Why can't the poor at the bottom achieve primitive capital accumulation?

In Wei Zhi, Cao Pi said: "The long-lived in three generations know clothing and food; in five generations, they know drinking and eating." Later, it was passed down as "Three generations in office, then you can understand how to dress and eat."
Decades of high growth in the past have given many people the illusion that primitive capital accumulation can be achieved in one generation.
But under normal circumstances, except for a very few, primitive capital accumulation usually takes several generations.
First, there's money.
Most people don't leverage, so most people's initial accumulation depends on saving themselves.
But there's a problem with being poor: rigid expenses take up too much of the income. With a monthly income of 5,000, spending 4,000 on food, clothing, housing, and utilities leaves only a little to be honestly saved for healthcare, retirement, and emergencies.
Then, after finally earning 10,000 a month, consumption levels rise under social pressure and peer influence (especially for the chubby friends chasing girls). The remaining amount doesn't grow to 6,000; maybe only 2,000.
Alright, keep working overtime and grinding until earning 20,000 a month.
This already puts you in the top 0.1% to 2% of the total population (depending on the criteria).
Then comes the big stuff: buying a house, getting married, having children, raising a family. In your early thirties, when your labor income peaks, you take on debt 15 to 30 times your annual income.
On paper, it might look like you have money—your house and miscellaneous assets are worth a few million; but in reality, this isn't true accumulation because you can't start investing. You have no idle funds, no proven business models from trial and error. Those numbers are just your emergency savings (and must be assets that don't depreciate).
Finally, when you're old, if you're lucky, you have some assets to pass down that won't burden the next generation with debt (then it's up to their luck); if unlucky, just surviving retirement is a victory.
This is the norm for a generation, and even for the upper middle class, a stable life.
So, from another perspective: suppose this person completes their generation’s accumulation. What would they look like?
They would need to rapidly shorten the debt cycle for housing, marriage, and children during their youth and middle age;
Their net income would likely need to break into the top 1%;
In middle age, they would start earning non-labor income through business and investments, maintaining financial stability;
They would develop expertise in certain businesses through trial and error, ideally in high-growth sectors, staying close to the trend;
Finally, they would pass down stable assets, essentially solving potential debt issues for the next generation, and help them develop the basic skills to maintain asset operation through education and social connections.
This is the primitive capital accumulation that a typical person can achieve in one generation.
In ancient times, it would be enough to support a self-sufficient farmer or small landowner to send a child to school; today, it’s middle to senior managers, technical supervisors, shop owners, landlords, mid-level officials, state-owned enterprise managers, etc. It sounds ordinary, but proportionally, it’s roughly the top 5%.
As for a single generation to fully break through, that’s even harder. Because money is only the most obvious part of primitive capital accumulation.
Besides money, ability, relationships, and luck are almost equally important.
The true value of primitive accumulation isn’t in the accumulation itself, but in the explosive growth from subsequent investments. Money is the basic chip, relationships are the conditions for getting on the table, ability is the skill level in playing the game, and luck is the final gatekeeper.
For a generation to fully break through, it’s not just about preparing money within twenty years, but also about finding a mentor and mastering the game skills.
And there’s an ultimate boss: even if you win the game, can you convert chips into real assets?
The large gains from successful investments turning into safe assets are a higher level of knowledge than primitive accumulation.
In short, many people may not realize how rare the high growth of the past thirty years is in modern history.
Because it was explosive growth, nearly every year the urbanization rate increased by over 1%, and annual social fixed asset investment grew from 200 billion to trillions, with some years even reaching ten trillion. The historical process greatly compressed individual effort.
This has led many to have illusions about “primitive accumulation,” thinking it’s just a meteoric rise, like a son-in-law or a dragon king. But returning to normal history, primitive accumulation generally takes about three generations.
For the poor, being debt-free for the next generation is already a victory. But it’s not easy: low surplus, long working hours, high debt for housing and children, poor resilience to major illnesses and accidents, weak knowledge and social networks that prevent access to high-growth projects, etc.
So, there’s no need to obsess over “primitive accumulation.” Spending on oneself, at least living a low-debt life, is also fine.