Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#171

Post by dreamdu5t » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:21 AM UTC

Mz wrote: post #150

LouisSayers wrote: post #146

It's not what you know, it's who you know. If you're a poor kid that manages to mingle with the rich and famous, I'd imagine you'd have some pretty good opportunities come your way too regardless of education. That's the real factor here. If you're connected, you can sell your shitty web hosting to all your dad's friends, and you can have doors open for you with minimal effort. Regardless, there are rags to riches st…

If you're a poor kid that manages to mingle with the rich and famous, I'd imagine you'd have some pretty good opportunities come your way too regardless of education. In theory. It is a theory I would like to believe in. But as a homeless woman who has managed to become the top ranked woman on HN, a forum that has plenty of people with quite a lot more money than me, as well as expertise in making money online (the t…

Why do you think you're homeless?

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#172

Post by sehutson » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:24 AM UTC

zeveb wrote: post #152

ccallebs wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think this explains quite a bit. I grew up fairly poor (single income household in Appalachia). I had to train myself out of a lot of speech patterns / mannerisms that don't fly in other parts of America. It's unfortunate, but the stereotype of inbred white trash is still alive and strong when most people hear Appalachian drawls. They hear the way we talk and immediately think we're ignorant. It's an open…

I'd go so far as to argue that it's harder to get by as a white Appalachian than as a black urbanite. Plenty of people & programmes care about the latter; few about the former.

There's a lot of truth to that. I grew up in a poor single-income family in rural southern Illinois and the only programs we really had were free lunches, special ed, and a few assorted gifted classes in some grades and subjects (and honestly, I don't think they were as advanced as the normal classes in average or better school systems). We had very little in the way of access to museums, schooling alternatives, after school programs, etc.

A conversation with the Wash U financial aid office made it very clear just how bad the low-income white situation can be. We were working on my financial aid package and trying to figure out some way I could get the loans and grants I needed (I nearly had to quit school) - and as the woman was looking through her options, she jokingly asked if I was hispanic, saying they had a number of full-tuition scholarships and other funding opportunities for black and hispanic students plus a few opportunities for inner city St. Louis residents. Nothing targeting the low-income and rural.

The good news is that they (along with many other schools) later dropped the race requirements for their scholarships. They also offer free tuition for most, if not all, low-income students now. Sadly, those changes were too late to help me avoid $100k in student loans.

Even now, though, I wonder if many rural students would know about those opportunities. When I was applying to colleges, I went through a couple guidance counselors before I found one who didn't try to talk me into going to community college and studying something easier, like cosmetology or secretarial work. It takes an abnormal amount of effort and drive to get beyond that kind of rural upbringing and educational system, but people tend to ignore the fact that white people can also have a lot of systemic disadvantages.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#173

Post by Mz » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:28 AM UTC

dreamdu5t wrote: post #171

Mz wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a poor kid that manages to mingle with the rich and famous, I'd imagine you'd have some pretty good opportunities come your way too regardless of education. In theory. It is a theory I would like to believe in. But as a homeless woman who has managed to become the top ranked woman on HN, a forum that has plenty of people with quite a lot more money than me, as well as expertise in making money online (the t…

Why do you think you're homeless?

It is a long story, rooted in the aforementioned incurable medical condition. Serious health problems are a common root cause or contributing factor to homelessness. (Source: I had a college class on homelessness and public policy some years prior to ending up on the street.)

At this point, if I could come up with a few thousand dollars in relatively short order, I believe I could get off the street under circumstances that would not make my health worse. But that's a rather tall order to fill, given my current circumstances.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#174

Post by cbhl » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:31 AM UTC

anotheryou wrote: post #116

Anyone else confused by the diagonal arrow on the graph? edit: > Specifically, rich high school dropouts remain in the top about as much as poor college grads stay stuck in the bottom — 14 versus 16 percent, respectively. weird comparison

The arrow basically says that 14% and 16% are similar.

"As a rich high school dropout, you have a 14% chance of being in the top 20%." "As a poor college grad, you have a 16% chance of being in the bottom 20%."

If you're in that ~15% of each group, you get the premise that the "poor" college grads didn't do better than the corresponding "rich" dropouts.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#175

Post by Swizec » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:35 AM UTC

rhgraysonii wrote: post #167

Gustomaximus wrote: post #154

An event that will always stay with me, some years ago I a job opened up where I would have some sway in recommending candidates. I had a uni friend who would fit the role well. A great bloke, smart and hard working. He came from a very blue collar, low income background. His job was pretty middle of the road stuff. This job would have been lateral in responsibility but in a better industry giving about 2+ times sala…

This really hits home for me. I once had a conversation with a very, very experienced developer who ran a local meetup and was discussing salary options at a new job. He balked when I told them what I asked for, and replied: "Just because you grew up as poor as me doesn't mean you should fear wealth. If it makes you feel that guilty take the shit and donate it to charity." And its really true. My first engineering jo…

> It really is a strange, new thing to come from nothing and all of a sudden be able to go out to eat at an Applebee's without worrying about your finances for a month.

This. I come from a background where ordering pizza was a special event. We weren't poor poor, but we had to be careful.

I'm getting more used to eating out and getting takeout, but I still read the menu right-to-left (prices first) even though 99% of the time it really doesn't matter.

Maybe someday I'll stop feeling guilty for not ordering the cheapest thing on the menu. Took me 2 years to get used to appetizers.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#176

Post by georgemcbay » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:48 AM UTC

mark-ruwt wrote: post #164

Gustomaximus wrote: post #154

An event that will always stay with me, some years ago I a job opened up where I would have some sway in recommending candidates. I had a uni friend who would fit the role well. A great bloke, smart and hard working. He came from a very blue collar, low income background. His job was pretty middle of the road stuff. This job would have been lateral in responsibility but in a better industry giving about 2+ times sala…

For anyone interested in digging into this concept, read up on "Impostor Syndrome". https://counseling.caltech.edu/general/InfoandResources/Impo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome

There may be some interplay with Impostor Syndrome, but IMO what is being discussed here is a different thing, for which there may be a more specific name... but if so I'm unaware of it.

Impostor syndrome is pretty much universal (insomuch as it crosses class/economy boundaries) whereas what has been mentioned here is a sort of anti-entitlement very specific to people who grew up poor. People in this situation are often afraid to ask for what they are worth (to the point where they will sabotage their careers to some degree as noted in Gustomaximus post), are generally afraid of authority even when there is no reason to be or the authority isn't actually an authority over them, etc.

I've definitely seen and experienced this phenomenon myself speaking as someone who grew up fairly poor -- single-mom American poor (which, as all things are relative, is quite different than seriously-might-starve poor... at least for now).

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#177

Post by jomamaxx » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:49 AM UTC

I worked at a Fortune 50 and we hired a lot of interns.

After I left, I thought back on the kids we hired, how talented they were, and what they went off to do afterwards.

The 'rich kids' were better prepared, more responsible, better communicators, had a better sense of the vision for the company and the consequences of what we were doing.

'College education' is surely causative to some degree, but in America, most wealth is not inherited, and those parents who can afford 'activities' for their kids are probably far, far better parents than others. It's not the 'activities' that I think develops the kids, I think it's the very fact that these parents are investing a lot of time and energy in their kids, teaching them positive behaviours that matters much more.

I wish I had the link but I read a study a while back that showed that 'rich parents' were far more conscientious than other parents.

I don't doubt that money is a big advantage, as well as social class, but it would be foolhardy to think that these are the fundamental issues.

Rich kids are posited as 'brats' in films and TV because it's populist - most viewers are not rich. And of course - those douches exist. By by enlarge, upper-middle class kids are great. I would bet they make better players than otherwise on average.

I should also point out that kids from communities wherein they were not seen as lower class - i.e. rural communities, seem to have decent dispositions as well, and at least by the numbers, they didn't have a lot of money. But it doesn't cost a lot to have a stable home / good parents out in the sticks.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#178

Post by jomamaxx » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 12:55 AM UTC

blfr wrote: post #49

But, of course, it's not just a matter of dollars and cents. It's also a matter of letters and words. Affluent parents talk to their kids three more hours a week on average than poor parents, which is critical during a child's formative early years. That's why, as Stanford professor Sean Reardon explains, "rich students are increasingly entering kindergarten much better prepared to succeed in school than middle-class…

No, the 'biggest influence' that parents have on their kids are the values, attitudes, the disposition, the care, the temperament, the focus, the self restraint and self discipline , and all the other behaviours they instil in their children by instruction or by example.

After that I would say it's economic and social class.

Of course genes play some role, but there's a pretty low correlation for inherited IQ anyhow.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#179

Post by jomamaxx » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 1:01 AM UTC

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #17

dleslie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to diminish the income gap. If we believe that few employers are happy to carry employees who provide a net productivity deficit, then on the face of it we cannot assume that those who are impoverished and employed are not meaningfully productive. The question we ought to ask ourselves is how much disparity is acceptable to allow across the incomes of productive individuals; or more bluntly, why do th…

Anything that increases social mobility would be good. America is doing quite poorly in terms of social mobility, compared to other top-tier countries.

"America is doing quite poorly in terms of social mobility, compared to other top-tier countries."

I think this is a myth.

Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland all do pretty well on the 'gini coefficient' - but they are tiny, relatively homogeneous societies. They are ethnic groups - and they are each smaller than Los Angeles.

What would the gini coefficient look like for 'The entire EU' for example - which would be a better direct comparison to America.

It would be terrible.

Why? Because Greeks grow up mostly to live in Greece, and much poorer than Swedes, who grow up to be Swedes, generally much richer than Greeks.

Poor Greeks, Sardinians, and Bulgarians kids mostly do not grow up to reach the level of wealth of middle class Scandinavians - not even close.

From Slovenia to London ... the gap is really quite huge.

Re: Poor kids who do things right don't do better than rich kids who do things wrong

#180

Post by xapata » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 1:03 AM UTC

jomamaxx wrote: post #177

I worked at a Fortune 50 and we hired a lot of interns. After I left, I thought back on the kids we hired, how talented they were, and what they went off to do afterwards. The 'rich kids' were better prepared, more responsible, better communicators, had a better sense of the vision for the company and the consequences of what we were doing. 'College education' is surely causative to some degree, but in America, most…

Blaming "culture" is often an excuse for shoddy research.

How would you measure "conscientiousness" if you were designing a study to correlate that with wealth?