Actually, what makes this topic most painful is a kind of loneliness belonging to this group.

Looking upward, he can understand the logic of those richer than him, but he can't join that circle.
He understands their language, but when he speaks that language, no one believes him because he doesn't have that social status.
Looking downward, he already has a huge cognitive gap with people of the same class.
His colleagues, neighbors, and family talk about topics that are fundamentally not on the same level as what he cares about.
He can't find someone to have deep conversations with.
He hangs in the middle. A place with no sense of belonging.
I have a friend who works as a clerk in a government agency back home, earning four thousand a month, but every night he reads books and writes analytical articles, and I admire his depth of understanding of political economy.
I asked him why he doesn't try switching platforms.
He said one thing that I still remember:
“There are too many people online with deep thinking abilities. Your depth isn’t valuable. Because in the information age, insight is oversaturated.”
In an era of scarce information, cognition is a scarce resource; with cognition, there is a premium.
In an age of information overload, cognition itself is no longer scarce; what is scarce are the channels and resources to turn cognition into value.
That’s why there are especially many “high-cognition poor” people in this era.
It’s not that people have changed; it’s that cognition has depreciated.
I don’t want to give you motivational clichés, saying “as long as you work hard, you can turn things around.”
What I want to say are a few practical truths:
First, your situation isn’t entirely your personal problem.
Don’t keep criticizing yourself with that “poverty mindset.”
Most of those words are spoken by rich people who don’t feel the pain.
Second, don’t completely give up by blaming “the system.”
The structure indeed limits you, but within those limits, you still have a little room to choose.
That space might be very small, but it’s not zero.
Third, beware of replacing action with cognitive pleasure.
Spending two hours analyzing the world every day isn’t as good as spending half an hour doing something concrete.
Even if that thing is small, clumsy, and seems “unworthy of your intelligence.”
Sometimes, the most correct cognition is: I don’t need that much cognition for now.
What I need is an action.
Finally, let me say something emotional.
The greatest cruelty to high-cognition poor people in this era isn’t making them poor.
It’s making them clearly see why they’re poor, then telling them: “Seeing it doesn’t help.”
You know all the principles.
You understand all the mechanisms.
You see through all the rules.
And then you realize, seeing through doesn’t mean surpassing.
Being clear doesn’t mean being free.
But I want to add: the next step after knowing but being unable isn’t to give up.
It’s to find that small part of “what you can do” within the boundary of “what you cannot.”
Even if that part is very small.
Even if it doesn’t match your cognition.
It’s real.
And a small real step is worth much more than a perfect big step.
The most valuable use of high cognition isn’t analyzing why the world is like this.
It’s helping you find where to land next in this imperfect world.
If you have that step, that’s enough.