The Black Informant | African American Commentary, News and Community Building

Achieving socioeconomic mobility upward takes a Hell of a lot more that just,

“mindset”. It requires knowledge (formal and informal), courage, determination, initiative, and… opportunity. $5 will get $10 that what separates a Shepard from the indigent and working poor is his level of education and his sanity.

It requires knowledge (formal and informal), courage, determination, initiative, and… opportunity.

Funny that you pick the weekends to manufacture arguments based on hair spliting. All what you mentioned is starts with the right mindset. Where there are no opportunities a person with the right mindset will make them. Since we are splitting hairs here, “formal and informal” should read ‘formal OR informal’.

I’m not splitting hairs; only responding to your cryptic broadside against social subsidies and the underclass. “Mindset” doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Neither is it the first building block upon which all success rests — if there is such a thing.

Before an individual can be of the mind to act, they require inspiration — which comes from the outside. Without aptitude to process information and (sometimes) innate physical ability, all the willpower in the world won’t translate into success. Also, opportunity and environment are often pre-existing variables beyond the individual’s control that have considerable influence on “mindset”.

My point being Shepard, you, and I are likely products of environments that give us an advantage over others were we to find ourselves suddenly indigent. And yet the three of us will experience different levels of success relative to each other, for a variety of reasons. So the inference socioeconomic mobility is simply the result of making one’s mind up is a dime-store cliche.

I’m not splitting hairs; only responding to your cryptic broadside against social subsidies and the underclass.

Taking a wack against the underclass? Simply amazing!

Before an individual can be of the mind to act, they require inspiration — which comes from the outside.

Again, this is dead wrong as well as it plays right into one of major fallacies of liberalism. It also shows a very limited understanding of street economics.

Take for example hair stylists in the Black community. Any Black woman can tell you where to go to get your hair done if you do not have the $200 or so that Beybey charges at the neighborhood shop. There are tons of Black women out there who know how to do hair, but are neither formally educated or licensed. Yet many of them do make a decent amount of money–enough to improve their economic condition. Bottom line, these individuals (hair stylists) see the need, see the income potential, and lastly make up their minds to further develop their business strategy. The problem for many of these individuals (and if you talk to them or have worked with as I have) is that many of them do not have a lasting entrepreneurial mindset. Portions of profits that could be saved for reinvestment for formal education and licensing are oftentimes squandered on depreciative items. The vast majority of these folks are content with making and spending, not pushing themselves beyond this status quo. To put it bluntly, many of these folks simply do not want to put forth the extra effort. Yet, a few of them do push themselves and capture the market. There are plenty of other examples we can pull from just the street level.

Before an individual can be of the mind to act, they require inspiration — which comes from the outside.

Outside conditions rarely triggers one to do better for him/herself. Not too long ago, there was the belief was that kids needed cable in the classroom. Then it was computers. There is a study out there (I would have to find it) that concluded neither has significantly improved grades or aptitudes. The city of Lancaster, CA is home to thousands of renters from LA (Compton/Inglewood area). Unfortunately, many of them exported the ghetto to that town as crime has gone up since the migration of folks from LA. Just as you may find lazy individuals in poor communities, you will also find lazy folks in rich communities who not only did nothing to gain their wealth, but are too undisciplined to maintain, grow and pass on that wealth to the next generation. What separates them from those who are actively moving ahead: mindset. You can apply the same thing to children born in single-parented homes who then in turn grow up, get married and establish a two-parent situation for their children that is lasting.

What separated the two men I mentioned in the post was mindset: One decided to sit back and hang his destiny on the people that passed by him on the corner while the other one made up his mind that the corner was a mere stepping stone to financial independence. BTW, the one selling the flowers was Hispanic (and most likely here illegally), the other was a White man.

So if you are settled on the fable that placing someone in the right environment will magically cause them to want to do better for themselves, go right on ahead with that belief.

“… this is dead wrong as well as it plays right into one of major fallacies of liberalism.”

You’re ridiculous, Duane. This subject has nothing to do with ideology or politics. It’s very basic human psychology.

“It also shows a very limited understanding of street economics.”

I had no idea I was talking to the Adam Smith of the ghetto. But… I’m pretty confident I’ve got a whole lot more experience in business development — even ghettopreneurship — than you. I’ve dealt with a lot of people who have the “mindset” to become successful business people, at least at first. They’re definitely motivated, they’re attending every seminar and buying every ‘self-help’ book they can. But something lit their spark. What was it? Who knows. Sometimes, it’s something they’ve seen on television, or heard about from a friend or relative. Maybe they looked up in the sky to see birds flying and decided to become a pilot. Regardless of the source of their determination, they’re undoubtedly influenced by a number of factors, both intrinsic and extrinsic (psychology, again).

Some folks learn the lessons they’re taught and apply them well. Others don’t do as well. Still, others fail completely. And there those who hit the lottery. There are any number of psychological and sociological factors that might explain each individual’s performance. The bottom line here is with the amount of human diversity that exists in nature, there’s no single item or 12-step process to explain ‘success’ ex post facto.

Suffice to say I’m not impressed by a preppie scrounging up a job that earns enough cash for an apartment, a truck, and a modest bank account.

This subject has nothing to do with ideology or politics.

It’s ideology becaue it is the belief that given the right environment, a person will want to better themselves–which is completely baseless.

Politics? Since when is liberalism only regulated to politics?

I had no idea I was talking to the Adam Smith of the ghetto.

Yep! I’m the same Adam Smith you chose to entertain you silly arguments every weekend. I guess that should make me feel special.

I’ve dealt with a lot of people who have the “mindset” to become successful business people, at least at first. They’re definitely motivated, they’re attending every seminar and buying every ’self-help’ book they can.

Notice that the people you are refering to DECIDED to do something first by going to the seminars and partaking of you infinate wisdom. Count the heads of the folks in your city who knew about those seminars and did not show up.

Regardless of the source of their determination, they’re undoubtedly influenced by a number of factors, both intrinsic and extrinsic (psychology, again).

Can’t argue with you there. But again, a person has to first want to succeed and want to do what it takes to get there. While that is certainly no guarentee to become part of the millionaire’s club, that person will never find himself locked down on welfare.

Suffice to say I’m not impressed by a preppie scrounging up a job that earns enough cash for an apartment, a truck, and a modest bank account.

It may not do a thing for you, but it sure lays waste the notion that folks are unable to make it past minimum wage in this country.

“It’sideology because it is the belief that given the right environment, a person will want to better themselves.”

Just because you put a kitten in an oven doesn’t mean it’s a biscuit. Shepard’s experiment is a layman’s behavioral study. It’s intended as political commentary, but discussing what makes folks tick is understood as psychology.

For accuracy’s sake, I never wrote anything about a person’s initiative being linked to “the right environment”. I wrote environment is one pre-condition that can influence one’s attitude — or what you call, “mindset” — and that no one factor exists exclusive of others, intrinsically or extrinsically.

“Notice that the people you are refering to DECIDED to do something first by going to the seminars and partaking of you infinate wisdom.”

How they came to make that decision is the result of an infinite number of variables working in an inexact and unidentifiable combination; some of which lie outside an individual’s ability to control. Then again, as no two people are identical (psychologically), they’re likely to respond differently to the same stimuli.

“But again, a person has to first want to succeed and want to do what it takes to get there.”

You’ve placed the cart before the horse again. A person needs to have a notion about what it is they’d like to succeed at before deciding they’d like to succeed. Only a poor marksman would attempt to shoot without a target to aim for.

“… but it sure lays waste the notion that folks are unable to make it past minimum wage in this country.”

That’s a straw man.

…but discussing what makes folks tick is understood as psychology.

Of course–if you are trying to go that deep. Shepherd’s experiment was simply a layman’s test (as you described) to demonstrate that a person (single, male, broke, reasonable health , no skills and no children) is able to improve his economic condition based first on a mindset that is determined not to settle using the existing public resources available in a city like Charleston, SC. As for my situation, I was married, broke, about to be homeless and in a city where I resort to cleaning office buildings, delivering newspapers and doing security because most IT positions (my background) in the area required a certain level of government clearance. I assure you that I could have just as easily continued to live off of welfare longer that we did.

How they came to make that decision is the result of an infinite number of variables working in an inexact and unidentifiable combination; some of which lie outside an individual’s ability to control. Then again, as no two people are identical (psychologically), they’re likely to respond differently to the same stimuli.

Okay, now we are making some progress here. Folks do respond differently to the same stimuli–one decides to first do something and the other decides to do nothing.

mindset

n 1: a habitual or characteristic mental attitude that

determines how you will interpret and respond to situations

This is where any progress begins.

So Oprah didn’t inspire herself? Chris Gardner had to get a push from whom to get where he got? How about Ray Charles? Etc., etc?

I am not saying all we accomplish is done solely on our own. Honestly – I do not believe that it is.

But one distinguishing characteristic of successful people is that they keep on plugging away and they keep an optimistic attitude. While an individual’s circumstances of birth – and their inborn talents (or lack thereof) can make this path far easier or tougher… it still is within most of us to achieve.

My nephew has Down Syndrome. Yet, he works at two jobs, saves money, and is continually pushed to do his best by his parents. (Does it help that he has two loving parents? You bet!)

I agree that some of us are so burdered, success is tough. It does not mean, however, that we ought not to encourage everyone to reach for something better. And we should not assume that it is outside the reach of many for whom we do write off a prosperous life.

Ahem…

You have to be able to conceive it before you can want to achieve it. The latter is “mindset”; the former isn’t.

“was simply a layman’s test (as you described) to demonstrate that a person… is able to improve his economic condition based first on a mindset that is determined not to settle using the existing public resources available.”

I’m not going to bother deconstructing that statement, other than point out Shepard did temporarily rely on public subsidies, i.e.; food stamps, public shelter, etc.. This is the case with most individuals who receive some form of gov’t assistance.

Again, this experiment is a straw man for no one argues a person can’t escape poverty. But Shepard, as you pointed out, is of sound mind and body — which is something that can’t be said of a large number of the indigent. He also walked into the situation with several intangibles that gave him an advantage. It’s not just a simple matter of one deciding anything, if you’ll consider many of the people he was around were incapacitated to some degree.

I hate to rely on anecdotes, but I have one that’s appropriate to this topic. About 20 years ago, I took a part-time position as a ‘recruiter’ to a secretarial school. The school provided gov’t financing to everybody who enrolled. Their prime target was young, unemployed women, 18+, whom had responded to the school’s advertising.

I’d go out to interview these women. They all claimed they wanted to improve their lives (there’s your ‘mindset’ for you). The overwhelming majority of those I sat with enrolled in the school! But…

Probably 95% of those who enrolled withdrew before the 1st class. Once you cut through all the excuses, the #1 reason for their withdrawal was a fear of debt from the student loan. They couldn’t understand how credit worked, or could be exploited to their advantage. Now to me — a person from a similar neighborhood, who actually did what I was endorsing — it made no sense. But I had been around people (lots of ‘em) who had taken out loans for post-secondary education. Those ladies couldn’t get past the idea that borrowing money (especially from strangers) is not a good thing. I’ve met indigent people who refused gov’t assistance (!) for similar thinking. And I see it all too often with many of the small business people with whom I consult and network.

Basically I think that MIB just like to “hear” himself argue (some people really are like that you know).

But what I WOULD like to know is: How many of those people out there that you (MIB) feel don’t have the opportunity, enviroment, but have “pre-existing variables” that cause them not to succeed, (whew) are YOU helping? You are certainly not helping by making excuses for them. What are YOU doing MIB to help these people? HUH? You say they need outside inspiration…are you being an inspiration for these people? If you are…good. If not…please stop arguing and admit that we all need the right mindset in order to succeed…period.

“was simply a layman’s test (as you described) to demonstrate that a person… is able to improve his economic condition based first on a mindset that is determined not to settle using the existing public resources available.”

This should have read “…a mindset that is determined not to settle using the existing public resources available AS A PERMANENT LIFESTYLE.” It was late.

He also walked into the situation with several intangibles that gave him an advantage.

Like what?

I’d go out to interview these women. They all claimed they wanted to improve their lives (there’s your ‘mindset’ for you).

This is where you keep screwing yourself up with this whole discussion.

As always, you take one thing I have said, take it way out of context and construct your own argument around it. You did this same thing with your rebuttal to my post on ‘Boondocks’ on your site by constructing a response based on an opinion you yourself admitted did not quite understand.

From jump, you have assumed that my usage of the word “mindset” meant that all a person has to do is believe it, name it and the world is theirs. This is not what I have been communicating throughout the post and our lil’ discussion. I even posted the definition of the word ‘mindset’ to underscore the definition of the word I have been referring to from jump. Yet this is the assumption you have used to construct your entire argument. Desire is one thing, but having the right mindset and will is what separates many of those who are successful and those who are not. The environment, while it can be a factor, has very little to do with a person’s willingness to do what it takes to move ahead.

To equate ‘mindset’ with desire as you have done in your last comment is not only foolish, but constructed out of the same straw you accuse me of using.

Probably one of the most dumbest questions I have heard in a long time is “Who wants to be a millionaire?” Of course everybody WANTS (or desires) to become one. But how many are willing to go through what it takes to reach that goal? Not many.

Once you cut through all the excuses, the #1 reason for their withdrawal was a fear of debt from the student loan.

Yet some of the most successful people out there were faced with identical risks and still went forward.