Debate Now Equal Opportunity vs. Equality of Result

Equality of opportunity before the law should result in equality of outcomes, ceteris paribus. We all know that is not the case.
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

No such thing as luck. You make your own luck. There is a saying that goes "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity"
 
Equality of opportunity before the law should result in equality of outcomes, ceteris paribus. We all know that is not the case.
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

No such thing as luck. You make your own luck. There is a saying that goes "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity"

There's chance or luck. Not everything is predictable, then not everything is neutral. There has to be good and bad fortune. I'd agree that it favors the ambitious. Fall in your lap luck can be a unicorn.
 
Equality of opportunity before the law should result in equality of outcomes, ceteris paribus. We all know that is not the case.
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.
 
Equality of opportunity before the law should result in equality of outcomes, ceteris paribus. We all know that is not the case.
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.

Sentencing standards?
 
Equality of opportunity before the law should result in equality of outcomes, ceteris paribus. We all know that is not the case.
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.

Sentencing standards?

More like, consistency in applying the law.
 
There's having a shot and taking it, and taking a shot and winning to account for. Human opportunity doesn't make for such simple math.
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.

Sentencing standards?

More like, consistency in applying the law.

I could see how sentencing standards can be a clean cut way of seeing to this. What remedies could reach front line law enforcement? Other than cameras, lets say.
 
While I agree that happens; it should be a Standard, more fixed than that when it comes to social justice.

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.

Sentencing standards?

More like, consistency in applying the law.

I could see how sentencing standards can be a clean cut way of seeing to this. What remedies could reach front line law enforcement? Other than cameras, lets say.

Those tend to be simple details, often in the "heat of the moment". I am referring to the reason we even have the concept of Socialism and equality before the law.
 

The difficulty lies in that the prevailing factor in the outcome is merit (or demerit). Luck even plays a significant role. Depending on the complexity of your goals, you can luck out and find no social roadblocks in your way at all.

I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.

Sentencing standards?

More like, consistency in applying the law.

I could see how sentencing standards can be a clean cut way of seeing to this. What remedies could reach front line law enforcement? Other than cameras, lets say.

Those tend to be simple details, often in the "heat of the moment". I am referring to the reason we even have the concept of Socialism and equality before the law.

This is from some universal reasoning? I am not familiar with it.
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
The flipside to hiring incentives is that it hurts retention. Depending on the value of the tax break, accountants would advise fire-to-hire policy.
 
I am referring to fixed Standards, not "dumb" luck concerning social justice.
Sentencing standards?
More like, consistency in applying the law.
I could see how sentencing standards can be a clean cut way of seeing to this. What remedies could reach front line law enforcement? Other than cameras, lets say.
Those tend to be simple details, often in the "heat of the moment". I am referring to the reason we even have the concept of Socialism and equality before the law.
This is from some universal reasoning? I am not familiar with it.
socialism is about equality.
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
i believe micromanaging our tax codes is inefficient.
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
i believe micromanaging our tax codes is inefficient.
Every country/government in the world does it.

Depends on your definition of micro.
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
i believe micromanaging our tax codes is inefficient.
Every country/government in the world does it.

Depends on your definition of micro.
It is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Why no micromanagement of the capital gains distinction whenever unemployment is above three percent?
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
i believe micromanaging our tax codes is inefficient.
Every country/government in the world does it.

Depends on your definition of micro.
It is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Why no micromanagement of the capital gains distinction whenever unemployment is above three percent?
No its not. It's the way things work. That's like saying corporations shouldn't make a profit. It's what they do.

Governments manage and regulate their economies. No corporations shouldn't manage themselves.

As for your second very confusing question that I don't even really understand what you're asking or saying my answer is huh?
 
It seems to me that the tension between these two concepts has never been greater in the U.S. Indeed, social and political divisions are growing wider every day. The same fact or event is often perceived so differently that it becomes almost unrecognizable to the opposing side.

Undoubtedly, the Equality of Result has been in the ascendant, as continuing racial or ethnic achievement gaps have fueled more government programs and campaign rhetoric to combat "institutional" discrimination. My question is: Where will this all lead? There is no sign that these achievement gaps will be closed in the foreseeable future, so what are the social and political ramifications of perpetual dissatisfaction among increasing numbers of our population?

Will we become a vertically segregated society, where both governmental and business organizations will be required to set aside positions at every level in order to achieve a particular "diversity" ratio? This is not a rant against Affirmative Action; rather, it is a question of how we will deal with increasing resentment as these achievement gaps persist. Will we ever be able to return to the concept of Equal Opportunity?
I can see how and why no blacks from metro Detroit work at my company. I don't think is intensional either. But because this is so common, I think we should give tax breaks to diverse companies and not to companies like mine. If we want the tax break we will be socially responsible.

Same way we should give tax breaks to companies that hire anyone unemployed for more than 3 months. It's a great way to solve the problem of companies who don't hire the unemployed. Can't force them so incentivize them.
i believe micromanaging our tax codes is inefficient.
Every country/government in the world does it.

Depends on your definition of micro.
It is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Why no micromanagement of the capital gains distinction whenever unemployment is above three percent?
No its not. It's the way things work. That's like saying corporations shouldn't make a profit. It's what they do.

Governments manage and regulate their economies. No corporations shouldn't manage themselves.

As for your second very confusing question that I don't even really understand what you're asking or saying my answer is huh?
Yes, it is; and, things don't work that well, or there would be no complaints from the left or the right.

Why shouldn't business taxes be tied to the rate of unemployment?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top