This is a good article, and the final paragraphs about the Norwegian model are welcome in a world where so many articulate criticisms fail to offer any positive

This is a good article, and the final paragraphs about the Norwegian model are welcome in a world where so many articulate criticisms fail to offer any positive suggestions. I am not sure about the following paragraph though: > For example, rich parents may pull special levers to get their kids into hyper-select schools, or elite internships, or exclusive entry-level jobs. In so doing, they—in effect— snatch precious opportunities away from the less fortunate. > Parenting doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game, but it often is. I find the zero-sum assumption here a little concerning. In terms of classical economics, it is a good short term assumption (there are only so many Internships or select schools) but a bad long term assumption (high profits will incentivise more school to open up; though I haven't thought about Internships enough to say either way). Is there any evidence that these opportunities are relatively inelastic in the long run? Or that the equilibrium is relatively zero-sum? i.e. that rich families find a way to take advantage in a way that puts others down long term?