Bitcoin Forum

hi actually i m not a newbie but newbie in forum :)

people love rich and give all respect to them if rich wants they give them ther A** without any reason but the reason behind will be money..

the community only love rick why not poor ,,, poor deserve`s more respect ... poor have much more peace in them expect rich ...

if rich wants help everyone help them if poor wants no one help expect few people


please give me some predictions :)

Because they think they deserve it. "Oh, he deserves to be poor, its their fault". This along with the hope of poor people to get rich, constitute the fundamental pillar to keep the capitalism scam going.

but if we look at there past or know full about them they really not deserve it.

Poors still have the humanity and rich do not,rich people made out a world of illusion in which they think they are happy from the things they get/have and make others fall into the same illusion.Poor people have less and are happy with what they have.They don't have more enough economy to make others happy.Rich are just those people who were once poor who stepped onto humanity and got onto

because most of the rich (im not talking about bankers/wallstreet) became rich by selling goods and services the public wants.
they enriched society with their goods and services.

Rich - poor (who are you to decide which title applies to whom?) 

I give respect to those who give it back...period.

I don't respect rich people more than poor people.  If you think otherwise or differently, then consider that you could be allowing Television and media at large to dictate what you believe is happening with this "we all respect rich people but not poor people".

very interesting topic

rich people often come to the property in the wrong way

Well the reason is that they had to do something to get that money usually
And well you don't suck up to a poor person you want to emulate the rich one.
Although in a sense only the rich can afford to help the poor as the poor can't do much to help others as they struggle in their day to day lives let alone have time to be concerned for others.

So in the end the rich may not by happiness but the poor will wallow in it, unless they get out of that and then are able to help others as well.
We start the journey together life takes us along many paths but these challenges help us to grow and its how we handle them that levels the playing field between those who succeed and become rich in the future and those that don't and only can dream of it.

Fixed that for you

Beside those who are born into upper class, it takes a great amount of hard work and sacrifice to get to the top.

Something not everyone willing to do. Hence the respect.

People who are rich tend to get more respect because they usually are the people who worked hard to get the income and money they have. It's the rich people who are handed their millions and did not do anything to gain what they own that I feel should not have respect. As for the poor in most cases they usually do not get respect because they are reluctant to do anything to help themselves make more money or even become rich. I would never say that someone who is poor should not be respected but I can see where you are coming from.

Most rich people didn't work hard, there's always a backstory behind it. Im not saying this is 100% of the times but most of the time.
Rich people have a certain halo that attracts most people, poor people don't attract most people. Easy.

because we think they had a better education

This is not always true, it depends on how the rich got his money.
By the way, nobody deserve more respect than another except for his achievements.

From Atlas Shrugged

We have no more respect for the begger than for the looter or the politician.
We have respect for the man who works to get his money without stepping on the property of others.

We respect the rich because we always think he earned it by his own effort, without violating property rights.

Pretty much. Unfortunately it never dawns on most to consider why from generation to generation, the poor stay poor and the rich stay rich. Hard work? My ass. Private property allowed for rent, profit, usury. The rest is history.

And to be clear, the people I've known who would be considered "rich" by relative standards, have always been the laziest I've ever come across -- the type who couldn't be bothered to lift a finger for themselves.

This entire topic is stupid. Most of the posts too. For starters, who are you to say what I think about people?

Simple, the poor create a financial burden on the collective that all of us front the cost of, the rich although they themselves can be a burden are where we extract most of our tax revenue from.

Even in countries with Welfare states being poor(for extended periods of time) isn't really thought of highly, especially since they give so much support and tool for people to climb up the social/economic ladder.

But I have great respect for the poor immigrants that come and work hard and contribute to society.

Are these rich you speak of Old Money? If so, that's understandable. But if it's Nouveau Riche, then I'm curious as to where you live.

Because that is what capitalism does (right or wrongly).  Money = you are worthy, no money = you are not worthy. 

IMO if society was more equal for everyone I would give rich people more respect. But nowadays most rich people already has rich parents and their fortune was not due to their sole inteligence and hardwork (I'm thinking about using Daddy's friends in instance)

Isn't it a kind of egoistic interest ? I respect him because I may need him later.

There are lot reason why that happens, but usually because :
Rich : They could help people, they have company that many people can have work on him/her company, people think usually rich people do good things

Poor : They make other people help him/her, people think poor people usually do bad things, people think poor people is reason why country win't grow up

I'm not racist, but i think this why people give respect to Rich and no-respect to poor

I got a better question. Why are people being self-destructive by envying those who do better than them instead of working on improving their own situation?

Socialism is institutionalized greed, backed up by violent men with guns.

We are all here to make money, whatever some may claim. We should not be advocating that people take our money from us and give it to others.

How do you make money? exactly, by taking money from another person.

How do you make money ? by being paid against services that your customer value more than his money.
Taking money imply coercion, a monopoly of government.
Making money is what productive people does.

Being rich = inheriting, scamming, etc.

I have a deal for you, since you are so afraid to be rich for its evil, I propose to purify your soul by taking care of your money for you.
You'll be loved for your sacrifices. :)

Radom Ramble:

In a Capitalist society, "Rich" normally = abundant wealth, (howsoever derived,) plentiful access to funds, being seen as successful based on the "stuff" you can afford to buy, the house you live in, cars you drive etc, etc...

And, no doubt, because of the way we are conditioned in a Capitalist society, we all mostly see these things as a marker of being "successful" because we have been conditioned to do so - its seen as, and feels, well, natural.

As an older, "successful" person, my own personal opinion is that the definition of "successful" should not be determined by governments, or even society, based on how "they" see you.  You should set your own markers.  Being "Rich" - (ie: having lots of money, or things,) does not make an individual "Rich" imo, although, I guess many people consider this to be the case...

My point is - happiness is everything, fiscal wealth means diddly squat in at the end of the day.  Being content, loved and happy is far more valuable than being "Rich". Trust me, I know. Find your own route to happiness - it may not be money-based, or bitcoin based, however much you think it might be..!  ;)

Set your own "Rich" - and you might find you already have more than you think...! :)

(In the meantime, Bitcoin is the future, and long may it live and make us all "happy"!)

This could not be further from the truth. You become rich by working hard, and building your money and having others work for you.

If everyone that was rich was a scammer then no one would want to do business with them.

I'd like some of what you're smoking. ;D

Putting aside the question of where their capital originated from.... the very idea that wealth is "inherited" is at odds with the idea of "working hard." Some people are just born into money, and they are lazy as hell.

No man can be smaller that its money. (Atlas shrugged ;))
If money comes into the hand of the lazy, then it will flee from its hand, no need for government intervention to take it from its hand by force to redistribute.

A fat purse quickly empties if there be no golden stream to refill it. (Richest man in babylon)
The man smaller than his money finish on crack, killed, abused, looted, and find that nothing can buy a purpose, so he will often be prone to depression.
Having too much money when you are not as great to make it is a curse.

So yes, you become wealthy by working hard and, I will add, for yourself. You can inherit the money, but I don't see what to envy to the dumb that can't make it that would justify coercion.

Maybe society should make the difference between rich and wealthy.
You can't inherit wealth, but you can inherit large sum of money.
Being wealthy is the power to attract money without coercion, so by definition a wealthy person becomes rich.

Couldn't agree more.

As someone mentioned earlier, that may be an appropriate characterization (if imprecise) of state socialism. But not all forms of socialism would use the state to enforce anything, and in fact, some oppose it on all fronts.

Interesting, do you mean there is a form of socialism where state doesn't have to exercise coercion, and where everyone is free to disassociate from the system and trade with who he wants for the price he wants and on what he wants ?
I did not think any kind of socialism was possible at the level of the state without coercion, what form of socialism do you mean ?

Union labor is a kind of socialism without coercion (only if they don't depend on government subsidies, and don't blackmail people that does not join them), which is good.
But I can't see how such thing would work at the level of a state. Any good reading ?

Well, thats the world think nowadays. Maybe they are thinking that poor people tends to do harmful stuff for a little money. They just avoid them or what. Have you watched a clip about this? They dressed a homeless man and groomed him like a rich guy. Placed the man in front of a coffee shop and asked for money from the people. He was given a lot. And then the crew dressed him in his homeless man clothes and put him again on the same spot, people avoided him. Check that out in youtube.

There is a strong correlation between IQ and socioeconomic status, and IQ is to a strong degree inherited.
This might explain why poverty as well as wealth seems to run in the family.

As a smart man once said, "there are no rich fools".
And that's why many of the wealthy families make sure the wealth is locked in trust funds governed by a collective of relatives, perhaps with one or two outsiders as a kind of "moderator". That way a stupid grandson or somebody else down the line that might not be as smart as the ancestor who made the fortune, can't lose the fortune due to hos stupidity.

Some people instantly earn a large amout of money by luck. They overlook poor from then. Even they are rich, but not wealthy in mentalIty. No one will be happy to help them.

If he can't spend the money he owns, because locked away from his stupidity, then I don't understand why you classify him as rich.
Either you can spend and you are rich, or you can't and it means the money does not belong to you.

He will loose it as quickly as he earned it if his brains don't follow.

Yes, there are such forms of socialism. The distinction is between State Socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_socialism) and Libertarian Socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism). Trade unionism/anarcho-syndicalism generally fall under the latter categorization.

Maybe "locked" is the wrong word, they do get to use the money, they just don't get to do it as they please.

exactly,

even though most people are worse of n capitalism (by design), many of them support it, in the hopes of ever becoming the top of the food chain (no matter how unlikely), and the ones that do not support it because they are so far down the chain they can't ever hope to be even somewhere near the middle, they are too poor to matter anyway.

Also, a lot of propaganda against anything that undermines capitalism.

this myth is so bad

do you think the children in china are poor because they are not working hard enough? aren't they making enough sacrifice?

the wealth in the world is unbalanced big time and rich people are not hard workers, at all.

rich people are often lazy and only worked relatively hard for a small amount of time (if at all) so that they never have to work again in their lives.

Who works harder: the king of the netherlands, 'earning' €800k tax free annually, or a kid making iphones 12 hours a day for a few dollars? Now who earns more respect?

you don't get rich from working hard, working hard only keeps the rich richer, that is, by your work you support the rich.

Face it, most people work for a boss, while the boss works for a large corporation. The ones really making a profit of all that hard work are the stock holders that own shares of that corporation. The only way to get rich is own (part) of a corporation. Or be born into it. Or be fricking smart and invent something like twitter or facebook (which is semi-hard work, for a couple of month/years).

The king works a lot more than 12 hours a day, so the king is the hardest worker in your comparison.
Kids don't work in china, they go to school, just like in the west.
And the wealth is not as unbalanced as you think, and it is constantly getting more even, due to capitalism actually. This is my evidence, http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen

In the last 20 years the proportion of the world population living in extreme poverty has almost halved.
Here is an ignorance survey for USA http://www.gapminder.org/news/ignorance-survey-in-the-usa-2013/#.VAb8pWM4jIU
And here you can find the same thing for Sweden and Norway, pretty much the same results, http://www.gapminder.org/GapminderMedia/wp-uploads/Novus-Gapminder-Ignorance-Survey-SWE-NO-nov_dec_20131.pdf

Yes it would, because that's the only way it could possibly happen.

The best way is to work and spend a % of ur money in btc.

not sure if trolling or just stupid

this make me cry..

personally i m poor :)and i m happy ..

LOL at kings ever working. In what planet?

If you guys seriously think that a head of state only works 8 hours a day and then relaxes for the rest of the time, you are seriously below the IQ median.
When you have evolved from Disney world to the real world we can start a serious debate.

Because our society is like a dysfunctional family in many ways.  Many those with obscene amounts of wealth believer they are or are seen by too many people as superior to others with less.  It's doesn't matter if they are dumb and immoral, what counts is how much wealth and power they have. 

Many People on the other end of the spectrum can't see past the glitz and glamor and fall for the illusion.  They will likely then will sellout for a chance to have a similar lifestyle.  I think most of us are guilty of this kind of behavior in one way or another and some more so then others.

It seems to me that if you respect people based on the money they have, you don't understand the value of anything. Some of the kindest, smartest people I know are poor. Well, money poor. I think they are rich beyond measure.

Whether a person is rich or poor has no bearing on whether they deserve respect. The important question is: how did they get so rich or so poor?

Why do people tend to show more respect for the rich and less for the poor? It's because rich people have the power to help you if they like you, and to hurt you if they don't.

An example. I once had a client who was incredibly rich, a multi-billionaire. As I worked on her project I found that the person she had assigned to oversee the project on her behalf was an idiot and the project was doomed to failure. I decided to terminate her contract and walk away. After much thought I decided to refund all the money she had spent on the project. Even though I knew she could afford to lose that money I also knew that she could easily use the courts to sue me out of business if she felt insulted.

The poor show respect to the rich out of a combination of greed and fear.

I do not object, except if this poor smart people have subsidies, in other word, a right to enforce by gov intervention to take money out of my pocket without my consent. (Well, I admit that rich are also good at getting subsidies, which I despise as much)
No matter how kind a person can be, if he lives on somebody else support without his consent (one example is getting subsidies), he is a scum. I will never compromise on that.

Yes, but in the case where you meet someone you don't know, and don't have any information about how he got the money, by default, you'll give more respect to the rich.
And that's normal, since I think that only a small fraction rich did it on the sacrifices of others. (ie without consent of the one who enriched him)

Not just capitalism. People in the new world are now built with that kind of attitude

it is common in this world, the rich are always respected for his money owned, while the opposite is poor always ignored, as God's creatures, we should keep mutual respect between people, regardless of whether rich or poor, how its important role in society, and how much benefit can be given to the public, it was considered by God to his creatures, Hopefully we become useful for others ...  :P

You say "we" when you should say I.

I give much more respect to Mcdonalds workers than Robert Reich, school teachers, professors, or Barack Obama.  The Koch brothers never asked for anything from Robert Reich except stop the financial bullying..

First, there's nothing wrong with being rich.  Sure, a lot of wealthy people are born into wealth, but that usually speaks to the successes of their ancestors.

Second, not all rich people are necrssarily bad or selfish, even billionaires.  A lot of people don't understand that many wealthy people (e.g. CEO's) spent years and years working ridiculously long hours, sacrificing personal relationships and leisure activities to spur their careers.  Most of the time, profits are reinvested back into the pursuit of career growth and development, whether that means additional schooling or perhaps helping a business to grow.  If a surgeon can save lives that no one else can, he deserves the ~$300k/yr. he gets.  If a CEO creates a business that provides jobs to hundreds of people so they can provide for themselves and their families, he deserves to keep millions.

A lot of people who complain about the rich could very well pursue employment in high-paying fields.  If you enter into a low-paying field (like I did while pursuing employment in the social services industry) then you should know what you're getting yourself into.  If you want more money, get out your thinking cap and come up with a plan to make it happen.

I agree that successful people deserve to be rich.  But the problem is inequality gap gets too big then entire economy suffers because the 1% cant do all the consumption.  You want a big middle class to do most of the consumption

Yeah, but unfortunately that's more of a political/policy issue.  I'm sure rich CEO's wouldn't mind a large, affluent middle class if it means that people will be buying more of their goods and services.

That's right its a policy issue rather than banking issue.  There are few theories to why this happen.

1.  Tax policy.  Capital gains is capped at 15% and ordinary income is progressive.  

2.  Deregulation from the 80's led to CEO compensation to take the form of stock options.  lt follows that most of their income is taxed as capital gains rather than ordinary income

3.  Globalization forced companies to reduce salaries or outsource jobs.  This multiplied the effect of inequality gap

But there is a finance component to it as well because when asset prices outpace inflation the asset holders have more to gain.  This also contributes to greater inequality gap

Since the rich make most of their money from investments, when the gap gets to be too large, profits will suffer, and investments will follow, and as a result the gap will decrease.

Maybe it's just late, but, referring to the bolded snippet, why do you think this is the case?

If I'm following your train of thought, you're saying implying that the profits of the rich will decrease when increasing wealth disparity forces the middle class to spend less.   If this is true, then sure, fewer profits mean that there may be less 'new' money for the rich to spend on 'new' investments...

...but this is because the middle class has less money, too.   How does the gap change significantly if both classes lose purchasing power?  Moreover, over time, the investments of the rich are more likely to appreciate in value, particularly hard assets like real estate.

How can it appreciate in value when no one is left for buying it ?
Especially in real estate, the crisis should have taught people that an house does not automatically increase in value.
And equities will not be protected from government created bubble. (QE)
The rich does not make money by doing nothing, if he does nothing he will be outsmarted and be the victim of its inferiors.

They might be doing something that the poor never can do, because their different position in society, especially their large capital

Take bank for example, they just earn interest difference between loan and saving, and get more loans from FED when necessary. This is a no-brainer job, you don't need a college degree to be a banker. But only those with large amount of capital can do it, and they already have long term relationship with FED and other large commercial banks

There are so many smart people out there, they are working hard and very poor, because they failed to see the big picture and truth from the right angle

Sure, as a libertarian, I do not endorse the current FED/banker system, I consider it like a fraud, and it is one of the reason why I am in Bitcoin.
But the crisis have made banks gone bankrupt (in Greece & USA, and I think more in the future), so they are not so invulnerable than that, despite the effort of the FED to make it otherwise by devaluating money.
This freaking system is artificially drawing smart people in finance, when they could create new business and job instead. (Remind me a book called "smart people should build things")

However, nowadays is the best period for the poor to become rich.
You don't need capital, only an internet connection.
Their is a skill shortage (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-29/employers-arent-just-whining-skills-gap-real), and you can learn everything on internet, especially in the computing industry.
This is the great thing of the knowledge economy, and would thus transfer wealth from stupid rich to smart poor even faster. This is what I mean by "being the victim of his inferiors".

You mean build stuff like a chat app that you can take nude selfies that self destruct?  People follow the money.  I thought you were a "free market" proponent

If you mean become rich in fiat money, then it is still the same old game where bankers positioned at the top. You can't earn money without bankers first release money at higher level. Even there is a skill shortage, without money that shortage will not translate into income

I just realized recently that money has never been generated by free market choice, it is always an imagination in people's mind and bankers/governments create money to fit this imagination: People think money is a measurement/unit of value, and the more you have the more things you can buy. Then as an authority they create this unit of value as money, give it a value and then people are satisfied. Since people need money to measure the amount of value, they seldom notice that the value of this unit itself is changing

How do bankers determine if a particular loan is a good risk to take? They need to evaluate the borrower's income and repayment history and assets to see if the borrower is an appropriate risk. If they are then a loan will be given, if they are not a good risk then it will not. This is not an easy job to measure this kind of risk and it takes a lot of legwork.

Yep nobody understands how risky this is and thinks banks make free money on interest.  They make money by taking risk on lending.  If there is a default then they also lose their money.  Banks go insolvent all the time

Ahah you don't know how these apps take my nerves. As a developer, that lost so much time of my life to make great software, some of which failed, seeing such stupid app succeed make me crazy, I admit that. ;)
But these app are not the software that drive the economy, only the one that make the biggest noise, because everybody can understand what they do.

But they are not all so evil, take Angry bird for example (that is not as much stupid as chat app), it created a whole industry of derivatives that are maybe bigger in term of sales than the game itself.
You can't deny that it has not created jobs.


So you understand why more and more of my money is converting in BTC, regardless of the rate of the day and why I believe in its future. ;)
The bankers and politicians have an edge that you can't beat no matter how much you work, as long as we use their money, which is not free market.

Nevertheless, the difference between poor and rich is not capital anymore but knowledge.
Central bankers, politicians and all parasites living on government subsidies are the exception, their edge is relations and privileged information, not knowledge.
Once their relations become irrelevant (either when they are dead, or the policital powers shift),  they will not keep their capital for long.
The rich does not stay rich forever and automatically, it takes deliberate fight to protect it, even for the politician and central banker.

The thought that one has just to give money to someone else hand and it grows automatically while you sleep, keeping the rich rich without effort, and gov has to step in to prevent that (giving even more power to the politician), is a dangerous myth.

It is actually pretty uncommon for banks to go insolvent because they are generally good at measuring risks. I would say that they do no make money by taking risks on lending, they make money by taking good risks on lending.

It's really not that uncommon. 

http://theoknows.com/wp-content/uploads/us-bank-consolidation-chart.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_2W9joD4mnDQ/TIWPtB71o-I/AAAAAAAAAwU/IX4k_y1YqIU/s1600/Banks+34++09.JPG

http://financemymoney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/number-of-us-banks.jpg

money gets respect. You might not get an honest answer but yes, money gets respect.

Merger of banks does not happen only because of insolvency.

"Money do the honest man". I've heard this sentence a long time ago, and I think that is a bit real.

Why you've afraid of a poor man which is in the street and ask you something? Why you admire a man that walk on a Ferrari?

That's why you give respect to a man that walk on a Ferrari, and not give respect to a poor man.

Someone could steal a Ferrari and you would believe he is a "hard working man that bought a Ferrari". Seems pretty stupid to me.

Because many times it's true. Having been on both sides of the fence, people with money either inherited it or worked hard for it. In the case of inheritance you can't do much about it, but you can be damn sure their parents/grandparents worked hard for it.

Working hard doesn't mean getting up early every morning and going to a 9-5 job that pays $4 an hour. It means understanding enough about the world around you and yourself to manipulate it into making it change for you. What are you good at? What are you lacking? Are people in your life successful, or do some relationships hold you back? Being around smart, successful people is inspiring. Being around laziness tends to inspire the same. Do you have an education? If not, why not? Information is free and it leads to understanding, and that can make you wealthy.

Life is hard and full of failure and pain. I was born with next to nothing, so were many of my successful friends. If you constantly complain about the rich, how "capitalism" is scam, and how their wealth should be distributed to you in some sort of socialist utopia, I have news for you. You will always be poor.

Money gets you respect. Its the reality. Too bad for people that dont have it.

That is because respect nowadays is all about the cold hard cash

No money = no respect
Money = yes respect
Gun = with respect
No Gun = no respect
No money for gun = come on!

That means, if you have no money, you get a gun.

Rich becomes the boss while the poor becomes his/her employee. You think the boss wants to be overtaken by his employee?

Dont confuse respect with fear.

Because it's human nature to respect success. Even animals display forms of appreciation for success. There is a type of crow where the female only goes to the male nest with the shiniest objects. Very primal if you ask me. There's not much to the explanation. Being rich is associated with success and successful people are respected in general.

you cant respect people for being rich.

You can only respect people who are open minded, clever and all in all a loving human being. only coincidence is that those people usually are rich.

for example, what respect you can have for someone who has won the money in lottery... bla bla/..

Nevertheless, most respect today is fear. You respect your boss because your afraid you might get fired. You respect your mom because you are afraid she might scold you, you respect the elders because you are afraid that you might be criticized by society.. meh

Guyz Guyz ........
 

I want a solid reason ??

but i understand just want more opinnions ..

and want to earn some btc if someone can help me to earn btc or i can work for you :)

Its the choice of each one of us. If you choose to respect the rich and less respect to the poor that is your problem. The problem is not about money, the problem is in the people.

Because people is delusional.

MOney = respect and so as fear = respect but no money no respect.

Because the poor don't want respect. They just want a job, wife, kids, house, and 2 cars.

That's pretty stupid thing to say. Everyone wants to be treated with respect regardless income.

Because the rich has the money. There are many things money can buy, including respect.

Damn right it does.

From Atlas Shrugged :

If you don't know a person, then stereotype are important to value someone quickly without knowing him.
The rich being competent and courageous (entrepreneur) is the stereotype of the rich.

So in this sense, Money buys respect and admiration.
But it is impossible that such person can buy admiration and respect for people who knows him (his workers, family, friends, partners), stereotype being discarded quickly after initial valuation of the person.

The question of this thread is more about the stereotype : Why such stereotype for the rich exists at all ? Why such stereotype for the poor exists at all ?

It's a matter of culture and how society influences your perception of the world, we are full of paradigms we don't even recognize if we don't think about them. A rich person is often seen as a realized one, someone who fullfilled his dreams and lived a useful life, while a poor man doesn't do anything for society, to merit a place in this world. It's really sad to think people really believe someone should earn his place on earth.

Because rich can demand respect. If the poor demands respect they are laughed at.

Skills pay the bills. ;)

I have a rational reason for this.

Money is a consensus on Value (blog post of context (https://purse.io/blog/post/81622566281/what-is-money/)). Someone with money would suggest that society deems him valuable. It would make sense to show respect someone society has deemed valuable, especially before knowing the person further.

What if he got no skills but is the son of Bill Gates?

Not necessarily true. If the rich earns his gain through proper and legitimate means, we respect because of his hard work and wisdom that earns him the wealth. If the rich earns via illegal means through harm caused to others then he don't deserve any of the respect.

Likewise, if one is poor but is hardworking but because of limitation due to education but is humble, kind, caring and giving, then he deserves all the respect, same like what the rich deserves. If a person is poor due to his laziness, then why respect him?

It's false what you want to tell. I know some people which respect poor and they do charity to this. But, best reason that all of us give respect to Rich is that rich is powerful and we can have possibility (giving respect) to have favour in future. If you have two friends, you give respect to more popular, rich, ecc. because you can get some advantage from it. From the other friend, you can get only friendship, but I prefer this ultimate (real friendship).

If someone made tremendous amounts of money on his/her own, like the owner of Virgin or something like that, people can respect them because they put in their time and learning into generating their own income. Those who want money and have business on their minds say that it is important to make friends with everyone and have an open mind. It's true but it's also ridiculous because it is not just your friends who make you rich - people need to do their own work too.
Those who want to make friends with the rich just because they are rich, deserve the least respect. But those who have found a way to be rich on their own could be respected.

I don't know a single case of a person getting rich out of hard consistent-over-time work. All of them inherited, exploited the poor (Nike etc) or had viral success. Mark Zuckerberg becoming a billonaire in 2 years is NOT an example of hardwork/gains.

Success requires talent, hard work and luck.  You need all three components for the recipe to work

The worst thing to think about is that you have to earn a place on this earth, it's not enough to be alive, you have to do something to be worth of existing otherwise you are useless and just wasting air. I understand the importance of contributing to the human progress, but they way our system is built, practically forcing everyone to do something they don't like just to survive is ridiculous. I could understand it centuries ago, but now...

I was afk for a while have to read all those comments !! man

Even if you inherit wealth, if you are not capable you can lose it very quickly. So in that sense, people who build on inherited wealth have to be admired too.