You really think anyone could be a math progidy, a millionaire by the time they're 31 and not getting it stolen from them by equally ambitious and ruthless upstart? You don't think a certain level of smarts is a prerequisite? Why is it such a controversial opinion?
I'd say the rich want everyone to think anyone can make it like Forrest Gump if they want to, and that the rich are no different than the rest of society - it deludes the niggercattle into working themselves to death for someone else's profit.
"I'm a math prodigy."
There, I've now made that assertion with the same level of credibility and evidence Epstein had.
I'm being facetious but no, Epstein wasn't a math prodigy. There's no evidence he was, it's just kind of out there to help explain how he made his fortune, but it's kind of an early 2020s explanation that doesn't hold up to scrutiny because there's nothing to prove it.
It in part ties into why I brought up the fact he was Jewish as you remarked on here:
You all bitch about Jews the same way African Americans bitch about Whitey cheating them and stealing their sheeit, as if they wouldn't do the same to Whitey if they had the ability to.
The Jew comment was more or less there because it's a cultural factor that can help explain some factor in their thought process/moral decision making. Whilst I'll acknowledge the cultural stuff that influences some aspects we see in Jews but not as often in whites and other races, I do not believe Jews are personally stopping me from doing anything. I'm where I am today as the consequence of my own inertia, but I digress.
The only reason it's a factor at all here is that it helps explain how Epstein got hired without a degree to work at the Dalton Barr school and how he was able to transition to Wallstreet with a similar lack of connections. It has pretty much no explanation outside of his and Barr's shared ancestry because without working at Dalton Epstein would never have been a public figure.
Out of
all the details regarding Epstein the one that hasn't been focused in on at all is how he got hired at Dalton in the first place. There was no prior connection between Barr and Epstein, and if Barr wasn't responsible for hiring him, then who was and why? We could surmise he knew someone who worked handled hiring and admissions and got in that way but there's otherwise no certainty.
There's a timeline where Epstein was simply, the "man" in the news bulletin: "Man found guilty of soliciting minors for sex" and that's it because he never had the opportunity meet someone who'd just give him free shit (which he got plenty of) alongside using people to give him favourable references to get jobs. That's another factor in how the "Epstein was a math prodigy" lie circulated because people would big up his abilities to act in lieu of qualifications or actual experience. It was one that self-perpetuated because the next person who heard it had no idea or not of whether it was true, they just accepted it and then shared it on to the next.
Meanwhile he was fired from Dalton due to his poor performance so at some point his lie eventually got caught up to him.
I posted an
article earlier about how he made his fortune, and genuinely, it was mostly driven by lies.
TLDR: Epstein was a charismatic liar, not a math whizz.
It's why he was great at selling himself and various schemes to others.
Why is it such a controversial opinion?
Frame it in the Epstein situation.
Now while it does take a certain amount of intelligence to get so far based on nothing but lies and charisma, one is based on moral character and the other is based on how you hold yourself and how you look. When framed in the idea that Epstein got to where he was because he was smarter and more ruthless than anyone else, it could be used to imply something else. If people
wealthier than Epstein were also in fact
stupider and
less ruthless than he was as to be scammed in the first place, and the only difference between them and Epstein is that Epstein was born to a working class family, it could indicate that the people he stole from - who tended to have inherited their wealth, as they were his favourite target - were simply stupid whilst also being of better moral character. Ergo:
Epstein was evil because he was born working class.
I'd say the rich want everyone to think anyone can make it like Forrest Gump if they want to, and that the rich are no different than the rest of society - it deludes the niggercattle into working themselves to death for someone else's profit.
This is largely a passed-down Boomer sentiment, back during a time period (50s-70s) where going from working class to upper middle class within a decade or less felt less insurmountable than it does today. It might be a self-perpetuated sentiment ("Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.") and might exist independent of media/elite pushing because the people who genuinely did do that are now in retirement age and so have differing context of how things are for most people than how they actually exist in the present.
The only delusion here though is thinking you could work yourself into dynastic/generational wealth within a year or something like that. Luck is a factor but it shouldn't be overestimated. You need to practice some actual foresight, inject some personal effort, and - most importantly - have agency. Don't want to use Epstein as a model here but most people would've been content with the $200k a year salary at some Wallstreet firm. He wanted even more so he worked at it. Rich GF to rich GF, scamming, draining accounts, etcetera.
I believe the youth call this a "grindset".
>Forrest Gump
Forrest Gump's mom fucked the dean of a local school to get Forrest admitted, and he was a retard but could run well with a ball so he graduated, and was given a shit-ton of money just for getting shot in the ass. Forrest was given a ton of free shit by friends and associates and a combination of luck and being a runner. You could argue Forrest Gump put in less work over time and was less responsible for his own fortune than Epstein was for his.
