You can get rich on intelligence alone

>rich =/= success
That's some hippy deflection right there. "Success" is an amorphous concept that people like you use to minimize the merits of those who have good lives and to make yourself feel better about your own shitty life. No offense.

Anyway, the chart I posted correlates IQ to wealth and income. Wealth and income are not subjective.

Anyone who denies the correlation between IQ and money is simply lying themselves. Connections and luck are nice to have, but the fact remains that cream floats to the top. Smart people get rich because smart people are valuable to society.

It's not PC to say it, but intelligence is the best indicator of a good life. The level of denial in this thread is sad, but understandable.

>fairness prevails
Nah nigga

nepotism rules the world. an employer 100% will prefer someone known/related to them, or even recommended by someone close, over a stranger no matter how good educated they are

When it's recognized; the wealthy exert power over the legislative process, which enables them to increase the wealth disparity. Intelligence and your concept of success tied to wealth are relative, we can agree on work ethic and pulling off great satisfaction out of that. The importance of hard work has immense value but its not always equated with output and purpose therefore the ethic and experience in itself can be a great source of wealth, its a very broad statement.

I must be a genius Since the Y axis doesn't to high enough for me

>I must be a genius
said every schmuck who takes a click-bait IQ test from Facebook.

>the wealthy exert power over the legislative process, which enables them to increase the wealth disparity
You're ignoring the fact that there are two kinds of wealthy. There's "traditional wealthy" who tend to vote Republican and who, I agree, tend to pass legislation, welfare and tax laws designed to increase the separation between the haves and the have-nots.

But there are also the "intellectual elite," the wealthy liberals that dominate the upper echelon of urban population centers. These folks tend to vote Democratic and tend to be ok with paying higher taxes in order to promote social welfare and equality.

This is like landed nobility and bourgeoisie all over again, let's not include politics in this. I'll agree with intelligentsia as a prime driver in economy for the sake of evolution as countries absorb the best elements and reward them accordingly.

>let's not include politics in this
You have to include politics because its an indicator of future intentions. Wealth disparity is a thing, no one can deny that. But while some of the wealthy are committed to preserving and increasing wealth inequality (Republicans), some of the wealthy are committed to decreasing inequality and improving fairness (Democrats).

Without the politics all you're doing is stating the problem. You need the politics if you want to discuss solutions.

75% connections
20% work ethic
5% luck

*faint smell of corruption lingers*

alright then this is Veeky Forums though.

scrap that, free enterprise within the laws of the nation we don't need politics, just build on any platform and be adaptable abiding to your own truthful ethic.

create value and wall your bubble. I'll reiterate the importance of connections.

>free enterprise within the laws of the nation we don't need politics
False. We've already seen the effects of an economy without social regulation: feudalism. The approach your advocating led to the greatest wealth disparity in the history of the world.

But hey, if you want to plow my fields and fight my wars, I'm not going to stop you.

>75% connections

JUST fuck my autism up senpachi

Correlation =/= causation. You would know that if you were born rich and bought a top tier education

And youre not rich so whats your point

40% work ethic
50% luck
10% connections

>democrats are fighting wealth disparity
Lol eat that propaganda up m8

>that net worth

baka senpai, my baby boomer mom is worth at least a mil, what the fuck is up with all these financially illiterate baby boomer fuckwads

I never said causation; I was very careful to say correlation in all my posts. If you were more intelligent you would have picked up on that.

Frankly, I suspect it's a case of bilateral causation. We can debate the degree of causality until the cows come home, but anyone who denies any degree of causality is being deliberately obtuse. Dumb people are born into rich families all the time, so clearly the causal link is not exclusively in that direction either.

All I know is that this thread has posited at least four links to monetary success: intelligence, connections, hard work, and luck. Only one of those elements has been supported by actual evidence. The rest is conjecture, wishful thinking, rationalization, and sour grapes. I'd welcome an intelligent discussion of the topic, but there doesn't seem to be anyone here capable of taking up the charge.

This.

>You're ignoring the fact that there are two kinds of wealthy. There's "traditional wealthy" who tend to vote Republican and who, I agree, tend to pass legislation, welfare and tax laws designed to increase the separation between the haves and the have-nots.

>But there are also the "intellectual elite," the wealthy liberals that dominate the upper echelon of urban population centers. These folks tend to vote Democratic and tend to be ok with paying higher taxes in order to promote social welfare and equality.

You're such a political tool that I don't know whether to call you a pleb, or just basic bitch millennial

>I never said causation
Then why are you rambling in this thread? Yes wealth buys better education nobody is refuting that. Do you have a point or were you just aching to post that graph youve had saved for three years?
Read the OP again and come back when you have anything relevant to say

>what the fuck is up with all these financially illiterate baby boomer fuckwads
I suspect that says more about American debt habits and savings rates than anything else, along with unrealistic expectations about mean wealth levels in this country. But that's not really the point of the chart, my post, or the entire thread.

The only actual evidence is ownership and responsibility, which often too fortunately don't go hand in hand.

Education isn't a silver bullet, not everyone can be successful by definition under classes, and rule.

What's considered good for the community isn't always so for the individually private enterprise or gifted student, that's why it takes alot of tact to stay ethical on your path to success.

Instead of name calling, why don't you try participating in the discussion? Or are you too dumb, as I suspect?

You uneducated Americans seems shocked at the low opinion that intellectuals hold of you, but then you validated our opinions by acting like cretins and thugs. If you want to earn a seat at the big kids table, stop acting like petulant children.

This seems about right.
I don't know why people think connections are so important.

deals

>socially awkward
>unlucky

thank fuck for my work ethic and smaaaaarts

Youve prattled on for 8 posts and have yet to make a relevant post. Congrats on wasting everyones time. Still the point remains you cant get rich on intelligence alone

>The only actual evidence is ownership and responsibility
Personally, I think net worth and income are pretty damn good evidence. And a lot more worthwhile and desirable than whatever the fuck you're talking about.

This is Veeky Forums. Trying to demonize monetary success here is like going to /a/ and shitting on the Japs. You're free to do it since this is Veeky Forums, but don't be surprised that everyone thinks you're a fucking retard.

>You uneducated Americans seems shocked at the low opinion that intellectuals hold of you, but then you validated our opinions by acting like cretins and thugs. If you want to earn a seat at the big kids table, stop acting like petulant children.

Ist das B8 mein Freund, ich weiß es einfach nicht? Ich bin nicht mal ein Ami.

Yes america is full of idiots. Sorry for inventing the modern world. Wed really love to come sit with the intellectuals lol

>the point remains you cant get rich on intelligence alone
A point you're apparently trying to push despite all available evidence pointing to the contrary. Feel free to post some evidence of what you think is the path to success. Or keep shitposting and we'll keep ignoring you.

An uneducated Eurofag is no better than an uneducated American. You're both garbage in any language.

>Wed really love to come sit with the intellectuals
Blame God. We're not in control of the genes you were born with (yet).

Jesus Christ you're either dumb as a rock or the worst troll ever
Stop posting

Evidence? How about you give me one example of someone who became rich without connections or wealthy parents

You do know that correlation and causation are two different things right?

>not a Eurofag
>not an American

It's one of the talented tenff I hear so much about.

>How about you give me one example of someone who became rich without connections or wealthy parents

Here's a few hundred. Enjoy the reading.

inc.com/business-insider/billionaires-who-went-from-rags-to-riches.html

businessinsider.com/best-rags-to-riches-stories-2015-10

list25.com/25-inspirational-rags-riches-stories/

biographyonline.net/people/famous/rags-riches.html

...

Well im not reading all that but starbucks dude was a football star he had tons of connections. He was handed his first shop. Just because poor people made connections doesnt make them smarter. Jesus could you miss the point any harder

I accept your apology and acknowledge your graceless attempt to move the goal posts. Dummy.

How is that moving them? OP was cant get rich without connections. I pointed out that he had tons of connections. Goalposts seem pretty fucking rigid to me

>You: post ONE example
>Me: Here's a hundred examples.
>You: I disagree with one or two of those examples.
>Me: ...
I'm beginning to see why you're confused about the whole intelligence/wealth thing.

On a side note, do you ride an actual short bus to school, or do you ride with the regular kids?

Lol god this is why i love Veeky Forums. People like you have no concept of logic. Like i said im not sitting here and reading a fucking novel and goin through your 1000 point checklist to refute every one just to argue with some idiot on a canadian pole dancing forum. I refuted one i knew off hand. If you would like to give me one specific example of a man who made it without any connections whatsoever id be more than happy to take a look

I agree with smartass user, an intelligent being will prevail, no matter what, whereas beings unable to think will blame their lack of sucess into things they can't handle, and there comes the failure train, the rails are an endless loop.

So you hardwork and are lucky and get some degre of sucess, or you have hardwork but no luck and you get nowhere, or you are smart

this
But I think, luck should be around 40%, seeing the oppurtunity and your LUCK, seizing the moment is about 10%.
Most people who aren't lucky are just too dumb to see and use it.

cope

connections = luck

being a wagecuck =/= success

Of course. Your social circumstances are the most significant thing in determining whether or not you will be successful. I'm sure there are geniuses in Africa who will never escape poverty and die without harnessing their talent.

No matter what? Are you sure that there's absolutely no circumstances so dire that will prevent an intelligent person from fully realising their full potential?

I agree that smart people tend to be more successful than others, but I don't reject the effect of social circumstances in helping or hindering their success.

Some people really are victims of circumstance. To think otherwise is to assume that people are capable of being supremely rational and perfect, which they are not.

THIS SO HARD.

The bell curve by Murray was a very interesting read.

>tfw I'm literally off the chart for all 3 criteria and I'm not a boomer :)

In terms of entrepreneurship, these qualities determine most of your chances at success.
>10% connections
>20% luck
>20% determination
>30% intelligence
>20% starting capital
Since ~80% of businesses fail, it is reasonable to say that you will need to fulfill at least 80% of this to be successful in a general sense. While there are exceptions to the rule, this ratio of skills are what is generally needed to make a successful entrepreneur.

I forgot you need connections to buy stocks. wtf is this thread

I think people are in denial about /biz selection bias towards:

-above average intelligence
-poor social skills
-low income

Fact is intelligence is the attribute most correlated with income. It is illegal to screen employees for intelligence is the US, military being the exception.

This

>illegal to hire using IQ

That's why companies started using college degree as a proxy in the 90's. Now that degrees have been affirmative actioned to near worthlessness they are using "experience" to let other employers sift out the wastrels. All this legislation does is make firms use work around for the same result. Does anybody actually think Google has anyone working for them that has less than 110 IQ? Of course not.

Then why aren't you rich?

Playing with the stock market is not a good way of becoming rich.

You need a lot of money to make anything substantial

They isn't even add up to a hundo u fuggin chimp

I'd say its more 10% luck, 20% skill
15% concentrated power of will
5% percent pleasure, 50% pain
but 100% reason to remember the name.

See

>Id
*I'd
>its
*it's
>75% connections
*[comma]
>einstien
*Einstein
>zuckerberg
*Zuckerberg
>would have been born
*had been born
>in
*[the]
>chicago
*Chicago
>projects nobody would know their names
*[period]

Yes OP, your place of birth is the only reason you're not a winner.

This is too good.