Hacker News Reader

The difference in the views expressed is that one takes all of the blame for your circumstances and puts them on your parents, and the other is taking the responsibility of providing good circumstances for your children. In the end, the meaning is about the same, but the undertones are a bit different.

View on HN

The meaning isn't close to the same; talking about your children's well being has nothing to do with talking about your own well being. And saying your parents matter isn't blaming them, it's simply an accurate description of reality. Having rich parents vs having poor parents has far more to do with how you turn out than your own effort does[1], that is the reality of this world, like it or not.

[1] http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate

The meaning is not the same because it's very difficult for poor and less educated parents to give their children what rich and more educated parents give them. My kids went to a high school that had a considerable socio-economic range and I was fairly involved in some stuff there, and it was clear there were plenty of poorer, less educated parents who were working really hard to give their kids everything they needed, but it was almost impossibly difficult for them.

This is not an argument against treating your children well, but the reality is that having parents who are well-off and educated buffers you against all kinds of mistakes and issues that would sink other kids. Moderating (not eliminating, which is neither possible nor desirable) social inequality is important precisely because we can say with as much certainty as we can say anything that there are kids out there today as talented and driven as Bill Gates who don't have anything like the resilient support system that he had, and without it they are likely going to be a drag on society rather than contributors to it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com