Yes, it's quite nice

Alright, time to flesh out a couple things, lest this URL decay into a rant space. We’re still in serious-mode, so let’s discuss entitlement today.

The topic of entitlement is a precarious one to broach. I hesitated before mentioning it in my last post for two reasons: 1) it raises hackles regardless of your background, and 2) the side issues associated with it are nuanced and complicated.

But put quite simply, living in New York pushed this topic to the forefront of my mind because you can’t escape the disparity between the top and the bottom. The city is a small space so you see everything. Furthermore, the rich are richer and, often, the money is older. To a lesser degree DC had a similar effect, but it was less directly focused on economics and more on prestige of job (which, I think, is eventually related to economics).

You can’t quantify the concept of entitlement. It’s really a behavioral issue obliquely related to number-friendly stats like economics and race. But what you can do is cringe at the way it distorts a human being’s persona.

Wealth is not the inherent evil here. The ‘bad’ wealthy aren’t bad because they’re wealthy. Just as an Hispanic child of illegal immigrants in East LA can’t dictate or change his origins, neither can the caucasian daughter of a Manhattan Hedge Fund manager growing up in Darien, Connecticut. Furthermore, there’s nothing evil about being a ‘Manhattan Hedge Fund manager’ or a caucasian (I hope!) or a daughter (although I might argue differently at times).

What I’m talking about here are over-privileged individuals who are never taught as children--and never take the responsibility to learn as adults--that they’re just lucky and not inherently better. This starts with an upbringing defined by the best schools, the right type of sophisticated language spoken, interacting with influential people, and the leisure-time to process all this cherished information. What follows are overinflated and overhyped test scores (another post), the corresponding colleges to which they’re admitted (also another post), the types of graduate programs they’re admitted to, and the types of companies who hire them. Guess what, then you start back at the beginning with the next generation.

I want to state very clearly that this doesn’t apply to every individual born into wealth, who succeeds in school and thrives professionally. This applies only to individuals like that who don’t have the insight know that many others could accomplish similar things given the right opportunities and who consider this ‘success’ their birthright. That’s entitlement and that’s what I’ve seen too much of over the past couple years, especially in the young professional world of Manhattan.

I have nothing against wealth. I hope to be rewarded nicely (money being a significant part of that compensation) for my contribution to humanity’s progress. I plan to work for my wealth and I plan to enjoy it once it arrives. I, overall, align with capitalists who think that competition and reward are key ingredients to a thriving society. If someone who’s earned their wealth deems it important to invest in their children’s futures, that’s their prerogative and should be respected. The onus, however, first falls upon them to instill in their kids that they shouldn’t rely upon inherited privilege. Furthermore, once those kids transition to adulthood, it’s then the children’s responsibility to act in a way that consciously acknowledges the inequalities from which they’ve benefited. They don’t need to feel badly, they only need to be aware and respectful.

The side issues here are apparent and abundant. To name a few: nature vs. nurture, standardized testing, racial disparity, and broadly, education. Before I stick my neck out and spout about other things I don’t take the time to defend, I’m gonna put a cork in it.

Hopefully that wasn’t too ranty.

Rant rant. Ranty ranty roo. Raaaaant. Rant.

Amen.