3 ms·

> I believe in equal opportunity but to not enforce equal outcomes for people. People always say this, but they don't account for how unequitable outcomes of

by danans 4y ago

> I believe in equal opportunity but to not enforce equal outcomes for people. People always say this, but they don't account for how unequitable outcomes of the past have influenced the unequitable opportunities of the present. For example, we can't hand-wave away the impact that the denial of equal opportunity for home ownership has had on African Americans. It accounts for a huge portion of the black/white wealth gap: https://www.brookings.edu/essay/homeownership-racial-segregation-and-policies-for-racial-wealth-equity/ https://www.brookings.edu/essay/homeownership-racial-segrega... Believing in equality of opportunity vs outcome is a nice sentiment, but without a significant redistribution of resources to actually make it start happening instead of the status quo (massive inequality of opportunity), it's just highlighting and not acting on the perfect while avoiding acting on the imperfect, but good.

mark_l_watson 4y ago
I think that you have really misunderstood me. I believe in a social safety net, but a modest one. I also think that a modest universal basic income would be better than what we have now since people can also work and get a combined income. I also don’t know anyone in my family or circle of friends who consistently gives more money to charities (monthly auto payments to three charities). Also, re: unfairness to African Americans in the housing market: absolutely true. I don’t know what I can do about that right now. When I was a teenager I volunteered in a head start teaching program for a year, ensuring that for at least a few kids they had equal chances in school. We all do what we can do, if we are motivated. A lot of people talk a good game about social justice and fairness, but sit on their asses and don’t actually do anything.
- danans 4y ago
  > I think that you have really misunderstood me. I believe in a social safety net, but a modest one. I also think that a modest universal basic income would be better than what we have now since people can also work and get a combined income. My comment isn't addressed at you as a person (whom I have no way of evaluating), but at the general appeals for "equality of opportunity vs outcome", which seem largely blind to systemic and structural inequalities that actively negate equality of opportunity today. Your (or my) personal efforts are sort of negligible to those larger issues. > Also, re: unfairness to African Americans in the housing market: absolutely true. I don’t know what I can do about that right now. That's the point. If the massive injustices whose effects echo through generations aren't addressed, then the marginal and even well-intentioned efforts will have limited effect. It took something the size of the New Deal to restructure American society in the aftermath of inequities of the Gilded Age and the Great Depression, and I doubt anything short of that type of effort will change the picture today. In the worst case, we could we end up with a society that relies on charity for its safety net (which at scale often comes with social/cultural/religious conditions attached). I also realize that for many that is a desired outcome, not something to be avoided. If we do a UBI but then strip other public supports for low and no-income people, it would likely do more harm than good, as there is no politically feasible UBI that is going to provide an acceptable minimum standard of living that includes healthcare, public safety, housing, and education for everyone, regardless of race or ethnicity. If people are struggling to stay housed and fed - which will likely happen if their benefits are stripped in favor of a UBI - they aren't suddenly going to pursue personal (and national) productivity-increasing self-improvement as proponents of that approach posit. They are going to figure out how to just survive another day, hurting others in their own community if necessary, which is often the case already today.

by danans 4y ago

mark_l_watson 4y ago

I think that you have really misunderstood me. I believe in a social safety net, but a modest one. I also think that a modest universal basic income would be better than what we have now since people can also work and get a combined income. I also don’t know anyone in my family or circle of friends who consistently gives more money to charities (monthly auto payments to three charities). Also, re: unfairness to African Americans in the housing market: absolutely true. I don’t know what I can do about that right now. When I was a teenager I volunteered in a head start teaching program for a year, ensuring that for at least a few kids they had equal chances in school. We all do what we can do, if we are motivated. A lot of people talk a good game about social justice and fairness, but sit on their asses and don’t actually do anything.

danans 4y ago
> I think that you have really misunderstood me. I believe in a social safety net, but a modest one. I also think that a modest universal basic income would be better than what we have now since people can also work and get a combined income. My comment isn't addressed at you as a person (whom I have no way of evaluating), but at the general appeals for "equality of opportunity vs outcome", which seem largely blind to systemic and structural inequalities that actively negate equality of opportunity today. Your (or my) personal efforts are sort of negligible to those larger issues. > Also, re: unfairness to African Americans in the housing market: absolutely true. I don’t know what I can do about that right now. That's the point. If the massive injustices whose effects echo through generations aren't addressed, then the marginal and even well-intentioned efforts will have limited effect. It took something the size of the New Deal to restructure American society in the aftermath of inequities of the Gilded Age and the Great Depression, and I doubt anything short of that type of effort will change the picture today. In the worst case, we could we end up with a society that relies on charity for its safety net (which at scale often comes with social/cultural/religious conditions attached). I also realize that for many that is a desired outcome, not something to be avoided. If we do a UBI but then strip other public supports for low and no-income people, it would likely do more harm than good, as there is no politically feasible UBI that is going to provide an acceptable minimum standard of living that includes healthcare, public safety, housing, and education for everyone, regardless of race or ethnicity. If people are struggling to stay housed and fed - which will likely happen if their benefits are stripped in favor of a UBI - they aren't suddenly going to pursue personal (and national) productivity-increasing self-improvement as proponents of that approach posit. They are going to figure out how to just survive another day, hurting others in their own community if necessary, which is often the case already today.