Haves and Nots

I'm not a full believer in the social theory that we are divided into classes, upper, middle, and lower. I think there are a few truths that come out of practicing that theory, but I don't think it is shaped enough to really say that there are classes and that these classes are in competition with one another and all those other assumptions and theories behind it all.

Sure, anyone can say that there are DIVISIONS in society. You can make up any boundary that you want and gerrymander the lines to fit into your theory, but that doesn't mean that it is a natural occurrence.

Anyway, I do somewhat agree that there are the "haves" and the "have nots"-- most social-conflict theorists believe that these are the upper and the lower class, and that the middle class bridges them and that some middle class people raise in class, others fall, but the middle is just kinda in the middle (that's how they explain it). They have enough, they don't control the means of production, but they aren't victims of it either.
The thing about this theory is that it is believed that the upper class oppresses and supresses the lower class, takes advantage of them, and that is why the upper class 'has' and the lower class 'has not'.--because they were cheated, they got less than their share and others got more than their share.
The problem I see is that the assumption is that we are all equal, and so they thing that the middle got just right, the upper got too much, and the lower got too little, therefore 'take from the upper, give to the lower'.
But the more I look at this complex situation, the more I see it as reverse from that:
The upper worked for everything they received, either from inheritance (their parents or grandparents or somewhere along the line worked for it) or from actual work (many wealthy business entrepreneurs risk everything to gain everything--many of them are from the lower class). The poor, or the lower class, it appears to me the more I ponder on this, is the group that takes advantage of the wealthy. Poor these days means living on welfare--living on someone else's work. It seems to me that the lower class is piggybacking off of the upper class. They expect to be equal--from birth. But we are not born equal, nor should we be born equals. We each are given what we are given for our own good. Some people aren't born rich because they can't handle it. Others are born rich because they can't handle being poor. Some are born poor so that they can have greater gains and victories when they overcome the world, others are born rich so that they have the means to do much good.
--I think God sends us into this life with precisely what we need. Nothing more, nothing less. We are then instructed to make the best of it and given EQUAL potential. It is that potential that allows some to work till they are wealthy, and to live a good life, have a family, and be happy. Others do not tap their full potential. They look for the easy way out of things. They choose not to obtain wealth, live a good life, and or be happy. Yes, happy. You choose to be happy and though some people may have less initial capacity to be happy, they have the potential to be just as happy as anyone else.