The meaning behind Thatchers words is mostly accurate within a limited definition of the word success even if her chosen metric was horribly flawed as there are a great many for whom it makes far more economic sense to rely on public transport, especially in larger cities where parking fees can cost more than the car itself.
A better way of phrasing it today would be something like...
"If you're 25 and you still work in retail you must consider yourself a failure"
Even this is not terribly accurate however as there are some retail positions which are quite lucrative and solid career choices.
The real point which she was trying to get at however is that successful people don't stay in dead end position for long. They take charge of their own lives and make good things happen for themselves. Sure there is a need for burger flippers in our world but there is a reason why most of them are in high school or college.
The real problem with her statement however is it only allows for a financial security definition of success. There are other goals one could set for their lives and one could be very successful in pursuing those goals while never achieving any level of financial success. For example artists, one could pursue the life of an artist and never seek more than a low paying job with random working hours because it affords them the freedom to pursue their passion.
I would argue that this person is just as successful in life as the guy making $250K a year and far more successful than the one who makes $250K a year and hates his life.
The problem of course is that most people who stay in dead end situations for extended periods of time are not doing it because they are pursuing alternative life goals, they are just too lazy to really try and making anything of themselves.
no subject
A better way of phrasing it today would be something like...
"If you're 25 and you still work in retail you must consider yourself a failure"
Even this is not terribly accurate however as there are some retail positions which are quite lucrative and solid career choices.
The real point which she was trying to get at however is that successful people don't stay in dead end position for long. They take charge of their own lives and make good things happen for themselves. Sure there is a need for burger flippers in our world but there is a reason why most of them are in high school or college.
The real problem with her statement however is it only allows for a financial security definition of success. There are other goals one could set for their lives and one could be very successful in pursuing those goals while never achieving any level of financial success. For example artists, one could pursue the life of an artist and never seek more than a low paying job with random working hours because it affords them the freedom to pursue their passion.
I would argue that this person is just as successful in life as the guy making $250K a year and far more successful than the one who makes $250K a year and hates his life.
The problem of course is that most people who stay in dead end situations for extended periods of time are not doing it because they are pursuing alternative life goals, they are just too lazy to really try and making anything of themselves.