Outrageous MP's guide to not being a poorfag
Pete wrote a piece, with a list in it, Cheep Pete’s Guide To Not Being A Poorfag. I don't think much of it, not only for the reasons pointed out by Stani, and not only for the reason pointed out in #trilemaii, and not only for having already written something about that, nor because the best advice really is "don't be a woman". But for many other reasons! Let's make a list.
The classical meaning of "millionaire" is, rather pointedly, and quite independently of the numeric content, "being one of those people whose opinions of things directs the future flow of events". Id est, a capitalist. This is a very strict and specific meaning - the nine year old all the girls in class bow to in worship IS a kid-millionaire, by this definition. His preferences shape future behaviours, his displeasures rearrange the social hierarchy, he's it.
Similarly, for the nine year olds trapped in saggy old bodies who watch TV in lieu of the pointless internal rumination most herdivores used to pretend constitutes their thinking prior to the invention of the cathodic tube, the various "stars" are also millionaires. Their recommendations and endorsements shape consumer patterns in the consumer mind, that's it. This explains the ridiculous notionsiii as to how much money the socks with eyes sewn on have, ever the golden font of comedy at their expenseiv.
The other meaning of millionaire however is literal, owner of a million in whatever fiat currencyv. This doesn't make one particularly rich - a guy living in the US and owning 1`000`000 USD is not even poor, he's chickenfeed. It's not that he can't go into the ghetto for a safari to hunt down black males like dogs and enslave some choice females for later rape and servitude. Quite contrarywise, he is forcibly confined to a special hunting reservation for black people from the ghetto to come, shoot the males like dogs and enslave choice females for later rape and servitude. Lafond has the gory details, if you must, but in any case it's strictly unclear why anyone would want such, outside of dedicated fetishists and other weirdos.vi
Confusing these two separate meanings (such as for instance when a title centered around "not being a poorfag" mutates into a discussion of "millionaire"-ness) is ill advised. In point of fact, there's three threads here. One's of laziness - people who figure if they're rich they no longer have to work. This is an inadequate solution - if the comings and goings of life are indeed such an unbearably grevious imposition upon you, the correct solution is suicide. That will definitely, and terminally, resolve the problem of work.
The other's ambition - people who try to compensate for their internally perceived inadequacy with the external marks of achievement. This is equally an inadequate solution. If the gnawing fear and subjective perception of worthlessness bother you to the degree of overt action, the correct overt action is to confront them. Go be someone's slave, openly and honestly, stop trying to paper over the fire.
There isn't a third - even if this absent third is liberally employed to try and distract from the presence of the other two. People who are better are better, there's nothing specific they need to do or commonly bother doing for the future to flow their way. It just does, and not because of them or through them, simply because they and the future are cosubstantial.
Money, as you can see, is no actual part of the discussion of either poverty, faggotry, or poorfags altogether.
———- A) Become a millionaire by saving pennies ? ; B) Most people don't want to be millionaires, they want to not be stuck to a cart while the hussies go a'hussin' in the meadow nearby.
This last point is uncharacteristic considering his stance in the clubsluts&sorority girls #trilema discussion the day previous, but nevertheless entirely valid. [↩]
- Quoth :
mircea_popescu: mixing things like "make a budget" and "pack a lunch / brew your own coffee" seems improper.
It is improper. Enumerations must always be made of items of the same kind. It's not enough that the items answer to the same purpose. They must actually be of the same kind. [↩]
- See This is how you fail ; and why ; and wherefore, do the exercises contained therein etc. [↩]
- As Lara Flyn Boyle didactically points out in Happiness,
Joy, I'm so sorry. But... don't worry. I'm not laughing at you. I'm laughing with you.
[↩]
- Pointedly not Bitcoin, no. [↩]
- Yes, yes, I get it, "that's the only place where you can get a job that uses the parts of your sack of flesh that you wish to be used". Hurr. [↩]
Friday, 1 April 2016
Cheep Pete's list has little to do with becoming an overnight kajillionaire and everything to do with training oneself to find and secure value, starting with one's own time and resources, however meagre. This is about degrees, not 180s.
We can both agree that money per se has little to do with this discussion, but we seem to be at odds over the value of thrift, economy, delayed gratification, and the directed cultivation thereof. Yes, people who are better are better, but this tautology would deny Nurture her evident role.
You need not be born into a life of pomp and prestige to ameliorate your station, nor does such a beginning guarantee your success. There's surely an element of luck involved in social mobility, but there's much to be said for the adage "The harder I work, the luckier I get." Not that this grants those who "try hard" the keys to the kingdom...
Friday, 1 April 2016
The value of thrift, economy, delayed gratification may be that it builds character.
That should be enough of and by itself, no need to sugarcoat it in the pious fraud of random "good things" plucked from the fairytales.
Ameliorating station is a dubious endeavour. Ameliorating self, perhaps is possible, though I remain reserved on the possibility of such amelioration by the self itself - it seems much akin to the breeches-powered selftrip to the Moon.
Friday, 1 April 2016
What you call "pious fraud," I'd call "actionable steps," but perhaps I'm too indoctrinated in the USian tradition of "self-help" books and the religious traditions of "don't touch that bacon!" to see through to the other side. From this vantage point, the possibility space of stupid actions is indomitably large and that of sane actions considerably more constrained.
Providing a prescription for right action is nothing new, but it is undoubtedly effective at preventing the repetitions of history's errors, perhaps even because of the sugar-coating. Maybe it should be otherwise, but I don't think we live in that world.
Friday, 1 April 2016
Take the simple case of "stay in school". So this is sound advice. But ... why ? Kid wants to know, he doesn't so he asks. Why ?
What do you tell him ? If you tell him "because that makes all the junior high sluts want you in their wazoo", you are committing utter fraud - they don't, at that age. If however you tell him "because that WILL make all the club sluts & sorority girls want you in their ass when you grow up" you are comitting pious fraud, and arguably a much worse offense - the kid can't verify your lie until it is sadly too late.
All the while, the truth of the matter is that there's very little why. "You'll maybe be less dumb, perhaps" is the most objective anything you can say.
Which is why it is so important for this question to be answered subjectively : "Because if you do not, ~I~, your father, will piss on your skull after having separated it from your body."
A less gruesome equivalent may equally well work, but the central point remains : "because if you don't I won't like you".
Never mind the money.
Friday, 1 April 2016
> if the comings and goings of life are indeed such an unbearably grevious imposition upon you, the correct solution is suicide .... ... they want to not be stuck to a cart while the hussies go a'hussin' in the meadow nearby. This last point is uncharacteristic considering his stance in the clubsluts&sorority girls #trilema discussion...
When I say 'work', this has a very specific meaning - the idiot crud that pays the bills.
And the 'hussies' I'd rather be chasing are named Cramer and Shoup. This probably makes me a monstrous thing from beneath the ocean.
Friday, 1 April 2016
@MP : With the benefit of hindsight as well as this discussion, "Cheep Pete's Guide To Being Liked By Cheep Pete" would've perhaps made for a better title.