Filmer Paradise wrote: » If your in a position to buy major stuff without having to use credit you have a head start on most other people. Things tend to be cheaper when you have a good chunk to start with. Money does really follow money when your careful with it.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Barristers do their apprenticeship by 'deviling' for another barrister for a year or two for free. This system ensures that by and large, only those from rich families who will support them through this period can afford to become barristers, one of the highest earning professions around. The same applies on a slightly smaller scale to the many jobs that require unpaid internships to create opportunities for young graduates.
Wanderer2010 wrote: » Its also used in relationships, I have often heard the term "Oh she wont look twice at you, money follows money" and I have seen when men/women would only consider a life partner who comes from a wealthy background. Some people call it plain snobbery. And in light of the recession when so much of this country were struggling, I abhor people who still aim for the money.
Widdershins wrote: » Filmer Paradise wrote: » If your in a position to buy major stuff without having to use credit you have a head start on most other people. Things tend to be cheaper when you have a good chunk to start with. Money does really follow money when your careful with it. Very true. Even from a small business owners perspective, if you have plenty of starting capital you can buy stock or supplies in bulk, saving yourself money, making it easier to get off the ground and start turning a profit. Basically money helps you clear hurdles, lack of money makes the going slow and difficult. Having money at the start is a head start, naturally, if managed well, it will open up opportunities to make more money.
cruizer101 wrote: » “The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.” ― Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms: The Play
Permabear wrote: » This post had been deleted.
Solomon Pleasant wrote: » This post had been deleted.
Permabear wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Gbear wrote: » A friend of mine is still in the middle of that at the moment. He comes from a working/middle class background. He's fron a fairly big family with not a whole lot of money. His parents help where they can but he's also done work on the side, saved up and so on. He gets some expenses, lunch and the like, but there's all sorts of ****e he has to pay for - wanky robes and the like that further serve to maintain the divide and keep out the riff-raff. It sounds tough. I've tremendous respect for him. You really have to want it if you're in his situation. There's something to be said for paying your own way through an apprenticeship but the extent that it's seen in the law professions seems deeply anachronistic.
CIP4 wrote: » Money follows money is an expression I have heard used but recently I have seen/heard of a lot of cases to which this expression applies. Whether it's getting the best deals or easily picking up good jobs with great conditions or just easily making more money scenarios that never happen for the average Joe. Things just seems to always work out well without the people necessarily putting much effort into it. So what's AH's view on this is it just a case that most people who have a decent amount of money are better at managing it than the low/middle class, is it just luck or is it a coincidence and wealthy people are at no more advantage in generating more wealth than anyone else.