They may have small dwelling + not many possessions but yet they are happy + their possessions are well taken care of. I’m so glad that I wrote on this topic. For it seems to me that someone who truly rejects outcome equality should also regard “equality of opportunity” as either trivially self‐ evident or wrong. And yes, although many of us will not achieve the dizzying level of success that others may, its up to each of us to try to enjoy the journey that we are on with our family, friends, community, + subcultures. Achieving equal outcomes for all citizens contravenes rewarding people based on the merit of their contribution. Jack…I truly appreciate your incisive comments. Tell as many people as you want to about it. I do agree with you too that the comparison between the two main ideas about equality will have its own dynamic as a philosophy over time. Fred, life is not always fair. Equality of Outcome requires that individuals have some share of goods, not merely a chance to obtain them without the hindrance of some obstacles. In countries with a strong free-market such as America, many believe that equality of opportunity creates a dynamic society that benefits all in the long run. something I have been addressing for some time. As opportunity becomes more equal so will outcomes. But the latter has the means to access those opportunities much more readily than the former. Like you say, there is no perfect solution. Therefore, even in countries that verbally place total equality as a goal, the actual attainment of the goal proves hard to achieve. Yes, the State must use force to ensure the compliance of equity, which violates the natural rights of individuals to freely pursue their own personal development and goals. For this, we all should be eternally grateful. Equality of Opportunity: We all start at the same point, but differences in outcome aren’t necessarily unjust—they could reflect harder or better work. The poor are poor because they lack thrift, not opportunity. And yes, this âfinancializationâ has led to an increase in wealth inequality. Interestingly, some are saying that would help lessen America’s rise in wealth inequality isn’t to just focus on wealth redistribution. Or is personal freedom only the right of the wealthy? And this is part of the reason these religions endure. Is it possible to achieve a, They are all very important ideals but based on the article by Alexis de Tocqueville, I would say equality if. But the outcome is up to the individual. For that matter neither is even definable. On one hand, entrepreneurship is a key necessity for America’s economy. In addition, though some won’t admit it…many of the things we like in our lives come about thru business innovation. However, there has to be a range of acceptance of equality of opportunity mixed in with a certain amount of equality of outcome. Perry Casilio, are you a hot sauce/pepper enthusiast? I’ve been pleased to see that many people from different areas of the world found this informative. Liberty, equality, or order? I believe our history demonstrates that. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. Interestingly, as opposed to the media caricature of the Trump voter, I’ve found that a fair amount of lower income conservative people are fairly well educated-sometimes often self-taught. Everyone must be completely equal! Producing a society with equality in any sense would be the equivalent of causing the “heat death” of that society. Not being a particularly politically savvy individual, it is possible that I oversimplify matters. After all…if everything + everyone were totally equal it’d create a truly slow motion society. Iâll repeat, outcomes are a measure, not the ends we seek. They say that we need to focus on the issue of wealth creation. Your idea of a “static place” created by a heavy emphasis on equality is true. It's like an. Above it was noted that outcomes were only a measurement, but not necessarily the end in itself. Equality of Opportunity is partly motivated by the plausibility of treating individuals equally and partly motivated by the unattractiveness of giving each person the same, or Equality of Outcome. Equality of outcome. As Maddison puts it âNot less an insuperable (impossible to overcome) obstacle to a uniformity of interestsâ. These combination of traits are what cause some to label me a JFK Democrat-a liberal of the old school. Although there’s no doubt that the social safety net that evolved with FDR, thru LBJ, + the current Democrats have helped, there’s also indication that the rise in socialism in America has led to a state of longing for more government services. For instance, although I’m a firm believer in a social safety net, I’m also well aware of the fact that many people who have a moderate or even lower middle class lifestyle feel that they create a reality based on their needs + sense of happiness as opposed to sticking to the dogma that Liberals sometimes imply that being below middle class results in unhappiness. If you agree with that + can envision that, that’s just fine. As for your idea that personal freedom is mostly related to having a certain amount of money…there are many people that have ample reason to disagree with that. you have two boys, one from This zip code one from That. If there are no rules to limit one’s wealth accumulation, then there are no rules about one person using their power against others, because in such a society, money equals power. Although the debate between the merits of equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome will endure, the concept of ensuring a basic level of equality and fairness has proven to be eternal. There will be plenty of material related to peppers, hot sauces and the like. This is just to make up for inequality? It’s interesting that this subject came up at the men’s group at my church yesterday, when the topic was “justice.” At one point, I espoused my feeling that a focus on “equality of outcome” has created an overall work force that is much less effective than that which would developed had we not become so concerned with making the force “appear to be equal.” That is, had we been more concerned with simply placing the most qualified person in the appropriate position, rather than being concerned with distributing gender and race “equally” across the board, our industry would naturally be more effective. After all, if our human intelligence is a guide for us in dealing with our underlying nature, instead of a slave to it, weâll then be able to reinvigorate certain ideas from The Enlightenment thatâve served us well. ( Log Out / Equality of outcome has a negative long-term result. And yes, you hit the nail on the head. Perry great topic, lots to talk about. Equality of Outcome. What I find so fascinating with the last sentence in your comment is that you invoke principles that hearken back to some of the eternal themes about mankindâs better nature that the Enlightenment often alluded to. As you know, finance deregulation that was pushed by both sides of the political aisle has now led to what some call a âfinancializationâ of our economy. ð. Another great, intriguing post. Any person who does that should be as proud of their accomplishments whether they collect garbage or fly to the moon. As for your feelings on equality, I respect them. And the term equality of outcome is seen as more controversial which connotes socialism or possibly communism and is viewed skeptically. Since individuals are never identical in mental and physical attributes, to say nothing of their individual histories and backgrounds the the physical space they occupy on the planet, opportunities and outcomes will vary. Equal Outcomes vs. Equal Opportunities Description: If you take all the change out of your pocket and look at the tail side of each coin you will find written in Latin the motto of the United States of America; 'e pluribus Unum'. Piketty’s book on the inevitable concentration of capital is indicative. Eventually, I think it is possible to achieve a balance of these three ideals but very unlikely because, usually if we change one thing to improve equality, liberty or order is then diminished somewhat. Hi A.P. Nice to have you stop by Michael + I’m so glad that you found that quote inspiring! I’m fine if you disagree with my statement âThe nature of the equality debate mostly revolves around how much equality is practical economically.” No problem…everyone has a right to their opinions. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. After all, this is a concept that The Founding Fathers had. Equality of Opportunity is Largely a Product of Less Unequal Outcomes Discussion: The more economic equality a country has, the more people there have access to opportunity. Yeah, this has been a most interesting post. Charlton Bryant and A.P. After all, ever since the banking deregulation of the 90’s, the western world has gone thru what many experts call a “financialization of our economy.” By deregulating investment banks + derivatives there’s been an explosion of what some call “casino capitalism.” Basically, the complex derivative culture has helped create an explosion of wealth for the finance class. From an economics viewpoint, many economists have pointed out that producing a totally equal society is almost impossible. We should stay focused and ask how can we guarantee equal opportunity through equal representation? Inequality of outcome breeds inequality of opportunity. In line with that, I remember how someone told me that inequality represents a challenge to an individual since it can propel them to act. Clearly, many of us like the adventurous aspect of life that looks somewhat upon a certain level of inequality as almost a challenge. You write “whether a loss of personal freedom is worth creating a totally equal society.” This is backwards; in a society based on money, those with no money have far far less personal freedom. This one has a trust fund, That one does not. Equality of outcome is possible only if the state violates the property rights of its citizens. — I never looked at equality from this point of view. And yes, many economists + economic experts accept this as an economic fact based on history. Thx so much Crosslife Spaces! When one really stops to think about equality + the dueling approaches to the concept, it really can become abstract. As you well point out, the ideal of equality pulls at our collective psyche. This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 2 pages. After all, if all of us had a Red Ferrari + an identical mansion would we be truly happy? Both equality of outcome and equality of opportunity have been contrasted to a great extent. Obviously, not many of us would like to live like that. Yeah…seeking total equality of outcome seems to create a static society. If the dynamic with the means of production were able to be changed, Marx believed that more equality would ensue. Equality of opportunity is best expressed in the phrase — career open to talents. “equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome” And neither is possible. Either there is a will to have an equal society or there is not. This is why your important question resonates with me. Basically, many Republicans and Libertarians are in favor of a society that works to maintain equality of opportunity. In the United States, 47% of your income level is determined by the income of your father, where in Denmark, only 15% of your income is determined by the income of your father. I agree that the concept of equality is fraught with contradictions. After all, one of the most commonly used terms in the political-economic sphere is equality. After all, we all wake up + conduct ourselves in a somewhat private fashion even though we live in broader society. The difference is that while equality of outcomes promises gains for every poor person, equality of opportunity explicitly leaves some people out. Painted as such, equality of outcome is an oppressive, Harrison Bergeron idea. E.g. + thx for the insights that you bring to the table! At some point I will do an article on the financialization of our economy. Hey Tom…thx so much for pointing out that my attempt to promote thoughtful discussion resonates! That means we must suppress achievement! I’m glad that I discovered your blog Ragnar! Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. And yes, many prominent Democrats too have profited from this deregulation in addition to Republicans. Privacy Equality of Opportunity vs Equality of Outcome. We can argue the fairness of taxes and the promotion of equal environmental health and safety, but the ideal of equal opportunity gets impugned by such confabulations. It is *possible* to go anywhere from any part of society but having the *opportunity* to do so is random chance based on a lot of factors beyond your control. As a result, economic production in communist countries is often weak due to the high level of control the government exerts. Copyright © 2021. I’ve been enjoying your thoughtful blog much too ð. The reasons for doing so are not those of misty eyed liberalism, but a recognition of what happens if that is not achieved and what kind of world it is that we wish to live. When this respect for equality of opportunity is coupled with the fact Americans enjoy a high amount of personal freedom, it explains how American history is full of stories of many who charted their own course and achieved much in their lifetimes. We should seek equality of opportunity. Interesting points on this subject which I have been pondering over. Not only does this stunt business, it creates social chaos since, whether we admit it or not, most humans like to have goals to achieve that aren’t always totally communal in nature. And some of it is dumb luck. It most likely isn’t even desirable. Is it a loss of personal freedom to make laws against killing — or is that law for everyone which insures freedom for the society at large? That cannot be denied. If you’re familiar with the equality of “opportunity” vs “outcome” dichotomy, it’s probably in the context of differing attitudes towards inequality across the political spectrum: the left favours thinking about equality in terms of outcome, while the right prefers the more meritocratic-sounding “opportunity”. See the videos below. On the contrary, I believe that equality of outcome is an appalling idea. A mainstream political view is tha… But I can’t help but feel, as a Christian, that each of us has been granted a specific, divinely drafted design that should logically lead to our finding out own niche in society if given the opportunity to do so. I believe that every individual is different. And subsequently, the low level of economic activity in these countries often has a detrimental impact on the lives of everyday citizens. I look forward to your blog posts too. Love this: “In this sense, Americaâs respect for equality of opportunity, whereby the old class structures of the monarchy were swept away, helped inspire many other countries to find the strength to give democracy a try. equality of opportunity: everyone is allowed to play at the lottery and has same chance to win the jackpot. We need to continue to equalize opportunity so that merit can be the true determiner of outcomes across our diverse population. I think equality of outcomes is how you measure equality of opportunity. Then say so. As a big fan of Mexican food, I’m curious about your posts + will let people know about your blog. It has more to do as you say with equality of value. However, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome can also be interpreted as two different types of equality. Yet…as with many philosophical ideas, equality lies within the eye of the beholder. I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding a social safety net. As a quick example at the top of mind, Trudeau just signed legislation that will provide millions of dollars to black entrepreneurs. . That’s why I felt compelled to write about it + get dialogue on it. Nice to hear from you again. And yes, the ability to access opportunities does appear to be more readily available to some that are better off. As we saw with communist countries that espoused it, the main way to enforce total equality is through tyranny. Although the debate between the merits of equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome will endure, the concept of ensuring a basic level of equality and fairness has proven to be eternal. For instance, its well known that the beauty + creativity of artists such as The Beatles flourished primarily in the business world. But this “I only believe in equality until it affects those with piles of money” is not speaking clearly. Therefore, as you allude to, a moderate amount of energy needs to be given to making sure that equality of opportunity is attended to in ways that give fair outcomes. The reasoning with equality is that if a moderate amount has been helpful, then increasing that amount will improve things more. Wishing you well, as well. Equality before God was not something the Founders took literally. It’s like being pregnant–you can’t be almost pregnant, nor can a society be almost equal. 02/07/2020 By Stillness in the Storm Leave a Comment. ( Log Out / That’s why I try to adhere to the idea of a social safety net that represents a “hand-up” to someone. Howeverâ¦in fairness to those who now feel theyâve been victims of reverse discrimination, itâs important that qualifications for advancement be based on merit as much as possible. Equality of opportunity provides in a sense that all start the race of life at the same time. However…when I ask them if they’d like to help out the poor by giving most of their money away…they balk. Terms. To do this, equality in representation is essential and not just in the legislative process but also equal treatment under the laws once written. A hotly contested political debate occurring is about the eternally powerful concept of equality. Each person has different values, passions and talents. In line with this is the assumption that its not in society’s interest to dictate who succeeds the most in life. And although an attempt to break it down totally numerically eludes us, the spirit of equality, at least as understood by our Founding Fathers, resonates with many from both sides of the political aisle. Where outcomes appear to be the ends is when one compares environments. Friedman has three categories for human equality: equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. When ya think of it, its hard to totally get a handle on. Interestingly, I find that some of my wealthier liberal friends that have made much money either thru finance or law, are not as happy as some of my lower income conservative friends. And thank you for wishing me well with the music. After all, this was a goal of the Khmer Rouge government. Kamala Harris Says Equal Outcomes Should Be the Goal of Public Policy "There’s a big difference between equality and equity." However, since it exists as a starting point for much of the political-economic debate that exists to this day, it has a certain relevance. In order to grow, we have to have many small businesses fail in order to keep the economy lean and functional.
Brisbane Tourism Statistics 2018, Saint Du 8 Septembre, Dame Onora O Neill, Tlbr3 2 Ion, Joaquin Miller Preschool, 18 Mai Haïti, Customer Satisfaction Towards Internet Service Providers,