There is a lot of theories sorrounding human nature and how we are always related to past life, the psychological-cord that affect us all and so forth. And the major theory around all these is the one on natural selection by Charles Darwin, who generalised a micro-observation into a ‘societal trend’ in explaining and justifying a lot of the evils of society, the competitions, the inequalities and so forth. I believe he was correct in 5 per cent of social nature of human beings and states, and economics, but not the 100 per cent he has been portrayed to be, rather the latter is of use by the interpreters and their patrons/or groups (the rich and so forth).
My theory is being born poor and amidst chaos and dangerous environment, that which demands sharp-mind , creativity and innovation to survive is actually, what makes people of poorer background the best of the breed, mental, physically and morally. It is the Nurture Selection, rather than The Natural Selection that accounts for the greater percentage of survivability and adaptability of the humans and animals; hence a smaller animal is more likely to survive harsher and dangerous environment than the big beasts, as it is by nature and nurture embedded with the necessity to be able to adapt in order to survive, through the application of innovative thinking, creative designs and out-of-the-box approach to life, unlike those born with a silver-spoon, they work always within-the-box, with more fear of rattling it, as the fear of unexpected is high, as they never had to adopt or deal with such conditions, they always had others dealing or taking the pain for them; hence Tories background of status-quo, and Labour innovative thinking. Hence, Indians millionaire with more successes than British ones.
The Ghettos or Project, provides a battleground to horn ones talents and skills in dealing with future trends and situations, and provides those raised within these spheres with more creativity and innovative thinking than those raised ‘within the box’, however, the latter are more ”leadership” as they are psychologically indoctrinated, through observations (seeing their parents controlling and giving orders; the ‘strata of classes’ in the household, the workers and the owners) , stories (told of their great ancestoral heritage of leadership and commands) and experiences (the simplest example, telling the butler what they need, perhaps) and so forth.
In short, I rather being born poor than rich, that old cliche, is as true as it can be.