I&#x27;ve spent lots of time in India, surrounded by people earning far less than what American hipsters call a &quot;living wage&quot;. Yet these folks weren&#x27;t dead!<p>Key graph: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;economix.blogs.nytimes.com&#x2F;2011&#x2F;01&#x2F;31&#x2F;the-haves-and-the-have-nots&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;economix.blogs.nytimes.com&#x2F;2011&#x2F;01&#x2F;31&#x2F;the-haves-and-t...</a> (THESE NUMBERS ARE ADJUSTED FOR PURCHASING POWER.)<p><i>Sometimes one is able to get out of poverty on their own, but that often requires, besides hard work, plenty of luck.</i><p>The role of luck is overstated. Here&#x27;s a thought experiment. Suppose we import 1 million Gujuratis, all of whom have income below the 95&#x27;th percentile of India. Fast forward 20-30 years. Do you still think that this group of a million people - having an average level of luck due to the law of large numbers - will have the same level of income as a similar group of American poor people?<p>Actually it&#x27;s not a thought experiment. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.economist.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;christmas-specials&#x2F;21683983-secrets-worlds-best-businesspeople-going-global" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.economist.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;christmas-specials&#x2F;21683983-se...</a><p>We&#x27;ve done this experiment with Chinese, Gujuratis, Punjabis, Bengalis, and all sorts of other folks. Mostly they don&#x27;t stay poor.