That may explain your blind spot.
Not
my blind spot, but the blind spot of the people who think initial conditions completely determine outcomes. IOW, that anyone born into a standard middle-class family in the developed world will deterministically (barring some catastrophic accident or windfall) be successful, and those born into less optimal conditions will deterministically become failures. Reality is that (to speak somewhat mathematically) the starting conditions simply define a zero point, and
success or failure should be measured relative to that point. So it's perfectly possible to be born with all the supposed advantages, yet become a miserable failure.
Essentially, the question is a math problem. Trying to understand it from anecdote or from personal experience clouds judgment.
OK, I do understand math. Formulate it as a math problem, figure out how to post it (I can easily cut & paste LaTeX), and I'll have a look.
Put another way, Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average, is a fictional place.
I don't see the relevance. Surely what all the posters are saying about their success being due to their advantageous starting conditions equates to "all the children are perfectly average".
(And as an aside, I've never really understood the problem with there being a community in which all children are above average. It's simply a matter of selection, in the way that say all MIT students are above average in math, or all professional basketball players are above average in athletic ability.)
For starters, I gave you many a chance to explain yourself better.
Sorry, but I think the problem is not my explaining, but your lack of comprehension, real or pretended.
PS: Reflecting on your comment about the PC thread, I begin to think I may have done you a wrong in supposing that you were pretending to a lack of comprehension in order to create an argument. ('Trolling', IOW) I now suspect the lack may be real, since it should be obvious that what I've written on that thread re correct use of words has been simply to poke holes in the argument that PC terms like 'Native American' spring from a desire for accuracy.