Comments on: Is it Right to Become Rich?

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 21:06:14 +0000

Hi Amit,

I noticed you are on PepperJam network, I am a merchant on PJN. It would be great to possibly work with you. If you have a moment, take a look at our site and let me know what it would take from a commission perspective to get you on board with us.

Best

Steve

By: Daniel

Daniel — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:09:56 +0000

Please excuse my poor english, I am from Uruguay and my mother tongue is spanish. I will take soma pains to convey my thinking the best I can. I am afraid that I don’t agree with the majority of the things I read here. Please excuse me, but this forum seems to me a group of rich people with conscience remorse (which is indeed a good beginning in itself) trying to convince one another that there is nothing bad in striving to get more and more and more money, very much beyond their basic needs. Unless the concept of “basic need” be stretched to reach luxurious houses, superb cars, vacancies at the caribbean and a gross bank account. It seems as if there would be a little interior voice that makes that rich people couldn’t be satisfied with their richness -as never can be- unless they can feel in any way that they are also “good”, that they are “spiritual”.
Let aside the sense of remorse that can rightly arise in an aspiring loving heart of a rich man who feel himself anyway co-partaker of the grotesque inequality of the economic arrange of the world, the millions of people which their -real- basic needs are not met, the thousand of children dying of hunger every day, the wars that must be waged in order to maintain this state of things, etc. Letting aside all this, I think that the great hindrance of a taskmaster like riches is where it exact to put our heart. It is illusory to think that anybody can strive to accumulate riches without putting his love in it. The love, inevitably, is put in the money and in the egoistic prestige and lifestyle which it provides, for us and probably for our family (our widened ego). And this is valid not only for the rich people, who are actually only the little part of the “riches-strivers” who reached their goal; it is valid for all people, poor or rich, whose heart is put upon the pursue of material accumulations.
The fact that some little part of the money of the outrageous rich people can go to alleviate their consciences through charitable help does not diminish at all their attachment to money.
Every great spiritual teacher in the history taught the benefits of austerity, and lived accordingly. Christ felt
compassion for the rich young man, because He knew that his fortune was a severe obstacle to his progress in the spiritual path (then He uttered the parable of the camel and the eye of the needle). He also said that we can’t serve two masters, God and riches. Buddha, being a prince by birth, renounced to the enervating, slumbering luxuries of the palace and lived a life of austerities, which created the conditions for his enlightenment. He used to say that we must kill the ego and be sure that it is well dead. Sri Ramakrishna, the great bengali mystic, continuously said that “woman and gold” (or lust and riches) were the biggest hindrances in the spiritual path. William Law said, with his precise and crude metaphors, that accumulating riches beyond our needs is like to store eyes and hands, because with the exceeding money we could provide help that could be as such for the people in need.
Mahatma Gandhi, with enormous worldly power at his command, choose to live a peaceful, minimal, austere life, based on severe self-restrain. He lived under the precept of not to waste a grain of rice, and used to say that we must eat only when really needed, only the strictly necessary, and only after doing something for another people. As a corollary of his spiritual greatness, he died, like Jesus, blessing his killer.
The examples could be unending, but I think that my point is sufficiently clear.
Excuse me if I offended you in any way, I certainly didn’t intend that. We are all immersed in an ego-driven culture which determine our viewpoints up to an important extent. This culture conditions us to be satisfied and “happy” with the empty husks which it calls “riches and success” (a fake, temporary, insecure, anguish-begetting happiness). But we have the capability (and finally the necessity), as the prodigal son, to get up and return to the home of our father, where we will find true riches which can’t be corrupted by the rust, nor stolen by thieves.
I greet you reverently.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:27:18 +0000

be careful there Isaac. Humility is just an inversion of the arrogant ego. in order to be free, one must release attachment to both humility and pride.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:05:10 +0000

Jamie Birch hit the nail on the head.

money is not evil, but the LOVE of money is what causes people to do bad things.

Im sure amit was pretty humble when he was living off 1200 a month. I would say his circumstance forced him to be humble. NOw that he is rich there is nothing forcing him to be humble but he must put effort into proactively humbling himself (which im sure he is doing a good job at).

this is where humans can falter with money is that they are not good at humbling themselves. man is a natural enemy to God.

You read in the book of mormon all the time about the ancient civilizations in the americas prospering and then forgetting about God. Then they are stricken down by disease, natural disasters, wars etc…the cycle goes on for generations and still today.

wanna know what will happen in the future? just study the past.

By: Amanda

Amanda — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:11:21 +0000

You are such an inspiration and what you say is so true! Thank you for starting to blog again!

By: Jamie Birch

Jamie Birch — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 04:59:43 +0000

It’s the LOVE of money that is the root of all evil. Money itself is neither good nor bad. It just is what it is, money. Money, and a lot of it, can be an immense blessing to your families, your community and the world at large. But with anything that you have in great abundance comes great responsibility.

By: Tommy

Tommy — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:25:56 +0000

Swami Yogananda says that prosperity and abundance is one of our inherent rights as children of God =)

By: Stephane

Stephane — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:46:36 +0000

Your chances of becoming rich are very thin…

By direct linking, you’ll also have a lower ROI.

And if you don’t want to build websites and landing pages, why don’t you just outsource it? Having a website is great cause not only you make profits from PPC, you also make money from SEO.

By: Ready to get rich

Ready to get rich — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:18:10 +0000

i have a decent salary as online marketer. I make alot of money for my company.

i never dared to run my own ppc campaigns as an affiliate.

if adwords treat affiliate direct linking the same way as non affiliate then i think i can become rich fast. i dont want to create websites or landing pages. just dirdect linking. so what do you think are my chances of becoming rich?

By: Y. Steven

Y. Steven — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:28:07 +0000

Yes its true, the main reason why people fail in their business because of so many people trying their best to get rich with their ways, some people choose the right way other choose the opposite. But all in all it was the final result who decide the winner.