A day in the life of the self made man.

[haele]

115. Because there is no common definition for success -

and not everyone can be a manager, or a business owner, or a farmer/landowner.
What do you do when you have a couple dozen million people left over after you've filled up all the "successful" jobs that the economy and the environment can sustain? What do you do when more than half the "work" available that needs to be done actually only requires part-time workforce to be hired - so if you had an intelligent and generous employer (looking at the negative long-term implications hiring only as needed which results in an inconsistent workforce and quality), they'd hire you full time and eat the margin when in terms of production, when they only needed you for three-quarters of the time at best...

From experience; most of the cubicle critters I know have a lot of time in between tasks when an office or company hires to the most efficient level between quality of work and level of workforce; that is why when businesses look at the bottom line and "downsize" to the point that the few remaining workers are overwhelmed with work, the quality of work and the capabilities of the workforce nosedive and those businesses usually find themselves losing money.

As for success itself - c'mon, it's it's not just about money and things. It's about the ability to be happy with what you're surviving on.

Some people want to live in familiar, safe and solid luxury, with lots of "stuff" around them. Some people are happier with nothing to tie them down, living for three hots and a cot, going from place to place whenever they feel like them.
Some people prefer to work for wages, letting someone else take responsibility for handling the bookkeeping and the business. Some people like to be in control of every minute detail.
Some people are artisans, who feel successful only when there is a tangible result. Some people could care less about a result, they're just happy feeling like there's something for them to wake up for in the morning.
Some people do best at hard, physical labor. Some people are best at thinking labor, mental puzzles of numbers or words that they pass hours and hours going over with. Some people like having a lot of people around them, some people prefer to be alone. Some are wicked smart, some are intelligent but unwise, some are wise but un-intelligent, some need to have their hand held crossing the room.

Some people just need a job that matches their abilities. A person who is best suited to be a farmer is not going to do as well at the job if they're a technical consultant for a bank's regional department.

All these "feelings" and abilities factor into how best a person can work in the environment they are in and how they personally would define success. It might not be how popular culture or you personally would define success, but there it is.

If you are defining "successful" as the ability to make a living and retire with enough that SSI is gravy and you don't really need any "help" from the government other than a mortgage program or student loan or so that you can fairly easily pay off, you're defining the financial success of the top 2% of the US population. In 1970, you'd probably be defining the financial success of the top 50% of the US population.

So... looking at the actual issue, there are a lot of factors other than what an individual does with government help that define "successful" Once you get your finger on it, you've pretty much answered your own question.

Haele