I get what you're saying. It's true that some very lucky people manage to escape their unprivileged position early enough in their careers such that it is not a

I get what you're saying. It's true that some very lucky people manage to escape their unprivileged position early enough in their careers such that it is not a problem for them. Their career growth trajectory has given them a constant source of optimism which has given them confidence in their abilities and their future. That's because they believe there is a strong correlation between talent, work and success - That's the source of their confidence. I think if you look at unprivileged, highly skilled, talented people who've been struggling to break through glass ceilings for a decade or two (in spite of delivering high quality work), then, you will get a better picture of what it means to be 'unprivileged'. These people are not confident in the future because they don't believe that there is a correlation between talent, work and success. Yet they are the most highly capable and they would have the best chance of succeeding if given the chance. But they probably won't be so lucky. They will be the most discriminated against of all. The consequences of being discriminated against in the past will be used as a basis to discriminate against them in the future. "We should not give them the opportunity because they have no track record of financial success." (Nevermind that they do have a track record of excellence in their fields but the financial proceeds of their work were captured by others higher up in the hierarchy).