Taken literally the idea romanticizes poverty, which the evidence flatly contradicts, but there is a real truth hiding inside it once you realize that the helpful kind of less was never less money: it was less indulgence, less cushioning, and more being needed
Source ↗
👁 0
💬 0
It is one of the most satisfying stories we tell: the child who grew up with little, who went without, and who outstripped the pampered rich kids to build a life of substance. There is a real truth buried in it, but the story is also dangerous, because taken literally it romanticizes deprivation in a way the evidence flatly contradicts. Growing up with less money is not, on average, an advantage. It is a serious disadvantage. So the claim needs unpacking with some care, because the grain of trut
Comments (0)