July 25, 2025 • 29 mins
Ever wonder why some people seem to attract wealth while others stay stuck? This episode pulls no punches as we reveal the 15 habits that keep people poor—and the game-changing routines that set the rich apart. From binge-watching TV and ignoring your health, to making risky financial moves and surrounding yourself with the wrong crowd, we break down the everyday choices that quietly sabotage your financial success.
But this isn’t just another money podcast—it’s a wake-up call. We’ll show you how millionaire habits like early rising, continuous learning, and smart money management can transform your life. Discover why personal growth, financial discipline, and even your approach to religion can shape your wealth journey. Plus, we’re not afraid to get controversial: is it true that poor people are more religious while the rich rely on their own efforts? We dig into the data and the mindset behind the money.
If you’re ready to ditch the habits that hold you back and unlock the wealth building secrets of the world’s most successful people, this episode is for you. Hit play, subscribe, and share with someone who’s ready to level up—because your future self will thank you for it.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/life-hacks-diy-more-transform-your-everyday-with-simple-tricks-and-diy-magic--5995484/support.
But this isn’t just another money podcast—it’s a wake-up call. We’ll show you how millionaire habits like early rising, continuous learning, and smart money management can transform your life. Discover why personal growth, financial discipline, and even your approach to religion can shape your wealth journey. Plus, we’re not afraid to get controversial: is it true that poor people are more religious while the rich rely on their own efforts? We dig into the data and the mindset behind the money.
If you’re ready to ditch the habits that hold you back and unlock the wealth building secrets of the world’s most successful people, this episode is for you. Hit play, subscribe, and share with someone who’s ready to level up—because your future self will thank you for it.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/life-hacks-diy-more-transform-your-everyday-with-simple-tricks-and-diy-magic--5995484/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Have you ever paused, maybe just for a second, to
consider how the seemingly small, almost invisible choices we make
every single day, like how we spend our free time
or even what we grab for lunch, might actually be
well charting the course for our financial future. What if
there were specific patterns of behavior that statistically differentiate people
(00:23):
striving for financial growth from those already living with abundance.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
It's a fascinating question, and maybe a slightly uncomfortable one too,
if we're honest and today, that's exactly what we're diving into.
We're looking at a really interesting collection of observations of
claims that are presented as well key distinguishing factors between
different financial situations. Okay, our source material lays out fifteen
distinct behaviors plus a kind of bonus observation, and it
(00:49):
suggests that these patterns are pretty common among people who are,
let's say, financially struggling, but they're largely absent among the wealthy.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Fifteen plus a bonus. Wow, what's quite specific.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
It is, and it definitely challenges some common ideas and
I think prompts quite a bit of self reflection.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
Absolutely, And look, it's really crucial we frame this discussion correctly.
Right from the start, the source itself actually says to
approach these claims with a grain of salt. It's right there,
meant more as prompts for thinking about ourselves, not like
you know, universal truths carved in stone. Our mission here
isn't to say yes, this is definitively it no note
(01:26):
at all. It's more about unpacking these ideas methodically, understanding
the logic as the source presents it, and then thinking
about what that might mean for us, for you listening exactly.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
We want to explore what the source is asserting and
really encourage critical thinking, thinking about our own habits, maybe
what we see around us, and the potential ripple effects
of choices that seem small.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
It's about having an open, honest conversation, maybe looking in
the mirror a bit, and perhaps even questioning some of
our own assumptions.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
And it's all based directly on the specific viewpoints in
the material we've added for this deep dive. It's like
holding up that mirror to habits we often just overlook.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Okay, let's get into it. Then we're going to start
by digging into some of the sources claims about how
time gets spent, particularly around media leisure stuff we often
see is just downtime.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Right, and the first core claim jumps right in. It
asserts that individuals who struggle financially tend to watch well
an excessive amount of television, especially reality TV and celebrity gossip.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Oh wow, okay, start and strong.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
Yeah, the sources pretty bluntly, if you have the time
to watch reality TV, you're probably poor. It's definitely designed
to grab your attention.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
That is bold. So what's the reasoning behind that? Why
is watching TV especially that kind singled out?
Speaker 2 (02:45):
The core idea presented is that this type of TV viewing,
you know, getting suck into celebrity lies or endless reality drama,
offers no value to your own life. It serves the celebrities,
the networks maybe, but not the viewer. It's painted as
this sort of time scene, something that just grabs you
and doesn't let go, eating up hours that can be
used elsewhere.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Okay, so it's about opportunity cost in a way, time
spent there is time not spent on something else.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Partly, yes, but there's a deeper layer two. The source
really hammers this idea of using TV to disconnect from
your problems escapism exactly. While some might say, you know
time you enjoy, wasting isn't wasted time quoting John Lennon.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Yeah, I've heard that.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
The source questions if passively watching a screen should be
something you truly enjoy. In that sense, the issue isn't
just the wasted hours, it's the psychological impact. How so well,
the argument is that if you habitually use TV or
similar media to disconnect from your own reality, you're essentially
training your brain not to confront your problems directly.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Okay, so it fosters avoidance.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
That's the idea. It erodes your sense of agency, your
problem solving muscle. You could say, you become more of
a spectator in your own life.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
And does this extend to other media like news?
Speaker 2 (03:59):
It does? Yeah. The source specifically calls out favorite news channels,
arguing they're often biased and pick their own magenta, basically
tailoring content to reinforce existing views rather than offering diverse perspectives,
creating an echo chamber, essentially right keeping you in their bubble. Instead,
they suggest using the internet for just a quick glimpse
(04:19):
of world events and then moving on to do your
own thing. Don't get bogged down in curated narratives.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
That's a really pointed critique of how we consume information
to and the contrast they draw with wealthy individuals is
quite stark, Isn't.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
It very stark? The source states quite plainly, rich people
aim to be on TV instead of watching.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
It, implying a shift from passive observer to active participant,
maybe even creator or influencer.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Precisely, the cost, as the source sees it, isn't just
the lost hours. It's cultivating a mindset that consistently avoids
engaging with your own life, your own challenges, and the
wider world in a proactive way.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
Okay, that connects directly to the second claim you mentioned,
doesn't it the one about being really into sports? But
as a.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Spectator it does perfectly. The source view is watching sports
very much like watching TV. Again, the label used is
escapism from your current reality.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
But wait, lots of people find sports engaging, restorative, even
it builds community sometimes. How does the source differentiate? Is
it about being passive versus active?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
That seems to be the core distinction. They're incredibly direct
about it, they say, unless you're a professional athlete or
an owner of one of the teams, there's really no
reason for you to watch sports.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Wow, Okay, that's extreme.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
It is. And the killer line, the one that really spicks,
is that as a spectator, you, as an individual, have
no impact on the outcome of the game.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Zero impact, zero impact, ouch.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Right, And this idea of having zero impact is key.
The source suggests this spectator mentality then sticks with you.
How so it leads you potentially to become a spectator
in life instead of being a player or an owner,
And consequently, maybe you end up criticizing others from the
sidelines without achieving much yourself.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So it's a learned behavior that bleeds into other areas.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
That's the argument. Yeah, they exempt the players and owners. Obviously,
active participation or ownership is framed as the rich counterpart.
This whole spectator in life metaphor ties right back to
the TV point passive consumption, lack of direct influence.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
All about agency, isn't it, or the perceived.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Lack of it? Exactly?
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
The source posits that if you get used to having
zero impact on the game you're watching, maybe that same
feeling that learned helplessness almost affects how you approach your
own goals, your finances your.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
Career, even if watching sports feels like a break or
connects you with others.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
The source seems to focus on the dominant mindset it encourages.
Is it one of detached observation or active engagement and
influence in your own life? That's the critical question they're posing.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Okay, I see the pattern they're building here across these
first two points. It's this consistent theme of passive consumption
versus active participation. It definitely makes you think about how
we use our downtime. All right, let's shift gears. We're
moving into maybe an even more personal area now, habits
around well being, health, personal presentation. These claims get quite.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Direct, they do. The third core claim is about diets,
specifically eating fast food and lacking nutrition knowledge. The source
claims many people struggling financially have no interest in knowing
what's in their.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Food, no interest or maybe lack of access or education.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
The source leads heavily on lack of interest or understanding.
It says they lack knowledge of healthy meals or barely
know anything about nutrition. It's framed as a knowledge gap
or perhaps a lack of prioritizing.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
That knowledge, and this goes beyond just physical health.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
According to them, Oh absolutely. The source asserts that consuming
large quantities of sugar and fats with no nutritional value
isn't just bad for the body, it actually blasts their brains.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
Just their brains, that's strong language.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
It is, and it ruins their bodies, preventing them from
performing it one hundred percent of their potential. They're drawing
a direct line between fuel and function, mental acuity, energy levels,
overall capacity.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
So poor diet equals poor performance in life.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
That's the explicit connection they make. Poor health, they argue,
directly affects everything physical, mental, professional, even romantic life. It's
positioned as a foundational element for success.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
You can't operate at peak potential if your body and
brain aren't fueled properly.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Exactly, it frames physical well being not just as being healthy,
but as a critical driver of productivity and performance across
the board. While acknowledging that things like food, deserts, or
cost can be factors, the source firmly puts the onus
on personal responsibility acquiring and applying nutritional knowledge as an
investment in your core ability to succeed.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Health as a performance enhancer. Essentially, Okay, that ties into
drive an ambition. Now sticking with physical well being, the
fourth claim is well, maybe the most surprising one yet
not showering often poor hygiene.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Yeah, this one is definitely arresting. The source even admits
they thought it might be a made up fact initially,
but then concluded it was true and amazingly, it explains
a lot.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Explains what though, how does basic hygiene connect to financial status?
In their view?
Speaker 2 (09:16):
They jump straight to the practical social consequences. Poor hygiene,
they argue, leads to reduced success, especially in jobs needing
human contact.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Like service industries sales exactly.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
The argument is people will trust them less and simply
want to spend less time in their presence. It taps
into those subconscious cues about reliability, self respect, professionalism.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
It affects trust. Okay, I can see that.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
And it doesn't stop there. They explicitly say it impacts
your personal life too, affecting the kind of partners you
might attract.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
Right, and the conclusion they draw is incredibly blunt.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
Yeah, the first step to success should be an early
morning shower, framed almost as a non negotiable starting point.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
It's fascinating. Why would something so basic have such weight
is it just about smell or is it deeper?
Speaker 2 (10:05):
The force implies it's about those subtle signals of self
care and discipline. It affects perceived trustworthiness, comfort, and interactions,
things that are vital for networking, job interviews, customer relations, everything.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
So it's about the non verbal message.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
It sunds that seems to be it. It suggests that
if you handle the basics like personal presentation and hygiene,
it signals a level of self respect and discipline that
others subconsciously pick up on. It builds or erodes that
interpersonal trust, which they argue directly impacts your opportunities.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
It speaks to consistency, maybe discipline in one small area
translating to others that could.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Be part of the underlying logic. Yeah, that's sort of
how you do anything, as how you do everything.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Perspective uncomfortable, but definitely makes you think about first impressions. Okay,
carrying on with this theme of proactive self management, the
next point is about health maintenance doctor checkups.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Right, and again it's framed not just as health advice,
but as a crucial financial strategy. Oh, so, the source
connects neglecting regular checkups with discovering serious diseases like cancer
only when they're in late stages.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Which obviously has huge health implication.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Huge and potentially fatal. They note, no matter how much
money you have, some things money can't fix if caught
too late, but it also leads to drastically higher treatment costs.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Ah the financial angle, catching things early is cheaper.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Much cheaper, according to the source. Regular checkups allow discovery
in early stages, making treatment possible at a lower cost.
If you wait, the cost can be astronomical of fortune
that impacts both you and your entire family.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
It underlines the financial burden of being reactive rather than
proactive with health exactly.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
The key insight here is framing health as an investment,
not an expense. It's presented almost like essential maintenance on
your most critical asset yourself.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Like maintaining your car to avoid huge breakdown later.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
Precisely, by investing small amounts of time and money in
preventative care regularly, you avoid potentially catastrophic costs both financial
and personal down the road. Its position as core personal
risk management, Foregoing checkups is seen as neglecting that essential maintenance,
inevitably leading to a bigger, potentially devastating bill later.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Health is investment, proactive planning. It's a recurring theme. Okay.
Let's shift focus now, specifically to financial habits, money management,
and what the source calls a growth mindset. These points
are very direct about money.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Itself, very direct. The sixth claim challenges a really common behavior,
buying clothes or products because they are on sale.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Oh okay, that's going to raise some eyebrows. Isn't bargain
hunting seen as smart not?
Speaker 2 (12:50):
According to this source. Generally speaking, they have a very
provocative rule. The only thing you should buy on sale
are stocks. Stocks.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
Okay, so assets that appreciate, not consumer.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
That's the idea. They can trast mindsets. The poor, they say,
focus on conserving or stretching the little that they have,
whereas the rich focus on increasing their incomes. It's scarcity
management versus abundance creation.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
So buying sale clothes reinforces the scarcity mindset.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
That's the symbolic implication they draw. They argue, sale clothes
are the items people who could afford to pay the
full price didn't want, so buying them makes you look
exactly like someone who can't afford to pay the full price.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Wow, that's quite a psychological take on shopping. It's not
just about the money saved.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
No, It's framed as being about identity and focus. Are
you focused on consumption, even discounted consumption, or on investment?
It suggests your buying habits signal maybe even reinforce your
financial self perception. Are you cultivating a discipline that directs
money towards things that grow or things that depreciate?
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Interesting? It forces you to question the why behind seeking discounts. Yeah, okay,
moving on the seventh claim, having no money saved. This
sounds fundamental.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
It's presented as absolutely fundamental. The source states starkly that
those struggling financially don't get ready for what's next. Savings conversely,
allow for both growth and buffering against shocks when something bad.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
Happens, the safety net and the springboard exactly.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
And they illustrate this with two scenarios that really drive
the point home, explaining why they think the rich are
growing richer while the poor are getting poorer.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Okay, what are the scenarios?
Speaker 2 (14:27):
First, a negative event say unexpected job loss or medical bill.
If you have no savings, you're forced to liquidate an
asset like your car, house, etc. Or take a loan.
Your life gets significantly worse.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
You go backwards right.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
But for the rich the sources after the event, they're
lived in the same position. The savings might be depleted,
but their core lifestyle isn't necessarily hit, or they're not
suddenly indebted. It highlights resilience versus fragility.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
Makes sense, and the second scenario.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
An opportunity arises, maybe a chance to invest, start a
side hustle, buy an undervalued asset. Those with savings have
the chance to expand their lives. The person without savings
can't afford to take full advantage, so.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
They miss out on growth opportunity.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Precisely, this ability to weather storms and seize opportunities is
presented as the key mechanism widening the gap. Beyond the
basics of savings are good, The compelling question might be,
how does having that buffer psychologically change your decision making?
Does it allow you to take calculated risks or play
the long game in a way you simply can't when
you're living paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
It creates options, resilience capital the ability not just to
survive shocks, but maybe even benefit from them. That's a
powerful advantage Okay. This leads logically to the eighth claim,
using credit cards or loans for well useless things.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Yes, And they have a simple rule for this, which
again really challenges common consumer behavior.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
What's the rule if you.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Take out a loan to buy something that doesn't generate
more money than the loan? Don't take it? Simple but strict.
Speaker 1 (15:58):
So borrowing is only for an investment.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
That's the explicit stance. Credit should only be used if
what you'll be using it for is an investment, something
that will ideally produce income exceeding the loan's cost.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
And they give examples of what's not an investment in
this field.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
Yeah, things people often finance. A large TV, Nope, new
designer gear like Supreme, Nope, unless you're actively planning to
resell it for profit immediately. A new I phone Nope,
unless you're, say a developer, using it to build an
app for your business. Otherwise, otherwise the advice is blunt.
Earn the money and then spend it. It's a very
(16:34):
rigorous definition of good debt versus bad debt, it really is.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
It pushes back hard against using credit for convenience or
instant gratification. It demands a calculation will this purchase make
me money?
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Exactly. It reframes credit entirely, not as a consumption tool,
but strictly as a potential wealth creation tool. It forces
you to ask, what's the real value here? If it's
not generating future value. It promotes a laid gratification and
serious financial assessment before borrowing.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
I think like an investor, not just a consumer even
with borrowing. Okay, point nine flows right from this, you know,
spending money before you actually have it, anticipating income.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Yeah. The source calls this one of the biggest dangers
in life, something that can cause your financial situation to
spiral down. It's about committing funds you don't possess.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Yet, making promises your current bank balance.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Can't keep pretty much. And they offer a really stark
affordability test, which is if you don't have money for
something that you're willing to part with without affecting your life,
then you can't afford it.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
Wow, So not just can I make the payment, but
can I buy this out right now without disrupting my
financial stability?
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Exactly. It's about radical discipline and grounding your spending in
present reality, not future hopes. If you fail the test,
The advice is simple, go back to work and then
get it.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
It really hammers home living within your means and cultivating patients.
It pushes back against that buy now, pay later call
culture completely.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
It suggests that impatience, fueled by easy credit and cultural
pressure is a direct road to financial vulnerability. The compounding
stress of being perpetually behind or obligated is seen as
a major hindrance.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Makes sense, It's easy to fall into that trap. Yeah, ohka,
let's shift again. We're moving into areas about personal responsibility,
mindset towards challenges, and the impact of your social circle.
This gets into some deep stuff about.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Character, maybe definitely. The tenth claim is about waking up habits,
specifically waking up later than rich people.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Ah the early bird claim right.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
The source states it as a statistical truth that poor
people are often lazier than the rich in the early days.
Very direct and yeah, potentially controversial language.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Lazier is a strong word, but they link it to
long term outcomes.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
They do. They argue that someone who uses their youth
to grow themselves is a lot less likely to remain
poor later on in life, wasting time early, especially on
meaningless activity instead of self education or productive work leads
to finding yourself so far behind what the world needs
from you that you'll end up miserable.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
A strong cause and effect claim.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
There, and they highlight what they call a paradox. People
who don't focus on growth early end up working a
lot harder with little success rate later in life just
to stay afloat. They mentioned early risers like Bill Gates,
Elon Musk, warn Buffett as examples.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So is it literally about the hour you wake up
or what you do with that time?
Speaker 2 (19:32):
That's the key question, isn't it? The source seems to
imply it's less about the clock time itself and more
about the discipline and proactive use of those early hours
time for focused work, learning, planning before the day's distractions
kick in.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Using the quiet hours strategically exactly.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
It's presented as a manifestation of a commitment to self
growth and seizing the day. Neglecting that prime time for
self investment, they argue, means you're constantly playing catch up later.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
Yeah, front loading the effort to avoid a harder slog
down the line. Okay. This idea of personal drive leads
right into Claim eleven, blaming others for misfortune accountability.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
Yes, and the Source is incredibly firm here ninety nine
percent of your life is on you. You are in
charge of your life, your relationships, your health. It champions
radical personal ownership.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
Leaves very little room for excuses, very little, And.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
It contrasts two reactions when something bad happens. The Source
claims the poor choose to victimize themselves. They look outward
for blame, whereas the rich the rich look into it,
study it, seek to find out what happened, why it happened,
and how they can protect from it in the future.
They look inward and forward.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
It's a fundamental difference in processing adversity.
Speaker 2 (20:42):
Absolutely. It touches on that psychological concept of locus of control.
Our outcomes determined by external forces external locus leading to victimhood,
or by your own actions and choices internal locus leading
to learning and adaptation.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
And the Source clearly links financial struggle with an external
locus and success with an internal one.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Precisely, it's not about denying challenges exist, but about your response.
Do you default to blame, which often leads to inaction,
or do you see it as a growing point, extracting
lessons to build resilience It's about turning setbacks into fuel for.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Development, cultivating a growth mindset even or especially when things
go wrong. That's powerful. Okay. Number twelve, never following through
on ideas or potential, the gap between dreaming and doing right.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
The Source emphasizes, the only thing you can control is
the amount of hours you put into your dream. Everyone
gets twenty four hours, but some do a lot more
than others in pursuing their goals.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
It comes down to effort and execution.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Yes, dedication to learning and implementing your passion, they argue,
means it's only a matter of time until you reach success.
It requires consistent, focused effort.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
And they had that striking statistic about businesses.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Oh yeah, that was really provocative. While maybe nine out
of ten businesses fail within three years, the source claims
all businesses fail because they never even got started.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Failure to launch is the ultimate failure. It really underscores
the importance of just starting absolutely.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
It attacks that paralysis of perfection as a more fear,
and the advice given is very iterative. If you have
an idea, work on it, put it out, get feedback,
improve it, launch again and again and again.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Fail forward, learn, adapt exactly.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
They even use their own example, mentioning three years writing
articles before starting their YouTube channel. It was an instant.
It was sustained effort and iteration.
Speaker 1 (22:30):
So the takeaway is stop dreaming, start doing, and keep refining.
Consistent imperfect action beats brilliant inaction every time.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
That's the strong message. Yes, potential is worthless until it's
activated through persistent effort and learning from feedback.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
Makes sense, okay. Claim thirteen Believing others should help you
reach the top challenging.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Entitlement unequivocally, the source states the world doesn't owe you anything.
Nobody does. You are in this by yourself. You are
in charge.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Harsh reality check.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
It contrasts that youthful belief and deserves success or rescue
with what happens when reality happens. The world, they say,
rewards only the best, the best, those that never quit,
those that keep learning, keep adapting, and understand that nobody
will solve their problems for them.
Speaker 1 (23:15):
So self reliance is paramount, no waiting for handouts.
Speaker 2 (23:19):
That's the core message. Face challenges head on, but it
does add a nuance along the way. You might meet
people who feel the same way and might share parts
of the journey with you.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
Collaboration is possible, even likely, but it's a bonus, not
the foundation.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Precisely, it's a call for radical self responsibility. Build your
own path. Don't expect others to pave it for you.
If you find allies who share your drive, great, but
don't depend on it. Success is framed as something fiercely
personal and earned.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Build it yourself. Okay, let's move into the final couple
of claims, looking at broader lifestyle choices and environment. These
touch on some very personal areas they do.
Speaker 2 (23:57):
Claim fourteen suggests that financially struggling into visuals tend to
have more kids and earlier in life.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
Okay, that's a sensitive topic. How do they frame that?
Speaker 2 (24:04):
Primarily through the lens of cost. They highlight that kids
are really, really expensive, quoting an estimate around two hundred
and fifty thousand dollars to raise one child in a
developed country.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
That's a massive financial commitment.
Speaker 2 (24:17):
It is, and the source attributes the trend of having
kids earlier or more kids while struggling to factors like
lack of education, that environment, and other factors. It contrasts
this with the wealthy, who supposedly wait a couple of
years until their standards of living improve to ensure the
right environment and prime conditions for their child.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
So it's presented as a strategic timing decision based on
resources exactly.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
The source focus is purely on the financial implications and timing.
The consequence presented for those struggling is stark. Once the
baby comes, the struggling begins just so they can stay
afloat and progress beyond barely surviving is almost impossible to achieve.
Speaker 1 (24:56):
It frames family planning as a significant economic decision with
long term impacts on financial trajectory.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yes, purely from that resource based perspective. It correlates financial
stability with the ability to provide optimal conditions, suggesting that
the timing of this major life event is strategically considered
by those aiming for financial security. It's about aligning major
life choices with financial capacity.
Speaker 1 (25:20):
A very direct economic analysis of a deeply personal choice.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Okay, And the final main claim number fifteen surrounding themselves
with other poor people the influence of your social circle.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
Right. This one draws on that common adage you are
the sum of the five people you hang out with.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
Most birds of a feather.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
Kind of the argument is that Associating mainly with others
who are struggling financially tends to reinforce their core beliefs,
potentially limiting aspirations and perspectives. Your environment shapes you.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
That feels intuitive. Our circles definitely influence us. What's the counterpoint, The.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Source argues for intentionally seeking out people who inspire you
and push you further. People doing incredible things themselves. Their success,
the idea goes, will only motivate you to exceed your
current reality. Seek out environments that pull you up, not
hold you back exactly.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
And there's a strong warning here again staying stuck in
an old crowd that might not support your growth. The
source warns, your potential will probably be crushed by those
who want to feel better about their miserable lives by
making sure yousuf for the same fate.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
Wow, that's harsh, but it highlights the potential negative drag
of an unsupportive environment.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
It really does. It suggests your social circle isn't passive.
It actively shapes your mindset, ambition, risk tolerance, even your
definition of possible. The advice is to consciously, maybe even courageously,
choose environments that foster growth, even if that means moving
on from old connections.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
A powerful reminder of the often underestimated impact of who
we spend our time with. Okay, that's the fifteen. Now
for the bonus observation, the one the source itself flagged
is potentially explosive.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yes, the bonus claim that financially struggling people are a
lot more religious, and they preface it by saying, can
you imagine the chaos if we started the video with
this one? Acknowledging its sensitive nature right away?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
So what's the core assertion here?
Speaker 2 (27:12):
The source states that statistically speaking, successful people rely on
their own forces for their well being. Well, the poor
hopes that a mythical force will somehow reward them for
being a good person.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Again, linking it back to that internal versus external locus
of control, reliance on self versus reliance on something external.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
That seems to be the connection they're making, relying on
own forces versus hoping for intervention or reward from a
mythical force. The even side mark Zuckerberg changing his public
stance on religion potentially for political reasons, as a kind
of example of strategic positioning by the successful.
Speaker 1 (27:49):
Okay, so it's crucial here to state, as the source acknowledges,
this is presented as a statistical observation they've made, and
it's controversial absolutely.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Our purpose here is just to report on the correlation
and the rationale as presented in the source, the idea
of self reliance versus hope for external aid, without endorsing
any view on religion itself. The source is essentially asking
do beliefs about agency versus external forces influence how proactively
people tackle problems and plan their lives.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Right, It's framed as another facet of that internal versus
external control dynamic. Yeah, okay, so just to wrap this up,
then we've gone through these fifteen claims plus the bonus
one whole range of habits and mindsets are source connects
to financial outcomes. And the goal again was just to
unpack what the source claims the logic behind it, even
(28:36):
if some points felt challenging or you needed that grain.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Of salt exactly. This whole deep dive is really meant
as a framework for you, the listener, to reflect, to
maybe step back and see if any of these patterns
resonate with your own life, your own aspirations, or even
just your observations.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
It's not about judgment, not at all.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
It's about using these perspectives, controversial or not, as potential
tools for insight. Understanding These correlations as presented might spark
some useful self evaluation.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
Yeah, it leaves you thinking if our daily habits really
are these quiet architects of our financial reality shaping things
over time. How much potential is just sitting there waiting
for us to maybe tweak our routines, you know, shifting
from passive watching to active doing, from blaming to owning,
from just hoping to actually planning and executing.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
It's a powerful thought.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
So here's the final question for you to chew on.
What's one micro habit, something maybe seemingly tiny or insignificant
in your day that you might look at differently now,
something you could perhaps reevaluate today knowing it might just
be a small lever but potentially a mighty one for
your future.
Speaker 2 (29:43):
Definitely something to ponder.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Think about it, and thanks for joining us on the
deep dive.
Have you ever paused, maybe just for a second, to
consider how the seemingly small, almost invisible choices we make
every single day, like how we spend our free time
or even what we grab for lunch, might actually be
well charting the course for our financial future. What if
there were specific patterns of behavior that statistically differentiate people
(00:23):
striving for financial growth from those already living with abundance.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
It's a fascinating question, and maybe a slightly uncomfortable one too,
if we're honest and today, that's exactly what we're diving into.
We're looking at a really interesting collection of observations of
claims that are presented as well key distinguishing factors between
different financial situations. Okay, our source material lays out fifteen
distinct behaviors plus a kind of bonus observation, and it
(00:49):
suggests that these patterns are pretty common among people who are,
let's say, financially struggling, but they're largely absent among the wealthy.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Fifteen plus a bonus. Wow, what's quite specific.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
It is, and it definitely challenges some common ideas and
I think prompts quite a bit of self reflection.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
Absolutely, And look, it's really crucial we frame this discussion correctly.
Right from the start, the source itself actually says to
approach these claims with a grain of salt. It's right there,
meant more as prompts for thinking about ourselves, not like
you know, universal truths carved in stone. Our mission here
isn't to say yes, this is definitively it no note
(01:26):
at all. It's more about unpacking these ideas methodically, understanding
the logic as the source presents it, and then thinking
about what that might mean for us, for you listening exactly.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
We want to explore what the source is asserting and
really encourage critical thinking, thinking about our own habits, maybe
what we see around us, and the potential ripple effects
of choices that seem small.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
It's about having an open, honest conversation, maybe looking in
the mirror a bit, and perhaps even questioning some of
our own assumptions.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
And it's all based directly on the specific viewpoints in
the material we've added for this deep dive. It's like
holding up that mirror to habits we often just overlook.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Okay, let's get into it. Then we're going to start
by digging into some of the sources claims about how
time gets spent, particularly around media leisure stuff we often
see is just downtime.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Right, and the first core claim jumps right in. It
asserts that individuals who struggle financially tend to watch well
an excessive amount of television, especially reality TV and celebrity gossip.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Oh wow, okay, start and strong.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
Yeah, the sources pretty bluntly, if you have the time
to watch reality TV, you're probably poor. It's definitely designed
to grab your attention.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
That is bold. So what's the reasoning behind that? Why
is watching TV especially that kind singled out?
Speaker 2 (02:45):
The core idea presented is that this type of TV viewing,
you know, getting suck into celebrity lies or endless reality drama,
offers no value to your own life. It serves the celebrities,
the networks maybe, but not the viewer. It's painted as
this sort of time scene, something that just grabs you
and doesn't let go, eating up hours that can be
used elsewhere.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Okay, so it's about opportunity cost in a way, time
spent there is time not spent on something else.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Partly, yes, but there's a deeper layer two. The source
really hammers this idea of using TV to disconnect from
your problems escapism exactly. While some might say, you know
time you enjoy, wasting isn't wasted time quoting John Lennon.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Yeah, I've heard that.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
The source questions if passively watching a screen should be
something you truly enjoy. In that sense, the issue isn't
just the wasted hours, it's the psychological impact. How so well,
the argument is that if you habitually use TV or
similar media to disconnect from your own reality, you're essentially
training your brain not to confront your problems directly.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Okay, so it fosters avoidance.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
That's the idea. It erodes your sense of agency, your
problem solving muscle. You could say, you become more of
a spectator in your own life.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
And does this extend to other media like news?
Speaker 2 (03:59):
It does? Yeah. The source specifically calls out favorite news channels,
arguing they're often biased and pick their own magenta, basically
tailoring content to reinforce existing views rather than offering diverse perspectives,
creating an echo chamber, essentially right keeping you in their bubble. Instead,
they suggest using the internet for just a quick glimpse
(04:19):
of world events and then moving on to do your
own thing. Don't get bogged down in curated narratives.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
That's a really pointed critique of how we consume information
to and the contrast they draw with wealthy individuals is
quite stark, Isn't.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
It very stark? The source states quite plainly, rich people
aim to be on TV instead of watching.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
It, implying a shift from passive observer to active participant,
maybe even creator or influencer.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Precisely, the cost, as the source sees it, isn't just
the lost hours. It's cultivating a mindset that consistently avoids
engaging with your own life, your own challenges, and the
wider world in a proactive way.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
Okay, that connects directly to the second claim you mentioned,
doesn't it the one about being really into sports? But
as a.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Spectator it does perfectly. The source view is watching sports
very much like watching TV. Again, the label used is
escapism from your current reality.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
But wait, lots of people find sports engaging, restorative, even
it builds community sometimes. How does the source differentiate? Is
it about being passive versus active?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
That seems to be the core distinction. They're incredibly direct
about it, they say, unless you're a professional athlete or
an owner of one of the teams, there's really no
reason for you to watch sports.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Wow, Okay, that's extreme.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
It is. And the killer line, the one that really spicks,
is that as a spectator, you, as an individual, have
no impact on the outcome of the game.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Zero impact, zero impact, ouch.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Right, And this idea of having zero impact is key.
The source suggests this spectator mentality then sticks with you.
How so it leads you potentially to become a spectator
in life instead of being a player or an owner,
And consequently, maybe you end up criticizing others from the
sidelines without achieving much yourself.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So it's a learned behavior that bleeds into other areas.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
That's the argument. Yeah, they exempt the players and owners. Obviously,
active participation or ownership is framed as the rich counterpart.
This whole spectator in life metaphor ties right back to
the TV point passive consumption, lack of direct influence.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
All about agency, isn't it, or the perceived.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Lack of it? Exactly?
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
The source posits that if you get used to having
zero impact on the game you're watching, maybe that same
feeling that learned helplessness almost affects how you approach your
own goals, your finances your.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
Career, even if watching sports feels like a break or
connects you with others.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
The source seems to focus on the dominant mindset it encourages.
Is it one of detached observation or active engagement and
influence in your own life? That's the critical question they're posing.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Okay, I see the pattern they're building here across these
first two points. It's this consistent theme of passive consumption
versus active participation. It definitely makes you think about how
we use our downtime. All right, let's shift gears. We're
moving into maybe an even more personal area now, habits
around well being, health, personal presentation. These claims get quite.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Direct, they do. The third core claim is about diets,
specifically eating fast food and lacking nutrition knowledge. The source
claims many people struggling financially have no interest in knowing
what's in their.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Food, no interest or maybe lack of access or education.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
The source leads heavily on lack of interest or understanding.
It says they lack knowledge of healthy meals or barely
know anything about nutrition. It's framed as a knowledge gap
or perhaps a lack of prioritizing.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
That knowledge, and this goes beyond just physical health.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
According to them, Oh absolutely. The source asserts that consuming
large quantities of sugar and fats with no nutritional value
isn't just bad for the body, it actually blasts their brains.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
Just their brains, that's strong language.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
It is, and it ruins their bodies, preventing them from
performing it one hundred percent of their potential. They're drawing
a direct line between fuel and function, mental acuity, energy levels,
overall capacity.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
So poor diet equals poor performance in life.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
That's the explicit connection they make. Poor health, they argue,
directly affects everything physical, mental, professional, even romantic life. It's
positioned as a foundational element for success.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
You can't operate at peak potential if your body and
brain aren't fueled properly.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Exactly, it frames physical well being not just as being healthy,
but as a critical driver of productivity and performance across
the board. While acknowledging that things like food, deserts, or
cost can be factors, the source firmly puts the onus
on personal responsibility acquiring and applying nutritional knowledge as an
investment in your core ability to succeed.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
Health as a performance enhancer. Essentially, Okay, that ties into
drive an ambition. Now sticking with physical well being, the
fourth claim is well, maybe the most surprising one yet
not showering often poor hygiene.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
Yeah, this one is definitely arresting. The source even admits
they thought it might be a made up fact initially,
but then concluded it was true and amazingly, it explains
a lot.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Explains what though, how does basic hygiene connect to financial status?
In their view?
Speaker 2 (09:16):
They jump straight to the practical social consequences. Poor hygiene,
they argue, leads to reduced success, especially in jobs needing
human contact.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Like service industries sales exactly.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
The argument is people will trust them less and simply
want to spend less time in their presence. It taps
into those subconscious cues about reliability, self respect, professionalism.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
It affects trust. Okay, I can see that.
Speaker 2 (09:42):
And it doesn't stop there. They explicitly say it impacts
your personal life too, affecting the kind of partners you
might attract.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
Right, and the conclusion they draw is incredibly blunt.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
Yeah, the first step to success should be an early
morning shower, framed almost as a non negotiable starting point.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
It's fascinating. Why would something so basic have such weight
is it just about smell or is it deeper?
Speaker 2 (10:05):
The force implies it's about those subtle signals of self
care and discipline. It affects perceived trustworthiness, comfort, and interactions,
things that are vital for networking, job interviews, customer relations, everything.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
So it's about the non verbal message.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
It sunds that seems to be it. It suggests that
if you handle the basics like personal presentation and hygiene,
it signals a level of self respect and discipline that
others subconsciously pick up on. It builds or erodes that
interpersonal trust, which they argue directly impacts your opportunities.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
It speaks to consistency, maybe discipline in one small area
translating to others that could.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Be part of the underlying logic. Yeah, that's sort of
how you do anything, as how you do everything.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
Perspective uncomfortable, but definitely makes you think about first impressions. Okay,
carrying on with this theme of proactive self management, the
next point is about health maintenance doctor checkups.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Right, and again it's framed not just as health advice,
but as a crucial financial strategy. Oh, so, the source
connects neglecting regular checkups with discovering serious diseases like cancer
only when they're in late stages.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Which obviously has huge health implication.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Huge and potentially fatal. They note, no matter how much
money you have, some things money can't fix if caught
too late, but it also leads to drastically higher treatment costs.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Ah the financial angle, catching things early is cheaper.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Much cheaper, according to the source. Regular checkups allow discovery
in early stages, making treatment possible at a lower cost.
If you wait, the cost can be astronomical of fortune
that impacts both you and your entire family.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
It underlines the financial burden of being reactive rather than
proactive with health exactly.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
The key insight here is framing health as an investment,
not an expense. It's presented almost like essential maintenance on
your most critical asset yourself.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Like maintaining your car to avoid huge breakdown later.
Speaker 2 (12:01):
Precisely, by investing small amounts of time and money in
preventative care regularly, you avoid potentially catastrophic costs both financial
and personal down the road. Its position as core personal
risk management, Foregoing checkups is seen as neglecting that essential maintenance,
inevitably leading to a bigger, potentially devastating bill later.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Health is investment, proactive planning. It's a recurring theme. Okay.
Let's shift focus now, specifically to financial habits, money management,
and what the source calls a growth mindset. These points
are very direct about money.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Itself, very direct. The sixth claim challenges a really common behavior,
buying clothes or products because they are on sale.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Oh okay, that's going to raise some eyebrows. Isn't bargain
hunting seen as smart not?
Speaker 2 (12:50):
According to this source. Generally speaking, they have a very
provocative rule. The only thing you should buy on sale
are stocks. Stocks.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
Okay, so assets that appreciate, not consumer.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
That's the idea. They can trast mindsets. The poor, they say,
focus on conserving or stretching the little that they have,
whereas the rich focus on increasing their incomes. It's scarcity
management versus abundance creation.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
So buying sale clothes reinforces the scarcity mindset.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
That's the symbolic implication they draw. They argue, sale clothes
are the items people who could afford to pay the
full price didn't want, so buying them makes you look
exactly like someone who can't afford to pay the full price.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Wow, that's quite a psychological take on shopping. It's not
just about the money saved.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
No, It's framed as being about identity and focus. Are
you focused on consumption, even discounted consumption, or on investment?
It suggests your buying habits signal maybe even reinforce your
financial self perception. Are you cultivating a discipline that directs
money towards things that grow or things that depreciate?
Speaker 1 (13:53):
Interesting? It forces you to question the why behind seeking discounts. Yeah, okay,
moving on the seventh claim, having no money saved. This
sounds fundamental.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
It's presented as absolutely fundamental. The source states starkly that
those struggling financially don't get ready for what's next. Savings conversely,
allow for both growth and buffering against shocks when something bad.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
Happens, the safety net and the springboard exactly.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
And they illustrate this with two scenarios that really drive
the point home, explaining why they think the rich are
growing richer while the poor are getting poorer.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Okay, what are the scenarios?
Speaker 2 (14:27):
First, a negative event say unexpected job loss or medical bill.
If you have no savings, you're forced to liquidate an
asset like your car, house, etc. Or take a loan.
Your life gets significantly worse.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
You go backwards right.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
But for the rich the sources after the event, they're
lived in the same position. The savings might be depleted,
but their core lifestyle isn't necessarily hit, or they're not
suddenly indebted. It highlights resilience versus fragility.
Speaker 1 (14:53):
Makes sense, and the second scenario.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
An opportunity arises, maybe a chance to invest, start a
side hustle, buy an undervalued asset. Those with savings have
the chance to expand their lives. The person without savings
can't afford to take full advantage, so.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
They miss out on growth opportunity.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Precisely, this ability to weather storms and seize opportunities is
presented as the key mechanism widening the gap. Beyond the
basics of savings are good, The compelling question might be,
how does having that buffer psychologically change your decision making?
Does it allow you to take calculated risks or play
the long game in a way you simply can't when
you're living paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
It creates options, resilience capital the ability not just to
survive shocks, but maybe even benefit from them. That's a
powerful advantage Okay. This leads logically to the eighth claim,
using credit cards or loans for well useless things.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Yes, And they have a simple rule for this, which
again really challenges common consumer behavior.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
What's the rule if you.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Take out a loan to buy something that doesn't generate
more money than the loan? Don't take it? Simple but strict.
Speaker 1 (15:58):
So borrowing is only for an investment.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
That's the explicit stance. Credit should only be used if
what you'll be using it for is an investment, something
that will ideally produce income exceeding the loan's cost.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
And they give examples of what's not an investment in
this field.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
Yeah, things people often finance. A large TV, Nope, new
designer gear like Supreme, Nope, unless you're actively planning to
resell it for profit immediately. A new I phone Nope,
unless you're, say a developer, using it to build an
app for your business. Otherwise, otherwise the advice is blunt.
Earn the money and then spend it. It's a very
(16:34):
rigorous definition of good debt versus bad debt, it really is.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
It pushes back hard against using credit for convenience or
instant gratification. It demands a calculation will this purchase make
me money?
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Exactly. It reframes credit entirely, not as a consumption tool,
but strictly as a potential wealth creation tool. It forces
you to ask, what's the real value here? If it's
not generating future value. It promotes a laid gratification and
serious financial assessment before borrowing.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
I think like an investor, not just a consumer even
with borrowing. Okay, point nine flows right from this, you know,
spending money before you actually have it, anticipating income.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Yeah. The source calls this one of the biggest dangers
in life, something that can cause your financial situation to
spiral down. It's about committing funds you don't possess.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Yet, making promises your current bank balance.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Can't keep pretty much. And they offer a really stark
affordability test, which is if you don't have money for
something that you're willing to part with without affecting your life,
then you can't afford it.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
Wow, So not just can I make the payment, but
can I buy this out right now without disrupting my
financial stability?
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Exactly. It's about radical discipline and grounding your spending in
present reality, not future hopes. If you fail the test,
The advice is simple, go back to work and then
get it.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
It really hammers home living within your means and cultivating patients.
It pushes back against that buy now, pay later call
culture completely.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
It suggests that impatience, fueled by easy credit and cultural
pressure is a direct road to financial vulnerability. The compounding
stress of being perpetually behind or obligated is seen as
a major hindrance.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Makes sense, It's easy to fall into that trap. Yeah, ohka,
let's shift again. We're moving into areas about personal responsibility,
mindset towards challenges, and the impact of your social circle.
This gets into some deep stuff about.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Character, maybe definitely. The tenth claim is about waking up habits,
specifically waking up later than rich people.
Speaker 1 (18:34):
Ah the early bird claim right.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
The source states it as a statistical truth that poor
people are often lazier than the rich in the early days.
Very direct and yeah, potentially controversial language.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Lazier is a strong word, but they link it to
long term outcomes.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
They do. They argue that someone who uses their youth
to grow themselves is a lot less likely to remain
poor later on in life, wasting time early, especially on
meaningless activity instead of self education or productive work leads
to finding yourself so far behind what the world needs
from you that you'll end up miserable.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
A strong cause and effect claim.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
There, and they highlight what they call a paradox. People
who don't focus on growth early end up working a
lot harder with little success rate later in life just
to stay afloat. They mentioned early risers like Bill Gates,
Elon Musk, warn Buffett as examples.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
So is it literally about the hour you wake up
or what you do with that time?
Speaker 2 (19:32):
That's the key question, isn't it? The source seems to
imply it's less about the clock time itself and more
about the discipline and proactive use of those early hours
time for focused work, learning, planning before the day's distractions
kick in.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Using the quiet hours strategically exactly.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
It's presented as a manifestation of a commitment to self
growth and seizing the day. Neglecting that prime time for
self investment, they argue, means you're constantly playing catch up later.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
Yeah, front loading the effort to avoid a harder slog
down the line. Okay. This idea of personal drive leads
right into Claim eleven, blaming others for misfortune accountability.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
Yes, and the Source is incredibly firm here ninety nine
percent of your life is on you. You are in
charge of your life, your relationships, your health. It champions
radical personal ownership.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
Leaves very little room for excuses, very little, And.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
It contrasts two reactions when something bad happens. The Source
claims the poor choose to victimize themselves. They look outward
for blame, whereas the rich the rich look into it,
study it, seek to find out what happened, why it happened,
and how they can protect from it in the future.
They look inward and forward.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
It's a fundamental difference in processing adversity.
Speaker 2 (20:42):
Absolutely. It touches on that psychological concept of locus of control.
Our outcomes determined by external forces external locus leading to victimhood,
or by your own actions and choices internal locus leading
to learning and adaptation.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
And the Source clearly links financial struggle with an external
locus and success with an internal one.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Precisely, it's not about denying challenges exist, but about your response.
Do you default to blame, which often leads to inaction,
or do you see it as a growing point, extracting
lessons to build resilience It's about turning setbacks into fuel for.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Development, cultivating a growth mindset even or especially when things
go wrong. That's powerful. Okay. Number twelve, never following through
on ideas or potential, the gap between dreaming and doing right.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
The Source emphasizes, the only thing you can control is
the amount of hours you put into your dream. Everyone
gets twenty four hours, but some do a lot more
than others in pursuing their goals.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
It comes down to effort and execution.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Yes, dedication to learning and implementing your passion, they argue,
means it's only a matter of time until you reach success.
It requires consistent, focused effort.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
And they had that striking statistic about businesses.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Oh yeah, that was really provocative. While maybe nine out
of ten businesses fail within three years, the source claims
all businesses fail because they never even got started.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Failure to launch is the ultimate failure. It really underscores
the importance of just starting absolutely.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
It attacks that paralysis of perfection as a more fear,
and the advice given is very iterative. If you have
an idea, work on it, put it out, get feedback,
improve it, launch again and again and again.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Fail forward, learn, adapt exactly.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
They even use their own example, mentioning three years writing
articles before starting their YouTube channel. It was an instant.
It was sustained effort and iteration.
Speaker 1 (22:30):
So the takeaway is stop dreaming, start doing, and keep refining.
Consistent imperfect action beats brilliant inaction every time.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
That's the strong message. Yes, potential is worthless until it's
activated through persistent effort and learning from feedback.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
Makes sense, okay. Claim thirteen Believing others should help you
reach the top challenging.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Entitlement unequivocally, the source states the world doesn't owe you anything.
Nobody does. You are in this by yourself. You are
in charge.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Harsh reality check.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
It contrasts that youthful belief and deserves success or rescue
with what happens when reality happens. The world, they say,
rewards only the best, the best, those that never quit,
those that keep learning, keep adapting, and understand that nobody
will solve their problems for them.
Speaker 1 (23:15):
So self reliance is paramount, no waiting for handouts.
Speaker 2 (23:19):
That's the core message. Face challenges head on, but it
does add a nuance along the way. You might meet
people who feel the same way and might share parts
of the journey with you.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
Collaboration is possible, even likely, but it's a bonus, not
the foundation.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Precisely, it's a call for radical self responsibility. Build your
own path. Don't expect others to pave it for you.
If you find allies who share your drive, great, but
don't depend on it. Success is framed as something fiercely
personal and earned.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Build it yourself. Okay, let's move into the final couple
of claims, looking at broader lifestyle choices and environment. These
touch on some very personal areas they do.
Speaker 2 (23:57):
Claim fourteen suggests that financially struggling into visuals tend to
have more kids and earlier in life.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
Okay, that's a sensitive topic. How do they frame that?
Speaker 2 (24:04):
Primarily through the lens of cost. They highlight that kids
are really, really expensive, quoting an estimate around two hundred
and fifty thousand dollars to raise one child in a
developed country.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
That's a massive financial commitment.
Speaker 2 (24:17):
It is, and the source attributes the trend of having
kids earlier or more kids while struggling to factors like
lack of education, that environment, and other factors. It contrasts
this with the wealthy, who supposedly wait a couple of
years until their standards of living improve to ensure the
right environment and prime conditions for their child.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
So it's presented as a strategic timing decision based on
resources exactly.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
The source focus is purely on the financial implications and timing.
The consequence presented for those struggling is stark. Once the
baby comes, the struggling begins just so they can stay
afloat and progress beyond barely surviving is almost impossible to achieve.
Speaker 1 (24:56):
It frames family planning as a significant economic decision with
long term impacts on financial trajectory.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yes, purely from that resource based perspective. It correlates financial
stability with the ability to provide optimal conditions, suggesting that
the timing of this major life event is strategically considered
by those aiming for financial security. It's about aligning major
life choices with financial capacity.
Speaker 1 (25:20):
A very direct economic analysis of a deeply personal choice.
Speaker 2 (25:24):
Okay, And the final main claim number fifteen surrounding themselves
with other poor people the influence of your social circle.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
Right. This one draws on that common adage you are
the sum of the five people you hang out with.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
Most birds of a feather.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
Kind of the argument is that Associating mainly with others
who are struggling financially tends to reinforce their core beliefs,
potentially limiting aspirations and perspectives. Your environment shapes you.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
That feels intuitive. Our circles definitely influence us. What's the counterpoint, The.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Source argues for intentionally seeking out people who inspire you
and push you further. People doing incredible things themselves. Their success,
the idea goes, will only motivate you to exceed your
current reality. Seek out environments that pull you up, not
hold you back exactly.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
And there's a strong warning here again staying stuck in
an old crowd that might not support your growth. The
source warns, your potential will probably be crushed by those
who want to feel better about their miserable lives by
making sure yousuf for the same fate.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
Wow, that's harsh, but it highlights the potential negative drag
of an unsupportive environment.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
It really does. It suggests your social circle isn't passive.
It actively shapes your mindset, ambition, risk tolerance, even your
definition of possible. The advice is to consciously, maybe even courageously,
choose environments that foster growth, even if that means moving
on from old connections.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
A powerful reminder of the often underestimated impact of who
we spend our time with. Okay, that's the fifteen. Now
for the bonus observation, the one the source itself flagged
is potentially explosive.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yes, the bonus claim that financially struggling people are a
lot more religious, and they preface it by saying, can
you imagine the chaos if we started the video with
this one? Acknowledging its sensitive nature right away?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
So what's the core assertion here?
Speaker 2 (27:12):
The source states that statistically speaking, successful people rely on
their own forces for their well being. Well, the poor
hopes that a mythical force will somehow reward them for
being a good person.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Again, linking it back to that internal versus external locus
of control, reliance on self versus reliance on something external.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
That seems to be the connection they're making, relying on
own forces versus hoping for intervention or reward from a
mythical force. The even side mark Zuckerberg changing his public
stance on religion potentially for political reasons, as a kind
of example of strategic positioning by the successful.
Speaker 1 (27:49):
Okay, so it's crucial here to state, as the source acknowledges,
this is presented as a statistical observation they've made, and
it's controversial absolutely.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Our purpose here is just to report on the correlation
and the rationale as presented in the source, the idea
of self reliance versus hope for external aid, without endorsing
any view on religion itself. The source is essentially asking
do beliefs about agency versus external forces influence how proactively
people tackle problems and plan their lives.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Right, It's framed as another facet of that internal versus
external control dynamic. Yeah, okay, so just to wrap this up,
then we've gone through these fifteen claims plus the bonus
one whole range of habits and mindsets are source connects
to financial outcomes. And the goal again was just to
unpack what the source claims the logic behind it, even
(28:36):
if some points felt challenging or you needed that grain.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Of salt exactly. This whole deep dive is really meant
as a framework for you, the listener, to reflect, to
maybe step back and see if any of these patterns
resonate with your own life, your own aspirations, or even
just your observations.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
It's not about judgment, not at all.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
It's about using these perspectives, controversial or not, as potential
tools for insight. Understanding These correlations as presented might spark
some useful self evaluation.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
Yeah, it leaves you thinking if our daily habits really
are these quiet architects of our financial reality shaping things
over time. How much potential is just sitting there waiting
for us to maybe tweak our routines, you know, shifting
from passive watching to active doing, from blaming to owning,
from just hoping to actually planning and executing.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
It's a powerful thought.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
So here's the final question for you to chew on.
What's one micro habit, something maybe seemingly tiny or insignificant
in your day that you might look at differently now,
something you could perhaps reevaluate today knowing it might just
be a small lever but potentially a mighty one for
your future.
Speaker 2 (29:43):
Definitely something to ponder.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Think about it, and thanks for joining us on the
deep dive.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!