our first house very young, bought a second house in our late 30's. Will be buying another shortly, as there's virtually no way to beat housing long term simply from the principle that its the only form of leveraged investment available to the common man and someone else is buying you an asset.

Worked overseas a lot in low/no tax environments, paid mortgage off early and took risks on variable products to minimise interest, and when in the UK worked for large national companies with good pension contributions.

It's all about taking on a decent level of risk, being willing to chase more money at your work, investing in yourself to develop your career, and long term thinking.

Glen_Clark

atypical wrote: »

Reduce inequality and the opportunity to fly high becomes more equal (bit of an obvious statement).

Absolutely - and that benefits the whole country.
The establishment must have realised that after the first world war when nepotism in the armed forces resulted in the hugely incompetent and disastrous leadership on the Somme. So they made the Armed Forces more Egalitarian - after all the Armed Forces protect the Government, so they want the best for themselves.
But almost everywhere else still seems to be based on nepotism.

gadgetmind

jamesd wrote: »

In a way similar to gadgetmind, though not as well,

I regard myself as comfortable rather than wealthy and TBH that's good enough for me. By the standards of many "darn sarf" I am undoubtedly a pauper, but frankly I just don't care as I judge myself by my own standards and needs rather than those of anyone else.

Coming here starting in 2005 and learning about investing helped significantly to increase my knowledge from minimal to fairly good.

Yup, it's a marvelous resource. I wish MSE had been around when I started investing, and the web in general back when I was much younger. I still like libraries and books but you can't beat information at your fingertips.

BTW, thanks for sharing your story.

I think I was also probably the first person in my family to go to university, and only two out of maybe 50-60 from my primary school passed their 11 plus.