This post may contain affiliate links. Please read our disclosure for more information.
The poor will always be with us in America because the poor engage in a lot of self-sabotage. This post lists five things the poor shouldn’t do—especially the young poor—if they want to give themselves a shot of becoming affluent.
The Poor Defined
To make things simple, I’m defining a poor person as any non-retired American adult who isn’t saving 20 percent of his or her take-home pay.
That, of course, is a very crude measure of pauperism. But creating that large of a “gap” between one’s pay and one’s expenses is so critical to elevating one from poor to comfortable and eventually to wealthy, it’s foolish to focus on any other metric.
Is this definition too stringent? Yes and no. It’s too stringent in the sense that it relegates most working American adults to poor status. And that, on its surface, is patently absurd. A guy driving a Lexus and living in a McMansion is hardly poor. But on a deeper level, it’s not too stringent. Most working American adults are bad at building wealth. They’re great at accumulating stuff and debt and living paycheck to paycheck. But they’re not great at saving, investing, and growing their net worth. And my definition of poor was chosen because it exposes this alarming deficiency.
Okay, with our working definition of poor out of the way, let’s turn to the behaviors that poor people need to avoid if they no longer wish to be poor.
Play Video Games
When I was a younger man, I was consumed by certain books. I spent thousands of dollars on books about politics and social issues and devoted countless hours to reading them. And you know what this obsession did for my financial well-being? Absolutely squat. Employers, it turns out, covet people with technical skills—that is, they covet people who can improve the quality of their products or improve the efficiencies of their operations. They don’t give a crap about people who know nothing but are well-versed in the musings of bell hooks and Charles Murray.
For a lot of poor people today, video games are the time-suck of choice. Rather than mastering an economically valuable skill or the fundamentals of money and personal finance, they’re using their limited resources to master the intricacies of Mortal Kombat or Madden NFL. Not good. Except for a select few, becoming a renowned gamer will do nothing to improve one’s ability to earn more and save more.
If you’re poor, you can’t afford to be frivolous with your spare time and money. Video games, political books, and all such time-sucks should be avoided like the plague.
Go to a Four-Year College
Unless you finished in the top third of your high school class and had an SAT composite score of at least 1200, don’t even think about going to a four-year college.
Despite what the college-industrial complex claims, pursuing a bachelor’s degree isn’t a good bet for the undisciplined and cognitively weak. I should know. This was an apt description of me when I shuffled off to Buffalo University back in 1979.
Now a question. Do undisciplined and cognitively weak college students pick majors that lead to high-paying jobs? If you answered “no,” go straight to the head of the class.
Undisciplined and cognitively weak college students don’t pick majors that lead to high-paying jobs because such majors are incredibly hard—even for disciplined and cognitively strong college students. No, undisciplined and cognitively weak college students pick fluff majors such as communication, sociology, and gender studies. And those majors are very suspect economically. That’s why we have the most educated baristas, bartenders, and basement dwellers in the world.
I was a sociology major at Buffalo University. And believe me, no employer of note was clamoring for my immense critical thinking skills when I emerged from UB in 1984. The only thing that saved me from abject misery was the timing of my excursion into higher education. I went to college before the era of crushing student loan debt. Today’s young people don’t have that luxury.
If you’re poor, getting an economically dubious BA from a non-elite college is going to do more harm than good. You’d be better off learning a trade, going to a community college, or starting a business.
Quick Aside: I came across the below Dave Ramsey video the other day and it really shows the evil of the college-industrial complex. What kind of people would allow a young person to rack up close to $200,000 in student loan debt for a tuba degree?
Consume News
If you consume a lot of “news,” you’ll turn into a yossarian.
What’s a yossarian?
John Yossarian was a WWII pilot in Joseph Heller’s Catch-22 who was under the mistaken impression that war was personal. In the conversation below, you get a clear glimpse of his paranoia:
“They’re trying to kill me,” Yossarian told him calmly.
“No one’s trying to kill you,” Clevinger cried.
“Then why are they shooting at me?” Yossarian asked.
“They’re shooting at everyone,” Clevinger answered. “They’re trying to kill everyone.”
“And what difference does that make?”
I understand Yossarian’s point. But I also understand Clevinger’s point, and his point is more compelling. No one was trying to kill Yossarian out of personal animus. His enemies really didn’t care about him. They were only trying to kill him because he was piloting a plane bringing bombs and carnage to their position. When Yossarian wasn’t in his B-25 over enemy territory, nobody was shooting at him.
A yosserian is thus someone who becomes so paranoid he or she can’t fathom the possibility that his or her “enemies” are only “enemies” because of his or her ruinous behavior, and not because of his or her very existence. And because he or she is so delusional, he or she is unlikely to stop performing the ruinous behavior bringing calamity and “enemies” to his or her doorstep. Talk about a catch-22.
The “news,” whether it has a left-wing bent or a right-wing bent, is expert at creating yosserians.
“You’re not a lowly fast-food worker because you’re a pot-smoking slacker who barely made it out of high school. You’re on the french fry station because you’re black and racist America refused to adequately fund the public schools you attended.”
“You’re not an unemployed carpenter living in a trailer and subsisting on SSI because you have no stomach for work and drank yourself into oblivion. You’re trailer park trash because the Dems allowed illegal aliens to swarm into our country and steal your job.”
I’m not saying, of course, that there isn’t powerful scum out there doing scummy things. There is. I’m just saying that the powerful scum’s scummy endeavors aren’t personal. You engage in stupid behaviors and the powerful scum will take advantage of you. Avoid stupid behaviors and the powerful scum will basically leave you alone.
Again, don’t consume “news.” The people who produce our “news” don’t care about your well-being. They just want you to become a half-crazed yossarian who votes for the politicians they favor. And you can’t afford to be manipulated by such tomfoolery—especially if you’re poor. No one escapes a paycheck-to-paycheck existence by being a world-class excuse-maker who votes the “right” way.
Own a Pet
I understand the appeal of pets, especially for poor people. In the video below, we see the plight of a homeless mother and daughter living in California. And I’m sure the only sentient creature that is genuinely excited to see them on a daily basis is the dog they have caged in the back of their car.
The need to matter is real. But if you’re poor, you got to resist the urge to matter via pet ownership. Pets simply require time and money you don’t have. Better to remain inconsequential and use the promise of pet ownership as a spur to righting your financial ship. Not fun, but infinitely more prudent.
Give to Charity
“Charity begins at home.” There’s a reason why earlier stewards of Western culture formulated this adage. They didn’t want poor people trying to help other poor people. A poor person’s primary job is to become non-poor. And that job becomes unnecessarily harder when a poor person’s time and money are diverted to anything that doesn’t improve his or her earning power and increase his or her savings. A poor person’s only charity should be him- or herself.
Final Thoughts
Okay, groovy freedomist, that’s all I got. What say you? Are these reasonable “no-go zones” for the poor? Or am I being a bit too curmudgeonly today? Let me know what you think when you get a chance. Peace.
I had noticed that Dave Ramsey turned off comments for the tuba player going a quarter of a million in debt.
So I found your post.
I would like to find a website or blog that analyzes what people are doing with music degrees and debt.
For academic year 2018-2019, undergraduate tuition & fees at Amherst College is $56,426. Food + apt = 20K more.
According to Amherst: “The goal of the music major at Amherst College is to provide you with a solid grounding in music theory and the fundamentals of composition, to teach you to think and write critically about music, and to help you achieve a level of sophisticated command in at least one of the following areas: performance or composition”.
$76,00 x 4 = about $280000 for “sophistication”.
Can you imagine the cult-like atmosphere you would have to create to have young people sacrifice their life and future to you?
I have been to Amherst. I am not an expert on cults, but it comes across as a cult.
I agree with that part about playing video games. They are a total time suck. I have seen too many young men spend hundreds of man-hours sitting in front of a video game console trying to put a ball into a basket. At least if they do this in real life they get the benefit of exercise and good health.
The amount of time playing games could have been spent learning a new language, starting a side gig, or going to school. You can spend money you don’t have to buy games, but not time working on building wealth.
To quote TLC: No I don’t want your number. And no I don’t want to give you mine.
Get a clue. Get off the couch and go to work. Good luck out there in the real world! I’m rooting for you.
Greenbacks Magnet recently posted…You Can’t Do That On Television Or With Your Finances
I’m an old fart, so the video game of my youth was pinball. But even during my college years, when video games began to proliferate (e.g., Pacman and Asteroids), I never understood the appeal. And what is it about guys? Why do they become obsessed with video games far more often than women do? Haha. It must have something to do with the evil matriarchy that’s ruling over us. Great freakin’ comment, my friend. Cheers.
Of all the games out there you could have said (Galaga, or for really old school fans Mega Mania and Space Invaders on Atari), and blog comments you could have replied to in all the world, you commented on mine. Sorry, old Casablanca reference there. Couldn’t help myself.
What’s really funny is that I just did a blog post last Friday on Nov. 1 about Pac-Man! I had to do a little bit of research and found out Pac-Man made a billion dollars and is one of the most recognizable and profitable video game characters of all time.
If I believed in coincidences, I would totally say this was one.
Kids were pumping more quarters into that arcade game than at the laundromat. Had they invested that money instead they might be one of Bill Gates, Oprah’s or George Lucas neighbors right now. haha.
Best Wishes, Miriam
Greenbacks Magnet recently posted…How To Collect Dividends Like Pac-Man Collects Power Pellets
“Great minds think alike.” I know it’s a cliche, but how else do you explain two bloggers independent of each other using Pacman to make a point? And you are spot on regarding the “pumping of quarters.” I didn’t “pump quarters” into an arcade game, I “pumped quarters” into beers. But the lesson is the same. Waste money when you are young and you will suffer when you are old. Great comment, Miriam. Cheers.
Interesting and thoughtful. Does not mean I agree with everything, but that is what we are supposed to do–think and logic the world around us so we can succeed. I do so agree with the not owning pets! MY GAWD! Pets are such a wonderful addition to our lives–providing we have already reached a point of complete financial stability. Just saying, my daughter has made so mad over getting pets and spending on pets!
Excellent point, Kay. Pets done right are a blessing. Pets done wrong are a curse.
“Employers, it turns out, covet people with technical skills—that is, they covet people who can improve the quality of their products or improve the efficiencies of their operations. They don’t give a crap about people who know nothing but are well-versed in the musings of bell hooks and Charles Murray.“
I certainly look forward to the day when I am out of the work force long enough to believe statements like this are true. Things have changed and more and more companies are making hiring decisions based on skin color and gender rather than merit.
Employers SHOULD operate on this basis, but sadly owners cannot hire HR managers who don’t compromise economic criteria with other criteria that have more to do with their social context
steve poling recently posted…Dave Ramsey Heresy
Yep. I don’t think you can emerge from college with an HR degree if you’re a “content of character” person. Nope. Our colleges only pump out graduates who worship at the altar of diversity.
Agreed. Diversity for the sake of diversity is a scourge.
Great points and very interesting definition of “poor.”
I think college is okay if you can get a scholarship or some sort. Or go to a community college for 2 years, then finish the last 2 in a university.
Pet – I’m not sure about. The problem with pets in the US is we treat them like kids. In other countries, if they get sick, they get put down. Here, people spend thousands for pet surgery and such.
Excellent point, my friend. College only hurts you if it saddles you with a lot of debt. Avoid the debt and your economic fortunes won’t be adversely affected.
I would add one more thing “Poor Should Not Do”: Do not drink alcohol. For one thing drinking alcohol is expensive. If you eat out and order any kind of alcoholic drink, it will most likely double your bill. If you instead just drink water, it is usually free! Additionally, you do not have to worry about being stopped on the way home and being issued a DUI by an alert Police Officer. Alcohol can be addictive, and can also be bad for your long term health. Just drink water and you will be healthy, and reach your financial goals much faster.
You could also add to alcohol: smoking, vaping, and taking any illegal drug.
Couldn’t agree more. Alcohol–and smoking, and vaping, and drugging–are big no-nos for anyone, especially the poor.
Poverty is a relative term. Anybody with my net worth or less is poor. Anybody with more than my net worth is rich. If you give everyone a million (inflation free) dollars, you’ll still have rich and poor, but their expectations of life and tokens of status will change.
OTOH, if you’re living in a place where people routinely starve to death despite readily available cheap food, it’s different.
“If you give everyone a million (inflation free) dollars, you’ll still have rich and poor, but their expectations of life and tokens of status will change.”
Because of insights like this, your comments never fail to make me a little wiser. Thank you.
Great post, Mr. G.
The “no-go” zones are applicable to anyone. Charity does begin at home. When the flight attendant tells you to put the oxygen mask on yourself before assisting your kid, it’s because if you pass out, your kid is out of luck. If you’re poor, you can’t help people financially.
I would say that the amount of news and talk radio one consumes is inversely proportional to their over all success. I can’t prove that, but it’s consistent with my observations. And, great video about the $280k tuba degree. I guess I’ll have to rethink my plans! But wait, what about my dreams???
LOL! Please don’t get a tuba degree. I’m sure some instruments are worthy of a degree, but the tuba isn’t one of them. Miles Davis didn’t choose the trumpet for nothing.
GREAT definition of “poor”, my friend, and certain to trigger some electron movement in the brains of your readers. Your thinking brings to mind a line from my post “Stealth Wealth”, in which I said:
“Visible wealth, while it looks good on the surface, may not be a true indication of real wealth. Who’s wealthier? The Stealthy, or the one with the $2M mansion?”
You’ve exceeded that with your definition “The one who doesn’t save 20% is Poor”. Simple, yet profound. Well done.
Oh, man. I forgot all about your “stealth wealth” post. That was a great freakin’ post. And I’m wondering if that’s the genesis of my 20% savings metric. Hmmmm. The plot thickens. The brilliant Mr. Groovy may not be so brilliant after all.
Interesting post, although I am having a hard time with your definition of poor. There certainly were times during our working careers where we weren’t able to 20% of our take home yet I wouldn’t have described ourselves as poor. As for charity….I volunteer at a local food pantry and the vast majority of the volunteers are hard-working and caring individuals who probably are saving for their futures, but not at 20%. Would you advocate they should not be serving their community until they save 20%? Without their support the food pantry couldn’t function and many more within the community would go to bed hungry. I think anyone who wants to help others less fortunate than themselves should…regardless of their personal savings rates. Glad you posted, it made me think!
Mr. P2F recently posted…Reflections
I hear ya, my friend. Maybe what I’m defining as poor is better understood as financial insecurity. Got to think about this one. And you’re not wrong about the charity part either. I’m just trying to emphasize that the financially insecure have to be very mindful of what they’re doing with their free time. Someone living in a tent probably shouldn’t be volunteering at a food pantry. But someone who is saving ten percent of his or her takehome pay can certainly be forgiven for being so noble. Love the way your mind works, my friend. Cheers.
Some of your points are OK, but there are many who do not have enough money to cover the basics. Just look at the minimum wage levels across the US. A child without adequate food and insecure housing will have a hard time focusing on studies. As for sociology, the statistics it accompanies are excellent training for analytics. I will be eternally grateful for my academic background in sociology. Its uses have expanded far beyond my career in criminology.
Well said, BK. These rules aren’t really applicable to those who don’t have enough money to cover the basics. (Although I have seen news clips of homeless people who own pets.) I do, however, disagree a little with your assessment of sociology. Sociology can give you more wisdom and help you get comfortable with statistics. But you don’t have to go to college to get that wisdom and statistics-related comfort. Just read sociology journals online or buy some sociology books. That’s just as effective, and it’s a lot cheaper than spending $300 to $400 per credit for a sociology course.
“Just read sociology journals online or buy some sociology books. That’s just as effective, and it’s a lot cheaper than spending $300 to $400 per credit for a sociology course.”
Yeah, no. That’s pretty absurd. Part of college is learning how to read the literature of your field, particularly in the sciences (even social sciences). Its like giving an ape an iPhone. They might be able to turn it on–and their Instagram would be hilarious–but they’re not going to use it properly.
I agree with your point, generally, but you can get a good job with a Comms degree–I work in the field. I don’t have a Communications degree, but I’ve worked for a couple of VPs who’ve had them. Sociology, as Bev said, is good analytical training for plenty of fields.
Gender studies? Well, you might have a point. Plenty of majors seem to exist just to create future perpetual grad students.
That said, people can make smarter decisions outside of the perceived “way to do things” around education. I would say the average 18 year old probably isn’t ready to commit to a field of study. (And not just the low performers in high school–my class valedictorian dropped out of college because she just couldn’t hack it, mentally.)
Taking a year off for a paid internship. Two years of community college. A stint in the military. These are all good ways to bridge the maturity gap.
Your advice is good on the aggregate, much in the same way BMI is a good measure across the population but might not be helpful for certain individuals. I have plenty of counter examples–kids who underperformed in high school who excelled in University (and vice versa).
For all, however, we need to rethink the university experience. Not every kid should go to college–trades are, in fact, a good alternative (most of the expensive homes on my street have tool-laden F-150s in the garage). And you should never mortgage your future for a degree that won’t get you anywhere.
You may be right, my friend. I took sociology years ago, and I don’t remember books such as “Twenty Years at Hull House,” “The Other America,” and “The Unheavenly City Revisited” as being so arcanely written that I needed a professor to help me distill their meanings and insights. I no doubt got more out of these books with the guidance of a professor than I would have gotten if I read them on my own. But how much more? And was the delta worth the cost of tuition? That delta may have been worth it back in the day when college was cheap. But today? I don’t see it. I really appreciate the push back, Greg. Great freakin’ comment.
Those books are one thing, but sociology journals–peer reviewed science–is a helluvanother. I studied the sciences as an undergrad, but I’m in communications now.
My skills in teasing through arcane knowledge to get some digestible points keeps food on my table.
Of course, I went to a public university in the 90s. I paid less for four years than some friends paid for a single year of a private school, even then.
Regardless, my pushback is all meant in love. I wouldn’t be here if I wasn’t so entertained, informed and delighted.
“Those books are one thing, but sociology journals–peer reviewed science–is a helluvanother.”
Very true, my friend. Bravo. And I know your push back is for all the right reasons. It’s commenters like you that keep me blogging. My blogging is just me thinking out loud, and I need people like yourself to point out my errors. There’s no way I can grow without such tender mercies. So keep pushing back, sir. I have a lot of faulty thinking that needs to be corrected. Cheers.
Excellent post. Other things that steal personal wealth might be smoking, drinking, drugs, tattoos, lotteries and California.
LOL! Best comment of the year. Check out this YouTube series I recently discovered. Except for California, the people in this series check off every one of your personal-wealth stealers.
The Great British Benefits Handout
I think avoidance of consumerism is a big part of staying away from being financially challenged. Buy only what you need, and many people will suddenly find they have money to save and invest. It’s fine to spend on wants occasionally, but when people must have the latest in fashion, technology, vehicles, and home décor, and are convinced that they deserve fancy, expensive vacations, they are setting themselves up for a lifetime of owing rather than FI. Don’t become a slave to what other people think you should have and decide for yourself what is truly needed vs. what is just wanted.
Excellent point, Pat! Mindless consumerism is the downfall of most of us.