[Closed] Why are rich people always so dull ?

One close friend has a jaw dropping amount of cash in the bank, but rarely dips in to it because it is not "his" to spend frivolously.

whose is it then?

Just while we're on the subject of massive negative generalisations, can someone explain to me why:

1. All Muslims are murdering extremists?
2. Why all women are completely and utterly irrational?
3. Why are all gay men so promiscuous?
4. Why are all vegans so utterly as dull as the rich...

I could go on but I think you get my point?

whose is it then?

He always refers to it as family money, currently entrusted to him!

A load of his family's land was sold off many years ago and although I think much of it has been reinvested elsewhere, there is still a load of cash in the bank.

He tends not to spend it on depreciating assets (so drives a cheap car, despite being a bit of a petrol head), but does spend a fair bit on houses (lovely ones in Yorkshire, north Wales and now Thailand). He also uses some for starting new businesses, he's a chef by trade and has always worked full time since I've know him, so likes setting up restaurants in various places. Nothing spectacular, but enough to provide him with a decent living.

What about rich, gay, female, vegan Muslamic swans?

Ah now they are the worst Flashy!

not being funny or anything but your name is Graham, you live in the midlands and you like trailquests.
now some people if forced to pick one word to indicate their opinion of you might jump to conclusions and form an untrue opinion from those facts and come up with the word ‘dull’

i think its something to do with owning a santa cruz bronson c with enve wheels

...massive negative generalisations...

If you'll excuse the attention grabbing hyperbole in the headline

I shall file this alongside "no offence, but..." and "with all due respect..."

1. All Muslims are murdering extremists?
2. Why all women are completely and utterly irrational?
3. Why are all gay men so promiscuous?
4. Why are all vegans so utterly as dull as the rich...

Not all gay men are promiscuous.

Not all gay men are promiscuous.

Wooooossssshhhhh! 🙂

So you're happy that 1, 2 and 4 are correct though?

I think you fell into his trap 🙂

There seem to be some faulty irony-meters on STW today

I used to work in a fairly low rent bar in Derby and, a couple of days a week, a fairly unassuming chap would come in, have a couple of pints of whatever was on offer. We all just assumed he was one of the many men of a certain age who would collect their pension at the post office next door and give most of it to us. Any way, one day we were having a chat about top gear/cars and he pipes up outlining reasons why he didnt choose a number of hypermegaexpensive supercars (all of the reasons were very nit picky, silly things)

'Alright John, what would you have if your numbers came up?'
'I bought a lamborghini actually'
'Righto, sure you did...'

Conversation tails off, I think nothing of it. Next day what turns up outside the pub? A black lambo, with an incredibly 'Told you so' looking John in the drivers seat. Apparently he rarely used it on the road (mainly track) as he didnt like the attention.

I think you fell into his trap

😆

Although, if it wasn't a trap, you just handed the Edinburgh Defence on a platter!

It wasn't a trap it was a point.

I cannot abide hypocrisy. All other human failings are fine, but hypocrisy is just unacceptable.

I'm guessing from "[i]Point 4[/i]" that geetee1972 knows the OP too 😀

You know I think I do know him - were you the chap I donated the guitar to MTG? I met your wife at the Garden Centre that time.

No offence meant and non taken.

I'm guessing from "Point 4" that geetee1972 knows the OP too

I wasn't sure, but I chuckled when I read it!

ffs - how many stereotypes. Such a funny thread.

I don't know what you call rich, but my mate lives in Monaco and paid cash for his £3m superyacht (OK it was 12 months old) - dull cartainly is not the way I would describe him!
I could post pics but I'm not going to!

Odd though, for every über-rich person building spaceships or giant clocks or exploring the depths in submarines there must be hundreds just content to live the quiet life. Fair enough, I suppose, but I'd definitely find some bonkers project to sink my teeth into if I won the EuroMillions!

but I'd definitely find some bonkers project to sink my teeth into if I won the EuroMillions!

My wife and often have that conversation of an evening. We would set up some sort of charitable trust, probably based around providing education access to underprivileged children through scholarships.

A friend of mine managed to work hard enough, pay off his mortgage and save enough cash that by the age of 37, he didn't need to work again as long as we was careful. He then started working voluntarily for a charity he'd always been partially involved with.

I only know one person (at work) who is wealthy and they freely admit they have no hobbies, no friends and no family. Quite proud of it in fact.

Nice cars and a never ending stream of Grand Designs type houses that they spend years doing up and then leave but nothing else apart from that. And work.

all part of life's rich tapestry eh

I wonder how many couples discuss all the philanthropic things they will do when they win the lottery - it's a kind of mindset that makes you believe you'll have a better chance of winning, a bit like saying prayers to get into heaven 8)

He always refers to it as family money, currently entrusted to him!

We have a number of friends who are in a similar situation where there grandparents / great grandparents made oodles of money and that has been passed down to them to invest, grow and enjoy. The family philosophies are that each generation has to leave more money for that before them. They enjoy very nice / priviledged lives but not at the expense of the family fortune.

A much better philosophy than the "new money" don't work cause daddy is rich and will leave sweet FA for their kids.

a never ending stream of Grand Designs type houses that they spend years doing up

Sounds like their hobbies are architecture, design and building. Which is pretty similar to Meccano.

🙂

I wonder how many couples discuss all the philanthropic things they will do when they win the lottery - it's a kind of mindset that makes you believe you'll have a better chance of winning, a bit like saying prayers to get into heaven

Funnily enough we won £50 on the lottery on the weekend. I bought my son a new bike helmet though so not sure that counts as philanthropic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McAfee

another not-a-paris-hilton-fan, and the bike press mocked royally when it was announced, until they started winning races and developing stars (Maverick Vinales, came 3rd in the championship).

[img] [/img]

Saw a documentary about some tedious daytime TV chef who spent something like £600k on an old ferrari just to enter the Mille Miglia. I was gutted when it blew up. 🙂

James Martin? He hates cyclists you know....?!

There was a young lady at JLP when I worked there who'd won millions on the lottery, just carried on doing her very ordinary IT job.

Wealth managers talk about rags to riches in 3 generations;
There's a generation that make all the money - self-made. They work hard, have positive values and a sensible attitude towards the wealth they created and tend to be responsible with it, having worked hard to create it.
The next generation grow up knowing some of this story, and with most of the values of their parents. Having seen the sheer effort their parents made, they tend to be responsible with the wealth.
Then the grandkids come along. All they know is big houses, private schools, wealth that's just 'there'. They've not worked for it and neither did they experience their grandparents working for it so they tend to take it for granted and squander the lot.
It's only the successful wealthy families that can engender in each generation that their job is to look after that wealth and pass it on to the next generation.

I have a theory that the Western world is going through an extended version of this - the Empire/Victorian generation built the infrastructure and institutions that our grandparents grew up with (look at how many UK houses are Victorian, and the railways for e.g.)

Our grandparents generation knew enough about it to not take the wealth for granted - helped no doubt by the scarcities of material goods during and between WW1, Great Depression and WW2. Then the baby boomers came along and went 'wa-haaaay' and wasted the lot. We're now picking up the pieces and could well be doing so for a couple more generations. Unless of course we can find some new way to generate wealth for ourselves...

Brooes I think there is some merit to your theory. I have read many times in various journals etc, that the babyboomers have lived through the single greatest step change in economic wealth that we've have ever witnessed and have amassed a huge amount of wealth. It is generation X that has over spent trying to keep up with things like rising house prices (driven largely by the baby boomers in the 80s and 90s).

Couple that with the population demographic that looks like an inverted triangle and a pension system that has always been based on the current generation of workers financing the current generation of retirees and you have the mess we are in today.

What brooes said.

The [s]rich[/s] wealthy with real class are those that can keep on growing the family generated wealth year on year through similar hard work.

I had forgotten how deeply Paris Hilton affects me. She is very beautiful.

🙂

A lot of rich people are bankers/traders/city types, and in that line of work you don't get time to do anything else apart from make loads of money.

I have a theory that the Western world is going through an extended version of this

Except that for the economy as a whole (rather than individual people) spending loads is beneficial.

Then the baby boomers came along and went 'wa-haaaay' and wasted the lot. We're now picking up the pieces and could well be doing so for a couple more generations.

Yup, my rents are going to squander all of theirs by becoming water pik....I jest....I mean boaters. Looking at the numbers, when they get to old to live on a damp boat, they'll suddenly realise that they'll have to move into social housing. YAY for a self-induced council house move!

Except that for the economy as a whole (rather than individual people) spending loads is beneficial.

Economies can and have worked with people investing their wealth better, the ridiculous amount of cash flow is creating growth....at the very top of the pyramid and creating debt slaves at the bottom.

Economies can and have worked with people investing their wealth better

Yeah possibly, but still, spending creates economic growth.

LHS - The upper classes refer to it as being rich not wealthy (google U/non-U) - typical middle class slip-up! 😀

I'm not a fan of inherited riches it helps imbed and grow inequalities - and inequalities are a big problem for growth in capitalism. The more that rich people use there money to accumulate more riches (rather than spend it) concentrating wealth - then the lower the proportion of wealth that goes into consumption of production. [EDIT] That is surplus value of production goes to the owner of the capital rather than labour - who then re-invest surplus +capital and repeats. This is one of the reasons why the last crash happened - excess of capital looking for investment and the repackaged subprime mortgage market provided a vehicle. Whereas labour tends to spend what it earns rather than accumulate driving the economy.

Before anyone else says it - this is traditionally a Marxist analysis - but there is much concern about just this effect in decidedly non-left organisations like the IMF (and eg the NYT ran a series about whether Marxists analysis was right).

So all those grandchildren blowing family fortunes on pink Bentleys are doing us all a favour.

Nick Mason has got a fantastic car collection, which he does actually drive.

LHS - The upper classes refer to it as being rich not wealthy

Wealth transcends class.

There are plenty of uppers who have no class as well as non-uppers.

I'm not a fan of inherited riches it helps imbed and grow inequalities - and inequalities are a big problem for growth in capitalism. The more that rich people use there money to accumulate more riches (rather than spend it) concentrating wealth - then the lower the proportion of wealth that goes into consumption of production. Whereas labour tends to spend what it earns rather than accumulate driving the economy. Before anyone else says it - this is traditionally a Marxist analysis - but there is much concern about just this effect in decidedly non-left organisations like the IMF (and eg the NYT ran a series about whether Marxists analysis was right).

You could make the counter argument that if the masses were encouraged to create more wealth instead of giving it to the upper classes, then they would be able to pass on better inheritances to their children.

All we are doing by blowing savings, is encouraging a debt fuelled econonomy - which turns us all into chumps for the upper echelons of society to feed off of. That will fuel inequality as well.

I guess if the upper classes/corporations didn't have that kind of money to lend in the first place then there couldn't be a debt driven economy....

@molgrips - City people do their best to have [i]some[/i] fun you know and their are plenty of financiers which give very generously to charity

@brooess - that's one reason wealthy families create family trusts, these are managed by a panel of people and it makes it difficult for one rouge generation / offspring to blow the lot. The grandkids, great-grandkids get an income but never get their hands on the "lump sum"

There are plenty of upper class people who do not have much money. Many families wealth was destroyed by the death duties levied after the war.

Tom - the debt we take on is the way that consumption is grows.

Consumption needs to continue, but the rich are accumulating a growing proportion of the surplus value. So they lend the money to us so we can consume and keep buying stuff to keep the economy going. BTW I'm not a conspiracy theorist - all this stuff happens as the result of individually rational decisions - it just has a potentially destabilising impact that is being realised post last crisis. Unfortunately its very difficult to do anything about.