Opportunity is often a matter of opinion. Some see opportunity where others never could. These people are to be looked up to as individuals because they possess the self-awareness (or even dumb luck sometimes :P) to achieve their goals, whatever they might be. Some people are completely content with their lot in life, even if it's just merely eking by - and I wouldn't say there's necessarily anything wrong with that at all. After all, who is anyone to say what the goals and successes of another person's life should be?

Of course some are born into situations they did not choose and of course some people get responsibilities thrust upon them they most certainly did not deserve. I could say something to the effect of it's how they deal with things that matters the most but even that seems like a completely impotent and hackneyed statement. What matters is what the individual does choose to do with, not what they are given, but what they take. Of course the world isn't fair. Of course not everyone gets the same opportunities in life. I don't think Jenny is ignorant to that. If anything, she is denouncing, not the poor, but the truly weak of spirit and individual drive. If you ask me, this argument is not necessarily about wealth, in a monetary sense, but personal wealth in the form of self-efficacy.

Is the entire argument this simple though? I don't think so, either. Individualism and personal success are great things to achieve in life, but they are most certainly not the end-all, be-all. Did Rand have a good point in essentially just extrapolating the give a man a fish-teach a man to fish proverb? I really think so. But I also think that the reality of the world is that a positive attitude will only take you so far and that several millennia of art, music and literature depicting man's inability and helplessness within the scope of greater men and organizations, or even beings far greater than any individual could ever even hope to triumph over has its merit in the human experience. Rand is only one theory.

I think that the next inevitable step from individual-centric thought is that of social dependency. I don't necessarily want this to turn into some indictment of society as a whole, but I think that when people help one another out - and I mean truly help one another out, not just toss resources at one another - there is less and less of a gap in communication as well as a profound increase in efficiency of thought. It's nice to be an individual at war with one's ego, in fact, it's quite necessary for most people at times in their lives. But what we can call love or karma or whatever is a much more potent prospect - it has to do with individuals coming together for whatever reason, and I'd say that is one of the most universal experiences of humanity.

No man is an island can be both a beautiful and terrible thing.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.