According to research shared by Chris Hogan, which he reports on in his new book, Everyday Millionaires, of the 10K millionaires he interviewed:
about 60% attended public state colleges
about 8% attended community college
about 9% did not attend college.
The majority did NOT attend prestigious colleges.

Other findings:
- most millionaires did not earn 6-figure salaries,
- most millionaires did not inherit,
- most millionaires are first-generation wealth-builders,
- most millionaires budgeted and saved.
- More info is available at the links in this post.

Related threads/posts:
Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be (March, 2015)

My DS13 heard Mr. Hogan’s assertion via a Dave Ramsey’s Podcast and said:

“Yes, but a majority of students don’t attend select Universitiies. It’s a statistical argument, What percent of students from select schools go on to be millionaires verse what percent from other schools?”

His Academic Games training in Prop has payed dividends.


Dr. Stanley’s ‘The Millioniare Next Door’ is also a very informative read to help correct many misunderstood ideas of who is and how they became a “millioniare”.

Looks like 23% did. That's much higher than the general population.

While some may make connections between the OP and various other conversations and experiences, the point made by Chris Hogan is that attending a prestigious college is not a prerequisite to building wealth.

I will go further to say that in my observation and experience, both high schools and college admissions consultants may often advise that students apply to and attend the most selective college possible, without regard to cost. However this may work against the ability to build wealth if one incurs considerable student loan debt as a byproduct of attending a prestigious and highly selective college.

This thread was posted because a frequent topic on the forums is a focus on, and anxiety regarding, college admissions. While some may crave the exterior validation of attendance at a prestigious college, there are also students who are accepted but choose to attend less selective colleges in order to minimize student debt. In considering "fit," some consider cost.

Yes, these forums are about Gifted Issues, and this particular forum is about gifted issues specific to adults.

The information which Chris Hogan shares based on his research fits nicely with discussions about college selection and affordability, being college-and-career ready, and having life skills including financial literacy. Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to clarify.

If 99 of 100 people who did C accomplished Y, and 1 of 1,000,000 people who didn't do C accomplished Y, then you can "prove" that C isn't a pre-requisite for Y.

However, 99% vs. .0001% is quite an advantage.

Did anyone ever claim it was a "pre-requisite"?

SET has published numerous studies on gifted individuals and gifted education and the correlation to career accomplishments (advance degrees, patents, CEO-level professions, and, iirc, earnings) and there is certain a position correlation. Is it 1.0? Of course not.

(Prop = Academic Games?)

Cranberry, just as there are "myths" about being gifted, there tend to be "myths" or misconceptions about being wealthy.

Chris Hogan shines a light which helps illuminate the diversity of experiences which exist.

Prop is Propaganda one of several game played competitively via Academic Games of America. A few of the other games are Equations, OnSets, Presidents, Wirkd Event... Here’s the website: https://agloa.org

A recent article

Why Your Clients’ Children Probably Won’t Benefit From an Ivy League Education
by Lynn O'Shaughnessy
wealthmanagement.com
January 24, 2019

surveys some research, including the paper

Elite Schools and Opting-In: Effects of College Selectivity on Career and Family Outcomes
Suqin Ge, Elliott Isaac, Amalia Miller
NBER Working Paper No. 25315
Issued in November 2018
NBER Program(s):, Labor Studies
Abstract:
Using College and Beyond data and a variant on Dale and Krueger's (2002) matched-applicant approach, this paper revisits the question of how attending an elite college affects later-life outcomes. We expand the scope along two dimensions: we do not restrict the sample to full-time full-year workers and we examine labor force participation, human capital, and family formation. For men, our findings echo those in Dale and Krueger (2002): controlling for selection eliminates the positive relationship between college selectivity and earnings. We also find no significant effects on men's educational or family outcomes. The results are quite different for women: we find effects on both career and family outcomes. Attending a school with a 100-point higher average SAT score increases women's probability of advanced degree attainment by 5 percentage points and earnings by 14 percent, while reducing their likelihood of marriage by 4 percentage points. The effect of college selectivity on own earnings is significantly larger for married than for single women. Among married women, selective college attendance significantly increases spousal education.

Very interesting, Bostonian, Thanks for sharing.... may be addressed, in part, by the following...Having looked at whether graduates of prestigious colleges earn more, some may be curious to consider whether these individuals build wealth with their earnings... or spend it on a lifestyle which some may call lavish consumerism. I believe this choice in planning and behavior is what Chris Hogan's research addresses.

When thinking of planning and following through (in this case, financial planning and budgeting), executive function comes to mind. Also the marshmallow test. (Important note: belief that the promised delayed rewards would actually be delivered is important , as shared elsewhere on the forums, Nov 2014)

Locking this for now - please be respectful on the forum.