MovieChat Forums > Politics > Equality vs Equity

Equality vs Equity

posted 3 years ago by Rorikon (16364)
16 replies | jump to latest

Equality = Sameness - Same thing
Equity = Fairness - Access to same opportunities

https://www.ywcalgary.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/equity-graphic-e1501102904560-600x505.jpg

Equality focuses on creating the same starting line for everyone. Equity has the goal of providing everyone with the full range of opportunities and benefits – the same finish line.

The goal of treating everyone the same way is noble and something we applaud, but it ignores the fact that people tend to differ in their abilities, resources and experiences. Those differences tend to actually become barriers; when we ignore the barriers, we end up promoting privilege. What we don’t do is solve the societal issues that have created such inequality – we feed into it.

Focusing on equity means that we recognize the system in place is leaving many behind and we actively dedicated resources to ensure everyone can catch up and succeed at the same level, barrier free.

I was looking at the pic above and was thinking, hmm, doesn't that mean bringing those with an advantage to no fault of their own be it genetics or other down a peg? How is that fairness? You took the boxes that were given to everyone (1 each) which is equal then applied equity where it gave the shortest person 2 boxes instead of 1. Doesn't that mean it uplifts the disadvantaged and brings down the advantaged so no matter how good you are at something, everyone is good at the same thing with no advantage? What's the point of even hiring skilled workers then if you can just uplift a non-skilled worker to the same level by bringing skilled workers down to their level or just saying low skilled workers are just as good as skilled workers? So we're not striving for the best of the best anymore? Or am I looking at this wrong? Again, just basing it off that pic.

If that's the case, I deserve a World Elite Black (no limit) Visa/Mastercard then even if I don't spend its minimum requirements or have the minimum household income. I should have the same access the celebrities have, you know, equity.

[–] LucasManning (5) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LucasManning (5) 3 years ago

You're not looking at it wrong. In fact, you nailed it.

Equality within this context means equal opportunity, i.e. the same starting line, as you quote in your post. It's what America was founded on. Equity is also a good thing (meaning a state of being just and fair), but its definition is being twisted to mean something else within the political arena. In the minds of modern progressives equity tries to ensure everyone ends up in the same place, which is a fool's errand, the foundation of socialism and communism, and the entire problem with modern day liberalism and progressivism.

One allows free will, allowing people to learn through effort, while the other tries to control behaviors and outcomes with a stranglehold via social policies and enforcement, propping people up who don’t want to make the effort to do it themselves at the expense of those who do. Which will always fail because it simultaneously suppresses the fundamental human need for achievement and purpose, squashing the will of those it purports to help, while punishing those who try. Equity means fairness of opportunity, not outcome. But that’s how it’s being employed. Striving for the same finish line can never work, and ultimately as you so astutely point out, will never produce equality.

e·qual·i·ty ( ¹-kw¼l“¹-t¶) n. pl. e·qual·i·ties 1. The state or quality of being equal. 2. Mathematics A statement, usually an equation, that one thing equals another.

eq·ui·ty ( µk“w¹-t¶) n. pl. eq·ui·ties 1. The state, quality, or ideal of being just, impartial, and fair. 2. Something that is just, impartial, and fair. 3. Law a. Justice applied in circumstances covered by law yet influenced by principles of ethics and fairness.

[–] B1cKsurN (14706) 3 years ago

Equality of outcome is communism.

[–] Rorikon (16364) 3 years ago

I think you meant to say equity of outcome. The saying goes 'equal opportunity not equity of outcome'.

[–] Quasimodo (16388) 3 years ago

Here's an idea for true equity. Free education, housing and health care for all and then you can make as much money as you like. But when you die it all goes back into Government revenue. No inheritance free rides.

[–] Rorikon (16364) 3 years ago

No arguments there. I feel that's more on the equality spectrum than the equity spectrum since it isn't bringing anyone else down. As for the it all goes back to government, I have to push back since that is where the equity aspect kicks in. Many billionaires and such are philanthropists, basically give about 90%+ of their wealth away anyway (before or after death) through philanthropy. That mostly entails helping human kind around the world.

[–] Keelai (31793) 3 years ago

Most rich are cheap and selfish. Their wealth goes to their heirs which is why Trump changed inheritance laws.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 3 years ago

Free education, housing and health care for all and then you can make as much money as you like. But when you die it all goes back into Government revenue. No inheritance free rides

Think about the consequences of that system. Why people would work?

If you have all your necessities safely covered by the state, why are you gonna spend you time working hard? Much better, have beers and fuck. You need very few money for that. You make some chicks pregnant? Who cares? The state takes care.

[–] Quasimodo (16388) 3 years ago

If you don't work you don't get the goodies. Providing you can work of course.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 3 years ago

Ok. Then you have most of people working and doing the bare minimum, literally zero effort, they don't give a shit about the result. Do you wanna live in a country like that?

[–] Quasimodo (16388) 3 years ago

I do live in a country like that.

[–] Keelai (31793) 3 years ago

Is the OP saying whites are genetically superior to non-whites?

Is he saying that he fears inferior nonwhites will be given more opportunities to superior whites to make them equal?

Clarification please.

If he's not saying the above, then his post appears to be a game of semantics. Non-whites and women never had equal access to opportunity.

[–] Quasimodo (16388) 3 years ago

How many times do I have to tell you ? You can't make people equal, it's impossible.

[–] Keelai (31793) 3 years ago

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

I'm going to assume your answering "yes" to my first two questions.

Further clarification please. Are you saying that you're also against equal access to opportunity? To be specific, you and a black man are going for the same job. Do you believe the black man should be immediately rejected based on his skin color?

[–] Satan2016 (23273) 3 years ago

Right! The OP is literally Hitler and wants to bring back slavery for woman and the white-challenged. Do you work for CNN?

[–] Keelai (31793) 3 years ago

I'lI ask you the same question. Are whites genetically superior to non-whites?

Will nonwhites be given more opportunities to superior whites to make them equal?