Suppose you very crudely modelled the spectrum of American attitudes on this topic using some kind of bell curve. I don't think many people across the pond realise just how far apart the American and Australian bell curve means would be. These kind of "the truth is unknowable" truisms may sound wise but don't really teach us very much about reality.

On average, Australian culture views anyone, who even passively demonstrates any significant level of achievement, with a high degree of suspicion. Australians make a national sport of cutting down people who excel in any way. Sure, there are sub-cultures there which can vary considerably from this general trend, but even they feel the influence of this prevailing attitude. The end outcome is that Australians tend to go to considerable effort to hide the things that may single them out as excelling among their peers, and emphasise those things which make them similar. (A few months ago the CEO of the most powerful retail company in Australia gave an interview attempting to reduce public ire at their price gouging tactics, dressed in the uniform of a shelf stacker from their supermarket chain. I'm not saying this could not have happened in America, but there it would have probably been seen as a stunt or a statement... in Australia dressing any other way would have raised eyebrows, and in fact most people initially failed to even notice it for the PR manipulation that it was.)

Geographic proximity will always play a role in bringing cultural norms together, and while the US is a big place, the US population throughout the 20th century had incredible mobility, going where the jobs were, which helped to tighten up that bell curve.

I think we (Australians) have a real lack of effort=success stories to draw from; if someone has wealth it was probably inherited.

In the US if you have wealth it's plausible that you had a great idea that got acquired, or a great skill.

In the US, the most likely cause of someone being wealthy is that their parents were wealthy.

But almost every wealthy American tells a story about how they did it by themselves, ignoring the schools that they attended, the services which were available to them, the people their parents associated with, and the ability to make high-risk investments because they had a built-in security net.

80% of US millionaires are first generation

Yet economic mobility, measured in terms of the likelihood that you die in a different income decile than you were born into, is lower in the USA than almost anywhere else in the developed world.

How to reconcile? It's fairly easy ... there aren't that many millionaires. The US has a society, culture and economy that allows for their occurence perhaps "better" than most other places. But this doesn't reflect the likely economic pathway that most of the population experiences in life.

The deciles are much further apart and the ceiling is massive. Compare the medians of all the countries (the US is at or near the top) then compare the 90th percentile and the US is heads and shoulders over the next highest.

1 in 12 Americans are millionaires.

Which proves that talking about millionaires is no longer that socially relevant thanks to inflation. Somehow ten-millionaire doesn't have quite that ring though.

So what? Economic mobility measurements remain vastly more indicative of the experience of 11 in 12 Americans.

America is good at generating millionaires (which ain't what it used to be)! News at 11!

There are many examples of Australians that have started middle class or even poorer and become wealthy (multi millionaires, a few billionaires) through their own business efforts.

What's lacking is a general habit of boasting about this, being wealthy, letting others in the country (ie. yourself) know about it.

You can find first generation pretty wealthy Australians in trucking, factory ownership, real estate, mining, warehouse volume sales, etc. Of those the ones most likely to be flash about their cash would be the real estate crowd, success in house sales is hard to come by without prominent self promotion.

Sure, I don't disagree that they exist as people, but as prominent stories in the culture they generally don't; outside of Lindsey fox I can't think of any...

Real estate wealth is a bit prominent, bit doesn't really have the same tone as designing or building something, more a reflection of our current dirt obsession.

You used a shit example with the Woolies CEO - he was immediately absolutely reamed on every medium because of the sheer transparency of the stunt - him in his shirt with name tag in an empty shop and then chucking a wobbly when he didn’t like the questions. He blew it and he looked like a tool.

I find the obsession we have with saying we have a problem with success absolutely does not translate to my lived experience here. I see it on the national stage where the moment someone fucks up everyone piles on, but usually they’ve been on a path to being a flog for a long time anyway and they need, at the very least, a reality check.

Think how much better Elon musk’s headspace could be if one person in his circle had told him ‘you are mortal’ regularly along his journey of multiple triumphs

Alright, settle down. The only sources I saw laying into him over it were the ones that make this kind of critique their life mission (professional or otherwise). As for the broad population, in as much as I could tell, it seemed they were upset about pretty much everything but the shirt, which is what I'm more interested in for the purposes of this discussion. Certainly, every person I spoke to about it hadn't even noticed it until it was pointed out, and the trend online didn't strike me as particularly different. I guess we'll have to disagree in that we got a different read of the situation.

Pretty much everything else you said confirms just how ingrained the attitude under discussion is in this country. Which is hardly surprising. If it was perceived as aberrant by the majority then it wouldn't be commonplace.

It's definitely a generalisation, but in my experience - and others who I've spoken to - this is broadly correct.

Matches my experience working with SF based companies.

But that's kind of my point. That might be the culture in SF, but that doesn't mean it is the culture everywhere in America. SF has its own distinct culture. And that is very different from the culture in, say, West Virginia.