It doesn't. We can go back and forth on this and argue the data. Even in the article they throw out caveats :

The authors behind the new NBER paper, on the other hand, are looking exclusively at bankruptcies. Since their analysis only includes former draft picks, they may also be tracking a somewhat elite subset of ex-pros. About 30 percent of players in the league were never selected in the draft, and—while I haven't seen any specific stats on this—I wouldn't be shocked if they generally had shorter, less profitable careers.

You are essentially doing what you always do (and what rjoe does) by taking a non-important issue and moving the discussion away from the main point. Many pro athletes make amazing amounts of money and go broke. If it's "so easy" to become rich when having a large financial windfall (as you implied with Trump), then why does it happen so often?

Making money is easy, right? Just put all of your net worth into an S&P 500 index fund and pick up 3.6 billion in 30 years, right? Easy game.

What would undrafted free agents going broke have to do with Trump?

Athletes weren't making enough money to retire wealthy in the 70s before the start of this massive secular bull market so we don't have any apple-to-apple comparisons on that front.

As I said originally before the first time you flew off the handle, I give Trump full credit for being an elite brand builder/marketer even though I think he kind of sucks at operating businesses (its what the record supports). He's not a bad asset trader either. Its just stupid to think taking a massive inherited amount of money and turning it into a greater massive amount of money in an environment where a nearly 40 year massive secular bull market means he could have done something pretty close with index funds is in and of itself an accomplishment that makes him one of the most successful humans that ever lived at all aspects of life.

Well that's my point. Who gives a crap? What does your argument of me giving an example being an overstatement really mean? What's the purpose of this side debate of whether most athletes go broke or not prove?

I was making a point that people who have been fabulously wealthy have gone bankrupt. You implied making money was easy, that of COURSE Trump is a billionaire! He was handed 40 million!

What you said was stupid. It was stupid then, it is stupid now. You arguing that many athletes don't go broke, even if correct, doesn't change the fact that your original premise was ******ed.

When I said you'll be stupid forever, I meant it.

I don't know, only you know why you threw a nutty over a factual correction.

lol

Please go post this in the economics forum.

lol wil, you sort of cropped off the rest of that point there chief.

You disingenuously trying to change the argument because of an obvious exaggeration isn't worth mentioning. When someone says "he's better at everything in life than every human that ever lived", it isn't difficult to understand it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Your stupidity knows no bounds.

It doesn't make him one of the most successful humans that ever lived just within the business world either, so your bizarre tendency to take issue with people taking your words at face value doesn't matter.

It cracks me up when people have achieved no level of success in anything criticize others. It really makes them look foolish. YOU criticizing someone like Trump is especially egregious because of your intellect. My reaction to your criticism reflected that.

lol @ gambool EVER criticizing ANYONE. You're one of the dumbest people I've ever had the misfortune of dealing with. I truly mean that. Most dumb people I meet at least know to keep their mouth shut when a topic comes up that they don't know much about. You, however, have no qualms about making yourself look like an unabashed fool.

I have successfully had a happy and healthy kid that is raised by me, his mom, and a loving extended family.

Congrats, I'm happy for you. I was talking more about professional success, if that helps narrow it down a little.

lol @ wil EVER criticising anyone for being dumb and being unable to keep his mouth shut. He's one of the dumbest people I have ever read on these forums blah blah blah

FAO Chez this would be an example of water carrying.

hahahahaha....OK, then Im just amused.

You mean the sort that would be water carrying in non-bizarro land as well?

You could define the term in a way that lets us differentiate between what I call water carrying and what others have called water carrying without adverse comment, but I'd much rather see Kerowo have a go.

Water is heavy, it should be called humping water.

By your metric everyone in this thread is in the top 10% most successful people of all time.

Probably not that far unless you don't really accept the idea of any metric for success.

It's not hard to understand the point I was making. I don't see why we have to go through this ad naseum. If you want to insult me or make fun of me, please feel free, but arguing against my point is pretty silly. There's nothing remotely strange about saying that someone who is in the top 500 richest people on the planet is wildly successful.

Everyone in this thread is great, except kerowo, who is stupid.

Too many definitions of success being used for it to mean much. Since this is a thread about Trump running for president I still don't see why his business success means anything as far as his presidential bid goes. Sure he could help Putin build a ****ty casino in Russia but that's about it.

It really does matter a lot because in a large part it's a beauty contest and voters think it matters.

That's assuming he has some chance of winning. if he has no chance then it doesn't matter at all.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politi...rson-cnn-poll/

Donald Trump has become the first Republican presidential candidate to top 30% support in the race for the Republican nomination, according to a new CNN/ORC Poll, which finds the businessman pulling well away from the rest of the GOP field.

Trump gained 8 points since August to land at 32% support, and has nearly tripled his support since just after he launched his campaign in June. The new poll finds former neurosurgeon Ben Carson rising 10 points to land in second place with 19%. Together, these two non-politicians now hold the support of a majority of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, and separately, both are significantly ahead of all other competitors.

Neither are going to win the nomination.

.

I find myself very much hoping letsgambool is correct but that's seems enough to make his business acumen (or lack of it) matter.

@Kerowo the point was that if he might win then the issue off his success matters not that it makes any view about his success correct.