Biggest ever recorded jump in weekly earnings as median NZ wages rise

[SueDonim]

I couldn't find the survey but to say that some people have been helped by parents is reasonable. If parents are in a position to help why wouldn't/shouldn't they? Like this guy https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/aucklander...G5ONB24BM/ who has apparently already paid them back and rewarded their input with a great deal of success, which he is clearly also paying forward. Just because some people get help doesn't mean all do, and the tone of comments like "think they got where  they are by just shear hard work" is part of the problem we have. Young people who don't see a need to work to achieve something in life because they see the tall poppies around them getting torn down.

And yes, "everyone else [does have] the same equal opportunity". Plenty of people come from nothing and achieve a lot. Why should they be criticised for that? They should be held up as role models to help push others out of the benefit go-round.

I don't see any definition of "rich" being put forward here, but do see people that seem to think that anyone who has done better than they is somehow greedy and shouldn't have what they have achieved. As with any generalisation there are of course some who deserve criticism, but by far the majority don't.

There are very few people who don't see a need to work.
Really, I don't think anyone needs 51 properties.


I'm referring to those who, having made some money conveniently 'forget' having been helped by family & claim that 'anyone can become rich if they work hard.'
People don't always have the same opportunities, abilities & luck, & not 'anyone can do it.'




http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/the-age-of-entitlement-how-wealth-breeds-narcissism

"Call it the asshole effect. That is the term coined by US psychologist Paul Piff after he did some stunning new research into the effects of wealth and inequality on people’s attitudes.
As we ponder Joe Hockey’s budget and his division of the world into "leaners" and "lifters", as we learn from Oxfam that the richest 1% of Australians now own the same wealth as the bottom 60%, we would do well to consider the implications of Piff’s studies. He found that as people grow wealthier, they are more likely to feel entitled, to become meaner and be more likely to exploit others, even to cheat.

Piff conducted a series of revealing experiments. One was remarkably simple. Researchers positioned themselves at crossroads. They watched out for aggressive, selfish behaviour among drivers, and recorded the make and model of the car. Piff found drivers of expensive, high-status vehicles behave worse than those sputtering along in battered Toyota Corollas.
[i]They were four times more likely to cut off drivers with lower status vehicles. As a pedestrian looking carefully left and right before using a crossing, you should pay attention to the kind of car bearing down on you."





[/i]

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/the-rich-are-different-and-not-in-a-good-way-studies-suggest.html<!-- @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } -->


[/url]


"Psychologist and social scientist Dacher Keltner says the rich really are different, and not in a good way: Their life experience makes them less empathetic, less altruistic, and generally more selfish.


[url=https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/the-rich-are-different-and-not-in-a-good-way-studies-suggest.html]

[font=Times New Roman, serif][size=small][color=#0000ff][url=https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/the-rich-are-different-and-not-in-a-good-way-studies-suggest.html]In fact, he says, the philosophical battle over economics, taxes, debt ceilings and defaults that are now roiling the stock market is partly rooted in an upper class "ideology of self-interest."


“We have now done 12 separate studies measuring empathy in every way imaginable, social behavior in every way, and some work on compassion and it’s the same story,” he said. “Lower class people just show more empathy, more prosocial behavior, more compassion, no matter how you look at it.”


In other words, rich people are more likely to think about themselves. “They think that economic success and political outcomes, and personal outcomes, have to do with individual behavior, a good work ethic,” said Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Berkeley.
Because the rich gloss over the ways family connections, money and education helped, they come to denigrate the role of government and vigorously oppose taxes to fund it."

Some good points there and some continuation of stereotypes.

You are right that "people don't always have the same opportunities, abilities & luck" but the biggest hurdle is that those who do have those opportunities don't take them. and that can be simply because they don't want to which is fine. But they shouldn't later be jealous of those who did.

On one level no one "needs" 51 properties, but a businessman at that level can do so much more, which he, at such a young age, seems to be starting out on. I recently read Branson's biography. You could argue that he didn't need any of what he attained, but the world sure needed all the social good that he was able to do.

I disagree with your quote about the cars. That is using the car as a status symbol, not showing actual wealth. Some of the wealthier people I know are driving the equivalent of the old Toyotas. It's the wannabees who buy the latest and greatest (or lease them) and try to look "the part". That lesson was pointed out to me in the late 70s when I was spending time at the farm down the road and my father said "do you realise that [the farmer] is a multi millionaire?" He drove a car cheaper than ours, and we were poor!

Also, the comment about family connections, money and education will undoubtedly be true for some, but what of those who had none of those and still ended up in the top brackets. Although I still don't see an actual definition of "rich".