Um, the land now called Mexico wouldn't be Mexico if it hadn't been "stolen" from the first nations peoples by the Spaniards (the latter being Europeans).

You best be talking a lot more about region, mobility and financial status. Most of us start out our working careers with 0 financial status and some parts of the country have an overall lower wage, those places also have a lower cost of living.

I think what most think is 'zero' financial status is like how Trump thought a million dollars was a 'small' loan. when I say ZERO, I mean no references or network to lean on AT ALL. I mean family that are also struggling.

the network around a person from BIRTH plays a big part in the opportunities they will have presented to them, regardless of how honest or hard working there are. of course there are EXCEPTIONS to every rule, but they are called exceptions for a reason.

To suggest that a grown person has no references or network means they grew up alone on an island. We all have people we know and who know us. Our teachers, business people, religious people, neighbors, and others we come across in everyday life. Are you saying they don't know anyone or that those they do know have no credibility? As for the financial part, most of the kids I grew up with had to make their own spending money. My parents paid for my basic needs, if I wanted more, it was time to go to work. I think I started doing work for pay somewhere around 12. My children also had to work for the extra things they wanted. I recall my daughter wanting these fancy designer jeans that were over $50 25 years ago. I gave her the going price for a decent pair of jeans - $15. If she wanted the designer ones, that was her problem!

Not when I am speaking in terms of 'success' or jobs. Networking means quite alot. People in regions where there is concentrated poverty, often dont know people that can provide them knowledge or skills or 'merit' to present for potential opportunities. Whereas people a bit higher up that ladder may have parents in positions or status to introduce them and expose them to the 'right' type of people and places where the opportunity may be presented to them. They may have the resources to get that degree that is going to give them enough 'merit' with employers to step into that job with potential for 'success'. We all have people we know. We don't all have people in positions or with experience to be an asset to us in terms of skills or references.


From business insider:


The benefits and the overall impact of networking have received a lot of study in recent years. The results of these reports vary to some extent, but all agree that it's definitely a popular way to get a job. Some experts say that 70% of people ended up in their current position thanks to networking. Others say it's more like 80% or even 85%.

Even when figures are broken down into different categories of job seekers and people are asked how they landed their current job, networking tops every list. In one survey, conducted by LinkedIn and the Adler Group, "active candidates" were separated out from "tiptoers" and "passive candidates," those who looked for work in more casual ways.


Regardless of the individual attitudes and approaches job seekers brought to the table, networking was the most popular way to get a job. For "tiptoers" it won out 3 to 1, and for even more casual job seekers, dubbed "passive candidates," networking dominated other job-search methods on a scale of 7 to 1.

There are a lot of hidden jobs out there
One of the major reasons that networking is such an effective way to get a job is that there is something of a hidden job market out there. Some estimate that as much as 80% of new jobs are never listed but are instead filled internally or via networking.

In fact, getting a referral for a job opening from someone who's already working with the company could give you pretty impressive odds. Only 7% of job applicants get this kind of referral, yet referrals make us 40% of new hires. Clearly, networking isn't just one potential route to finding a new job — it's actually the most effective path.

"At least 70%, if not 80%, of jobs are not published, " Matt Youngquist, president of Career Horizons told NPR. "And yet most people - they are spending 70% or 80% of their time surfing the net versus getting out there, talking to employers, taking some chances [and] realizing that the vast majoring of hiring is friends and acquaintances hiring other trusted friends and acquaintances."


https://www.businessinsider.com/at-least-70-of-jobs-are-not-even-listed-heres-how-to-up-your-chances-of-getting-a-great-new-gig-2017-4

there are plenty who do not live in these types of 'networking' circles.

I'm well aware of the value of friends/acquaintances and networking. I think most children are exposed to their first work experiences in that manner through neighbors or relatives. I have a difficult time comprehending that type of environment where children would be raised without being exposed to other people. I have never lived in such a community or even visited one for any length of time where such a situation would exist. I cannot envision such a community or why anyone would live there especially with children. I would think such children are being raised as failures from birth and the only solution is to remove them from such a place!!

Is this the America you know and think it is the norm? Sorry but that is not the America I know and money/poverty has little to do with it! I suspect you are equating the problems of big metro area slums with American life in general.

Two words...

Home schooled.

NOT TRUE in my world. Home schooled children are involved with the local school system for certain classes and extra curricular activities as well as usually church and their community. Not to mention through family friends and relatives. The only thing you could say that they miss are some of the public school classroom activities.

I am not talking about being exposed to other people. I am talking about being exposed to a NETWORK in terms of people that can pass along the mentorship and/or references that can be an ASSET to 'success'.


In communities of concentrated poverty, as just one example, it does not help Billy to put on their references their aunts and uncles and neighbors, if those aunts and uncles and neighbors are only AVERAGE joes struggling to get by as well. Unlike Sam who can put down a neighbor who works in an impressive job title or an acquaintance of the family with the same. It doesnt help for Him to put down education at the little known community college, if he is competing with people who had the means to go to a college with a 'reputation'. This is the competition for 'success' in THESE times. IT is not like a couple decades ago even. it is changing and changing FAST.

How kids start, which they usually dont have alot of choice over, and what networks they are able to be planted in, whether through birth or a family's financial options, both have ALOT to do with their chances of 'success'. Nothing is set in stone and there are exceptions. But children who dont get a start with those assets, are not losers for struggling in their lives as adults.

Add that to how, even with the link you provided, the cost of living is continuing to increase faster than the wages, and the market is changing so drastically due to technology, and you have two more obstacles for even those kids that dont have a working network of mentors and references that market considers or values, to overcome.


It is easy for the two legged person to call the one legged person a loser for going slower in the race. But in reality, that they stay in the race to the finish, to me, says more about them than the two legged person who wins.

Sorry but here again I have to disagree with you. While the reference from the bank president or the corporate president are worth more, the reference from the corner mechanic or the server at the diner have value as long as those individuals are established in their community. While an engineering degree from MIT is worth more than the one from the college of south texas, both have value. The only time a degree is useless is when it is for some useless field from some unknown college.

You seem to have a fixation against people with money, a title, and even those who work everyday for their living. Anyone who puts in an honest day's labor deserves our respect!!

The one legged person is a loser when they don't even enter the race because they don't believe they can do it! A failure before they even start.

I dont have a fixation against anyone, which is why Im not calling people 'losers'. I am simply stating differences in people's situations. People have different obstacles and different 'privilege' is all. And acknowledging BOTH instead of pretending people exist in vacuums that are all the same, is to me a better way to start towards progress.

Yeah. Living in a canister vacuum didn't work for Norm the Genie.

lol ... vaccuum was the wrong word. Just expressing that everyone doesnt truly have 'equal' access to opportunities for 'success'. Some are facing really difficult obstacles, not of their own making, which cause their struggle to be a little more laborous, and their resources much more scarce without 'help'.

Please let me give you what I believe is great insight about people that you and many progressives seem to not understand. Trash people be trash! It makes no difference if they are white, black, yellow, brown, or pink they are still trash. No mater how hard you try you cannot fix them for they don't want to change. Save your energy from them and put it to where it will do the most good and forget about the trash! Someone out there needs your help and will respond positively to that help!

Yes, different people have different situations and what they need to overcome those obstacles is different. There is one common denominator among all of them to overcome those obstacles; they must have the desire and willingness to do the hard work to overcome their obstacles. When someone makes excuses for them or accepts their failures, they never will overcome the obstacles. It is called being an enabler - we know you can't overcome your problems because you are......and society just won't give you a chance because.......! Fill in the blanks with whatever is the theme of the day.

a few points to correct, in case I was not clear.

There is 'trash' in every demographic and description of people we have when describing employment or financial status or 'success'.

There is a difference between ACKNOWLEDGING obstacles and making 'excuses' for people. There is also reality in the way our economy is set up and the way the job market works in terms of who becomes 'successful'. of course there will be 'trash', but mostly there are people no more trash than anyone else, but partially due to how the ECONOMY and our CLASS STRUCTURE works are overcoming much more nearly insurmountable odds to move up in the world.

If I was advocating to make everyone millionaires, I would understand the miscommunication. But Im not. What I am stating is that assistance programs SHOULD be there for the times when people need help overcoming obstacles, not for a LIFETIME, and not as an 'excuse' not to try, but as a means for them to have more of a shot at living with basic decency while they wade through their personal rough waters.

Those "obstacles" you refer to are often the making of the people involved. We have programs to help people overcome their obstacles to success but they have to be willing to participate.

I hear from many business people how impossible it is to hire someone even as an entry level employee. They can't pass a drug screen; they won't show up for work on time and when scheduled; they aren't attentive to their job; they don't have a basic education.
Finding an honest employee who will actually show up and do the job is nearly impossible because these people have all those so called "obstacles" in their lives!! A job environment is not a social-welfare center but a place for a productive output.

1. Plenty of hard-working people struggle to feed their families because those people created obstacles for themselves.

2. Plenty of people acquired fortunes through honest and ethical means. They are often on the receiving end of wealth envy.

3. It isn't uncommon for people with wealth envy to believe that the wealthy acquired wealth through "dishonest and unethical" means.

4. It takes more than hard work to acquire wealth. It also takes personal risks.
Wealthy people often get that way because they risked their money and other assets by investing them, with the knowledge that they could lose what they invested.

5. Those who just work for salaries or wages aren't risking their money and other assets. Instead, they are trading their labor for pay checks.

6. Wealth is useless to wealthy people unless the wealth is used to acquire goods and services. As wealthy people spend their wealth, they create demands for goods and services. In turn, those demands result in the creation of jobs for others. Hence, the wealth ends up being transferred to those who supply the goods and services.

7. Just who gets to decide how much money that every person needs? Plenty of people in the USA don't consider themselves to be wealthy, but they are wealthy from the perspective of people living in Third-World slums. For example, from the latter's perspective, one has more money than one could ever need if one can afford to buy a computer.

8. Every type of natural asset is unevenly distributed throughout planet Earth. Thus, not everyone can acquire wealth through the use or sale of natural assets that are high in demand.

9. Show me a Human who believes that all people should have equal wealth, and I will show you a person who is out of touch with reality. Should those who haven't risked their own money and other assets have the same wealth as those who have made such a risk?

10. Equal opportunity and a level playing field don't guarantee equal results. Way too many people demand equal results no matter how poorly that they play.

Know what would MAGA ?
To be rid of dingbat donald tramp and family and there russian backers
Almost 9 million people agree
Go to >>> NEEDTOIMPEACH.COM >>># needtoimpeach
Sign up and be counted

???


These things are all also true along with the fact that 'success' isn not a natural or common result of hard work and integrity anymore than lack of it is the natural result of not working hard or having inetegrity.


Wealth is a totally different thing than financial status in the context of the topic. Wealth is an accumulation of ASSETS (that which one has above expenses for BASIC NEEDS).


For example, health is an asset. Not everyone is BORN in good health, not every child has had any choice or done anything to end up in poor health as they grew from child to adult. The same is true with opportunity for success. not everyone is born with very good opportunities for success. Not everyone is born into regions or networks that foster, encourage, and support it. Not all kids will grow up in regions or networks that foster, encourage, or support it.

Wealthy people contribute and take risks, but that is true of anyone trying to live life. Poor people make their own contributions(contributions are not always with dollar signs in this life) and take their own risks trying to survive.

That brings me back to the point that attributing 'Success' or 'wealth' strictly to some character attributes is intellectually dishonest.