To think the system’s set up so the rich get richer and the poor get screwed?

[ThatGreenBear]

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how society is structured, and it feels like no matter how hard some people work, they’re always struggling, while others just seem to get wealthier with minimal effort. Whether it’s the tax system, housing market, or even access to education and opportunities, everything seems stacked in favor of those who already have money and power.

AIBU to think that the system is rigged to keep the wealthy at the top while making it incredibly hard for the rest of us to get ahead? Or is this just how life works and we should all just accept it? I’d love to hear others’ thoughts on whether the playing field is as unfair as it seems, or if it’s possible for anyone to get ahead with enough hard work.

It depends. I know one person who had three older aunts and uncles with no kids. They were all successful and as such left her a fortune. She doesn't work and has a huge house in a affluent area and is sending her three kids to private school. All the kids will have down payments for homes and she's invested in property which is increasing her worth. This is an extreme example but if you are born into money then you have a lifelong advantage. It's very difficult these days for most people to build up wealth as the cost of living is do expensive.

I do agree with this, of course generational wealth makes a huge difference, I'd be interested to see anyone who claims being born into a family with a lot of money of which you know you'll inherit property/assets/a chunk of money in the future from more than likely makes a huge difference; both to the opportunities afforded and to the 'risks' you can take with a safety net.

However I don't think it's impossible for people born into poverty to elevate themselves into a career that pays okay.

Every rich person I know started rich.

Not me, I grew up on a massive council estate and became a teen mum, no silver spoon for me.

Why do you think so many very wealthy individuals like Paul Marshall, Banks etc seek control of the msm to influence politics so heavily.

I would argue that an 18-20 year old can work an awful lot more hours than 12 a week even on top of uni (some degrees like medicine excepted of course).

It’s also where the generational thing comes in. If you can’t afford to go to Uni then I would be working to ensure my kids could stay at home for a reasonable rent so they could. Then if they do the same their kids could go to a better Uni so on it goes.

There’s also life choices. A lot of the people I know who have done well have chosen jobs with accommodation for a number of years whilst young. Or worked abroad - our old babysitter is currently 22 and doing a few years on cruise ships working in the gym. According to her Mum she should have a fair bit saved up afterwards. That’s on top of going to the local college to do sports science 3 days a week so she could live at home and work part time.

The percentage of tax you pay goes up as you earn more. The bottom rate is 0% and the top rate is 45%. The top 1% pay 30% of all income tax.

I did too, in fairness I wonder if the views people have of what constitutes 'rich' are the same or different depending on our backgrounds etc.

And from the opposite end of the spectrum if you start work at 16 and do 6 hours per week on minimum wage you will have almost £10k saved up by the time you are 20. Do 12 hours a week from 18-20 and invest in a LISA and that’s a whopping big chunk of a flat deposit.

Thats pretty much what my 24 year old did and he’s now saved 70k.
He worked as a school cleaner during A levels.
He is fortunate to live in an affluent household and attended a good comprehensive in a decent area and was able go university.

So many apologists for an economic system which, while flying an 'opportunity for all' banner, actively marginalises others by design. As a PP said: it's a feature, not a bug.

Those of us in our mid to late 40s and above who have "worked hard" for our acquired security really must not kid ourselves that our efforts are in any way greater than the efforts and sacrifices of those who are currently striving to achieve aforementioned security for themselves and their families. To suggest this reveals such a lack of awareness.

As a teacher I meet parents who work all the hours available yet barely make ends meet. They work hard and make excellent, responsible choices all day, every day.

The "When I... / In my day,... / I left school and..." anecdotes fail to acknowledge any relevant class analysis. My own example proves this:
When I went to university to do teacher training (having studied at evening classes and worked ft in a minimum wage job for years as an immigrant to gain necessary qualifications) I attended lectures and placements 30 hours per week, studied, and flipped my minimum wage job to 30 hours at evenings and weekends. I "worked hard". I gained a 'quick' basic qualification alongside (another year of evening classes) in an alternative trade and supplemented my initial teaching salary with more work at weekends. I was able to take advantage of relatively low rents in scummy house-shares (absolutely buying a house for the landlord as a PP said -usually an acquaintance whose parents had been able to provide a deposit and act as guarantors) to make some savings and eventually accrue enough for a small deposit of my own. Back then, even at the top of the first 'boom', two relatively modest salaries were sufficient to buy a house at what was then considered to be a massively inflated price on a no-go estate. Times have changed. There is no comparison between what our "hard work" in the 90s and 00s could achieve, and now.
Before the 90s? You were all l a u g h i n g. Hard work is hard work, but the rewards are no longer what they were. It's disrespectful to suggest that we somehow worked harder.

I’m in my 70s. Society was very different when I was young, there was a far smaller middle class, the big majority of people would have been defined as working class. Getting a council house, was for many, the first time they’d had indoor plumbing! There were very few welfare benefits, families pooled resources just to get by.

We didn’t climb the career ladder, left school at 15, no uni, just jobs, had our DC young. We both had to work, but the opportunities were there for our children. The old working class diminished as more and more of their children born in the 70s and 80s became better educated, and entered professions. We were the first generation where large numbers of ordinary people became home owners. Like many others, our DC, and their partners, have been relatively successful in their careers, and as it continues, the next generation reaps the benefits. A bit of luck is always needed, but a bit of effort helps too.

There will always be outliers like WhitneyBaby who have achieved security without 'silver spoons'. Good for you, WB. How do we stop pedistallising such anomalies in an effort to defend what in my view is the indefensible, systemic stacking of odds against the majority of young people growing up without the undeniable advantages already established upthread?

You need a good education, it’s harder for poorer people to get a good education but not impossible.

That's how money works. Those with money generate more money by doing absolutely nothing simply through interest.
Those struggling borrow and have to pay more as a result.
It's messed up.
But it teaches people to be careful and make good decisions. The people is truly lets down is those who can't make good decisions through circumstances and bad mental health, that's the ones who are truly let down by the system.

It's interesting to see people pointing out rags to riches stories to demonstrate that everyone can benefit from a capitalist system. The reason rags to riches stories are so compelling is precisely because they are relatively rare. People with generational wealth simply have their money working for them without really having to work themselves. And then there was the trickle down economics. You give the wealthy incentives so that they will share the wealth down, but they simply keep more of it for themselves. Certain areas of work like food and restaurants rely exclusively on part time employment and zero hour contracts, and politicians like this. Because it artificially inflates employment numbers. On paper people have jobs even if they don't earn anything. Then there's the assmption that everyone has a stable home, with parents encouraging education. Let's not forget sheer dumb luck. Landing that first job, meeting the right person, having the right network. There are so many things wrong with the assumption that anyone can make it.

I had a pt time job at 16, for about a month. I had to give it up because anything I earned was taken away from the jsa my dad got after he was medically retired. Lots of young people have to contribute to family finances once earning, they can't just earn and save. That's a privilege for the better off. Then even if they do manage to get into university they don't have parents who can guarantee their housing, so are forced into staying at home and attending local unis with less opportunities and their work earnings still have to contribute to the household. The system is set up to keep poor people down. It's not impossible to get out of it, but it is a lot harder for those who don't have money.

Yes, children with severe SEN absolutely don't have the same opportunities. But 'milder' ones arent always held back - Richard Branson and Alan Sugar are dyslexic, one of my colleagues as a physio is visually impaired.

My Mum, my Dad and my best friend all grew up in abusive households, all have gone on to be extremely sucessful. These circumstances I absolutely appreciate make it harder to succeed, but not impossible. Positive examples help children believe they can acheive even against the odds, and we need to promote a sense of belief that people have some control over their futures. Otherwise it's just promoting hopelessness and trapping children in poverty. I see this amongst my daughters friends, there are children living in very similar conditions with parents with similar jobs, but very different attitudes to learning, school etc. At 9, it feels like you can predict the outcomes for these children, although I really hope I'm wrong, as some are very bright and have great potential

Yes the Internet will have changed things. Not sure about careers in schools though, based on my year 12 and year 10 sons.

I wish people would stop coming out with shite like you make your own luck though. I have absolutely busted a gut, been to uni 4 times and am educated to postgrad level, worked really hard to get to hod level in teaching then my undiagnosed adhd led me to burn out and I realised I'd married the wrong man who also had undiagnosed asd and was masking. I did everything right, educated, worked hard, got a mortgage on my own in my 20s, married and bought a bigger house before having kids etc and now I'm a divorcee living in a rented house and claiming UC because my local government wage is so low. I'll only ever own a house because my mum died earlier this year and probate will be granted soon. I went back to teach full time when my kids were both 5 months old. Enlighten me to what else I could have done, please?

YABU for having only just noticed.

But what is the alternative to a capitalist society? Communism? This has been proven not to work for anyone, as it reduces aspiration - why work hard and have a stressful job to be paid the same as someone with a low stress low qualifications.

The brutal truth is that some people are brighter, better people skills, more aspirational, more creative. People need a combination of ability, luck and hard work to succeed.

At school there is often now a 'we are all winners' approach to sports days etc, which doesn't prepare children adequately for the real world. They are led to expect that everyone will acheive the same, which then leads to disappointment. At my daughters school sports day, she won every race, and then got comments from other children 'you should have run slower and let me win one' 'you are a show off' etc, as if success is a bad thing. She is not boastful, she hates compliments, and I could then see why, there was almost a level of shaming in her doing well, and that's evident on here.

We need to celebrate success in all it's forms, not begrudge it.

As @EasternEcho says, rags-to-riches stories such as Bushmillsbabe's parents', and the wearing-extremely-thin tales of Alan Sugar / Richard Branson's success are vanishingly rare.
Why do we insist on upholding and defending a system that has us searching for anomalies and outliers in it's defense.
And as for the "Well, what do you want -communism?!" retort; I come from a country which up until relatively recently enjoyed a socialist government flirting with market economics. Worked pretty well and is lauded the world over for its equality. Sure, there are flaws but the gaps are now widening at an alarming rate since it embraced an all-out capitalist model. Inequality is inherent in the system.

Exactly this.

I'm rich and getting richer. Vote labour. Don't mind paying taxes. Give quite a bit away. What else am I supposed to do?

But I must have played 100 games of monopoly against my sister. I’ve probably won 90 of them. She’s older than me and perfectly smart. I’m just much much better at monopoly…

Twas ever thus

Is it even possible to move away for uni without parents financially supporting you these days? All I see is stuff about the loan not being enough to cover rent, let alone food, utilities, phone. Therefore meaning the WC students have to work more hours, which will have a detrimental impact on their studies, whilst the MC ones get mummy and daddy to send them money so they can focus on their course.
Why don't we have free education like in other countries? That would massively level the playing field!