The most successful children have parents who play these 8 roles

[Shogun]

I think any attempt to classify and predict human behavior is flawed.
Human consciousness, and the ways in which it effects decision making/motivation/etc. is still a mystery, so it allows for people to attach whatever bias they might have to it. In any attempt at forming an explanation their are way too many "exceptions" you have to ignore.

Even defining what "successful" means is impossible...what's seen as "successful" in America in 2019 considers such a limited moment in human existence, past and present, that it's basically meaningless.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Is it? Being born to rich "meh" white parents >>>> being born to poor "good" parents

Being born into wealth is the real privilege. And wealth is white.

No.That’s far from facts. That white privileged environment breeds co-dependence (drugs, lack of self control and coping skills) who usually cheat or engage in dishonesty to avoid failure -grounds for maladjusted social deviant retards who just happen to have the white benefitts of status, networks and connections to level up.

Poor good parents, when raised the right way, know about work ethic, appreciate challenges and respect value bc it takes more than just money to help them succeed.

Do you have any links supporting this argument? I think this is wishful thinking in an attempt to downplay the tangible and highly impactful ways in which wealth plays a part in individual success.

Having wealth allows wealthy parents to lean more heavily on outsourcing successful skills/habit formation. Furthermore, having wealth can lead to a sort of compound effect if the parents are good parents along with having wealth, which in a competitive environment is very beneficial for their kids.

I'm with Nicole. Having wealthy but shytty parents makes you most likely to be a wealthy but shytty person. You may be more likely to finish college than a poor person, but there is a LOT of socially deviant behavior among the wealthy and a lot of them are deeply unhappy with their lives and make the people around them unhappy too. I mean look at fukking Hollywood.

Whereas if you have good parents who are poor, then you might not end up rich, but you actually have the combination of the two experiences (a safe, strong upbringing and meaningful trials to overcome and life experiences exposed to) that often leads to true greatness.

Imagine that you know you are about to die, and you have two little children. You could either place them were two really good parents who are working class, or two terrible parents who are wealthy. Would any of you really hand your kids over to those wealthy losers?

 

[AZBeauty]

Keeping the phones out their hand as long as possible should be up there.

 

[Strapped]

I dig it

 

[Althalucian]

This is all true based on my experiences and observations (and as a parent). But it ignores other factors that can come in to damage your child along the way.

Also if society treats the parents like trash and/or kills or poisons them that also doesn't help. Gotta invest in both kids and parents.

 

[re'up]

I know my Mom was very much a "revealer", through museums, art, movies, television, movies, things of that nature, and while limited in resources, I carry that with me into adulthood. Early learning, I know I was reading at a very high level at really young age, and that had aided my intelligence significantly. Those things can go a long way, when money and capital/assets are not available.

I can now move and function at a higher level than many of my peers who have more money and higher social status, simply because for a lack of better word, I am "smarter".

 

[Shogun]

Keeping the phones out their hand as long as possible should be up there.

It’s like fighting the tide at this point.

 

[ogc163]

I'm with Nicole. Having wealthy but shytty parents makes you most likely to be a wealthy but shytty person. You may be more likely to finish college than a poor person, but there is a LOT of socially deviant behavior among the wealthy and a lot of them are deeply unhappy with their lives and make the people around them unhappy too. I mean look at fukking Hollywood.

The initial comparison was between "meh" wealthy parents vs. "good" poor parents, not sh*tty or horrible, I took meh to mean mediocre or below average but not relatively horrible. A mediocre wealthy parent still has access to relevant variables outside of home culture that a good poor parent does not, the gap would still substantially favor the child of the wealthy parent.

And how are we defining success in relation to these kids? I should add that the authors define success as achieving self-actualization, and given my value system that is how I would define it as well. Having wealthy mediocre parents vs. poor parents in this regard would once again lead me to prefer the mediocre wealthy parents, mainly because of the probability of the downside risks that comes with living in poverty.

Now if we are talking about horrible negligent wealthy parents then yes I would prefer good poor parents over them, but that wasn't the original comparison.

 

[Starman]

That basically the test is bullshyt and the biggest factor in it was the fact that the kids parents were rich and highly educated

Listen to 131 - The Marshmallow Replication by You Are Not So Smart on #SoundCloud

This is great! Thanks for putting me on. I'd rep, but uhh...

 

[Robbie3000]

The real privilege in life is being born to good parents.

This is very true. In my life I saw average kids succeed because of good parents and I’ve seen very bright kids fail because of bad parents.

 

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

Decent list and well written. I never thought of parenting broken down into those personality/character traits. Not that the idea for instance of taking kids to museums is some new concept - but to think of that as a philosophical mindset is very interesting.

One of the things that isn't really mentioned is how they feed into each other. Very poor parents may for instance dedicate their livelihoods and sacrifice everything to put their kids in a top private school. Now, they don't have the trait of the "resource" parent who can pay not only for schools, but camps, tutors, and connections - but by virtue of going to elite schools they can gain entrance into the world of connections and access.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

The initial comparison was between "meh" wealthy parents vs. "good" poor parents, not sh*tty or horrible, I took meh to mean mediocre or below average but not relatively horrible. A mediocre wealthy parent still has access to relevant variables outside of home culture that a good poor parent does not, the gap would still substantially favor the child of the wealthy parent.

And how are we defining success in relation to these kids? I should add that the authors define success as achieving self-actualization, and given my value system that is how I would define it as well. Having wealthy mediocre parents vs. poor parents in this regard would once again lead me to prefer the mediocre wealthy parents, mainly because of the probability of the downside risks that comes with living in poverty.

Now if we are talking about horrible negligent wealthy parents then yes I would prefer good poor parents over them, but that wasn't the original comparison.

Even "meh" wealthy parents, any below average at all, usually end up with worthless kids. The combination of privilege and below-average parenting is a bad one. And I'm talking about morally, ethically, self-fulfillment, etc., not income and education.

If you are actually living in poverty then life can throw you through shyt, but I'd still take a good parent in poverty over a bad parent in wealth. But I was more thinking working class than destitute poverty. Growing up we always had enough of everything, we just didn't have no extras.

This is very true. In my life I saw average kids succeed because of good parents and I’ve seen very bright kids fail because of bad parents.

Malcolm Gladwell has a chapter about arguably the smartest man in the would. He had a really horrible upbringing, abusive father and such, it damaged his ability to chart any of the expected paths to success that you would have thought for someone with such a high IQ.

 

[NZA]

it's an ok list but successful parents are not going to allow their children to test their parenting methods in "meritocracy". these concerns mean nothing to them. if the kid isnt intellectual, they will shape society so that the kid just cant fail. look at trump, lol

 

[Copy Ninja]

Keeping the phones out their hand as long as possible should be up there.

It's impossible.

The key is to moderate and be sensible about your kids using technology, which they will need to be familiar with because of how integrated technology is to our society. You don't want them falling behind other kids.

You also gotta factor in that every kid has different temperament. So what works for my son may not necessarily work for my daughter and vice versa.

In regards to 'good' vs 'bad' parenting and wealth, a kid growing up in a wealthy family will always have an advantage because they will get to experience many more things vs the poor kid simply reading said experiences in books. My wife is a teacher and she often talks about the differences in the kids who experience things vs the kids who read about it and how the kids who experience things have greater capacity to understand the concepts of the curriculum. For example if they are talking about the Revolutionary War, the wealthy kids family may have taken a trip to the northeast and been to the historical sites. Those kids will have a personal experience and will have a better understanding of the subject matter vs the kid who simply read about it. So even the wealthy parents that people may label 'bad' can provide experiences to their kids that will help them better prepare for life vs the kid who grows up in a low income family but have 'good' parents.

 

[AZBeauty]

It's impossible.

The key is to moderate and be sensible about your kids using technology, which they will need to be familiar with because of how integrated technology is to our society. You don't want them falling behind other kids.

I let my daughter use technology if it is related to her schoolwork which is every class this school year. I do not let her go on youtube, facebook or any other social media platforms now. I did the last few years and I saw a decline in her critical thinking when it came to completing her school work. I had to help her more, it took her longer to figure things out. Since I have taken it from her, she is has done much better. So my comment stemmed from that. She's 10 yrs old. It was the same thing with my friend, who has a 14 yr old (my niece). She started messing up in school and getting lazy, she took her phone from her around the same time and she has also seen a big improvement. Her daughter got her first phone at 5 yrs old. I got my daughter her first phone when she was 8. It was the worse decision I made as far as supporting her academically in my opinion.