Second, it unfairly vilifies an entire group of people. How? If someone wins the lottery, obviously it isn't vilifying them to say that it was predominantly lu

Second, it unfairly vilifies an entire group of people. How? If someone wins the lottery, obviously it isn't vilifying them to say that it was predominantly luck. If someone by chance invests in a mining company that the very next day discovers a rich deposit in a mine though played out, is it vilifying the investor to praise their luck? The author believes that most great wealth is attributable to luck. You can argue that this is not true. But if it is true, it's certainly not vilifying anyone to make the suggestion. And finally, it allows people to feel good about doing little. No, it allows people to feel good about not being rich. It also makes them less likely to blindly worship the wealthy. Human beings are, on the whole, naturally productive. They want to contribute, and feel needed. It's human nature. It's not like everyone will suddenly sit on their hands if we were to find out that becoming rich is mostly luck. Not getting cancer is mostly luck too, but that doesn't mean people don't take prudent measures to reduce their risk.