Rich Dad, Poor Dad: What the Rich Teach Their Kids About Money
- Thread starter -ooO-(GoldTrade
- Start date
Excellent comment.
What is wrong with this book and the premises that it makes is that essentially every example is taken out of context specifically to exploit one's ignorance of time and monetary finance principles.
In the opening of this thread, the quoted percentage aludes to the notion that so many percent of the rich purchase their automobiles (as the example used) for 25% less than the non-rich people. BUBKISS (politically correct way of saying bull chips)
That example does not provide complete data or a fully worded sentence, nor does his book properly explain the subject, complaint, theory or solution to a logical person or in a manner that respects the essential notion that if a solution is out of reach to the average man, then it really is no solution at all.
The movie Philadelphia, with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington playing both lawyers, used the expression on the cross examination of the defendant, who just expoused a whole lot of malarky: "now explain it to me as if I were a six year old". Very effective method.
That book can't be explained because even a six year old, or the average intelligence of most grown-ups, whether US residents or of other countries, could not understand what he's trying to suggest through his misrepresentation.
Most people negotiate and take advantage of 3 things: 1) advertised auto sales and discounts; 2) leasing or other modified ways of non-purchasing of automobiles; 3) rebates and incentives or employee discounts and trade-ins to lower the price of newly purchased or used automobiles. His suggestion that one waits until the auto in question either is offered for resale after depreciation or purchase through self-financing (essentiall all cash and no debt) is not practical and would return us to the old Gold Standard that Bretton-Woods under Nixon freed us up from. Up until that time all prices were at true cost.
Financing produced both benefits and damage, but allowed for substantial growth of the economies of almost every municipality, family, company and institution through debt, debt-management and leverage. It also produced the very same asset inflation that makes the very same jobs that we trade upon possible, namely the explosive stock market.
Frankly that idoit doesn't know what he's talking about.
What is wrong with this book and the premises that it makes is that essentially every example is taken out of context specifically to exploit one's ignorance of time and monetary finance principles.
In the opening of this thread, the quoted percentage aludes to the notion that so many percent of the rich purchase their automobiles (as the example used) for 25% less than the non-rich people. BUBKISS (politically correct way of saying bull chips)
That example does not provide complete data or a fully worded sentence, nor does his book properly explain the subject, complaint, theory or solution to a logical person or in a manner that respects the essential notion that if a solution is out of reach to the average man, then it really is no solution at all.
The movie Philadelphia, with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington playing both lawyers, used the expression on the cross examination of the defendant, who just expoused a whole lot of malarky: "now explain it to me as if I were a six year old". Very effective method.
That book can't be explained because even a six year old, or the average intelligence of most grown-ups, whether US residents or of other countries, could not understand what he's trying to suggest through his misrepresentation.
Most people negotiate and take advantage of 3 things: 1) advertised auto sales and discounts; 2) leasing or other modified ways of non-purchasing of automobiles; 3) rebates and incentives or employee discounts and trade-ins to lower the price of newly purchased or used automobiles. His suggestion that one waits until the auto in question either is offered for resale after depreciation or purchase through self-financing (essentiall all cash and no debt) is not practical and would return us to the old Gold Standard that Bretton-Woods under Nixon freed us up from. Up until that time all prices were at true cost.
Financing produced both benefits and damage, but allowed for substantial growth of the economies of almost every municipality, family, company and institution through debt, debt-management and leverage. It also produced the very same asset inflation that makes the very same jobs that we trade upon possible, namely the explosive stock market.
Frankly that idoit doesn't know what he's talking about.
i buy my cars off leases and I end up selling them a year later either making money or break-even, so the car didn't cost me a thing other than insurance and repairs. The car is run off my companies name, so I don't pay for it with after-tax dollars.
I don't see that as too complex, although for most people who are employees I'd only suggest buying a car a couple of years old, you don't want to mess with the tax authorities. No big deal, and you save a bunch of money.
I think for the average household, not advanced investors like a lot of us, the general messages are good. NOT the exact examples he states, but general ideas: things like save a portion of your income, reduce your spending, be careful about buying a huge house that ends up taking all your cash out of your pockets, things of that nature.
Haven't you read about people making $150k one year then laid off and declaring bankruptcy? Why? Because they have 2 car payments (probably both BMW's), huge house and other debt obligations. Those people need to read books such as this one.
It's not how much you make, it's how much you save. That's not a new thought, nor am I crediting Robert with saying it, but many people forget such good ideas. It's a refresher course
I don't see that as too complex, although for most people who are employees I'd only suggest buying a car a couple of years old, you don't want to mess with the tax authorities. No big deal, and you save a bunch of money.
I think for the average household, not advanced investors like a lot of us, the general messages are good. NOT the exact examples he states, but general ideas: things like save a portion of your income, reduce your spending, be careful about buying a huge house that ends up taking all your cash out of your pockets, things of that nature.
Haven't you read about people making $150k one year then laid off and declaring bankruptcy? Why? Because they have 2 car payments (probably both BMW's), huge house and other debt obligations. Those people need to read books such as this one.
It's not how much you make, it's how much you save. That's not a new thought, nor am I crediting Robert with saying it, but many people forget such good ideas. It's a refresher course
Interesting.
I have not read the book in question, however, I am enjoying the exchanges in this thread. I did manage to read a few reviews, though, two of which are hyperlinked below.
http://money.cnn.com/best/magazine_archive/2003/01/KIR.html
http://money.cnn.com/best/magazine_archive/2003/01/latest.html
I find it interesting that the author has evidently fabricated certain elements of his past to better align it with the message he wishes to convey. What I find particularly fascinating, though, is that his proponents do not deny but readily accept this little excursion in creativity and poetic license. Apparently, the rationale is that one must look at the bigger picture, the greater message, rather than at the boring and pesky minute details that collectively comprise that bigger picture. I wish I had that kind of confidence. Unfortunately, I do not. When I find that someone has deliberately lied to me, it is difficult for me to determine, going forward, what to believe and what not to believe no matter how compelling the point may seem. I guess I'm just not that clever.
Indeed, the author is a lucky man. His unconditional following has assured that he no longer has to limit himself to factual detail. He can focus his energy on being a big-picture visionary. I imagine we are all familiar with the trading equivalent: buy low, sell high (or buy high and sell higher if that pleases you more). Cut your losses short and let your profits run. Yes, we all need more books with different titles and in different colors to tell us that.
As an aside, I wonder if the author Jeffrey Archer, who wrote the best-selling novel Rich Man, Poor Man in the 1970s, got any compensation for the blatant rip-off of his book's title.
I have not read the book in question, however, I am enjoying the exchanges in this thread. I did manage to read a few reviews, though, two of which are hyperlinked below.
http://money.cnn.com/best/magazine_archive/2003/01/KIR.html
http://money.cnn.com/best/magazine_archive/2003/01/latest.html
I find it interesting that the author has evidently fabricated certain elements of his past to better align it with the message he wishes to convey. What I find particularly fascinating, though, is that his proponents do not deny but readily accept this little excursion in creativity and poetic license. Apparently, the rationale is that one must look at the bigger picture, the greater message, rather than at the boring and pesky minute details that collectively comprise that bigger picture. I wish I had that kind of confidence. Unfortunately, I do not. When I find that someone has deliberately lied to me, it is difficult for me to determine, going forward, what to believe and what not to believe no matter how compelling the point may seem. I guess I'm just not that clever.
Indeed, the author is a lucky man. His unconditional following has assured that he no longer has to limit himself to factual detail. He can focus his energy on being a big-picture visionary. I imagine we are all familiar with the trading equivalent: buy low, sell high (or buy high and sell higher if that pleases you more). Cut your losses short and let your profits run. Yes, we all need more books with different titles and in different colors to tell us that.
As an aside, I wonder if the author Jeffrey Archer, who wrote the best-selling novel Rich Man, Poor Man in the 1970s, got any compensation for the blatant rip-off of his book's title.
ThunderDog you make some good points. In fact I am not a huge fan, buying all the crap he sells. My point has always been if someone is completely new to finance, or understanding how their money is being spent, this is not a bad book.
For example, my girlfriend knows absolutely nothing about her finances. She told me she can't even balance her checkbook on a monthly basis. People like that still exist. Anyway, the easy stories of Rob helped her see that there is lot for her to learn.
What scares people like that away is if they jump into advanced areas of finance. They get frustrated and give up. With my help, and several books, she's able to 'see' what I see when I look at her pathetic attempts to balance her books, and look into the future with some kind of plan.
And as far as buy low/sell high, cut your losses, i've seen plenty of people not follow those rules. Sometimes people need to be reminded that the most effective strategies are based on simple ideas.
Thanks for the input guys, very informative
Canuck
I read the book about a year ago, and to save others the time from doing so, here is Kiyosaki's secret formula to getting rich
(without all the motivational psycho-babble):
1. Don't spend more then you earn
2. Invest your savings in profitable investments (!)
3. Reinvest the proceeds from those profitable investments into other profitable investments
4. After you've done all that, hire a good accountant and a tax attorney to shelter your profits
If you have to buy a book in order to figure this out, I'm not too sure how succesful you'll ever be
(without all the motivational psycho-babble):
1. Don't spend more then you earn
2. Invest your savings in profitable investments (!)
3. Reinvest the proceeds from those profitable investments into other profitable investments
4. After you've done all that, hire a good accountant and a tax attorney to shelter your profits
If you have to buy a book in order to figure this out, I'm not too sure how succesful you'll ever be
Wonder if that's how he got the idea for his book? Maybe he was reading it one day after coming home from his crappy job. (Please don't tell me he was a millionaire. His only business is the Rich Dad franchise.)
I can imagine it now:
"Rich cat, poor cat." No thats not it.
"Rich dude, poor dude." Closer but still not it.
"Rich dad, poor dad." Thats it!
The entire series is basically a great title and a good concept in search of content.
http://www.inflationdeflation.com/index.html
http://www.inflationdeflation.com/images/cartoon.gif
An add-on to Monopoly Game ideal for children ... and adults
http://www.inflationdeflation.com/images/cartoon.gif
An add-on to Monopoly Game ideal for children ... and adults
It is estimated that half of trillions of the planet is offshore and so not paying for tax, guess why the rest is pressured by tax haha !