Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Let me try to articulate my feeling this way...I don't think we need government programs to guarantee equality of outcome. But I think it might be worthwhile to have safety nets that guarantee more equality of opportunity.
The difference between equal "opportunity" and equal "outcome" is a convenient rhetorical distinction used to politically strive for the latter. The glue that equates the two concepts is the word "equal". In reality there is no such thing as an equal opportunity. Opportunities cannot be equal in actual time, space, and matter. Even less so within the more complex realm of human beings and human nature.
If by "opportunity" you mean the chance to acquire a finite existing object, obviously, not only is it not possible for "everybody" to acquire that object, but no matter how assiduously "everybody" attempts to meet the requirements needed to get that object, there are those factors which you keep insisting must be overcome for everyone to have the same "opportunity"--those pesky things that no one can possibly control--hereditary differences that physically or mentally or psychologically (even spiritually, if you will), qualify in some way some more than others to get the object. There is a pre-existing condition which nullifies an "equal" opportunity to achieve the goal.
On the other hand, if you mean by opportunity one's individual capacity to achieve personal goals, even in the face of difficult obstacles, that is, treating every obstacle as an opportunity rather than a defeat, that would be a "more" equality of opportunity, one which cannot be tampered with by politics. If you politically remove the obstacle, you erase the opportunity for the individual to overcome it. You do not create "more" equal opportunity, you erase the opportunity in the hope of creating a more equal outcome.
For example, I had friends at UCONN whose parents worked hard to pay tuition, and my friends didn't work hard and graduated with worthless degrees in things like communications. Those friends are struggling a bit, and I have no problem whatsoever with the fact they are struggling. They had the opportunity, they made bad choices, so it's just and fair that they face the consequences.
You judge that the reason those supposedly less fortunate friends are deservedly struggling is because they didn't take advantage of opportunity to make good choices rather than bad ones. How many choices in the sphere of what you consider good and bad were there to make? If the good choices were narrowed to a smaller finite number, would it be possible for everybody to succeed in the limited space provided by the market? Would some, even most, not win the coveted positions which would go to the "most qualified" amongst all?
And what part did those factors which they had zero ability to control have in making choices--inherited abilities and personality characteristics? And those that chose "communications," did they all fail? Or did some succeed in doing "well" with that choice? And in filling the limited number of positions that excluded others who made "bad choices"? Some will "do better" in the financial arena than others. And that will be the case, no matter how hard everyone tries nor how wise they are. The political guise of creating equal opportunity (outside of obvious discriminatory practices such as race) cannot do so, and any attempts are actually trying to create equal outcomes. As far as "more" equal opportunities, some are more equal than others.
I can't bring myself to feel the same way about people who struggle with medical expenses. If my friends (with the sick daughter) were struggling because they made bad business decisions, or because they flushed their money away on expensive cars, that's one thing. But their struggles are from causes that they had zero control over.
In a perfect world, we'd all have the same oppotunities to be successful. I have no issue with people who make stupid choices, having to live with the consequences of their choices. However, I don't think that's equivalent to someone struggling because they, or someone in their family, was born sick. Those are distinguishable scenarios.
|