[radicalbyte]

Within a nation this is a very good argument for taxation and wealth redistribution. You have to give those kids born to poorer parents a chance. It's better for them, it's better for you, it's better for everyone.

It's also what Gates is kind of doing - redistributing his wealth to help the people who most need it.

[TangoTrotFox]

This seems reasonable but there are some issues here as well. For instance it seems that if you gave somebody a huge amount of money, that they'd likely be able to pull themselves out of poverty. I mean, by definition, they are immediately placed in the upper or middle upper class. Unfortunately this has shown to be ineffective. For instance of all individuals who receive large windfalls of money, or win the lottery, some 70% [1] manage to end up bankrupt!

Giving money to people is not really enough to solve problems. We can see this same problem in our education system for instance. US education has been slipping quite severely by most metrics, yet we spend much more per student than most of anywhere in the world excepting something like 3 nations (Luxembourg, Switzerland, Norway IIRC).

While obviously the wealth of wealthy households is undoubtedly useful for child rearing, I think more important is the education that these households instill in their children. I grew up very poor and in an urban area. And I know that, undoubtedly, what helped me more than anything else was the 'Big Brothers and Big Sisters' program. I think the lessons and learning from there set me up for success far more so than having some money splashed my parent's way would have.

[1] - https://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2016/01/why_do_...