Source of wealth of Scientologists

Kha Khan

Patron Meritorious
I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie. It has to do with the source of the earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. of Scientologists. I'm referring to individual, public Scientologists who support the superstructure that is Scientology. Not FSMs. The people who earn, or have, "wog" money that is subsequently poured into the CO$ for auditing, training, ideal orgs, and to receive meaningless certificates and shiny medals.

My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general.

It seems a lot of people who spend a ton of money on Scientology, and particularly the "Grand Jubilee Puba Meritoriouses," have inherited wealth. Or are spending mommy and daddy's money. And I'm saying this is true to a greater extent than with a group that contributes comparable amounts to other "charitable" [LOL :omg: ] endeavors.

As for those who earned their money, it seemed a lot had professions where, to be precise, and quite frankly insulting (but perhaps not inaccurate), they were: (1) overpaid; and (2) again, the earnings were not highly correlated with critical thinking skills or intelligence as I've defined it. In other words, for example:

People who profit from artistic talent (e.g., primarily actors, but also musicians, singers, artists, etc.)

People is sales.

Dentists are very disproportionately represented, as compared to doctors who are underrepresented.

Court Reporters. (As I recall an extremely disproportionate number in the COS.)

Other people who due to anomalies in the economic system that deviate from a pure, free market, "your income is directly linked to the value you add" system, and/or artificial monopolies, earn more than one would expect (or hope).

I guess what I'm trying to say, in the nicest possible way, is that compared with other churches and "charities" [LOL :omg: ] -- e.g., mainstream Christian Churches, Jewish Synagogues, museums, hospitals, universities, symphony orchestras, ballets, zoos, etc. -- the Church of Scientology disproportionately receives its income and contributions from the demographic that may be described as "disproportionately wealthy and relatively dumb," or "disproportionately wealthy given how, well, relatively dumb they are."

We already know that Scientologists are, on average, less educated than the public at large. (Or at least far, far less educated than a group that would have to make comparable financial contributions to another religion or "charity.")

Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.

Just a thought.
 
I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie. It has to do with the source of the earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. of Scientologists. I'm referring to individual, public Scientologists who support the superstructure that is Scientology. Not FSMs. The people who earn, or have, "wog" money that is subsequently poured into the CO$ for auditing, training, ideal orgs, and to receive meaningless certificates and shiny medals.

My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general.

It seems a lot of people who spend a ton of money on Scientology, and particularly the "Grand Jubilee Puba Meritoriouses," have inherited wealth. Or are spending mommy and daddy's money. And I'm saying this is true to a greater extent than with a group that contributes comparable amounts to other "charitable" [LOL :omg: ] endeavors.

As for those who earned their money, it seemed a lot had professions where, to be precise, and quite frankly insulting (but perhaps not inaccurate), they were: (1) overpaid; and (2) again, the earnings were not highly correlated with critical thinking skills or intelligence as I've defined it. In other words, for example:

People who profit from artistic talent (e.g., primarily actors, but also musicians, singers, artists, etc.)

People is sales.

Dentists are very disproportionately represented, as compared to doctors who are underrepresented.

Court Reporters. (As I recall an extremely disproportionate number in the COS.)

Other people who due to anomalies in the economic system that deviate from a pure, free market, "your income is directly linked to the value you add" system, and/or artificial monopolies, earn more than one would expect (or hope).

I guess what I'm trying to say, in the nicest possible way, is that compared with other churches and "charities" [LOL :omg: ] -- e.g., mainstream Christian Churches, Jewish Synagogues, museums, hospitals, universities, symphony orchestras, ballets, zoos, etc. -- the Church of Scientology disproportionately receives its income and contributions from the demographic that may be described as "disproportionately wealthy and relatively dumb," or "disproportionately wealthy given how, well, relatively dumb they are."

We already know that Scientologists are, on average, less educated than the public at large. (Or at least far, far less educated than a group that would have to make comparable financial contributions to another religion or "charity.")

Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.

Just a thought.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Dentist and chiropractors are particularly target by Scientology consultant groups becasue those practitioners have good incomes and have not had liberal educations.

While doctors may not have liberal educations per se, their education does expose them to a plurality of ideas and interests within the culture, and their education is science based.

Chirpractors and dentist have know-how, doctors have knowledge.

I think any profession that has knowledge as opposed to mere know-how will shy away from Scientology when first exposed to it. but in America you can make lots of money with particular know-how and very little knowledge. (sales, information technology, private business, etc.)

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
God you two are pompous A**s

I suppose the both of you have degrees in philosophy and make your living through book sales? (when of course you are not helping judge the next round of Nobel prizes...)

:coolwink:
 
Last edited:

Achi

Patron
God you two are pompous A**s

I suppose the both of you have degrees in philosophy and make your living through book sales? (when of course you are not helping judge the next round of Nobel prizes...)

:lol: :thankyou:

I was looking for a word here. Pompous.

:owned:
 
Lovely. And (after leaving the CoS) I milked cows for a living, and you know what? I would put my IQ up against yours in a heartbeat.

PLUS, I was a damn good herdsman (or milkmaid, as one of my bosses called me).

Is that what a doctor calls a heartbeat or what a chiropractor calls a heartbeat?

There is no reason for you to be offended.

We can express our opinions here. Our opinions, like yours, is based on what we've learned and what we've experienced.

We're different. And I don't rate others on a scale.

But I once had to argue with two very wealth Scientologists who insisted that World War II started when Hitler invaded Israel and ended in the 1960s when Kennedy dropped the atomic bomb on Vietnam.

When I told them otherwise their reply was "You don't have all the data."

And I can tell you even more incredibly stupid things others like them have said and believe.

You can call me any kind of name you like, but don't tell me these people and many of the others like them are intelligent.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Achi

Patron
Is that what a doctor calls a heartbeat or what a chiropractor calls a heartbeat?

There is no reason for you to be offended.

We can express our opinions here. Our opinions, like yours, is based on what we've learned and what we've experienced.

We're different. And I don't rate others on a scale.

But I once had to argue with two very wealth Scientologists who insisted that World War II started when Hitler invaded Israel and ended in the 1960s when Kennedy dropped the atomic bomb on Vietnam.

When I told them otherwise their reply was "You don't have all the data."

And I can tell you even more incredibly stupid things others like them have said and believe.

You can call me any kind of name you like, but don't tell me these people and many of the others like them are intelligent.

The Anabaptist Jacques

True, no reason for me to be offended. Yes, I am sure that many Scios are stupid, I bet many more are clever, and if they did not get in too young to get an education, probably well informed also. They are deluded, not necessarily ignorant.

So, do you really have a degree in philosophy? Do you really have published books?
 

LA SCN

NOT drinking the kool-aid
All I can say is...

I just wanted to toss out an idea I've been mulling for a long time before I go to dinner and maybe catch a movie. It has to do with the source of the earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. of Scientologists. I'm referring to individual, public Scientologists who support the superstructure that is Scientology. Not FSMs. The people who earn, or have, "wog" money that is subsequently poured into the CO$ for auditing, training, ideal orgs, and to receive meaningless certificates and shiny medals.

My theory is that, when compared to the public at large, such earnings, wealth, income, savings, etc. is far less correlated to critical thinking skills and, well, intelligence (at least narrowly defined; i.e., not "emotional intelligence, but instead math / logic / scientific intelligence) than the public in general.

It seems a lot of people who spend a ton of money on Scientology, and particularly the "Grand Jubilee Puba Meritoriouses," have inherited wealth. Or are spending mommy and daddy's money. And I'm saying this is true to a greater extent than with a group that contributes comparable amounts to other "charitable" [LOL :omg: ] endeavors.

As for those who earned their money, it seemed a lot had professions where, to be precise, and quite frankly insulting (but perhaps not inaccurate), they were: (1) overpaid; and (2) again, the earnings were not highly correlated with critical thinking skills or intelligence as I've defined it. In other words, for example:

People who profit from artistic talent (e.g., primarily actors, but also musicians, singers, artists, etc.)

People is sales.

Dentists are very disproportionately represented, as compared to doctors who are underrepresented.

Court Reporters. (As I recall an extremely disproportionate number in the COS.)

Other people who due to anomalies in the economic system that deviate from a pure, free market, "your income is directly linked to the value you add" system, and/or artificial monopolies, earn more than one would expect (or hope).

I guess what I'm trying to say, in the nicest possible way, is that compared with other churches and "charities" [LOL :omg: ] -- e.g., mainstream Christian Churches, Jewish Synagogues, museums, hospitals, universities, symphony orchestras, ballets, zoos, etc. -- the Church of Scientology disproportionately receives its income and contributions from the demographic that may be described as "disproportionately wealthy and relatively dumb," or "disproportionately wealthy given how, well, relatively dumb they are."

We already know that Scientologists are, on average, less educated than the public at large. (Or at least far, far less educated than a group that would have to make comparable financial contributions to another religion or "charity.")

Perhaps Scientologists are also, on average, just more stupid.

Just a thought.

When I was busting ass to make progress on the bridge it irked me no end to read a success story by this attractive young lady in her mid 20's who had made it from raw public to on OT 7 in 2 years and was urging others to move up as it was so easy now.

The omitted data was that as the scion of a wealthy family she didn't have to work for her money and was available for course and auditing at all times as she didn't have to work. And no doubt didn't have to confront too much in life.

I've seen these types join staff and come apart like a $2 watch.
 

Kha Khan

Patron Meritorious
God you two are pompous A**s

I suppose the both of you have degrees in philosophy and make your living through book sales? (when of course you are not helping judge the next round of Nobel prizes...)
Pushed a button?

Argumentum ad personam anyone? Oh wait, I guess that was pompous.

I may be a pompous A**. But that doesn't mean what I've said is false or invalid. You might try addressing what I've said, as opposed to calling me names.

Hmmm, wait, what does that remind me of -- calling somebody names, instead of making an argument on the merits? Oh yes, Scientology.

Good to see the Scientology training was so beneficial.
 
When I was busting ass to make progress on the bridge it irked me no end to read a success story by this attractive young lady in her mid 20's who had made it from raw public to on OT 7 in 2 years and was urging others to move up as it was so easy now.

The omitted data was that as the scion of a wealthy family she didn't have to work for her money and was available for course and auditing at all times as she didn't have to work. And no doubt didn't have to confront too much in life.

I've seen these types join staff and come apart like a $2 watch.

Look at the bright side ... she's probably still in the cult and you're not.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Pushed a button?

Argumentum ad personam anyone? Oh wait, I guess that was pompous.

I may be a pompous A**. But that doesn't mean what I've said is false or invalid. You might try addressing what I've said, as opposed to calling me names.

Hmmm, wait, what does that remind me of -- calling somebody names, instead of making an argument on the merits? Oh yes, Scientology.

Good to see the Scientology training was so beneficial.
Aww c'mon, you're not accusing Alex of the very thing he accuses others of are you? That's not fair, Alex said it first! :)
 

Kha Khan

Patron Meritorious
When I was busting ass to make progress on the bridge it irked me no end to read a success story by this attractive young lady in her mid 20's who had made it from raw public to on OT 7 in 2 years and was urging others to move up as it was so easy now.

The omitted data was that as the scion of a wealthy family she didn't have to work for her money and was available for course and auditing at all times as she didn't have to work. And no doubt didn't have to confront too much in life.

I've seen these types join staff and come apart like a $2 watch.
As I recall, the old, frequently unspoken Scientology prejudices were:

Sea Org > Class V staff > Public

Training Route > Auditing Route

Perhaps those prejudices were not entirely without reason? They were not entirely irrational? My questions are not rhetorical. Particularly with respect to Training Route > Auditing Route.

When I was in, even as a mere Public, I had this idea (probably just my own, preconceived fixed idea) that it was supposed to be work. We were Clearing the Planet, damn it!

And then I'd see some rich dude, who had inherited his wealth, or was spending daddy's money, just go up the auditing route and I'd get a feeling (entirely unfair and irrational) that he was somehow... cheating... not earning it.
 

Achi

Patron
Pushed a button?

Argumentum ad personam anyone? Oh wait, I guess that was pompous.

I may be a pompous A**. But that doesn't mean what I've said is false or invalid. You might try addressing what I've said, as opposed to calling me names.

Hmmm, wait, what does that remind me of -- calling somebody names, instead of making an argument on the merits? Oh yes, Scientology.

Good to see the Scientology training was so beneficial.

:lol: Actually, considering having to do bloody bullbaiting, I think Alex and I failed to use our Scientology training. That said, calling you two pompous a$$es is no more ad hominem than you categorizing thousands of people as dumb. Hmm?
 
:lol: Actually, considering having to do bloody bullbaiting, I think Alex and I failed to use our Scientology training. That said, calling you two pompous a$$es is no more ad hominem than you categorizing thousands of people as dumb. Hmm?


No it isn't actually. We are making an argument and gave our rationale. Alex and you just called us names. There is a difference.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Moonchild

Patron with Honors
Is that what a doctor calls a heartbeat or what a chiropractor calls a heartbeat?

There is no reason for you to be offended.

We can express our opinions here. Our opinions, like yours, is based on what we've learned and what we've experienced.

We're different. And I don't rate others on a scale.

But I once had to argue with two very wealth Scientologists who insisted that World War II started when Hitler invaded Israel and ended in the 1960s when Kennedy dropped the atomic bomb on Vietnam.

When I told them otherwise their reply was "You don't have all the data."

And I can tell you even more incredibly stupid things others like them have said and believe.

You can call me any kind of name you like, but don't tell me these people and many of the others like them are intelligent.

The Anabaptist Jacques

re: my bold.

Yes; you don't know whether to laugh or cry really do you? Did you get this stuff from 'The Pilot'....Ken Ogger?

He was a smart guy....and there's the tragedy. He actually believed this, much like Capt. Bill I think. And how did 'The Pilot' end up?
 

Kha Khan

Patron Meritorious
:lol: Actually, considering having to do bloody bullbaiting, I think Alex and I failed to use our Scientology training. That said, calling you two pompous a$$es is no more ad hominem than you categorizing thousands of people as dumb. Hmm?
No, as The Anabaptist Jacques pointed out, he and I made an argument and gave our rationale. Alex and you just called us names.

And don't worry, you used your Scientology training to perfection. Never defend, always attack. When (as almost always) a Scientologist cannot make an argument on the merits, make a personal attack and/or change the subject.

Pass. Very well done.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
The difference is that my insult (or what was perceived to bean insult), was backed up by an argument.
I agree! :)

Now, back on topic: The main "cheating" that occurs when someone does the so-called Auditing Route is quite obvious, the PC is cheated.

Hubbard has stated innumerable times that the person will NOT make it to OT without the Training. Registrars and C/Ss that allow people to go the Processing Route are violating very basic Hubbard instructions and thereby expose their own lack of belief in the actuality of the postulated "results" of scientology.

Either that or they think Hubbard was wrong about the necessity for training.
 
I agree! :)

Now, back on topic: The main "cheating" that occurs when someone does the so-called Auditing Route is quite obvious, the PC is cheated.

Hubbard has stated innumerable times that the person will NOT make it to OT without the Training. Registrars and C/Ss that allow people to go the Processing Route are violating very basic Hubbard instructions and thereby expose their own lack of belief in the actuality of the postulated "results" of scientology.

Either that or they think Hubbard was wrong about the necessity for training.

They believed that Hubbard was right about the necessity of money (for him).

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
Top