3 ms·

Is that a rhetorical question with a foregone conclusion? As an average American, whether prosperity increased or decreased, I feel grateful and prosperous eve

by Denzel 9y ago

Is that a rhetorical question with a foregone conclusion? As an average American, whether prosperity increased or decreased, I feel grateful and prosperous every day. I can walk outside without fear of bombs dropping from overhead; I can run, bike, drive, or fly anywhere within this vast, beautiful land without encumbrance; I have uncensored access to the internet at-large; I get to watch some of the greatest entrepreneurs in the world build amazing things; I can communicate and interact with any one of the 300 million+ people here; and I can make money as I please when I please without anyone blocking me. And I can start doing all this with a minimum wage job (like I did). That's just to name a few things. No one is owed anything except for equality of opportunity. Are we wishing for equality of outcome? On its face, I can't understand why that would ever make sense. Do I think we're fully at equality of opportunity yet? No. But I feel that's what we should be working on. That's what we should be protecting. I don't give a hoot who made $10B as long as I have the opportunity to as well.

BenchRouter 9y ago
> No one is owed anything except for equality of opportunity. Are we wishing for equality of outcome? On its face, I can't understand why that would ever make sense. I hear this frequently, but it's sorta missing the point. Nearly all people want equality of opportunity, and not outcome. What people are concerned about is: 1) The bad outcomes don't need to be Kafkaesque or medieval (e.g. "too poor to be sick" doesn't need to be a thing). 2) If bad outcomes are becoming more and more frequent (as we see with e.g. wealth inequality becoming more pronounced), it's a smell that something systemically bad is happening. It's probably a sign that equality of opportunity is being reduced over time. > Do I think we're fully at equality of opportunity yet? No. But I feel that's what we should be working on. That's what we should be protecting. As I noted above, if outcomes are becoming more and more polarized over time, it's a likely sign that equality of opportunity is ceasing to exist. Outcomes are the dependent variable we kinda have to use for measuring equality of opportunity, because we don't really have anything else to measure.
- jaggederest 9y ago
  I think the key thing people miss when they go on about 'equality of opportunity not equality of outcome' is that by making some of the outcomes intolerable (dying of cancer because you can't afford care, for example), you actually deny opportunity. If the route to wealth and satisfaction in life was russian roulette, would that be considered 'equality of opportunity' and thus fine? I doubt it.
j2bax 9y ago
>Do I think we're fully at equality of opportunity yet? No. I think this would be the issue most people have with the increasing income gap. As long as billionaires can pay a lower tax percentage than the lower/middle-class, I think frustration and desire for change is valid.
abandonliberty 9y ago
Your list of things you appreciate is great! However, point in time data has little relevance to the argument I put forward. Unless you are implying that average Americans care more about the FEELING of prosperity than ACTUAL prosperity, so that reductions in their actual prosperity do not go against their will. Lotteries exhibit wealth concentrating behavior, so there is some evidence for this argument as people(particularly the poor and less educated) voluntarily participate. However, I'm pretty sure if we polled people they would disagree. I suspect even you may disagree. Also: >I can run, bike, drive, or fly anywhere within this vast, beautiful land without encumbrance I suspect making that claim requires either willful ignorance or a lack of exposure to minorities - or both. Oppression of minorities does not imply a breakdown of democracy though.
- Denzel 9y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your distinction between feeling of prosperity and actual prosperity. What do you consider actual prosperity? And my claim requires an imperfect broad brush because nothing in this world will ever reach perfection in the eyes of everyone. However, I don't feel the need to add little conditions and details to everything I say when it applies to the vast majority of people. I am a minority. I live in a city of minorities. My days are spent with minorities and people in the majority. My claim applies to the 1M+ minorities in my city. It requires neither willful ignorance nor lack of exposure to minorities.
  - abandonliberty 9y ago
    Your claim is fine, except that it has no real relevance to the argument. It could be true in a kingdom or a fascist dictatorship. It's meaningless without something to compare it to. You need to distinguish between "point in time" data such as your claim, and data collected over time or with comparisons. Saying 'things are great!' is relatively meaningless to understanding the health of a democracy.
    - Denzel 9y ago
      You didn't exactly answer my question. Show me the data on the real prosperity you're talking about. I'm asking for it.

by Denzel 9y ago

BenchRouter 9y ago

> No one is owed anything except for equality of opportunity. Are we wishing for equality of outcome? On its face, I can't understand why that would ever make sense. I hear this frequently, but it's sorta missing the point. Nearly all people want equality of opportunity, and not outcome. What people are concerned about is: 1) The bad outcomes don't need to be Kafkaesque or medieval (e.g. "too poor to be sick" doesn't need to be a thing). 2) If bad outcomes are becoming more and more frequent (as we see with e.g. wealth inequality becoming more pronounced), it's a smell that something systemically bad is happening. It's probably a sign that equality of opportunity is being reduced over time. > Do I think we're fully at equality of opportunity yet? No. But I feel that's what we should be working on. That's what we should be protecting. As I noted above, if outcomes are becoming more and more polarized over time, it's a likely sign that equality of opportunity is ceasing to exist. Outcomes are the dependent variable we kinda have to use for measuring equality of opportunity, because we don't really have anything else to measure.

jaggederest 9y ago
I think the key thing people miss when they go on about 'equality of opportunity not equality of outcome' is that by making some of the outcomes intolerable (dying of cancer because you can't afford care, for example), you actually deny opportunity. If the route to wealth and satisfaction in life was russian roulette, would that be considered 'equality of opportunity' and thus fine? I doubt it.

j2bax 9y ago

>Do I think we're fully at equality of opportunity yet? No. I think this would be the issue most people have with the increasing income gap. As long as billionaires can pay a lower tax percentage than the lower/middle-class, I think frustration and desire for change is valid.

abandonliberty 9y ago

Your list of things you appreciate is great! However, point in time data has little relevance to the argument I put forward. Unless you are implying that average Americans care more about the FEELING of prosperity than ACTUAL prosperity, so that reductions in their actual prosperity do not go against their will. Lotteries exhibit wealth concentrating behavior, so there is some evidence for this argument as people(particularly the poor and less educated) voluntarily participate. However, I'm pretty sure if we polled people they would disagree. I suspect even you may disagree. Also: >I can run, bike, drive, or fly anywhere within this vast, beautiful land without encumbrance I suspect making that claim requires either willful ignorance or a lack of exposure to minorities - or both. Oppression of minorities does not imply a breakdown of democracy though.

Denzel 9y ago
I'm not sure I understand your distinction between feeling of prosperity and actual prosperity. What do you consider actual prosperity? And my claim requires an imperfect broad brush because nothing in this world will ever reach perfection in the eyes of everyone. However, I don't feel the need to add little conditions and details to everything I say when it applies to the vast majority of people. I am a minority. I live in a city of minorities. My days are spent with minorities and people in the majority. My claim applies to the 1M+ minorities in my city. It requires neither willful ignorance nor lack of exposure to minorities.
- abandonliberty 9y ago
  Your claim is fine, except that it has no real relevance to the argument. It could be true in a kingdom or a fascist dictatorship. It's meaningless without something to compare it to. You need to distinguish between "point in time" data such as your claim, and data collected over time or with comparisons. Saying 'things are great!' is relatively meaningless to understanding the health of a democracy.
  - Denzel 9y ago
    You didn't exactly answer my question. Show me the data on the real prosperity you're talking about. I'm asking for it.