Full time job? Consider yourself lucky

[Berkut]

So we decided that people with full time jobs really are lucky, because they were born in the USA or the West in general?

Hmmm. I think I will stick with "Yeah...sure, except that it isn't really about luck...."

[Barrister]

So we decided that people with full time jobs really are lucky, because they were born in the USA or the West in general?

Hmmm. I think I will stick with "Yeah...sure, except that it isn't really about luck...."

I dunno man.

First we are absolutely lucky to have been born in the West, and not to Chinese peasant farmers or Indian slum dwellers.

Second, within the west we are lucky to have been born to middle-class or working-class families.  Every day I deal with adults who I know never got a fair crack at life by virtue of being born to unemployed, drug or alcohol-addicted parents.  As an aside I dealt with a file yesterday where police responded to a complaint of unattended children.  Sure enough there were 4 kids, ranging from 5 to infant, a couple of whom were wandering the halls of the apartment building, and the 4 adults present were each one passed out drunk.

Finally, I'm pretty sure each of us has had a few lucky breaks in our careers.  Sure I could've been luckier still, but while my last few jobs have been because I've built a solid resume, my first couple... they could have hired any number of people, and I can't say why they chose me.

[Berkut]

So we decided that people with full time jobs really are lucky, because they were born in the USA or the West in general?

Hmmm. I think I will stick with "Yeah...sure, except that it isn't really about luck...."

I dunno man.

First we are absolutely lucky to have been born in the West, and not to Chinese peasant farmers or Indian slum dwellers.

Of course. But I don't think that is the point the article is trying to make.

After all, that is true no matter what the economic times are right now.

Second, within the west we are lucky to have been born to middle-class or working-class families.

You might have been, I was not. My parents never made enough money to be above the poverty line until after I moved out of the house, and I was the 4th of 5 kids.

Every day I deal with adults who I know never got a fair crack at life by virtue of being born to unemployed, drug or alcohol-addicted parents.

Yeah, know how they feel.

But did they really not get a "fair" crack? Their shot at a decent life was a hell of a lot better than probably about 2 billion other people on the planet by virtue of the fact that they were born in Canada, for example, instead of Zimbabwe.

So are they unlucky to be born to loser parents, or lucky to be born in Canada?

As an aside I dealt with a file yesterday where police responded to a complaint of unattended children.  Sure enough there were 4 kids, ranging from 5 to infant, a couple of whom were wandering the halls of the apartment building, and the 4 adults present were each one passed out drunk.

That does suck.

But while it is unfortunate those kids are not getting as good a shot as we would all like, the idea that they have NO shot is bullshit. And when two of them figure it out and make it anyway, and the other two do not, the two failures will decry their lack of "luck" and the two successful ones will think "Damn, I am so lucky to have gotten out of there....".

But it won't be about luck in either case, not really.

Finally, I'm pretty sure each of us has had a few lucky breaks in our careers.  Sure I could've been luckier still, but while my last few jobs have been because I've built a solid resume, my first couple... they could have hired any number of people, and I can't say why they chose me.

No question everyone has some lucky breaks.

But there are unlucky breaks as well.

It is like someone complaining that they always end up with assholes in their relationships, and why can't they catch a break and find someone nice for a change - lets go down to the bar and see who we can hook up with tonight...

Yes, there is a lot of luck in life, but mostly your success or lack thereof is driven by you. It was not "luck" that got you a law degree, it is not "luck" that gets you to work every morning.

Yes, some people are truly unlucky, and some people are truly fortunate. But mostly everyone gets out of life about what they are willing to put into it - the idea that "luck" is a primary driving factor for most people is an excuse, for better or worse.

[DGuller]

That does suck.

But while it is unfortunate those kids are not getting as good a shot as we would all like, the idea that they have NO shot is bullshit. And when two of them figure it out and make it anyway, and the other two do not, the two failures will decry their lack of "luck" and the two successful ones will think "Damn, I am so lucky to have gotten out of there....".

That misses a larger point, though.  Being born in circumstances that require you to excel just to pull yourself out of vicious cycle is bad luck on its own.  We can't all be geniuses with infinite willpower and resourcefulness.  Someone with average skills will thrive if he were born as a trust fund baby, and flounder if he were born to two drug addicts.  You can't say that luck had nothing to do with the secound guy's life sucking, because it is possible to overcome these circumstances.  Just becuase a skilled poker player can win with a bad hand doesn't mean that getting a bad hand is not bad luck.

[Berkut]

That does suck.

But while it is unfortunate those kids are not getting as good a shot as we would all like, the idea that they have NO shot is bullshit. And when two of them figure it out and make it anyway, and the other two do not, the two failures will decry their lack of "luck" and the two successful ones will think "Damn, I am so lucky to have gotten out of there....".

That misses a larger point, though.  Being born in circumstances that require you to excel just to pull yourself out of vicious cycle is bad luck on its own.  We can't all be geniuses with infinite willpower and resourcefulness.  Someone with average skills will thrive if he were born as a trust fund baby, and flounder if he were born to two drug addicts.  You can't say that luck had nothing to do with the secound guy's life sucking, because it is possible to overcome these circumstances.  Just becuase a skilled poker player can win with a bad hand doesn't mean that getting a bad hand is not bad luck.

I think that misses the even larger point though - when the skilled poker player wins the game over all the hands he gets, we don't say "Oh yeah, he was lucky..." No, we say "Yeah, that is a skilled player". You can't just look at one hand, you have to look at the overall result. Those with skill know how to overcome the bad luck and exploit the good luck.

Someone with average skill, intelligence, willpower, whatever, will have average results. And that isn't a matter of luck either - that is a matter of them getting the results their skill and dedication achieved for them.

The larger point here is that the fundamental good luck we all enjoy is that we live in societies where your success or failure is largely dependent on your own abilities, rather than on your particular circumstances. There is enough opportunity in both Canada and the US that even those who are not fortunate enough to be born with that silver spoon still have enough opportunity to excel, or even have an average, middle class life.

Of course everyone's success is dependent on things outside their control as well, and their family background is part of that. But it is a small part compared to their own ability, at least in our modern societies anyway.

So again, having a full time job is not really a matter of luck. Just like winning a game of poker is not a matter of luck, even if there is plenty of luck involved.

[CountDeMoney]

Until they totally eliminate the mortgage interest deductions, you should have at least something in the way of a mortgage, even if it's a little one that has a negligible impact on your expenses.

If I really want deductions I will just donate money to charity.

lol, like there are any charities out there you'd shovel that much money to.

[Berkut]

I think DGullers poker analogy really does an excellent job of ullustrating just what I mean.

Bad poker players will lose at poker, and say "Man, I just don't have any luck!" and focus on those bad hands where they couldn't draw to that inside straight, and think "Yeah, I lost because I was just not lucky!"

Good poker players just keep winning the bad players money, and they don't do it because they are so damn lucky, but because they know how to mitigate the bad hands, and make their opponenets pay on the good hands, and how to tell the difference between the two.

The outcome, however, is rarely in doubt. Those who are better will do better than those who are not as skilled. And that has nothing to do with luck, even if there is a lot of randomness in the mechanics of the game.

[Barrister]

Berkut, I don't know your family background, and don't wish to pry about it.

I would suggest money though has little to do with it.  I know plenty of people raised in poverty, but by parents who taught their children the value of hard work and stressed education, and whose children have done very well.

The kids who hardly have a chance are those who taught their children how to live on welfare, taught their children that school is not important, that it's okay to get drunk out of your mind at 2 in the afternoon.  And lets not forget those children born with brain damage due to pre-natal substance abuse.



As to DGuller's poker analogy - it works when you consider that you only get one hand of cards to play.  Over a whole series of games the cards do tend to average out and skill can begin to show.  But you don't get a whole series of lives to live - you only get one.  As a result it takes a hell of a lot of skill to win when your hand is a 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 of different suits.

[alfred russel]

How does the poker analogy even work? The circumstances you are born into define who you are. Maybe some stuff is innate, but I don't think I would have the same values, etc. if I was born in precolumbian mesoamerica.

[garbon]

How does the poker analogy even work? The circumstances you are born into define who you are. Maybe some stuff is innate, but I don't think I would have the same values, etc. if I was born in precolumbian mesoamerica.

What value is there in saying someone is lucky to not have been a precolumbian mesoamerican?

[alfred russel]

How does the poker analogy even work? The circumstances you are born into define who you are. Maybe some stuff is innate, but I don't think I would have the same values, etc. if I was born in precolumbian mesoamerica.

What value is there in saying someone is lucky to not have been a precolumbian mesoamerican?

Depending on your personality and role in society, it could have been pretty sweet.

What I was getting at is that who we are is a product of our environment. It doesn't make so much sense to compare a person's outcome in life to whether they were a "good" or "bad" poker player.

[DGuller]

I think DGullers poker analogy really does an excellent job of ullustrating just what I mean.

Bad poker players will lose at poker, and say "Man, I just don't have any luck!" and focus on those bad hands where they couldn't draw to that inside straight, and think "Yeah, I lost because I was just not lucky!"

Good poker players just keep winning the bad players money, and they don't do it because they are so damn lucky, but because they know how to mitigate the bad hands, and make their opponenets pay on the good hands, and how to tell the difference between the two.

The outcome, however, is rarely in doubt. Those who are better will do better than those who are not as skilled. And that has nothing to do with luck, even if there is a lot of randomness in the mechanics of the game.

The problem is that you're taking my analogy, and drawing a completely different conclusion than I intended.  The reason I brought in poker analogy is that it is precisely the game where good luck can easily overcome good skill for a pretty long duration.  In poker, a mediocre player who runs well will easily crush a shark who runs badly.  Conversely, an average player will lose if he gets bad cards, but even if he is average, he is still unlucky.  He's not any less or more deserving of good results than the average player who gets AA all the time.

Yes, on average, both players will get average cards, and skill will win out.  However, actual poker games are what they are, they're not statistical average.  I think you vastly overestimate the role of skill in short term run, which made you draw the unintended conclusions from my analogy.

[Berkut]

But life is not a short term run by definition - it is a very long term run.

Your initial hand is only that - the hand you start with. You are not doomed to only being as good as the hand you start life with, not in America anyway. There is plenty of social and economic mobility available.

So yeah, I am drawing a completely different conclusion than you intended - that is the point. Your analogy doesn't lead to the conclusion you intended because life is not a single hand of cards, but lots and lots and lots of hands of cards. And skill does in fact win out over luck of the draw, MUCH more often than not.

To the extent that results are driven by luck, all of our "luck" to be born into a society with excellent (relative) social and economic mobility vastly outweighs the luck of where you are born within that society.

Of course there are outliers -some people are so unlucky that no amount of subsequent good luck will matter. And some people will make it regardless, because theya re lucky enough to be the kids of Bill and Melinda Gates or whatever.

But overall, for most people, having a full time job is not a matter of luck, but a matter of work ethic, intelligence, and ability.

[Barrister]

Whatever Berkut.  It's just a different perspective - there's no way to statistically "prove" how much a person's success comes down to "luck".

As a philosphical point I try to see myself as being very lucky in life.  It keeps me humble and gives me perspective. 

[Berkut]

Berkut, I don't know your family background, and don't wish to pry about it.

Pry all you like, I don't mind in the least.

I would suggest money though has little to do with it.  I know plenty of people raised in poverty, but by parents who taught their children the value of hard work and stressed education, and whose children have done very well.

So do I, actually. Not my parents, but I know many who have done just that. No question that there is a cultural aspect of how you raise your kids, what values you instill in them, etc., etc.

However, it isn't ironclad - you have plenty of examples of people whose parents did not instiall those values, and yet realized them anyway, and the reverse as well, of course - plenty of people who do the right things by their kids, and they still turn out to be losers.

The kids who hardly have a chance are those who taught their children how to live on welfare, taught their children that school is not important, that it's okay to get drunk out of your mind at 2 in the afternoon.

Wait, I thought you said you didn't know my background???

I don't want to paint TOO bleak a picture (because lord knows there are worse examples than my own), but lets just note that I have two older brothers who are both alcoholics, drug addicts, and if they lived anywhere near you, you would have an extensive and long lasting professional relationship with both of them. In their cases, anyone would look at them, look at my parents, and think "Yeah, that figures".

On the other hand, I have one sister who pretty much got lucky and dodged that because she was fortunate enough to meet a great guy after she dropped out of high school who adores her, and works his ass off to make a very good life for them and their children. Absent that, I wonder how she would have turned out.

My youngest sister went more my route - saw her older brothers, the drugs, the booze, the jail, and responded with "No fucking way, that isn't going to be me..." and is now a nurse in NYC, very typical middle/upper class lifestyle.

So yeah, results vary enough even within a single consistent environment that IMO it is clear that the driving variable is not environmental in most cases, but rather the individual.

  And lets not forget those children born with brain damage due to pre-natal substance abuse.

Now we are getting into the realm of those who have a sitty enough starting hand that they really are fucked. But statistically, they are a small enough total as to not effect the overall average results much - nor has it gotten worse because the economy stinks, so not really relevant to the claim that if you have a full time job today (as opposed to say 10 years ago)you are lucky.

As to DGuller's poker analogy - it works when you consider that you only get one hand of cards to play.  Over a whole series of games the cards do tend to average out and skill can begin to show.  But you don't get a whole series of lives to live - you only get one.  As a result it takes a hell of a lot of skill to win when your hand is a 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 of different suits.

Your life is a series of hands. You are not doomed to the one hand you get. You get new hands all the time.

You find a great job because you bump into some guy at a party.

You get laid off because your company is bought by someone else.

You meet some awesome woman who makes you incredibly happy.

Your mother is killed in a car accident.

Life is not a single hand of cards, but an almost infinite number of hands. You have to deal with the good and the bad.