chana,

You amaze me. The fact that you talk about the need for statistics in one hand while making statements after statements without any basis amazes me.

So, you think along the following lines - your sentences here-:

(i) the truth is that "Earning money without corruption is impossible in Nepal"
 
 You should be remembered for this "Impossibility Theorem". A Chanatarkari Impossibility Theorem. Kudos. I am assuming you had done good empirical studies to come up with this.
 
(ii) The man who does not earn sufficient is not considered a successful person.

Another gem from Chana Tarakari. Please define "sufficient" so that we know how much you are talking about. And who "considers" here? How does it differ from how people think in other countries, say, US?

(iii)So, I mentioned earlier, every case has a different story. People of different fields, e.g. science, managment, technology, education, health etc. may have different environment but the condition is similar. 

Boy, it is even more enlightening, new insight. What does "the condition is similar" mean here?

(iv) If we collect data, I don't expect to see more success than failure side. 

On what basis do you form your expectation here? What a vague statement from our great social scientist.

(v)Most so called successful people (who earned money and name) have somehow exhausted the corrupt system and loopholes

I have no idea what 'exhausting the corrupt system' means. But using loopholes is not illegal, is it?

In fact, this is what I call "antisuccessful people' mentality of our Nepali brothers. If someone is successful, rather than trying to understand how he coped with the existing system and how he achieved success, people like you are quick to lable them corrupt. This attitude demonizes successful people and tries to create stereotype about them. It also creates complacency in lousy, lazy complainers by letting them think that they are behind not because they were lazy but because they were beaten by corrupt people which may or may not be true.

(vi)Those people who have tried to correct the system, be honest, and did not do "khurafati kaam", they are mostly "failed people" in the eyes of common citizen in Nepal.

This is another gem. Now you are blaming common citizen. Common people appreciate all kinds of people. Who says, for example, Mahabir Pun was a "failed people"?

In summary, yet another generalization about successful people that attempts to discourage other people from working hard and is worth ignoring.