This is the land of opportunity. College is readily available for anyone qualified, as are trade schools for education in technical subjects. The military is always hiring. Those who have found success through hard work are penalized with a progressive tax scale, so the better you achieve, the more you are punished. These taxes do in part go to worthwhile services, such as policing, but also to harebrained social experiments, such as subsidizing the poor. In case you haven't been to Skid Row lately, be advised that poor people smell like kitty litter. Show me a poor person who got straight-A's in school. More likely they had sexual relations at a young age, entreating their primal urges at the expense of taking their education seriously. Racial disparity is not an excuse. Minorities in underperforming schools have more opportunities than whites because they have less competition in achieving a high percentile ranking in their class. The drive to achieve is cultural, exemplified by the glorious Asians, who work incredibly hard at difficult subjects such as mathematics and engineering and require no subsidy. Being "born rich" is a misnomer since taxes are extracted on income, not assets.
Therein the politics of "whose fault is it" come around, where there are people who think it is that they are born with unchangeable genes and that IQs matter, as it gauges natural levels of talent...
Or people who think that the influences of the environment around these people were the factors that lead to them not having a good understanding of the world.
I think it's a combination of both, where anyone can become learned with enough time, it's just that some will do it slower than others.
It sounds great and easy in practice but you're under-estimating how difficult it appears to be for some.
Not everyone is educated on contraceptives by the age that they have sex, and the younger they are when they have the baby, the worse the baby's chances are of a brilliant rearing. The younger someone is the less experience they have, thus the less likely they'd be to make an intelligent decision around their natural impulses for the D, non?
Single motherhood does actually correlate to underachievement. The younger the mother, the more likely they end up as a single mother.
Single mother parents have been shown to be more likely to rear children who suffer through child abuse or are also unsuccessful in life. It is called a cycle of poverty, after a while things get bad enough (and it's less than 50% that the threshold starts having horrible effects), that the country slowly starts dying.
Abused children also show a much higher likelihood of developing mental illnesses, including many of the ones associated with criminal activities. Worse yet, with more of the population considered to be less understanding and educated individuals, the less likely it is that any of these people receive help, compounding the effect later on if they manage to rear their own children (it's expected these children also have a higher chance of abuse, because for the parent it was normalized).
