https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/03/01/144958/if-youre-so-smart-why-arent-you-rich-turns-out-its-just-chance/
There's a special place in hell for niggers who post edited horseshit.
>>509102638
^ nigger

>>509134345 (OP)

Much of it depends on upbringing. Most successful people were raised by good parents and inherited generational wealth. They were able to go to college etc. I know people that were given million dollar homes by their parents. That is a major leg up.

In contrast you can have a very high IQ but end up a drug addict due to childhood abuse.

>>509134345 (OP)
>ITT poorfag cope

>>509134594
Retards like you think 6 figure salaries are wealth kek. You’ve never met an actual wealthy person in your life.

>smart
Browns think changing the ceiling bird's battery makes them smart. Trannies think reading XKCD makes them smart. Women think buying shit they don't need when it's 40% off makes them smart.

Smart has no meaning anymore.

>>509134345 (OP)
I have accepted my fate in life. I'm a nobody and always will be. No amount of dreaming or working will ever give me the life my grandparents had 50 years ago. I will always be a slave, a cog, a number for tax officials to audit to my government and job. Ill die as I lived, in anonymity.

>>509134649
>MIT studies are "cope"
http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068
"Talent vs Luck: the role of randomness in success and failure"
No, you're coping that you live in a jew-controlled puppet state with no generational wealth.
>Our results highlight the risks of the paradigm that we call ”naïve meritocracy”, which fails to give honors and rewards to the most competent people, because it underestimates the role of randomness among the determinants of success.

>>509134677
Throwing a tantrum isn't an argument.

>sit in a room all day staring at a screen doing fuck all
>chance never has the possibility to even arrive
turns out i'm just fucking stupid

>>509135349
>chance never has the possibility to even arrive
obv the fault for this lies in sitting in a chair

>>509134345 (OP)
>rich=successful
Why are all billionaires socially awkward divorces? Why do the "richest" amongst us need a seemingly unlimited supply of money to be happy?

My family makes me happy. My gardens make me happy. My children make me happy. Money? Nah, just means I'm gonna have greedy freeloaders calling more often. More money? More jews in your vicinity.

No. Fucking. Thanks.

>>509135995
Based.
2nd kid on the way for me.
House paid off.
No debts of any kind.
The jew fears the white father with time to raise his kids.

>>509134345 (OP)
Yeah it has nothing to do with inflation bleeding everyone dry, other than the baby boomers who were able to ride the wave up on a factory worker salary. Sorry chud you’re just not smart enough to be middle class.

>>509135839
no, fault for this lies in being despondent and having no drive.
the problem with this 'chance' theory is the fact it throws the net way too wide
yeah, if you're born in some third world slum then chances are you are not going to make it no matter your brain
born in the first world to a middle-class family with european ancestry?
not so much
and yes, if you go to the ultra-rich it's going to be a bigger factor again
but that's not the framing the article is pushing
>>509135995
i get it but
who are you quoting?

>>509137460
The fault lies in financial criminals and their schemes, and the cancerous effect they have on the on the societies parasite off of. People arent just despondent for no reason lol
>the framing the article is pushing
I understand the propaganda article is forwarding a narrative

>>509138138
>The fault lies in financial criminals and their schemes
This.
Payday lenders, 1% down mortgages, NNN business leases, unbankruptable student loans, etc. only exist because we tolerate usury and rent-seeking kikes.
None of these are necessary for society, and inseed only make life worse for everyone except the banker getting paid.

>>509138138
>The fault lies in financial criminals and their schemes, and the cancerous effect they have on the on the societies parasite off of.
that's undoubtly a big part of it but it's not all
source: i know people who persevered and from where i am standing it seemed to me they just did more and in a shorter time than most
>People arent just despondent for no reason lol
no shit, but that's still a choice
else everybody would be

not saying the system is fair just saying you can still absolutely game it so if you want the riches bad enough there is no excuse

>>509134345 (OP)
Advancement will necessarly be rare according to wealth inequality.

Luck will be a major cause of advancement the more people compete. Because advancement is rare, it has lasting impact and does not average out.

If there was ever a method to attaining advancement others would copy it until it conferred no advantage. Luck would once again predominate as a selection factor.

>>509139681
>not saying the system is fair just saying you can still absolutely game it so if you want the riches bad enough there is no excuse
No you literally can't that is what they proved in the paper, dumbfuck. Not that you read it. (Or could read it)