I didn't say work hard. Nor did I say it will be fine. I said it IMPROVES THE ODDS OF SUCCESS.
> they also got talent
I don't buy that. When I was younger, I enjoyed competitive ballroom dancing. I was terrible at it, but I kept at it for years, and finally was able to get on the floor in a competition with the good dancers. I'd get complimented on my "talent". What a laugh. Talent is good for about 1%. The other 99% comes from working at it.
> doing something is usually better. But just doing something will not bring you closer to success.
You just contradicted yourself.
> Not doing crimes is such an odd thing to mention here
Considering the number of people in jail who thought it was a good idea, it seems an obvious thing to mention.
Dropping out and doing drugs is a choice. Odds of being a success dim considerably if you take that route.
But it isn't my definition of a loser. If you read my posts consistently, a loser is a person who believes he does not have agency in his life. They drift along, never trying, always making excuses, always blaming bad luck. Their journey through life is predictable.
You can always tell the winners, too. He may be poor, middle class, or wealthy. But he's always excited to face the next day, always has ideas he's working on, always fun to talk to, never dwells on past failures, and most importantly, takes responsibility for his life - the good and the bad.
So scammers like MLM/Gurus/Influencers and the rest are seen als winners.
Still they are what they are scammers.
That single person responsibility thing is nice in theory but breaks really fast in the real world.
Yes it works for people who already had a great start and they can decide.
But that for me is a pretty middle class western world view and has led to were we are now.
If that is good or bad I don't know but could it be better? Sure.
First we need to understand that sometimes things are not in our hands.
Sometimes the system is rigged against us (not always).
If we then start to make the play field fair for everybody then your theory would work but I don't see this happening in the next 10 years.
I didn't say work hard. Nor did I say it will be fine. I said it IMPROVES THE ODDS OF SUCCESS.
> they also got talent
I don't buy that. When I was younger, I enjoyed competitive ballroom dancing. I was terrible at it, but I kept at it for years, and finally was able to get on the floor in a competition with the good dancers. I'd get complimented on my "talent". What a laugh. Talent is good for about 1%. The other 99% comes from working at it.
> doing something is usually better. But just doing something will not bring you closer to success.
You just contradicted yourself.
> Not doing crimes is such an odd thing to mention here
Considering the number of people in jail who thought it was a good idea, it seems an obvious thing to mention.
Dropping out and doing drugs is a choice. Odds of being a success dim considerably if you take that route.
But it isn't my definition of a loser. If you read my posts consistently, a loser is a person who believes he does not have agency in his life. They drift along, never trying, always making excuses, always blaming bad luck. Their journey through life is predictable.
You can always tell the winners, too. He may be poor, middle class, or wealthy. But he's always excited to face the next day, always has ideas he's working on, always fun to talk to, never dwells on past failures, and most importantly, takes responsibility for his life - the good and the bad.