Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 143 posts

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#121

Post by phreeza »

justindz wrote: post #108
Arjuna wrote: post #83

I was born and grew up in WV. As many of you know, it is a poor state. We grew up on powdered milk. Most of my ancestors either went into chemical production (a local term from where I grew up is the "Chemical Valley", although most of that production and associated jobs are gone now) or slipped into the mines to work black gold [1]. We didn't have a lot, and there was no way that we could afford a computer. However,…

Born, raised and educated entirely in West Virginia. Currently a Director of Product Management at a DC tech company. My dad, who worked for the National Park Service for 35 years (retiring last month) brought home a 25Mhz "shades of grey" decommissioned laptop for me to play with in Jr. High. The rest is history. If I look back on that history, I definitely see myself being incredibly lucky, but also putting myself…

Not an early model Toshiba sattelite by any chance? My first computer had those specs, also dexomissioned hand-down, from my uncle.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#122

Post by beat »

king_jester wrote: post #86
beat wrote: post #37

As someone born in the bottom fifth who worked up into the top fifth, a big part of it is actively escaping childhood culture and that culture's expectations. When I grew up, I didn't know anyone wealthy or successful - I met them when I was an adult. Good role models are critical for kids' sense of scope and possibility. Then again, as a political liberal, I tend to say an un-liberal thing when talking about income…

> Then again, as a political liberal, I tend to say an un-liberal thing when talking about income distribution... income isn't distributed evenly, but neither is talent. Mediocre people don't advance society. They tend to stay where they started (which explains a lot of management mediocrity - some are born into positions of privilege, but lack the talent to do anything with it but maintain the status quo). The way t…

I think you misunderstand me. "class divisions, racism, sexism, etc" are impediments to talent. I firmly believe that talent and ambition are distributed evenly across humans, regardless of gender/race/class/etc, and I presume you do as well. "Advancement for some" as a function of talent is, in my opinion, society-wide advancement, because mediocre people aren't going to advance society, period. "Advancement for some" as a function of gender/race/class is an impediment to society, because the talents of those it excludes are squandered (or worse, turned to destructive paths).

To be sure, I'm being elitist here, and I don't deny that. But I think the empirical evidence is on my side. Show me a social revolution led by average minds, and I might rethink. More likely, I'll point out the brilliant minds that led the average.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#123

Post by mindcrime »

jshen wrote: post #118
Arjuna wrote: post #83

I was born and grew up in WV. As many of you know, it is a poor state. We grew up on powdered milk. Most of my ancestors either went into chemical production (a local term from where I grew up is the "Chemical Valley", although most of that production and associated jobs are gone now) or slipped into the mines to work black gold [1]. We didn't have a lot, and there was no way that we could afford a computer. However,…

"I've personally found that life is what you make it, no matter where you come from or your background" No, it really isn't. Statistics show this very clearly, and this shouldn't require statistics for us to know it. "Many of us have been extraordinarily lucky—and we did not earn it. Many good people have been extraordinarily unlucky—and they did not deserve it. And yet I get the distinct sense that if I asked some o…

Yay, another HN post that seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives, and tries to attribute everything to luck and uncontrollable external factors.

The reality is, we all live in a cold, uncaring, unsympathetic world, and are subject to multiple random and unpredictable (and uncontrollable) forces. Pointing this out is no great insight, and this notion does little or nothing to change how one should approach the world. In the end you can only play the cards you are dealt, whatever they may be. But what you do with those cards is what matters.

People are born into disadvantageous situations all the time, and yet they manage to escape that environment and go on to have great success. Is is really all just "luck" or is it the case that your choices and actions affect your ability to even take advantage of what "good luck" happens to come your way?

"Luck = preparation + opportunity" might sound like just a silly slogan for Nike t-shirts or something, but there's a lot of merit to that. Maybe using pedantic definitions you can't literally "make your own luck" but in an effective sense, that's exactly what you do. You make your own luck by putting yourself in a position to have good things happen to you. You make your own luck by preparing yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come along. You make your own luck by acting to change your circumstances.

And, yes, "black swan" events (of the "bad luck" variety) can come along and destroy you. It can happen to all of us, but that's just another tautology that isn't a very insightful observation.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#124

Post by king_jester »

beat wrote: post #122
king_jester wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then again, as a political liberal, I tend to say an un-liberal thing when talking about income distribution... income isn't distributed evenly, but neither is talent. Mediocre people don't advance society. They tend to stay where they started (which explains a lot of management mediocrity - some are born into positions of privilege, but lack the talent to do anything with it but maintain the status quo). The way t…

I think you misunderstand me. "class divisions, racism, sexism, etc" are impediments to talent. I firmly believe that talent and ambition are distributed evenly across humans, regardless of gender/race/class/etc, and I presume you do as well. "Advancement for some" as a function of talent is, in my opinion, society-wide advancement, because mediocre people aren't going to advance society, period. "Advancement for som…

> I think you misunderstand me. "class divisions, racism, sexism, etc" are impediments to talent.

Agreed.

> I firmly believe that talent and ambition are distributed evenly across humans, regardless of gender/race/class/etc, and I presume you do as well.

I think this might depend on how we are defining talent. Ultimately people have worth even if they don't meet any definition of talent just by virtue of being a human being.

> "Advancement for some" as a function of talent is, in my opinion, society-wide advancement, because mediocre people aren't going to advance society, period. "Advancement for some" as a function of gender/race/class is an impediment to society, because the talents of those it excludes are squandered (or worse, turned to destructive paths).

How exactly are we defining talent here? It seems like you would see some people as not having said talent and that those people wouldn't contribute to the advancement of society. However I would view such a definition of talent as an institutional barrier. There are a wide variety of people with different interest, skills, abilities, disabilities, and levels of function. That some of these people don't meet a definition of talent or, because of the way such a definition is crafted, cannot be talented is a really limiting factor for the success of society. Again, has society really advanced so long as there are classes in which people are viewed as less useful than other people? Promoting the value value, even if just implicitly, of some groups over others is a part of systemic, institutional barriers.

> To be sure, I'm being elitist here, and I don't deny that. But I think the empirical evidence is on my side. Show me a social revolution led by average minds, and I might rethink. More likely, I'll point out the brilliant minds that led the average.

I'm not really sure how this could be qualified. Social revolutions and changes aren't just the result of a few key individuals and there has been a tendency to ignore those people who have participated in such social change based on who they are or the kind of work they performed, or possibly the work they did not or could not do.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#125

Post by jshen »

mindcrime wrote: post #123
jshen wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I've personally found that life is what you make it, no matter where you come from or your background" No, it really isn't. Statistics show this very clearly, and this shouldn't require statistics for us to know it. "Many of us have been extraordinarily lucky—and we did not earn it. Many good people have been extraordinarily unlucky—and they did not deserve it. And yet I get the distinct sense that if I asked some o…

Yay, another HN post that seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives, and tries to attribute everything to luck and uncontrollable external factors. The reality is, we all live in a cold, uncaring, unsympathetic world, and are subject to multiple random and unpredictable (and uncontrollable) forces. Pointing this out is no great insight, and this notion does little…

"seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives"

Nice strawman. I certainly don't believe that.

"You make your own luck by putting yourself in a position to have good things happen to you. You make your own luck by preparing yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come along."

This is true, but it is only half the story. Different environments have different amounts of opportunity. America has far more opportunity than Afghanistan, making your own luck will get you a lot farther in America and you can't "make" which country you were born into. Environment plays a huge role, even within America. Health plays a huge role, even in America. Anyone that is successful has been very fortunate, and a lot of smart hard workers have not been fortunate. It's important to recognize that.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#126

Post by mindcrime »

jshen wrote: post #125
mindcrime wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yay, another HN post that seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives, and tries to attribute everything to luck and uncontrollable external factors. The reality is, we all live in a cold, uncaring, unsympathetic world, and are subject to multiple random and unpredictable (and uncontrollable) forces. Pointing this out is no great insight, and this notion does little…

"seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives" Nice strawman. I certainly don't believe that. "You make your own luck by putting yourself in a position to have good things happen to you. You make your own luck by preparing yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come along." This is true, but it is only half the story. Different environments have different am…

Nice strawman. I certainly don't believe that.

That's good to know. And I'm not saying that you specifically do believe that... it's more that your earlier post just seems to fit into a meme that seems to be becoming more and more prevalent around here, in which everything becomes attributable to "luck". Perhaps I over-reached in lumping your post into that category. Probably I'm just overly sensitive on this topic. :-)

Environment plays a huge role, even within America. Health plays a huge role, even in America. Anyone that is successful has been very fortunate, and a lot of smart hard workers have not been fortunate. It's important to recognize that.

I mean, yeah, in a sense... but you can work backwards from any success and find ways to attribute that success to luck. I mean, we're all "lucky" that a huge asteroid didn't strike the Earth yesterday and cause a worldwide cataclysm that might have killed us all. But focusing on that isn't, IMO, terribly useful, exactly because those things are out of our control.

OTOH, unless one rejects the idea of "free will" (which is certainly a valid point of debate), then you can control your own choices and actions - and I tend to believe that it's more important to focus on those things which are subject to (at least a degree of) control by us as individuals.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#127

Post by joshuacc »

fingerprinter wrote: post #66

I can't help but feel that this is about a couple of things: 1. education 2. income 3. influence I've travelled and lived all over the world. It always struck me odd that the poorer places in the world always seem to value religion over education (my perception), and it creates a nasty cycle where the majority of people don't/can't better themselves. I saw this first hand in the southern US where it was always God #1…

As a bit of a counterpoint, I'm originally from rural Mississippi and was raised by very religious parents who would absolutely say that God should be #1. But this didn't translate into devaluing education. Instead they viewed it as their religious duty to give their children the very best education they could so that we could make a positive difference in the world.

"You would be amazed at the things people would give up if they thought "God" told them to."

I wouldn't be surprised at all. My parents made tremendous sacrifices to provide their children with a better life because they believed God wanted them to.

On the flip side, I have often seen people making poor decisions and attributing the decision to what they believed God wanted them to do. However, I don't think it is at all obvious that this is caused by their belief in God. It seems more likely to me that in the absence of belief in God, they would make similarly poor decisions but give different justifications.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#128

Post by jshen »

mindcrime wrote: post #126
jshen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"seeks to denigrate the idea that individuals have any control over the outcomes in their lives" Nice strawman. I certainly don't believe that. "You make your own luck by putting yourself in a position to have good things happen to you. You make your own luck by preparing yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come along." This is true, but it is only half the story. Different environments have different am…

Nice strawman. I certainly don't believe that. That's good to know. And I'm not saying that you specifically do believe that... it's more that your earlier post just seems to fit into a meme that seems to be becoming more and more prevalent around here, in which everything becomes attributable to "luck". Perhaps I over-reached in lumping your post into that category. Probably I'm just overly sensitive on this topic.…

" But focusing on that isn't, IMO, terribly useful"

I agree when we're talking about making decisions in our own lives, but we should think about it at the level of society and government. We want policies that increase opportunity,and we need to know when we are failing. Social mobility is decreasing in America, and we should do something about it.

Re: In America, Where You're Born Is Correlated With How Far You'll Go In Life

#129

Post by hnal943 »

mindcrime wrote: post #52
jurassic wrote: post #21

In the white trash southern town where I grew up being a teacher at $35k/yr is considered one of the better jobs available. Military service is the best option for young men who want to provide a living wage to their families, especially since no education is required. A few dozen doctors and dentists and veterinarians make bank and live like kings (not really joking... think giant sailboats docked at their beach man…

This sound very similar to where I grew up. I'm also from a "white trash" rural Southern area. And I grew up near the beach, so you saw huge contrast between the million dollar+ beach houses at the private end of the beach, and the rest of my county which was mostly rural, tobacco farms, timber logging for the paper companies, and Green Swamp[1]. I knew people who turned down full tuition scholarships to the flagship…

In reading anecdotes like this it seems that in the south, "Christianity" has been hijacked to have something to do with keeping up the status quo or patriotism or something, which is radically different from my experience (and not at all reflective of the bible). God doesn't live in Alabama, so I'm not sure why you'd have to follow him there....
Post reply on HN