PDA

View Full Version : The Science of Getting Rich



SuuT
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 07:43 PM
CHAPTER 1 - The Right To Be Rich




Whatever may be said in praise of poverty, the fact remains that it is not possible to live a really complete or successful life unless one is rich. No man can rise to his greatest possible height in talent or soul development unless he has plenty of money; for to unfold the soul and to develop talent he must have many things to use, and he cannot have these things unless he has money to buy them with.

A man develops in mind, soul, and body by making use of things, and society is so organized that man must have money in order to become the possessor of things; therefore, the basis of all advancement for man must be the science of getting rich. The object of all life is development; and everything that lives has an inalienable right to all the development it is capable of attaining.

Man's right to life means his right to have the free and unrestricted use of all the things which may be necessary to his fullest mental, spiritual, and physical unfoldment; or, in other words, his right to be rich.

In this book, I shall not speak of riches in a figurative way; to be really rich does not mean to be satisfied or contented with a little. No man ought to be satisfiedwith a little if he is capable of using and enjoying more. The purpose of Nature is the advancement and unfoldment of life; and every man should have all that can contribute to the power; elegance, beauty, and richness of life; to be content with less is sinful.

The man who owns all he wants for the living of all the life he is capable of living is rich; and no man who has not plenty of money can have all he wants. Life has advanced so far, and become so complex, that even the most ordinary man or woman requires a great amount of wealth in order to live in a manner that even approaches completeness.

Every person naturally wants to become all that they are capable of becoming; this desire to realize innate possibilities is inherent in human nature; we cannot help wanting to be all that we can be. Success in life is becoming what you want to be; you can become what you want to be only by making use of things, and you can have the free use of things only as you become rich enough to buy them. To understand the science of getting rich is therefore the most essential of all knowledge.


There is nothing wrong in wanting to get rich. The desire for riches is really the desire for a richer, fuller, and more abundant life; and that desire is praise worthy. The man who does not desire to live more abundantly is abnormal, and so the man who does not desire to have money enough to buy all he wants is abnormal.

There are three motives for which we live; we live for the body, we live for the mind, we live for the soul. No one of these is better or holier than the other; all are alike desirable, and no one of the three--body, mind, or soul--can live fully if either of the others is cut short of full life and expression. It is not right or noble to live only for the soul and deny mind or body; and it is wrong to live for the intellect and deny body or soul.

We are all acquainted with the loathsome consequences of living for the body and denying both mind and soul; and we see that real life means the complete expression of all that man can give forth through body, mind, and soul. Whatever he can say, no man can be really happy or satisfied unless his body is living fully in every function, and unless the same is true of his mind and his soul.

Wherever there is unexpressed possibility, or function not performed, there is unsatisfied desire. Desire is possibility seeking expression, or function seeking performance. Man cannot live fully in body without good food, comfortable clothing, and warm shelter; and without freedom from excessive toil. Rest and recreation are also necessary to his physical life. He cannot live fully in mind without books and time to study them, without opportunity for travel and observation, or without intellectual companionship. To live fully in mind he must have intellectual recreations, and must surround himself with all the objects of art and beauty he is capable of using and appreciating.

To live fully in soul, man must have love; and love is denied expression by poverty. A man's highest happiness is found in the bestowal of benefits on those he loves; love finds its most natural and spontaneous expression in giving. The man who has nothing to give cannot fill his place as a husband or father, as a citizen, or as a man.

It is in the use of material things that a man finds full life for his body, develops his mind, and unfolds his soul. It is therefore of supreme importance to him that he should be rich. It is perfectly right that you should desire to be rich; if you are a normal man or woman you cannot help doing so. It is perfectly right that you should give your best attention to the Science of Getting Rich, for it is the noblest and most necessary of all studies.

If you neglect this study, you are derelict in your duty to yourself, to God and humanity; for you can render to God and humanity no greater service than to make the most of yourself...




As the preface to Wattles' book clearly states: "This book is pragmatical, not philosophical; a practical manual, not a treatise upon theories. It is intended for the men and women whose most pressing need is for money; who wish to get rich first, and philosophize afterward. It is for those who have, so far, found neither the time, the means, nor the opportunity to go deeply into the study of metaphysics, but who want results and who are willing to take the conclusions of science as a basis for action, without going into all the processes by which those conclusions were reached...''

However, in the same preface, he admits to the fact that the underpinnings of the text itself is gleaned from such notable figures as Descartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Schopenhauer, Hegel, and Emerson; and such notable theories as that of monism as related to Hinduism. So, in a very real sense Wattles is creating not only a Science of getting rich, but a love of the wisdom of any such endeavor; ergo, a philosophy.



I have only posted this first section of the book for discussion as I can remember the visceral reaction I had to it when I first read it many moons ago: I was sickened, and at the same time - could not stop the laughter that stemmed from my complete agreement.



Some bold statements are made, that much is obvious. However, I am fascinated by how people react to these statements, and would love to begin a discussion concerning the text, as it is capable of accommodating such a vast range of perspectives and input.


For anyone interested in reading the entire book, it can be found here: http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0304spiritpsych/030412.Wattle.Getting.Rich.pdf (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soil andhealth.org%2F03sov%2F0304spiritpsych% 2F030412.Wattle.Getting.Rich.pdf)

Janus
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 08:35 PM
I already stopped reading after this.

...for to unfold the soul and to develop talent he must have many things to use, and he cannot have these things unless he has money to buy them with.
Totally wrong as long as one is not extremely poor one can always use the internet + local public libraries to do that. I never needed to pay anything for all the things I learned and am still learning and I hate to be arrogant but my knowledge surpasses the one of others paying for that stuff. I think it's because my motivation is internal (curiousity) and not external (wealth). I think that we should neither strive for poverty nor for being rich but simply for those things we need to develope ourselves and therefore take the middle way.

Cuchulain
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:11 PM
I already stopped reading after this.

Totally wrong as long as one is not extremely poor one can always use the internet + local public libraries to do that. I never needed to pay anything for all the things I learned and am still learning and I hate to be arrogant but my knowledge surpasses the one of others paying for that stuff. I think it's because my motivation is internal (curiousity) and not external (wealth). I think that we should neither strive for poverty nor for being rich but simply for those things we need to develope ourselves and therefore take the middle way.

I totally agree. After graduating college after 5 years, the first thing that crossed my mind was I could have learned all that in 3 months with a library card, and saved $70,000 (minus the dollar fifty for the library card)

SuuT
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:32 PM
You both have dealt with only one of aspect of Wattles' triad: the mind. He continues, thus:


...There are three motives for which we live; we live for the body, we live for the mind, we live for the soul. No one of these is better or holier than the other; all are alike desirable, and no one of the three--body, mind, or soul--can live fully if either of the others is cut short of full life and expression. It is not right or noble to live only for the soul and deny mind or body; and it is wrong to live for the intellect and deny body or soul. We are all acquainted with the loathsome consequences of living for the body and denying both mind and soul; and we see that real life means the complete expression of all that man can give forth through body, mind, and soul. Whatever he can say, no man can be really happy or satisfied unless his body is living fully in every function, and unless the same is true of his mind and his soul. Wherever there is unexpressed possibility, or function not performed, there is unsatisfied desire. Desire is possibility seeking expression, or function seeking performance...

Can man live on intellect alone?

Ultimately, for Wattles, it is about time enough to better all the aspects of self: if either of you had more time, what would you do with it?

By what means does one attain more time...?

Janus
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 10:47 PM
I already confessed that I stopped reading after that paragraph already but I simply do not live for the body. As long as it is not hurting I'm fully fine with it and do not care about it at all. I'm mostly living on intellect and maybe a bit on soul but body? Not at all. If I personally had more time ,I have already enough of it, I'd spend it the same way.

Cuchulain
Friday, September 7th, 2007, 11:18 PM
I look at it from the perspective that if someone was never rich, and gives that as a reason for not living the life he/she wanted, then that person has noone to blame but themselves.

I can see how wealth obviously enhances ones life, but to consider it a prerequisite for fulfillment as outlandish to me, and indicates a very closed minded and materialistic way of thinking.

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:35 AM
I consider material wealth and intellectual development equally important, and will strive for both.

Janus
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:49 AM
I consider material wealth and intellectual development equally important, and will strive for both.

Why material wealth and intellectual developement? The thesis of the author was that wealth per se is not important but a crucial requirement for the latter so I'm curious why you're striving for wealth itself.

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 12:50 AM
Why material wealth and intellectual developement? The thesis of the author was that wealth per se is not important but a crucial requirement for the latter so I'm curious why you're striving for wealth itself.
Perhaps because intellectual development is not my sole aim in life?

SuuT
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 01:06 AM
I consider material wealth and intellectual development equally important, and will strive for both.

Kudos to you for that!

I think there tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from most people; indeed I know it to be true as I have used this text for years in my ethics classes. Without fail, the standard replies, as we have seen, appear first: an outright refusal to even continue reading the text, the word 'materialistic' ALWAYS enters the scence early, and it it always from individuals who have a reflexive aversion to wealth qua wealth.

Wealth is very often concomitant, epiphenomenal, with the very potentiality to be Noble. - Wattles explains why... if people will read and objectively analyse: what he is saying cannot be less 'materialistic.'

It always (and still!) surprises me the extent to which the overwhelming majority of people who read this chapter are almost transposed into an alternate universe! - what I mean is that it cannot be more evident that Wattles wants to use wealth as a tool; not the pursuit and aquisition of wealth for the sake of its pursuit and aquisition.

I'd still love to see a discussion come to brew; I just hope people will at least read the excerpt.:D

Jäger
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 10:37 AM
I agree with him, however what stains his theory is the people in our world who are rich but don't have talent at all.
Such examples, which seem prominent in our mind produce the counter reactions you mentioned, maybe the likes of Paris Hilton. And of course: envy. In Germany we say "Envy is the most honest form of paying tribute." :D
However I can find nothing new in this text, we live in a world consisting of matter, we consist of matter, of course we ought to be materialist, matter gives the advantage of survival, all abstarct things are just that abstract, I can't hit my enemy with Germanicness and I can't feed my children Newton's Law.

Janus
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 10:42 AM
Perhaps because intellectual development is not my sole aim in life?

Unimportant since he did not only refer to the developement of your mind but also of your body and soul. Wealth was not the goal but the way to achieve goals for him.

Furthermore I did not refuse to read the rest because of "materialism" which I did not find but because of simple flaws in his logical because all these things are easily possible without wealth (atleast if you do not consider the financial possibilities of an avarage Westerner as wealth).

SineNomine
Saturday, September 8th, 2007, 01:40 PM
Unimportant since he did not only refer to the developement of your mind but also of your body and soul. Wealth was not the goal but the way to achieve goals for him.
Perhaps I was not explicit enough - I value wealth both as a means for fulfilling material as well as intellectual ends. Clearer now?

Hersir
Sunday, September 9th, 2007, 12:47 AM
"Formal education will get you a education, self-education will make you a fortune." I am not sure who said it..

SwordOfTheVistula
Monday, September 10th, 2007, 06:26 AM
"Formal education will get you a education, self-education will make you a fortune." I am not sure who said it..

Most employers look for formal education though

brianweg
Monday, September 10th, 2007, 06:28 PM
Totally wrong as long as one is not extremely poor one can always use the internet + local public libraries to do that.

Or one can get paid to learn..as I did...there many things I know that I learned at work, while getting a paycheck. Problem comes up..I figure out how to solve it using information on the internet..something solved and something new learned.


Most employers look for formal education though

It depends, if you have, say, 10 years of experience, they don't generally even care about formal education at that point. If you've got no experience at all, then they do want a degree of some sort. You aren't going to get more than an entry-level job with no education and no experience, but after you've been at that job a year or so you've got experience, so you can look for another job that pays better..stick around there a while...and repeat.

Needless to say, you need to start working early on in your life to make this work..someone who starts this in their mid-20s after flunking out of college, well, so sorry..

Cuchulain
Monday, September 10th, 2007, 06:39 PM
Most employers look for formal education though

A great many of those doing the employing however, are self-educated.

cerebro
Friday, September 14th, 2007, 01:17 PM
The best way to get rich: Write a book about how to get rich.

United Faith
Friday, September 21st, 2007, 10:33 AM
The best way to get rich: Write a book about how to get rich.

So very true. People will be forever addicted to those get-rich-quick books despite how full of crap they are.

I used to be very good at making money but I've lost interest in it now.

rainman
Saturday, November 22nd, 2008, 11:00 PM
So where is the information on how to get rich? I don't see anything. Just a bunch of long winded philosophy about nothing.

The Horned God
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 01:24 AM
So where is the information on how to get rich? I don't see anything. Just a bunch of long winded philosophy about nothing.

There can be no such thing as a book that is going to reveal the best way for you specifically to get rich. The most likely approach would be completely different for each person depending on their talents and abilities and on a lot of other factors as well.

However a positive attitude towards the accumulation of money is pretty essential. Someone who thinks that rich people are necessarily immoral or who believes that "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" is not going to get rich because they harbour negative associations with wealth.

I believe this is the reason wattles book concentrates so much on personal philosophy towards money. Later on in the book he does talk more about some of the actions that need to be taken on the way to wealth, such as finding a mentor and building a circle of like minded friends, etc. Specific how-to type information is pretty scanty though, in this or in any other book of the type. Many of the later get rich books by lesser authors repeat to a greater of lesser extent the advise in this book especially when it comes to personal philosophy.

In short, reading a book is not going to make anyone rich, it might however give you an example of the correct mental attitude to have if you intend to pursue wealth seriously.

lei.talk
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 08:33 AM
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=852599#post852599
if you read the instructions, beforehand,
you should have no trouble designing a business
to generate cash-flow for your family.
this will allow your children to enjoy natural lives
away from the urban worker-ghettos that have, obviously,
juvenilised the expression of our genes.

as living nordic exemplars,
their superiority will be obvious to all.

if you attempt to utilise the contemporary memes,
you will be trapped on the wage-slave's tread-mill.
there has been no "paradigm-shift";
the natural laws always apply.


i advise every one to, first,
save up their "drop dead!" money.
that is the amount of money
that allows you to refuse to compromise your principles.

then utilise compound-interest to double that money
(the "rule of seventy (http://www.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ355/choi/Rule70.pdf)" does that in one decade)
or by investing in a worthy business enterprise
or by purchasing homes.

when you become wealthy enough,
rather than living in seclusion,
my advice is to develop a business.

i prefer small businesses,
because they do not attract the government's attention,
you can exercise closer control
and you get to inter-face with many persons.

pick a business that you would patronise.
i love to read; i grew up in libraries.
my first business was a news-stand.

my garage and patio was cluttered
with my exercise and martial arts equipment,
so i opened a palaestra.
i had more room
for more equipment
and more persons to practice on.
...

some of your employees will rise to independence.
finance their businesses
so they can be the good example to others
that you were to them.
persons learn by example.
...

my point is, almost any one can make good money
if they recognise their unique talent
and develop it into a marketable skill.

wage-slavery will not allow you to protect your family
from the evil influences of the workers' ghetto.


the largest expenses that you are likely have
are food and shelter.
as long as you are buying those from some one,
you will have money-problems.
...smaller farmers can't make a living anymore
(the land of my familly measures about 1200 acres...
and that's not enough to make a living)even a small piece of land is enough
to feed your family and make a living.
you may need to wrap a green-house around your home.
more likely, you need to grow specialty-items
that no one else is offering for sale.
do not waste your energy competing with others
(demonstrate your unique talents and skills
in every thing you do - it is easier and you will be happier).
...

always keep in mind the original and proper sequence:
families produced their own food
on the clan-estate (which had accrued over generations).
they would take their surplus production
to the cross-roads on market-day to trade
and, then, retire to their land with their gains.

the only persons that lingered at the cross-roads
(past market-day) were those who offered inappropriate goods
or whose skills were inadequate
to garner them patronage on an estate.

do you not see city-life as full of artifice?
do you wish your children born and raised
at the cross-roads?
Adam Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith) -
The greatest tragedy of the poor is the poverty of their aspirations.http://www.capitalism.net/
...capitalism
which is not a policy or a doctrine,
but (instead) a description of voluntary transactions
among individuals who are productive enough
to possess a surplus to trade
toward their mutual benefit (http://www.capitalism.net/).

Fortis_in_Arduis
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 12:38 PM
Looks good. I would like to cultivate a desire to create and use wealth wisely, instead of thinking about spending it. I feature of the manner in which we are farmed has been that we are not taught money management at school, as though such necessities should only be for the few. Indeed university students are something of a commodity today, rather than themselves being the investors.

Imperator X
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 11:05 PM
Suppose you were given 50K, and that was all you had. What would be the most effective way to generate capital on the stock market, bonds etc ?

The Horned God
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 11:19 PM
Suppose you were given 50K, and that was all you had. What would be the most effective way to generate capital on the stock market, bonds etc ?

I reckon with 50k you'd make more money by starting a retail business than by trading stocks, i.e buy stock (and shift it) not stocks. ;)

Loki
Sunday, November 23rd, 2008, 11:44 PM
Suppose you were given 50K, and that was all you had. What would be the most effective way to generate capital on the stock market, bonds etc ?

I would probably put 40k in secure government bonds, and speculate with the rest (10k) on more risky options like stocks. Fact is, your parents could have bought Japanese stocks 30 years ago, and still had a loss today on their investment. The stock market is not for everyone, it confounds even the most intelligent.

Always try to limit your risk, and never use a large portion of your initial capital. If all goes wrong, you will have something to fall back on.

The Horned God
Monday, November 24th, 2008, 12:30 AM
^ I don't know what the situation is like in Britain but in Ireland government bonds are only a reasonable investment as long as you are not in a high income tax bracket;


Government bonds

A bond is simply a loan in the form of a security with different terminology.

It is a debt on which the issuer is obliged to repay the principal and interest (the coupon) at a later date, termed maturity.

Government bonds are usually referred to as risk-free bonds, because the government can raise taxes or simply print more money to redeem the bond at maturity.

The National Treasury Management Agency has responsibility for bonds issued by the Government. Despite repeated attempts, officials in the NTMA would not return calls last week.

But Goodbody Stockbrokers' Neil Carroll says you can buy Government bonds through a stockbroker or through you bank branch. "Bonds may suit people who have become risk averse in this type of environment, but they are less tax efficient than deposits," he added.

Individuals will pay a price that comes with the security of Government bonds because the interest income is taxed at your higher income tax rate (41pc if you are a higher earner) as opposed to DIRT of 20pc.

Bond interests, or coupons, provide a return of about 4.25pc at the moment, Mr Carroll added.

The tax situation on bonds means they are not a good option for higher earners.

Source. (http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/investments/the-lowdown-on-safe-investments-1480448.html)


For someone who is paying tax at the higher rate a 3% savings account at the bank might be a better option. Or even the post office.

rainman
Monday, November 24th, 2008, 12:39 AM
I know how to make a lot of money. In our system capital begets more capital. It isn't fair at all but working doesn't pay. Thus it would make sense to "live like a Jew" and not spend money whereever humanly possible. $1 saved today is like $10 tommorow. Though %99 of my problem is fidning other people. Most of my money goes into paying rent and other things that could easily be solved by working as a group. Since I am surounded only by theives, liar, uncivilized morons and the like when I try to get a roomate or something they just steal from me cause me more problems and expense than I had to begin with.

Especially white Americans have this notion of living very expensively. Everyone needs their own place, their own car, all these useless appliances, cell phones, lap top etc. Waste, waste, waste. This is putting us at a HUGE disadvantage to other people. Mexicans for example usually come up here and work 5-8 years and then retire for the rest of their lives. They use one van and all car pool. They all cram into one apartment or house. Maybe we shouldn't be that extreme, you have to be sanitary, but we waste about %80 of our money I think. One example I saw on PBS this lady says she knew a friend that deposited her money in a bank. Like 50 k or something. Got %4 interest or something. The other friend borrowed 50 k at %13 interest. From the same bank!! Wal street is just slurping up the difference, the friend could have loaned the money to the other one. That's why we need to for local networks. Rent off of each other and family. Buy off each other etc. Otherwise a lot of your wealth is just being siphoned off by walstreet.

But anyway how to invest 50K. Depends what you are good at. If you are bad at math and you aren't business smart you probaby will loose money in any investment. In that case go with government bonds or bank CDs that have a guranteed rate of return. The easiest way besides that is real estate. Buy a house and rent it out. Or buy a house, fix it up and resell. Obviously now is not a good time to sell though. You will need a good income to cover hard times. Like if a renter moves out and the place is empty for several months. However generally the renter will pay your mortgage and always get a 15 year mortgage its almost the same monthly rate as a 30 year. Then in 15 years your renters have bought you a 100 k house or whatever. You just need like the down payment and credit or if you pay with cash whatever. It will be work. You will get bad renters sometimes, you will have to do repairs. It isnt' cakewalk but its a lot easier money than a job unless you make a really good salary at your job.

Most people I talk to about real estate don't believe me. Yet my own dad has made a killing off of it. It seems unbelievable, but I think rent is over priced as well as home prices. But yeah. All of it is unbelievable. Money makes more money to such an extent that its absurd and workers are screwed over all the time (as well as consumers). Most rich people don't fool with real estate especially fixing up cheap crappy homes and renting in low or middle income areas. They feel its too much work. And for them it is. They can drop a couple million into some big corporate deal and make a %30 return in one year. But for a normal person its the best way to make money.

Stocks you have to know what you are doing. I mean take a little mini course in it or something. Even then it still is a risk. Granted a risk where you are likely to make money if you know what you are doing, but still even the smartest investor can loose money. Generally this is why you only put a small percentage of your investment in "high risk" which can also have high returns but don't put more in than you can afford to loose. Like maybe %10 or something if you know what you are doing. If anyone tells you a stock is safe or a sure thing they are full of BS don't listen to them. Some stocks are more risky than others, but its all a risk.

Small business, again more complicated than real estate but you can make more money. More risk also. Also you have to know what you are doing and should know the business. My uncle used to make like $12 an hour in home appliance repair. He started his own business and pays his kids like $20 an hour for the same job (just cutting out the middle man by owning and operating it yourself). So yeah there's huge money in it but if you aren't good with numbers or you don't know the business (like say you never did appliance repair and want to open up an appliance repair business- no. Or you never worked at a resteraunt but want to open one up- no). I guess it can be done but you are really taking some big risks. Now like opening a gas station or McDonals usually has very little risk. But you need a few hundred thousand dollars to get started and you have to make sure to get managers that won't steal from you (or manage it yourself).

But if nothing else if you can live as cheap as possible and just put your investments into something with a %10 return the money will more than double every 8 years.

We really need a business network for folkist. I believe the system as it is now will collapse. So I'm "investing" a lot in self sufficiency or at least the ability to fall back on such if things do go sour. But as long as the system is up and running and if you are going to participate you might as well do it smart and have your money make you more money rather than busting your *ss for a paycheck.

Like I've posted elsewhere I would rake in $5,000 profit a day at a gas station I worked for and they would pay me $40 out of that. It's crazy how much money these businesses make and how little they pay the people that actually do the work. Though you have to consider the risk involved in investing as well. If you do start a business- make it into a corporation. That way if it goes bankrupt they can't come after you personally for any of the money.

The Horned God
Monday, November 24th, 2008, 02:52 PM
I was on to my bank just now (Allied Irish Bank or "AIB") and was told that their ordinary savings account yields 6.5% interest, and their current account is now 3.7%.

lei.talk
Sunday, December 7th, 2008, 09:27 AM
http://i36.tinypic.com/14cy4g5.jpg
Niall Ferguson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson) presents a history of finance in “The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=niall+ferguson+the+ascent+of+money)”. Mr. Ferguson contends that financial systems are responsible for human progress. He recounts the maturation of world finance and the role it has played throughout history from the Italian Renaissance and French Revolution to the American Civil War and the current global financial crisis.

Niall Ferguson (http://www.niallferguson.org) is the author of several books, including "The Pity of War (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=niall+ferguson+pity+of+war)", "Empire (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=niall+ferguson+empire)" and "The War of the World (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=niall+ferguson+war+of+the+world)". Mr. Ferguson is currently a history professor at Harvard University as well as senior fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University and senior research fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University.


Watch now! (http://www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=9954&SectionName=History&PlayMedia=No)

OneEnglishNorman
Sunday, December 7th, 2008, 04:42 PM
Fact is, your parents could have bought Japanese stocks 30 years ago, and still had a loss today on their investment.

I doubt that, for example Sony stock today has a P/E of 5.40, on a bunch of Japanese stocks even starting at a depressed point in time you should be ahead after less than 10 years, and over 30 years what other investment strategy for Japan could possibly compete??



Suppose you were given 50K, and that was all you had. What would be the most effective way to generate capital on the stock market, bonds etc ?

The most effective way, over the mid and long term, is to invest yourself in good divided-paying stocks. Re-invest the dividends and be patient. Stocks will usually out-perform bonds in five-year periods, for longer periods the difference is even greater. If you feel like speculating, gold and silver look like good bets in the short term. I'd be wary of holding precious metals in the USA however, because of the risk of government confiscation, store precious metals over the border in Canada if you can.

But I would say for an American, have most of your investment portfolio based overseas, because once the de-leveraging period is over, the Dollar is going to drop hard and fast. You have a window of opportunity now while the Dollar is holding up and foreign stocks are at bargain prices, but it will not last forever.

lei.talk
Sunday, December 7th, 2008, 07:36 PM
You don’t need to be a stock market expert.
You don’t need to be a math whiz.
You don’t even need a big bankroll.
All you need is AIM.

Automatic Investment Management. The money machine that takes the uncertainty out of investing—and teaches you how to make money in the market.

Trusted by thousands of investors worldwide since 1977, this bestselling classic reveals Robert Lichello’s revolutionary formula for earning profits in stocks and mutual funds—automatically. Unlike other investment strategies that focus on stock selection, AIM relies on timing—and is designed to work in any kind of market with any size investment.

Lichello originally developed AIM in response to the heartbreaking collapse of the great bull market of the 1960s—and today his ideas are more relevant than ever. AIM is easy, dependable, and it works. Simply put, it’s a money machine—just waiting to be turned on.

Now Lichello has updated AIM for today’s market. Reformulated as AIM-HI (AIM High Intensity), AIM-HI will do for you what it has already done for million.

http://i35.tinypic.com/2ez4q46.jpg

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=%22Robert+Lichello%22

lei.talk
Sunday, December 7th, 2008, 08:10 PM
http://i35.tinypic.com/2h4c30y.jpg

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=richest+man+in+babylon+george+s.+claso n

lei.talk
Friday, January 2nd, 2009, 10:55 AM
http://i44.tinypic.com/ke86ls.jpg



a typical classified advertisement
from a local newspaper:

NO DOWN PAYMENT - ASSUME FHA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FHA_loan)/VA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA_loan) HOME-LOAN
immediately! must move to new job in two weeks. help!
please call any time day or night (714) 591-XXXX please

lei.talk
Friday, January 2nd, 2009, 11:40 AM
These people cannot be millionaires! They don't look like millionaires, they don't dress like millionaires, they don't eat like millionaires, they don't act like millionaires--they don't even have millionaire names. Where are the millionaires who look like millionaires?

- The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/millionairenextdoor.htm)
http://i41.tinypic.com/5b37lx.jpg

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=%22the+millionaire+next+door%22

http://i43.tinypic.com/2j2xgyf.jpg

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=%22the+millionaire+mind%22+%22thomas+j .+stanley%22

forkbeard
Friday, January 2nd, 2009, 12:28 PM
Earths resources are being depleted so fast that humans will need another planet by 2050. Another planet is not going to materialise and so we are left with a few remaining scenarios.
1, Everybody adopts sustainable development and living so that resources are able to be replenished and conserved.
2, We wait for a Darwinian struggle for survival to begin in which our people have no gaurantee of survival. The struggle will be a literal hell on Earth.
3, Human population growth is forcibly restricted as is human consumption of resources.

In all of these scenarios it is totally unacceptable for ideologies of Capitalism, materialism and consumer society to perpetuate.
The biggest criminal in this destruction of the planet is the USA and Capitalism. It is therefore imperitive that the United States be destroyed along with all capitalists if life on Earth is to survive.

Jäger
Friday, January 2nd, 2009, 01:01 PM
In all of these scenarios it is totally unacceptable for ideologies of Capitalism, materialism and consumer society to perpetuate.
Capitalism in the strict sense, is nothing else then the protection of private property and a price building mechanism through supply and demand.
The first is required for any successful advancement, evolution, and there is no alternative to the latter.
The strategy should be to limit the expansion of the market, and protect its borders (Wirtschaftsräume).

Neophyte
Saturday, January 3rd, 2009, 11:32 PM
Capitalism in the strict sense, is nothing else then the protection of private property and a price building mechanism through supply and demand.
The first is required for any successful advancement, evolution, and there is no alternative to the latter.
The strategy should be to limit the expansion of the market, and protect its borders (Wirtschaftsräume).

The problems occur when the market expands, transcending the boundaries of the state and the political process and comes to control it. If we want the state, the political function of the nation, to dominate over the market, then the market must be organised within the confines of the state.

Gorm the Old
Saturday, January 3rd, 2009, 11:38 PM
Buy low; sell high.

lei.talk
Saturday, January 31st, 2009, 03:21 PM
http://i40.tinypic.com/zwkigh.jpg
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=%22judith+h.+mcquown%22+%22inc.+yourse lf%22


http://i39.tinypic.com/1o55l3.jpg
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS281US281&q=%22anthony+mancuso%22+%22incorporate+y our+business%22

euroamerican
Saturday, January 31st, 2009, 06:12 PM
Money is a tool. It is a very useful tool to further one's aims. However, in our modern world, esp in the USA, money has become an end in itself. In the absence of a real spiritual focus, money becomes the source for feelings of security, protection, status, prestige, etc. The modern hyper-capitalist world has created a culture of consumers, not citizens. Consumers know the price of everything, and the value of nothing. The ruling powers want that. However, it is a mistake to disdain money and wealth in reaction to the consumer society. It is better to find a positive and constructive way to earn a good living, and then to support the building up of a new folk culture. It takes money to buy land, build houses, start businesses, raise kids etc. It takes money to support organizations that fight for a better world.
Money is a tool. It's a good tool to have. It doesn't make you any better or wose. It simply gives you more options.
You can't really get money, i.e. use the tool of money, if you have a negative attitude towards it. I did that for years. It was good as a purification process. I had to get the virus of materialism out of my system. Now I see money as a useful tool. I intend to have this tool, and to use it.

saxonbrit
Thursday, April 6th, 2017, 05:03 AM
Germanics are entitled to money IMO. So sick of reverse discrimination, affirmative action, and all the other bs against whites. We're not moving over for anybody. Why should we? We built the civilized world. That is a fact. Everybody around the world wants to move to Germanic countries.