> Did something happen early on in that person's life that just kind of made them give up? That is a retrospective way to address fairness. Another is, "Given

> Did something happen early on in that person's life that just kind of made them give up? That is a retrospective way to address fairness. Another is, "Given where they are, can they start doing better and end up in a better place?" A systemic problem that can (or used to) shove people down economically could be different than a systemic problem that doesn't allow a (reasonable) way to advance once they're at the bottom. Point being, maybe people gave up. Maybe it's their fault. Maybe there was nothing they could do about it. But it's imperative that they have credible ways to undo that decision going forward. Relevant issues (different people will add and/or subtract from the list): 1. permanent felony records and difficulty in getting records expunged after a history of good citizenship 2. hard cut-offs in government benefit programs 2a. getting a raise should not be a personal net loss 2b. getting married should not be a personal net loss 2c. getting more hours should not be a personal net loss, for you or your employer (the ACA really messed up here) 2d. moving to a better situation should not put your benefits at risk 3. Age discrimination needs to be taken more seriously 3a. 50-year-old college grads should have the same shots as anyone else. Otherwise, retraining from failed industries will be prohibitively difficult. 3b. New grads can't afford to wait 5-10 years for their first shot... this causes delayed marriages, delayed savings for retirement, an aging workforce, etc. 4. Home addresses are tied to wealth. Public schools are tied to home addresses. So public educational opportunity for kids is tied to how much wealth their parents have. Something has to be done about this.