This article was missing something to me. There are definitely inequities in “luck”: genetics, upbringing, etc., that one has no (or very little) influence over. The author uses this to draw the conclusion that, more or less, if you’re unlucky, that sucks. You had better hold your hand out and wait for someone with better luck to come by and help you. If that fails, you better head to the ballot and fill every bubble with a “D” next to it if you want any chance of a good life.<p>This is the learned helplessness that, IMO, fuels modern socialism here in the US. It’s the “there’s nothing I could have done” sentiment. It’s the “I wasn’t born into wealth” sentiment. Even if there are situations in life that confer one a disadvantage, why not make the best of them? Yes, it takes effort to have self control and make good decisions. That doesn’t mean people should be told that their circumstances in life provide them a “get out of jail free” card to not even attempt to exercise them. That type of thinking is defeatist.<p>I support a meritocracy. In accordance with that, I think we should aim to reduce the inequities that our social structure creates. Drawing attention to those pain points is useful and can be something we can improve upon. Telling entire swaths of people that their upbringing was unlucky and that’s the cause of their lot in life is not a recipe for empowering those people. So long as they are stuck waiting for someone else to fix their problems, IMO, they will never have them fixed.