I won't dignify Ayn Rand with a full reading, but my understanding from reading rather too much of her apologists is that Randian actually welcome that state of affairs.

Not the case with my friend, who was more in the "I guess it'd be nice otherwise but that's the only way it works isn't it?".
Which, admittedly, takes a lack of curiosity about the world, but that's something I had come to expect (hell, she likes Orlando as a holiday destination).
Until I mentioned it she probably never gave a thought to the implications in terms of inequality of quite a few people being able to retire at 45 (without being entrepreneurs to boot).

But she also says that 500k£ is too much to spend for a house (though in Central London it's hard to go much under that), so there may be some hope yet ;-)

I agree with you that "Analysis and critical thinking are relative luxuries, and are only possible through training, practice, focussed effort, and undistracted time." (well, maybe undistracted time is not fully required, or even focussed effort, for someone whose mind is tuned in that way).
But you started with training. Is that not what education is supposed to give us? I was not trained in an English speaking system -only my last, MSc year in European Studies, but then there were very few English people in the course. Does education tend to help or hinder analysis and critical thinking here?

There may be an epochal thing to it, too. I have the impression (maybe wrong, the plural of anecdote not being data) that in France too, they are getting less common. But France is still a highly politicised country, so I would guess that there is a bit more of it.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

She might change her mind if she's made unemployed and finds it impossible to find a job because her work is outsourced (to Asia?)

what I often see among the younger people who find themselves in this predicament is not understyanding, but a sense of personal failure. They internalize the system's failings as their own. After all, that's about the only way failure can be interpreted in a system based on successful competition as the definer of worth.  

But that won't happen unless the system fails her personally, and she has the realisation that there is a game being played, and it isn't necessarily rigged in her favour.

Same result as above- I'd bet she already knows there's a multi-level game being played, but at present she sees herself as one of the winners.
Millions of people- a huge segment of market-world are victims of sixty years Edward Bernays's wonderful technology.
To lose-even in a riggeed game- means you're a loser.

It's even coded into the language by now.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

TBG

My pet theory is that narrative logic is an evolutionary adaptation that makes it possible for humans to invent and share ad hoc rules and tribal ethics in a simple and efficient way.

I would think this is almost certainly true. If a behavior works >80% of the time and does not result in the death of a large number of those who employ it when it fails, it is highly likely to persist. If it persists, genetic changes that favor are more likely to emerge. Plus the narrative can always change in response to events. The neuro-physiological bases of social speech?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."