Now imagine you work two jobs to pay for food and shelter, you don't have a car or a library within walking distance, you couldn't afford any education beyond high school, and employers are statistically much more likely to ignore your resume because your name sounds black.
I admit that this sort of individual is particularly hard hit. There are programs that can help with different aspects of that situation, but no guarantee all will work with enough synchronicity to facilitate a full college education. That said, people who have it that rough also have nothing to lose. That's exactly the sort of person who could tolerate temporary homelessness if it means a better future. If the baseline goal is to improve their financial station, they should be going after trade skills, not full college. Trade skills could get them a stable career, a car, and solid resume. After that, they can consider going further, but there is definitely a path.
Of course there's a path, but it's a very difficult, not at all guaranteed path. Compare this path to a guy with money in the bank, a college degree, a decent resume, and 60 hours of spare time a week saying "just study a little and start applying to jobs, anyone can do it", and you can see why this thread seems so condescending. And imagine saying "you've got nothing to lose" to someone like this with a kid. This isn't a contrived scenario, there's millions of people like this in America. You might say it's irresponsible to have kids in this situation, but it's not quite that simple.
There's no doubt that we live in a better world than the past, but I don't think it's helpful to spread this idea that anyone can succeed if they just try hard enough. That's the goal, not the reality, and it will never be the case that everyone has an equal chance to succeed.
Depends on the kid, the family and the market. Willing to move for the job? No? Why not? Willing to work in a related field until you can get into your first choice? Why not? Willing to switch jobs 3 times in the first 5 years? Why not?
Folks have unequal chances for sure. But a significant fraction of the differences are, what they're willing to do.
These questions are still from the perspective of someone with money, education, and options. Imagine you're talking to someone below the poverty line, not your friend with a comfortable but unsatisfying job.
> Willing to move for the job?
Sure, how? What if I have no money and no credit? You're asking me to come up with a down payment on an apartment, transportation to another city, some kind of rental van or moving service, and a landlord who will take someone like me.
> Willing to work in a related field until you can get into your first choice?
Related field? I can't get anything above a minimum wage job. My "first choice" would be literally any job with predictable pay and hours.
> Willing to switch jobs 3 times in the first 5 years?
I'm working three jobs right now so my family can eat.
Again, this is not a contrived example. Millions of people live like this.
My buddy from down south moved to Silicon Valley, with his wife and newborn baby. They camped in the State Park in a tent while he interviewed. It took moving, taking an entry-level job and doing whatever was asked for him to succeed.