How easy is it to become a GM?

Do you belong to a chess club ? The reason I ask is that all of us benefit from feedback. This can be after playing a game and analysing or more informal discussion. Don't be too hard on yourself. You will be getting better, but not necessarily in a way that will  immediately be apparent.

If you don't already do it, pick the a collected games collection of a world champion and study the games. Work through the games with a card covering the moves and try and work out the next move. Try and visualise the positions in the variations without moving the pieces..

Of course, I belong to the greatest chess club on the site: The Intellectual Chessists Society!

https://www.chess.com/club/intellectual-chessists-society

Errm, I think he meant a real one, not a virtual club.

well I'm 18 and I started playing exactly one year ago and I'm a 1600 now! anything is possible you just have to work hard enough granted it might be natural for me but I still work my butt off! they say I can't make it to grandmaster. but I'll show them soon enough

You will show absolutely nothing. 

Getting to 1600 is not difficult at all if you put a decent amount of time studying. You will soon realize how different it is to achieve more than 2000 ELO, and you will also realize how nearly impossible it is to achieve more than 2300, we are not going to even talk about becoming a GM. 

Good for you for achieving 1600 in one year, but to believe that you will become a GM is not being positive, it is being delusional. There is a big difference. 

Wow! Humblebug. Positive thinking indeed! Good luck in your quest 😊

it's impossible

Remember too that being a GM, unless you're one of the top 20 or so in the world, isn't a passport to wealth or success. It doesn't pay very well at all, and many a GM struggles to do quite ordinary things like buy a house or support a family. Chess is not a good career choice.

I knew a player who gave his whole life to chess. He was a chess master but that is all.

He was often living in very poor conditions.

He had a good job with Social Security Administration but gave it up for dubious chess interests.

When he was in college [he attended Millikin University in Decatur Illinois as i did] he declared that his life's ambition was to be a chess professional.

 He was and even published some mini magazines but he was poor all his life.

Possibly of interest:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/can-anyone-be-an-im-or-gm
What It Takes to Become a Chess Master by Andrew Soltis

"... going from good at tactics to great at tactics ... doesn't translate into much greater strength. ... You need a relatively good memory to reach average strength. But a much better memory isn't going to make you a master. ... there's a powerful law of diminishing returns in chess calculation, ... Your rating may have been steadily rising when suddenly it stops. ... One explanation for the wall is that most players got to where they are by learning how to not lose. ... Mastering chess ... requires a new set of skills and traits. ... Many of these attributes are kinds of know-how, such as understanding when to change the pawn structure or what a positionally won game looks like and how to deal with it. Some are habits, like always looking for targets. Others are refined senses, like recognizing a critical middlegame moment or feeling when time is on your side and when it isn't. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093409/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review857.pdf
100 Chess Master Trade Secrets by Andrew Soltis
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708094523/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review916.pdf
Reaching the Top?! by Peter Kurzdorfer
http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2015/11/16/book-notice-kurzdorfers-reaching-the-top.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm
What It Takes to Become a Grandmaster by GM Andrew Soltis
https://www.chess.com/article/view/don-t-worry-about-your-rating
https://www.chess.com/article/view/am-i-too-old-for-chess
https://www.chess.com/blog/smurfo/book-review-insanity-passion-and-addiction
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/09/26/books/books-of-the-times-when-the-child-chess-genius-becomes-the-pawn.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2017/05/05/making-a-living-in-chess-is-tough-but-the-internet-is-making-it-easier/#4284e4814850

https://www.chess.com/news/view/is-there-good-money-in-chess-1838
"... Many aspiring young chess players dream of one day becoming a grandmaster and a professional. ... But ... a profession must bring in at least a certain regular income even if one is not too demanding. ... The usual prize money in Open tournaments is meagre. ... The higher the prizes, the greater the competition. ... With a possibly not very high and irregular income for several decades the amount of money one can save for old age remains really modest. ... Anyone who wants to reach his maximum must concentrate totally on chess. That involves important compromises with or giving up on his education. ... it is a question of personal life planning and when deciding it is necessary to be fully conscious of the various possibilities, limitations and risks. ... a future professional must really love chess and ... be prepared to work very hard for it. ... It is all too frequent that a wrong evaluation is made of what a talented player can achieve. ... Most players have the potential for a certain level; once they have reached it they can only make further progress with a great effort. ... anyone who is unlikely to attain a high playing strength should on no account turn professional. ... Anyone who does not meet these top criteria can only try to earn his living with public appearances, chess publishing or activity as a trainer. But there is a lack of offers and these are not particularly well paid. For jobs which involve appearing in public, moreover, certain non-chess qualities are required. ... a relevant 'stage presence' and required sociability. ... All these jobs and existences, moreover, have hanging above them the sword of Damocles of general economic conditions. ... around [age] 40 chess players ... find that their performances are noticeably tailing off. ..." - from a 12 page chapter on becoming a chess professional in the book, Luther's Chess Reformation by GM Thomas Luther (2016)
http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/LuthersChessReformation-excerpt.pdf

Many years ago, there was a statistical survey of all GMs done. This showed that the players improved dramatically in the first seven years, but by the end of seven years they were within 200 points of their maximum lifetime rating.

So, be glad of whatever improvement you make in your first year, but bd aware that there's a clock on you. Keep working to be the best you can be and see where you are in seven years.

Btw, the seven year benchmark is also often used as how long it takes a person to become fluent in a language. I mention this because chess is often compared pedagogically to learning a language, or a musical instrument.

For the musical instrument it is not always the case. 

There are many people who made amazing progress about 10-15 years after they started practicing. I know people who were complete nobodies when they were children and teens, but then improved a lot at about 18 years of age. 

Started playing here 3years ago though i knew how to play from childhood days but I realized soon enough that becoming just an expert player is much harder for me than refilling an emptied toothpaste tube with the same paste.I give up,hands down.

It is definitely possible to grow from beginner to GM in a decade or less. At the same time, it is silly to set such a goal on the beginner stage, when you don't have even a remote grasp on what GM players are like. Are you willing to pretty much dedicate your life to chess, studying and playing 4-5 hours a day? Are you willing to regularly play in OTB tournaments, going all around the country and the world and paying all the expenses from your wallet? Are you willing to go through thousands painful losses in long rated games, each making you doubt your ability to play strong chess? And all this given, are you willing to accept the possibility that the goal will never be achieved (as it happens for many very hard-working and passionate players)?

I'm not saying it to discourage you, I just suggest that you reach a level allowing you to, at least, have some general idea of what happens in the brain of a GM when he/she plays chess and what amount of knowledge and experience they possess - and before then having only a goal of improving your game. Otherwise the harsh reality may be quite painful to hit.

You couldn't be further from the truth. Study psychology sometimes. Adults are actually better learners simply because they're adults lol. It's all just a myth. It would have been a different story had he already been playing chess for sometime, because for adults it is hard to change habits, not learn things.

Most people don't set out to be GM's, so forget that. It's more interesting to see if you can even get to 1600 or 2000 to start.

Now, the reasoning of some of the other repliers is rather suspect, so I can reassure you. I probably gained most of my rating as a child and a tactics program with active play got me to 1500 or 1600. After that I was only slowly improving over the years with regular play and sometimes studying. The exact date is not important, but, somewhere halfway in my twenties/late twenties I peaked, closing in at almost 2000 rating OTB. I became less active after that. That's a period of at least 15 years. What is important: I know I can still get a little better, if I just practice on my weaknesses. So, if I did a lot of tactics, I probably could be 2000+.

Nobody knows how high you can get, but I know if you just work effectively on what you're not good at it will give the most effect. Most serious players already have a favourite opening. Most important not to forget are tactics, master games and endgames. If you aim high you probably need a coach too. 

I think it has more to do with the ability to concentrate, than with the ability to change habits. A kid doesn't have many responsibilities, he/she relies on their parents in almost everything. No worries, no lists of everyday activities, nothing - whenever they study or play chess, they are able to focus on the activity 100%, with all the excitement and curiosity native to children.

On the other hand, an adult has to work their job or do their school/college studies. An adult has to remember when to go to buy food in a store or when to cook it at home. When to pay the rent or the mortgage. When to clean the house. When to send a few e-mails to relatives and colleagues. Add to this a lot of new hobbies the person has accumulated over their life and "responsibilities" in those... There is just too many distractions, it is impossible to focus one's entire attention on the studies - hence the effectiveness of both the studies and the play in the actual games drops significantly.

People plateau not because they are unable to become better. They plateau not because they are unable to change their habits or way of thinking. They plateau because they are not willing to sacrifice a lot for the cause of becoming better - something children do not have to do, because they already get almost everything for free and guaranteed, there is nothing to sacrifice.

Put an adult in a fantasy house where they don't have to do anything and always get the food they need, all the accessories, everything at will and have all the time in the world to do whatever they please... And, I'm pretty sure, he/she can become a GM as fast as "chess progenies" do nowadays.

you must start playing when you're a child and never stop, and maybe you could be a gm, maybe...

It is really easy.