The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[redsimon]

People who are successful don't recognise the huge amount of luck involved in getting to where they are today.

They tend to think they are talented and hard working.

Thinking every successful person is lucky seems a bit of a comfort blanket to me.

Most successful people do work hard and are smart to get where they are.  And many appreciate when they have been given advantages and "run good" as it were.

Generally when people go from ordinary to extraordinary it will involve an atypical amount of luck though. Think about Bill Gates going to school somewhere where the parents could afford to give the school a computer. (Outliers section paraphrased)

I'm not sure why hard working and "talented" people cannot also be lucky.

For people who believe in talent, and when I say this, I don't mean, Fredrick plays seventeen instruments so he is musically talented, I mean, that 3 year old just picked up a brush and painted the Mona Lisa talented. Do people that believes in these sorts of "gifts" or whatever you would describe them as go around testing different things, or do they think they aren't talented? I was talking with a friend about the possibility of being musically gifted but never finding out. What about footballers who are "naturally talented"? Are they lucky? Coincidental hard workers?

I used to think I was "gifted" at maths. It turned out as soon as I stopped practicing then I wasn't very gifted all of a sudden.

It is often said Alex Ferguson is the best football manager in the history of the sport. It is also said if they had lost that cup tie at Oxford he would have been fired.

So, Mark Robbins stubs his toe or the Oxford keeper makes a fantastic save, Fergie never wins a single trophy at United.

He still possesses all the attributes that made him so successful, but wouldn't be seen as the best manager in football history.

The difference? Pure luck.

It was at Nottingham Forest ffs

[DaveShoelace]

Isn't this the old Nature vs Nurture question?

For me, no. This is about do you have enough control in your life to steer it in the direction you want, or is it mostly predetermined for you (by your upbringing OR your genetics).

Sorry to sound dense Baz, but if we take away upbringing and genetics, what's left?

What I am saying is your upbringing and genetics are both predetermined. So with that in mind, as an adult, do you still have control over your life, or are you on a course that was always mapped out for you?

[Woodsey]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

[nirvana]

To answer your question you kind of have to consider how many people with notionally 'good' genetics and a 'good' upbringing appear to achieve very little by most normal measures.

I'd expect the number of notional underachievers to rise and I think there's obvious linkages to the massive improvement in standards, conditions, health, wealth, education most of us will have experienced in our lifetimes. ie You don't have to achieve very much at all to be better off  - and in Maslow's terms - somewhat self actualised - compared to the vast majority of people living an adult life 50 years ago.

Surprised anyone wants to drive themselves incredibly hard to achieve a big gain materially whilst not gaining much in terms of wellbeing.

[arbboy]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

So there is no luck in being a sales rep and landing on a soft terrority for a firm where anyone could make sales for whatever reason but you look like the sales hero and get a promotion from a results orientated manager who gets a bonus based on your performance and feels loyal to you even though he doesn't understand variance or being results orientated?  The harder you work the luckier you get but there are huge elements of luck involved in every part of life.  The more times you are willing to roll the dice the more likely you are to ride out the swings but to say there is no luck involved in your career/business is pretty naive.

[RED-DOG]

Isn't this the old Nature vs Nurture question?

For me, no. This is about do you have enough control in your life to steer it in the direction you want, or is it mostly predetermined for you (by your upbringing OR your genetics).

Sorry to sound dense Baz, but if we take away upbringing and genetics, what's left?

What I am saying is your upbringing and genetics are both predetermined. So with that in mind, as an adult, do you still have control over your life, or are you on a course that was always mapped out for you?

Lol. Sorry Baz, you're still not making sense. If something or someone is not stopping you from doing what you want to do, then of course you have as much control over your life as anyone else. Why wouldn't you have, unless you're talking about fate or something?

Because of your upbringing, your genetics, your mindset or your personality, you might not choose to do something, but that doesn't mean you can't.

[AlunB]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

I'm stunned that you think this. I can think of literally hundreds of examples from mine and friends and colleagues lives where luck played a huge role from work to love to all kinds of things.

The way I met my fiancé is so absurdly fortunate I'm amazed we ever met at all.

[Woodsey]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

So there is no luck in being a sales rep and landing on a soft terrority for a firm where anyone could make sales for whatever reason but you look like the sales hero and get a promotion from a results orientated manager who gets a bonus based on your performance and feels loyal to you even though he doesn't understand variance or being results orientated?  The harder you work the luckier you get but there are huge elements of luck involved in every part of life.  The more times you are willing to roll the dice the more likely you are to ride out the swings but to say there is no luck involved in your career/business is pretty naive.

No because the weak rep will get found out eventually and binned, I know because that my job and what I do. I've been in the game over 20 years in a cutthroat environment, you get ups and downs but when the down comes the managers stick with the guy they know are good and the weak guy will be out the door in a flash.

But I know you are always right so knock yourself out and have the last word  

[Woodsey]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

I'm stunned that you think this. I can think of literally hundreds of examples from mine and friends and colleagues lives where luck played a huge role from work to love to all kinds of things.

The way I met my fiancé is so absurdly fortunate I'm amazed we ever met at all.

Ok I should add in the majority cases just to be accurate, yes there is always the odd lucky fuck, but I totally contest the amount of luck being portrayed here to the majority of people who are successful. Most would have got there eventually, try and try again and all that for the guys willing to put the work in..

[AlunB]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

I'm stunned that you think this. I can think of literally hundreds of examples from mine and friends and colleagues lives where luck played a huge role from work to love to all kinds of things.

The way I met my fiancé is so absurdly fortunate I'm amazed we ever met at all.

Ok I should add in the majority cases just to be accurate, yes there is always the odd lucky fuck, but I totally contest the amount of luck being portrayed here to the majority of people who are successful. Most would have got there eventually, try and try again and all that for the guys willing to put the work in..

I think this is basically the kind of answer Barry was looking for originally. That opinion, and it can only ever be an opinion, tends to be that shared by right wingers (both successful ones and not).

[AlunB]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.

No it's not, it's such a tiny part of society it's basically irrelevant in the whole scheme of things. I do agree however luck is a big part of sport, hence why it's not comparable to real life.

I'm stunned that you think this. I can think of literally hundreds of examples from mine and friends and colleagues lives where luck played a huge role from work to love to all kinds of things.

The way I met my fiancé is so absurdly fortunate I'm amazed we ever met at all.

Ok I should add in the majority cases just to be accurate, yes there is always the odd lucky fuck, but I totally contest the amount of luck being portrayed here to the majority of people who are successful. Most would have got there eventually, try and try again and all that for the guys willing to put the work in..

I tend to agree with that, but I think the difference between rich and poor is the number of times you can fail. If you don't have a safety net you can't afford to fail very often. Maybe we all get the same odds just some people get to place more bets than others?

[david3103]

Not sure what relevance this has to politics, other than the level of BS being spoken.

The 'sliding door' examples being offered as evidence are just laughable. Nobody knows how their life would have turned out if they had taken a different train, or path or whatever.

Life has so many randomising factors that luck has to play a part. But it impacts on all of us, and let's not forget that bad luck strikes all too.

What is certain is that it is possible for people from poor backgrounds to move up the wealth ladder. It's also possible for children of middle class, comfortable families to slip down it.




PS whilst the story about Mark Robbins saving Fergie's job is a popular one, it is apocryphal at best.

[AlunB]

Not sure what relevance this has to politics, other than the level of BS being spoken.

The 'sliding door' examples being offered as evidence are just laughable. Nobody knows how their life would have turned out if they had taken a different train, or path or whatever.

Life has so many randomising factors that luck has to play a part. But it impacts on all of us, and let's not forget that bad luck strikes all too.

What is certain is that it is possible for people from poor backgrounds to move up the wealth ladder. It's also possible for children of middle class, comfortable families to slip down it.




PS whilst the story about Mark Robbins saving Fergie's job is a popular one, it is apocryphal at best.

So what's your answer to the original question?

[Jon MW]

Question of the day

How much personal agency do you think the average person has today in the UK? If someone commits a crime, is that ever excusable because of their circumstances? If someone is born into a poor environment, are they poised to always stay that way? Is someone born into a privilaged rich environment, are they destined to have a good life?

Obviously there are outliers on both sides, but I'm talking about the majority here. When someone gets to, say, 30, how much of what their life has become been down to them, and how much their environment?

I ask this in a politics thread because there seems to be a very distinct difference in how people on the left and right view this.

Great question. Personally I think we are the masters of our own destiny and whilst we can be dis/advantaged by our surroundings it all comes down to character whether we succumb to or exceed.

pretty much the same as bobalike I think whether you fail or succeed is almost entirely down to (a) how talented or intelligent you are and (b) how hard you work.

It might make it a bit easier if you have a privileged background and you might get a few headstarts but ultimately I don't see much to show that each persons destiny is ultimately in their own hands.

[david3103]

Not sure what relevance this has to politics, other than the level of BS being spoken.

The 'sliding door' examples being offered as evidence are just laughable. Nobody knows how their life would have turned out if they had taken a different train, or path or whatever.

Life has so many randomising factors that luck has to play a part. But it impacts on all of us, and let's not forget that bad luck strikes all too.

What is certain is that it is possible for people from poor backgrounds to move up the wealth ladder. It's also possible for children of middle class, comfortable families to slip down it.




PS whilst the story about Mark Robbins saving Fergie's job is a popular one, it is apocryphal at best.

So what's your answer to the original question?

Which question do you want answering? I answered what I felt were the two key issues.
No, and errrm no.

Question of the day

How much personal agency do you think the average person has today in the UK? If someone commits a crime, is that ever excusable because of their circumstances? If someone is born into a poor environment, are they poised to always stay that way? Is someone born into a privilaged rich environment, are they destined to have a good life?

Obviously there are outliers on both sides, but I'm talking about the majority here. When someone gets to, say, 30, how much of what their life has become been down to them, and how much their environment?

I ask this in a politics thread because there seems to be a very distinct difference in how people on the left and right view this.