[Social Watch#20] So, why do poor people lack empathy?

I often see “poor thinking” or similar expressions on Facebook. It is usually criticizing people for being poor. It is more due to their own personality traits than their income. People born in poverty are more likely to have these personality traits. Make them less able to earn money than others, poverty leads to character traits, character traits lead to poverty, leading to a vicious circle.

One of the most common and obvious traits is impatience and eagerness for quick success. Want a quick payback. I believe that many people have heard about various investment experiences. Buffett also said that the stock market is for those who are patient, or he told you that long-term investment can get better returns. These are also proved by objective figures. In my business experience, I have also observed that no matter in business or investment, it is more successful to be patient. I agree with this statement, and if everyone disagrees or questions this statement, we will not refute him, because this is not the focus of this article.

Since we are quite sure that patience is the source of wealth, why should the poor be eager for quick success and speculate? Is it because of inherent character problems? Will the poor be able to get out of poverty and walk on the road to wealth if they read the articles on Facebook and fix their personality problems? Let me talk about the conclusion first, I think it is impossible. In my opinion, the short-sightedness and quick success of the poor cannot be corrected.

Let me tell my own story first. I was raised by my great-grandmother. My great-grandmother was at least 70 years older than me. She was picked up by someone else. Her husband died young and did not inherit any property. Her job was to wash dishes all her life. Because my parents both worked, the only person who could take care of me when I was a child was my great-grandmother, who became disabled when I was ten years old, and the roles were reversed and I became the caregiver. Then the few of us lived in a house with no other rooms and the size was no more than eight pings. When we wanted to sleep, we took out mats and slept on the floor. The above is not describe how bad the living environment in Hong Kong is. What I want to write is, in such an environment, what would I think when I was a teenager?

At that time, I thought, I want to make a lot of money as soon as possible, and then improve the life of my great-grandmother. There is no need to have no room at this age, crowded in such a place, because of quarreling with people every day. Think of a bunch of people living in a place without a room, and living habits that interfere with each other, and quarrels are a very reasonable result.

But I also know very well that he is very old and will not live for a few years. Well, don’t talk about those 30-40 year savings plans to buy a house and become rich, ten years or even several years’ plans are too long for me. What I need is instant cash.

I must be eager for quick success because what restricts me is not simply a lack of money, but also “time”. The problems I need to solve, time is limited compared to others, because what I want to solve is not that I want a car, like today. Children of the middle class want to “buy a house before the age of 30” and live in luxury. The poverty I inherited is not just a lack of money, but time. If you tell me that the poverty of your great-grandmother and the poverty of your previous generation are their fate, if they cannot make themselves rich, they will live a poor life in their old age. That’s their problem, it’s their life choice, and you have no responsibility or obligation or anything.

I believe this should be the answer for many people.

But let me tell you, young people who are born at the bottom do not degenerate but strive instead, and strive to pursue a better life. Most of their thoughts and wishes will be the same as mine. They are not pursuing a luxurious life for themselves, but seeking to improve the life of the previous generation. People who are born in poverty and have good character will be more grateful for the care they received when they were young. They can survive and grow up because of the care of poor family members. It is not because of filial piety that they want to make their families better. Isn’t it weird, young people, to watch the people who took care of you grow up poor and miserable?

When our society is talking about empathy, anti-discrimination, and tolerance of great benevolence and righteousness, but at the same time, it advocates that “you don’t care about the poverty of your previous generation, because it is not your responsibility”?

When you notice that many people who say this can agree to sympathize with new immigrants, foreign workers, and African refugees at the same time, but say that your family’s poor life has nothing to do with you, don’t you feel awkward? Asking everyone to look far away when others are suffering, or they have no empathy. When it comes to taking care of their loved ones, it becomes a matter of responsibility. Can empathy be lost in the Taiwan Strait?

This is an incomprehensible gap between different birth classes. When many people with better backgrounds say they are poor, they may say, I didn’t inherit any farmland from the previous generation, and my parents didn’t give me any money. What is the difference between the poor? No, the difference is huge.

Because even if the previous generation didn’t give you anything, let’s not talk about studying, supporting and growing up, at least you have never had the problem of “improving the lives of the previous generation before they die” in your life. From the very beginning, your own life Self-responsibility is your starting point. At the same time, I feel that the life of the parents is naturally their responsibility. They have a good life, and they don’t help the children to pay the down payment, which has already made the children fall behind the starting line.

Even if they don’t do anything for the previous generation, they don’t need to go through a choice of conscience.

As for the children of the poor? If they can be ruthless and completely ignore the poverty of the previous generation, then their starting line is zero. That is, it is their business that the parents are poor, other people’s fathers have property to inherit to their sons, and I have nothing, what should I pay for them? You can say that.

However, those who choose this path can give up empathy for their relatives, and naturally it is even more impossible to empathize with outsiders.

There used to be a movie called The Best Lost Friend, and the villain in it said a very good line. He said, “My younger brother needs kidney dialysis every day, my father needs heart surgery, and my elder brother is arrested outside because of his debts.” “It turns out that you have so many difficulties and you have to help me.” “No, I won’t help my relatives who are in such a miserable situation. Why should I help you?”

If everyone accepts that everyone is only responsible for their own life and not for the life of the previous generation, then the above villain is the person everyone will produce, so don’t talk about conscience. A society without a conscience is not because everyone is inherently evil, but because the children of the poor have to make moral choices very early. If I choose this path, I often feel that the society owes me, the previous generation has not given me an inheritance, but they still owe me. This is how selfishness and villainy are born.

Did you ever hear of the trolley problem? This is the trolley problem. Poor children have to choose whether to have empathy for people from the beginning. And a child from a good background, even if he doesn’t get a dime from his family, he can choose to procrastinate on these moral choices until he is thirty or forty years old, and he doesn’t have to face it. The poor have to choose to be a good person from the beginning or to admit that empathy is a luxury, and the poor must give up empathy. The above ones stop here, and the people on the other side are naturally conscientious children.

What will happen to such a person? They chose to share the wealth and time poverty of the previous generation. Life is not a matter of the starting line. The selfish children above have a zero starting line, while the conscientious children have a negative starting line. From the beginning, they have to pay for the family, pay the medical expenses of the previous generation, pay off the debts of the previous generation, or spend time taking care of the previous generation every day. All things are harder than others. The above kind of people feel that the society and their parents owe them, while the conscientious children feel that they owe the previous generation.

Sounds like a saint with a conscience.

But what does conscience lead to? This can lead to quick success.

Just like the story I said at the beginning, what they make money is not for luxury, not for their own enjoyment, or even to improve their own lives, but to improve the lives of some poor people who are older than themselves. If there is no way to make money early, Even if you make money in the end, things will still fall through. If before improving the lives of their families, they have died. You can imagine how much sense of loss these conscientious children feel in their hearts. Even if they make money later, there is no way to make up for this sense of loss.

Yes, if the purpose of making money is to repay the person who took care of you, that person has disappeared when you make money, and you think that with that money, you can buy a car, eat well, and live well Can a house make you feel better?

This has led to these conscientious poor children who are impatient, they always want to get rich quickly, and they are easily attracted by speculation, opportunities to make quick money. Because their desire is that the time limit is stricter than others. A child with a good background can have a successful career in his fifties or sixties, and can invest until his later years to reap the rewards, because they are all for themselves, and the worst is to leave it to the next generation. Time was on their side. And time will not be on the side of “those who have paid for the previous generation”.

This kind of people who pay for the previous generation usually live a modest life, simple servants, no whoring or drinking, but they are more greedy than those who spend extravagantly because what they want to buy is the most expensive luxury: to makeup for the life of the previous generation.

So when the poor struggle, and the society tells you that all the ways to get rich here is through patience, they tend to speculate and take risks. It is a pity that their parents are poor, so naturally it is difficult to confer What social intelligence they have, the result is that they are easy prey for others. If the problem he wants to solve must be solved within five or ten years, it doesn’t make sense for them to choose to be patient. This also explains that there have been many corrupt officials and corrupt officials in China over the years, no matter how severe the punishment is, it is useless because as long as you consider how many people are the hope of the whole family studying hard in a poor window, you will know why so many people would rather die Greed for his vote.

Of course, the final result is usually a failure. And then they either spend a lot of money on loved ones who are going to die and then have no money to grieve when the loved one dies, spending the money on previous generation debts and medical bills. To continue that cycle of poverty in the next generation. The only thing you can gain from taking care of the poor previous generation is to be worthy of your own feelings and conscience, but it is definitely not conducive to wealth accumulation. (I hope no one will say anything about inheritance from elders at this point… I will say again that there is no inheritance other than debt)

Like the good happy prince, conscience leads to sacrifice, and the result of sacrifice is a heap of dust.

In the end, did you notice it? In fact, poor people who lack empathy and selfishness, who do not take care of their relatives or outsiders, may live a healthier life. In the end, poor people are more suitable for lack of empathy.

Note: I would like to add that “people without empathy” usually think that they have it. They will donate 100 yuan to some charity, release small animals, or read “Namo Amitabha Buddha” under fb and feel that they have done it Good people with empathy. Do some innocuous behaviors to make yourself believe that you are a good person, and then use it to prove that you have empathy, which has nothing to do with empathy.

[社會觀察#20] 所以，窮人為何欠缺同理心？

我在臉書上常常看到「窮人思維」或者類似的說法，通常就是批評人貧窮，比起收入多寡，更多是因為自己的性格特質，出身貧窮的人更容易有這些性格特質。使他們比別人更不能賺到錢，貧窮引致的性格特質，性格特質又引致貧窮，導致惡性循環。

其中最常見，也最明顯的特質，就是沒有耐性，急功近利。想要快速得到回報。我相信很多人都聽說各種投資心得，巴菲特也說股市是給有耐性的人，或者跟你說長線投資得到的回報更好，這些在客觀的數字上也得到證明。在我從商的經驗中，也觀察到不論生意，或者投資，都是有耐性的行為比較會成功。我認同這說法，而如果大家不認同或質疑這說法，我們也不去反駁他，因為這不是這文章的重點。

既然我們頗能肯定耐性就是財富之源，那麼窮人為何還要近功急利，投機？是因為先天品格有問題嗎？是否讓窮人看看臉書上的文章，修正他們的性格問題，他們就能走出貧窮，走向財富之路？

先說結論，我認為是不可能的事。我認為，窮人的短視與急功近利是不能修正的。

我先說我自己的故事，我是被曾祖母照顧大的，我的曾祖母比我年紀大至少七十歲，本身就是別人撿回來的，丈夫早逝，沒有繼承任何物業，一輩子的工作是洗碗。因為父母都要工作，我小時候唯一還能照顧我的人是我曾祖母，十歲開始，我曾祖母就傷殘了，倒轉角色我變成了照顧者。然後大家幾人住在一個沒有別的房間，大小不多於八坪的房子裡，要睡覺時拿出墊子睡地上。以上的並不是為了形容香港的居住環境有多惡劣的，我想寫的是，在這樣的環境下，我十幾歲時會想的是甚麼？

那時候我想的是，我要盡快賺大錢，然後改善我曾祖母的生活。不需要在這個年紀還連個房間都沒有，擠在這樣的地方，每天因為跟人吵架。想想一堆人住在沒有房間的地方，居住習慣互相干擾，吵架是很合理的結果。

但我也很清楚其年紀已很大，沒幾年可以活。那麼，別說那些甚麼三十年四十年積蓄買房子致富計劃，十幾年，甚至幾年的計劃，對我來說都太長了。我需要的是立即賺到現金。

我一定是急功近利的，因為限制我的並不單純只有沒錢，還有「時間」，我需要解決的問題，時間比別人有限，因為我要解決的並不是我想要車子，像今天一堆有產階級的小孩一樣想要「三十歲之前買到房子」，想要奢侈生活，我繼承的貧窮並不僅是沒錢，而是時間。

如果你跟我說，你曾祖母的貧窮，你上一代的貧窮，是他們的命，如果他們自己沒有辦法令自己富有而去到晚年都要過貧窮的生活。那是他們的問題，是他們的人生選擇，你沒有責任也沒有義務甚麼的。

我相信這應該是很多人的答案。

可是我告訴你，出身底層不墮落反而奮鬥，努力追求更好生活的年輕人，他們大多想法與願望就會跟我一樣，不是追求自己能過奢侈的生活，而是追求改善上一代的生活。出身貧窮而品性較好的人，對於小時候受的照料，就會更感激，自己能夠活下來並成長靠的就是貧窮家人的照料，想要令家人過好一點並不是因為孝順，一個善良的年輕人，看著照顧自己長大的人貧窮困苦，這不是很詭異？

我們這個社會到處都談論同理心，反歧視，包容大愛之類的大仁大義時，卻同時主張「你不用理你上一代的貧苦，因為不是你的責任」？當你留意到這樣說的人，不少都同時可以同意同情新移民，同情外勞，同情非洲難民，卻叫說你家人過得不好跟你無關，不會覺得突兀嗎？要求大家都注視遠方別人受苦的時候，不然就是沒同理心，去到照顧自己的親人時，反而就變成了責任歸屬問題，同理心可以丟臺灣海峽了？

這就是出身階層不同一個難以理解的差距，很多出身較好的人說自己貧窮的時候，他們可能會說，我也沒從上一代繼承甚麼農地啊，父母也沒給我甚麼錢啊，我跟窮人有甚麼分別呢？不，分別很大。

因為上一代就算甚麼都不給你，讀書供養照顧長大這些先不說了，至少你一生中從沒有「要去在上一代死去之前改善他們生活」這個問題存在過，打從一開始，自己的人生自己負責，就是你的起點。同時覺得父母的人生自然是由他們負責，他們本來就過得不錯，他們不幫孩子出頭期款已經讓孩子落後起跑線了。

他們就算不為上一代做甚麼，都不需要經歷一次良心的選擇。

至於窮人的孩子呢？如果他們能夠無情的，把上一代的貧苦完全無視，那麼他們的起跑線就是零。那就是父母貧窮是他們的事，別人爸爸有資產給兒子繼承，我甚麼都沒有我還要為他們付出甚麼？道理你可以這樣說。

不過選擇這條路的人，對親人都能捨棄同理心了，自然對外面的人更不可能同理心。

以前有一套電影叫最佳損友闖情關，裡面的反派就說了一句很好的對白，他說「我弟弟天天要洗腎，我爸爸要做心臟病手術，我大哥欠債在外面被人追殺」「原來你也有這麼多困難怪不得不幫我」「不，我親人這麼慘我都不幫，憑甚麼要我幫你？」

如果大家就接受每人只為自己人生負責，不用為上一代的人生負責，那麼上面這個反派就是大家會生出來的人，那就別扯甚麼良心了。一個沒有良心的社會，並不是因為大家生性邪惡，而是因為窮人的小孩很早在道德上就要做出選擇。選擇了這條路，往往就會演變成覺得社會虧欠了我，上一代沒給我遺產還要給我負擔，他們也虧欠了我，是窮人生仔正仆街，全世界都欠了我。自私與反派就這樣生出來的。

有聽過電車問題嗎？這就是電車問題。

窮人孩子一開始就要選擇是否要對人有同理心。而出身好的孩子，就算一毛錢都沒從家裡得到，他是可以選擇一直拖延這些道德選擇問題，去到三十歲，四十歲，都不用面對，當一個一輩子安心理得的好人。窮人就是一開始就要選擇當好人當到底，還是承認同理心是奢侈品，窮人必須放棄同理心。

以上那種就停在這，另一邊的人自然就是有良心的孩子。

這種人會怎樣呢？他們選擇了分擔上一代在財富與時間上的貧窮，人生就不是起跑線的問題，上面那種自私的孩子，起跑線是零，而有良心的孩子，起跑線是負數。他們一開始就要付家用，付上一代的醫藥費，還上一代的欠債，或者每天花時間照顧上一代，他們所有事情都比別人辛苦。上面的那種人覺得社會與父母虧欠了自己，而有良心的孩子則覺得自己虧欠了上一代。

聽起來真是有良心的聖人。

不過良心會導致甚麼？這會導致急功近利。

就像我之前說的故事一樣，他們賺錢求的不是奢侈，不是自己的享受，甚至不是改善自己的生活，而是改善一些比自己年長的窮人的生活，如果沒有辦法很早賺到錢，就算最後賺到錢，事情還是會落空的。如果在改善家人的生活之前，他們已經死去了。你可以想像這些有良心的孩子心裡有多大的失落感，就算他們之後賺到錢了，也沒有辦法彌補這種失落感。

是的，如果你賺錢的目的，就是為了報恩那個照顧你的人時，那個人在你賺到錢時已消失了，你覺得拿那些錢，去買個車子，吃個好的，住個好房子，能令你的心裡好過嗎？

這導致了這些有良心的窮人孩子，都沒有耐性，他們總是想要快速致富，而且很容易被投機，賺快錢的機會吸引。因為他們的願望是時限比別人還要嚴刻。一個出身不錯的孩子，可以去到五六十歲事業有成，可以投資去到晚年才收穫，因為他們為的都是自己，大不了是留給下一代。那時間就站在他們一邊的。而時間不會站在「為上一代付出的人」的一邊。

這種為上一代付出的人，生活通常節斂，簡僕，不嫖不酒，但他們比奢侈消費的人卻會更貪婪，因為他們要買的是最貴的奢侈品：彌補上一代的人生。

所以窮人奮鬥，而社會告訴你，我們這裡全部致富的方法，都是要靠耐性時，他們就很容易走向投機，挺而走險，可惜的是，他們的父母家庭貧窮，自然也難授予他們甚麼社會智慧，結果就是他們很容易成為別人的餌食。如果他要解決的問題，是必須五年內，十年內就解決的，他們想選擇有耐性也沒有意義。這也解釋了中國歷年來貪官污吏是不止的，再嚴刑也沒有用，是因為只要你考慮到有多少人是寒窗苦讀的全家希望時，你就知道為何那麼多人寧願冒死都要貪他一票。

當然最後的結果，通常是失敗的。然後他們要不就是在會死去的親人身上花掉了一大筆錢，然後在親人死去悲傷之餘也沒有錢，把錢都花在上一代的債務與醫藥費上了。在下一代延續那個貧窮的循環。照顧貧窮上一代得回的，就只有對得起自己的感情與良心，但一定不利財富積蓄。(希望說到這裡別有人說甚麼可以繼承長輩遺產之類的… 我再說一次沒有債務以外的東西可繼承)

就如同善良的快樂王子，良心導致犧牲，犧牲的結果就是化為一堆塵土。

最終你有沒有察覺到呢？其實欠缺同理心自私，不照顧親人也不照顧外人的窮人，人生可能還會健康一點。最終窮人還是比較適合欠缺同理心的。

註：補充一句，「沒同理心的人」通常都會以為自己有，他們會跑去捐 100 元給甚麼慈善機構，放生小動物，或者在 fb 下面唸句「南無阿彌陀佛」就覺得自己是做了好事有同理心的好人。做一些不痛不癢的行為來令自己相人自己是好人，再用來佐證自己很有同理心，跟同理心其實沒有關係。