Comment by LAC-Tech | Hacker News Reader

Comment by LAC-Tech | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Many of my peers had middle-class parents working normal jobs who just loved unconditionally + put effort forward... the difference between them and those who had less than ideal upbringings is typically vast.

I think it's definitely a starting handicap, no doubt about it. But I'd be very wary in telling those people - if any are reading this - that they're just not going to be successful.

Without getting too touchy feely - I definitely had un-supportive, unstable, conditionally-loving parents. Was it a setback? Yes. Would I be financially ahead of where I am now had they been better? Probably. But you know what, I'm doing alright. Maybe not by HN silicon valley standards well ahead of the curve in my little first world country. Never lost ambition even if I stumbled a lot along the way.

So yeah if you're younger, and reading this, and a bad childhood is still messing with your mind - please don't think all hope is lost. It will be harder but not impossible.

> But I'd be very wary in telling those people - if any are reading this - that they're just not going to be successful.

If they're reading this, they're already the type of person trying to find success. It's important to remember that a lot of these results about families and finances are _statistical_. There are a myriad of other factors, whether known or not, that lead to success and anyone reading this who thinks they aren't cut out for success should never let that get to them.

I also grew up in a similar family to you, but (other than the crazy amount of times I've gotten lucky) I distinguished myself from my peers in my income-depressed area by being excited and interested in trying to get out of my circumstances. Most didn't. So if you're reading this and worried you aren't as far ahead as your peers, don't. The fact that you're worried will go a long way.

>by being excited and interested in trying to get out of my circumstances.

There are a lot of people who are "excited and interested" and never amount to anything because of the above mentioned "circumstances" that you were able to overcome, given a series of factors: natural predisposition, hard work, luck, gravity of the initial conditions and so on. Textbook survivorship bias.

I acknowledged the role that luck played in my post, I'm fully aware that I'm a survivor. Unless you're saying my insight is incorrect, I'm simply saying what I think will improve the odds, not guarantee victory. I'm not sure why you're replying to me about this.

Where does personal agency end and circumstances begin?

A good work ethic isn't "luck". If someone has a good work ethic it's because the people in their life when they were growing up worked their butts off to give it to them. People don't escape poverty because of luck (look at lottery winner outcomes). They escape poverty after about three decades of hard work toward that goal, usually spread across multiple generations.

>Textbook survivorship bias.

Textbook "doesn't fit my narrative, find a way to discount it" bias.

If being born to a wealthy family is "luck" then being born to a family who will work their butt off to give you a good start is also "luck".

> "Where does personal agency end and circumstances begin?"

If it's "I choose to work harder", it's personal agency. If it's "we're voting away support systems because I turned out OK and you should just work harder" it's not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com