> White high school dropouts are wealthier than Hispanic college graduates.
What I'm seeing is "people who have lived in America for a long time (European heritage) are on average wealthier than people who arrived fairly recently from third world countries (Hispanic heritage).
the article says absolutely nothing about immigration or third world countries. whether the paper controls for generational wealth i don't know.
>Why is that surprising?
...it's not to me since i understand we live in a structurally racist society
>Why is that a problem?
...the op asks about "privilege" not whether it's problematic. inherited wealth is most certainly privilege. i was only addressing that. there are many good reasons why privilege of this sort is problematic that i will not rehearse here (many smart people believe estate tax should be 100%; here is the guardian on it https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/24/utopia...).
So people work hard all their life for their wealth (maybe they earned a lot or maybe they were just frugal) and smart people think it is okay for the state to take 100% of it away? And you think that's okay? I just can't get my head around how anyone can think that's moral at all.
Oh yes, I see this is teh same Guardian writer that was defending Stalin so no surprises really.
>I just can't get my head around how anyone can think that's moral at all.
it's not rocket science: fair is value-system and ethics dependent. yes in a certain value-system and ethics it is not fair to give people advantages they didn't themselves earn. whether it's the right ethics/value-systems is up to you as an individual and us as a society to decide.
really obvious example: weight classes in combat sports.
