I think this is always the wrong question, even when someone is maybe not going about their life in the best way. Framing it instead as something like "what could I be doing differently that might improve my situation in the way that I want long term?" is going to be more helpful.
Also (and this is probably controversial) I would assert there's an ethical problem with the question, in that it puts an a priori burden through assumption on someone (even hypothetical) who by definition is vulnerable. Again, it's just not the right way to approach the issue.
I've seen too much in my life to buy into the premise of a question phrased in this way; it would be asking me to ignore the obvious. The most successful people I know (and they are very successful in their fields by any definition) got there more by their surroundings and circumstance than anything else, and it happened in very obvious ways that I've seen tested in "natural experiments" of sorts (for example, where they move from setting A to B and back again for reasons that have nothing to do with them). Sure, if they were incompetent or unambitious or something they wouldn't be where they were, but when I think of others who are similarly competent and ambitious, the biggest differences I see are in the opportunities they were given, the social environments they are in, and weird quixotic dynamics of life and society.
One of the most frustrating things to me about this all is that if you tried to capture these things with some kind of simple description it would be impossible. Something that looks like an opportunity from the outside might actually be a really horrible catastrophe from the inside, or vice versa.
It's much easier to break something than to maintain and develop something optimally, and this goes for human lives as well. I wish we would focus more on the latter and less on blaming the broken for the former.
They speculate and gamble in crypto instead of investing in index funds, for one. Compare the 5-year returns for SPY, DIA, or QQQ vs. Bitcoin. They look for shortcuts to success , thinking they know better, when tried and true methods (like college-to-career + home ownership + index funds) are more boring but more consistently successful. People are always looking for ways to reinvent the wheel. Often this leads to wasted time, wasted money, frustration. Success is not about being a super genius or knowing more, but just avoiding the things which do not work
Not everyone can be successful monetarily. If everyone becomes a millionare, the new rich standard would be billionare and the ultra wealthy would probably be trillionares.
Also (and this is probably controversial) I would assert there's an ethical problem with the question, in that it puts an a priori burden through assumption on someone (even hypothetical) who by definition is vulnerable. Again, it's just not the right way to approach the issue.
I've seen too much in my life to buy into the premise of a question phrased in this way; it would be asking me to ignore the obvious. The most successful people I know (and they are very successful in their fields by any definition) got there more by their surroundings and circumstance than anything else, and it happened in very obvious ways that I've seen tested in "natural experiments" of sorts (for example, where they move from setting A to B and back again for reasons that have nothing to do with them). Sure, if they were incompetent or unambitious or something they wouldn't be where they were, but when I think of others who are similarly competent and ambitious, the biggest differences I see are in the opportunities they were given, the social environments they are in, and weird quixotic dynamics of life and society.
One of the most frustrating things to me about this all is that if you tried to capture these things with some kind of simple description it would be impossible. Something that looks like an opportunity from the outside might actually be a really horrible catastrophe from the inside, or vice versa.
It's much easier to break something than to maintain and develop something optimally, and this goes for human lives as well. I wish we would focus more on the latter and less on blaming the broken for the former.