Survey finds that most British people are perfectly happy to

>>1484086
Because the majority are now below what we perceive as average, as are their peers. The Average of the 60s-90s is the new Successful.

>>1484092

So wanting to be average is now aspirational?

>>1484086
Notice all the Leavers and UKIP voters. kek

>>1484154

The numbers are remarkably uniform in general, really. Lack of ambition seems to be pretty pervasive.

I was pretty surprised that the number of Conservative and Labour voters saying that being average is 'OK' is identical. I would've thought that many more Labour voters would have agreed.

File: genres.jpg (48KB, 538x538px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 538x538px

honestly they don't know how low the bar they need to jump over is.

So few people ever actually show up to coaching and training events, and of those fewer still challenge themselves to apply beyond the classroom.

Pareto's laws hold, and the peoples success is not a normal distribution but a log-normal distribution.

These are book sales. So we're already cutting out huge portions of the subhuman populace. Even among the "elite" reading class we have this divide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv7LwFPp3SY

>>1484124
Unironically yes. A majority will fail and not reach that goal, if you are "average" as we saw it when growing up, you are the rare few at the top 10%.

They can live off the dole, no need to work. Why work when you get a living for free?