Seeker, another conclusion could be that in the unexplained 65% of cases there must indeed be an explanantion and we just haven't found it yet but if we do we might be able to make great progress in achieving our individual and collective potentials. A case for a 'seeker' perhaps?

While it sounds somewhat true, it's muddy at best. If children had access to in the order of one hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars inheritance, that is one or more business ventures right there paid up front, with bank confidence at the highest of levels. Now if another group of children had nothing, their chances of starting similar business would fall to one to three percent, or thereabouts, and even bar access to certain business ventures. Investing the money alone would grant some very tidy returns, whereas for the latter group, they are blocked from the same lucrative and successful avenues.

Gee, thanks Nicholas. You've ruined my day. It's bad enough for those of us with high IQs and the people skills of a 3B pencil to know how little our intelligence counts for. And we do, believe me. But to now learn that, from too much early contact with us, our children are likewise doomed to relative failure while the likes of Eddie McGuire prosper, is too bitter a pill altogether. Thanks. Thanks a lot.

tubley you are making some incredibly ignorant assertions. Foremost is the mistake that every child is 'created' equal and has equal opportunities. This is supported by your utopian metaphors and ideals. Success is not simply a choice. Psychology is not simply a choice. Individuals are composed of hugely complex inputs and outputs, for example, life experiences, ego, talent, chemical neurology, genetics etc. If you believe it is within every person's ability to be wealthy through robotic choices, you are an ignorant fool.

Annoyer-me, you must come from a well funded mental institution, perhaps The ABC. Your Elitist ridicule is becoming irritating.
If you were half as smart and intellectual as you claim, then your commentary would reflect the superior knowledge instead of castigating others with pathological and poisonous venom. Please go back to your spider web and eat buggs.
Or contribute something other than your hatred.

Annoying you, my dear -all, is precisely my intention. You are more than pleased to spew venomous (and illiterate, and illogical) abuse at, just off the top of my head, Bushbred, Scout, and Shonga, yet whine most piteously when someone takes your paranoid rantings to task. And sorry to disappoint you, but I'm self-employed, and reasonably lucratively so. No taxpayer funds my income. Another silly insult, and wrong yet again.

By the way, next time, try posting your rejoinder on a thread in which I've attacked you. It makes ever so much more sense.