Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Explain the trick?
It has trapped a few, that were offended.
It hasn't trapped anyone.
You've been speaking in half-riddles. If you want simple answers, ask simple questions.
Also, you seem to have this idea that there a bunch of "Cultural Marxists" out there just waiting to turn the country into Soviet Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth.
All that from 3 basic questions.
It became defensive quick.
Where is that "teaching moment"?
Why do you want equal outcome for all?
Explain how Equal Outcome benefits you?
Do you agree, with the demographic box, equal outcomes has placed you into?
I wasn't asking how the 3 questions offended you.
These people are nuts. How many times have we heard people carry on about some wealthy person - "They have enough, they need to share it", "They can't spend that kind of money in their lifetime, they need to give some of it away", "They have everything they need, it's time to start giving their money to other people and not horde it all - you can't take it with you", on and on.
All of these things have been said right here on this forum. They will, of course, claim that doesn't mean "equal outcome" - and if they do, then what the hell does it mean? You just want it because...? The entire "equal outcome "argument has been about the left claiming some morals that they don't actually have.
To pretend that "Noooo, we meant we want fairness for everyone" is nothing but a disguise that they want equal outcome.
Everyone in this country already has the right to pursue happiness. Not getting what they want when they want, it does not mean that they don't have the right. Claiming that someone not succeeding is because of their color, gender, or income level is a lie. The proof is that many people who are the same color, gender, and come from the same or wore income level have succeeded.
They already have a "fair shot" at it if they apply themselves. If they meet a road block, it doesn't stop them.
The claim that this person makes more than this person based solely on their color or on their gender is also an indicator that they want "equal outcome". Not every job gives everyone the same base pay. There are factors to consider: Experience, expertise, education, and maybe even consider that the person who got paid more did better negotiating. To imply that it's all because of color or gender is asking for equal outcome. They don't know what the person did because no one has pored over everyone's resumes and asked why this particular individual is being paid more than that one. It's not possible because most employers would never answer that question to some "curious" person demanding to know why. It's not their business.
So everyone assumes - and they want things changed based on those assumptions - and those changes are, indeed "equal outcomes" despite how much they want to pretend that 's not what they are asking for.
What the left says:
Quote:
"Politicians have been particularly down on the politics of envy, and mostly opt for what they see as the less controversial equality of opportunity: of course people should not expect to end up with the same bundle of commodities or same level of happiness, but it is fair enough that they should expect to have the same opportunities to thrive."
What the left means:
Quote:
Equality of opportunity is then set up as the mild-mannered alternative to the craziness of outcome quality...
They know it doesn't sell, so they cloak it under "equality of opportunity".
It is a good thing to want to help everyone reach their potential. It is a good thing to give people extra help that they need, because people are individuals, and everyone needs different help with different things.
It is a terrible, catastrophically bad thing to use the government to do this.
Why? Because it's communist.
Quote:
To strive for equality means to aim for equality of opportunity. To strive for equity means to aim for equality of outcome.
How many people in the general population know this important difference between the words “equality” and “equity”? I’d venture a guess that many do not know anything about this topic, period. I know that I myself had no idea the word “equity” existed as a concept in the social sciences until I was an adult.
Our ignorance of these terms as a society is very dangerous in the climate we are in. Right now, we have feminists, communists, racial activists, and various other sorts of social justice warriors running the show on our college campuses. These ideas, which were even recently mostly bandied about on Tumblr, have now become a vital part of liberal arts education. And whether we as a society wish to admit it or not, higher education in America – particularly the liberal arts and social sciences – has become a recruitment outfit for the radical left.
...
Quote:
In a social justice “utopian” society, some rights can be taken away from you for the sake of equity. They always phrase it as giving extra help (which I have no issue with on an individual basis), when in reality, it often looks like cutting down some people to move everyone closer to the mean.
...This does not mean we live in an unequal society. It means just the opposite – that in the United States, the Constitution lays out the Rights which apply to all Americans.
It doesn’t get much more equal than that. It’s a beautiful thing, and something we must fight for whenever we see those who wish to impede on the rights of some for the “greater good” of others.
When you hear someone asking for greater equality, press them on it.
Often, you’ll find it was equity they wanted all along.
I quote that site not as "proof" of anything, but because he says exactly what is going on. This is nothing new from the left. They always do this. They get people to believe a certain way, when they face resistance to that certain way, they feign horror at the very thought. We saw it back in the early 2000s when they swore up and down that they weren't socialists! What! How dare you say such a thing!
Except we see that many of them are, indeed, socialists, and are outright admitting it now.
They will pretend that no, no, it's just "equal opportunity", which everyone already has as far as, "everyone has the right to pursue happiness". To insist "equal opportunity" means that you ignore realities. Yes, someone who is poor will not be able to pay their way through an elite university unless they work very hard and get some kind of scholarship. Some people think it's not fair that they would have to work really hard when this other person over here grew up in a family with money and paid their way in.
If you try to equalize that, you will be, in the end, forcing equality of outcome. You will be taking from the one who has the money to pay their way in so that the person who doesn't have the money to pay their way in will have the same "opportunity" to get in. In other words, the same "outcome".
The left can try to act like they only want "equality of opportunity", but if you peel it back, layer by layer, what they want in the end is indeed "equality of outcome", and they will take from you in order to get it. Because, you have enough, you don't need it, it's not fair and it surely is because of your race or gender - which isn't fair.
They are defensive because they know that we know what they are trying to do no matter how they try to dance around it and claim it's something else.
You've been speaking in half-riddles. If you want simple answers, ask simple questions.
Also, you seem to have this idea that there a bunch of "Cultural Marxists" out there just waiting to turn the country into Soviet Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth.
These people are nuts. How many times have we heard people carry on about some wealthy person - "They have enough, they need to share it", "They can't spend that kind of money in their lifetime, they need to give some of it away", "They have everything they need, it's time to start giving their money to other people and not horde it all - you can't take it with you", on and on.
All of these things have been said right here on this forum. They will, of course, claim that doesn't mean "equal outcome" - and if they do, then what the hell does it mean? You just want it because...? The entire "equal outcome "argument has been about the left claiming some morals that they don't actually have.
To pretend that "Noooo, we meant we want fairness for everyone" is nothing but a disguise that they want equal outcome.
Everyone in this country already has the right to pursue happiness. Not getting what they want when they want, it does not mean that they don't have the right. Claiming that someone not succeeding is because of their color, gender, or income level is a lie. The proof is that many people who are the same color, gender, and come from the same or wore income level have succeeded.
They already have a "fair shot" at it if they apply themselves. If they meet a road block, it doesn't stop them.
The claim that this person makes more than this person based solely on their color or on their race is also an indicator that they want "equal outcome". Not every job gives everyone the same base pay. There are factors to consider: Experience, expertise, education, and maybe even consider that the person who got paid more did better negotiating. To imply that it's all because of color or gender is asking for equal outcome. They don't know what the person did because no one has pored over everyone's resumes and asked why this particular individual is being paid more than that one. It's not possible because most employers would never answer that question to some "curious" person demanding to know why. It's not their business.
So everyone assumes - and they want things changed based on those assumptions - and those changes are, indeed "equal outcomes" despite how much they want to pretend that 's not what they are asking for.
What the left says:
What the left means:
They know it doesn't sell, so they cloak it under "equality of opportunity".
I quote that site not as "proof" of anything, but because he says exactly what is going on. This is nothing new from the left. They always do this. They get people to believe a certain way, when they face resistance to that certain way, they feign horror at the very thought. We saw it back in the early 2000s when they swore up and down that they weren't socialists! What! How dare you say such a thing!
Except we see that many of them are, indeed, socialists, and are outright admitting it now.
They will pretend that no, no, it's just "equal opportunity", which everyone already has as far as, "everyone has the right to pursue happiness". To insist "equal opportunity" means that you ignore realities. Yes, someone who is poor will not be able to pay their way through an elite university unless they work very hard and get some kind of scholarship. Some people think it's not fair that they would have to work really hard when this other person over here grew up in a family with money and paid their way in.
If you try to equalize that, you will be, in the end, forcing equality of outcome. You will be taking from the one who has the money to pay their way in so that the person who doesn't have the money to pay their way in will have the same "opportunity" to get in. In other words, the same "outcome".
The left can try to act like they only want "equality of opportunity", but if you peel it back, layer by layer, what they want in the end is indeed "equality of outcome", and they will take from you in order to get it. Because, you have enough, you don't need it, it's not fair and it surely is because of your race or gender - which isn't fair.
They are defensive because they know that we know what they are trying to do no matter how they try to dance around it and claim it's something else.
Explain the rational for someone who works and saves their butt off wanting a guy who slacks and doesn't pay his bills(but has the same opportunity) to have the same outcome? That would kill productivity and progress. That's exactly what would be done if you wanted to stagnate instead of progress. I'd really like to see where the US can take our advancements. I have no interest in retracing ground we've already covered and this Christian rule thing that some are pushing for is third world ****.
Having said that when I see someone pay 39,000 for a purse when we so many Americans, let alone the world's population, struggle to live it does make me think...OH COME ON!!!!!
I attacked? How so? That is not permitted here as per TOS. You better report that.
I asked, Why do YOU want equal outcome for all. You replied defensively like I called YOU out personally.
If you don't want equal outcome, why the debate, have defensive confrontational attitude and irrational argument?
You know what I meant so just stop it. others have asked you to explain that what you meant again no one was offended.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did you have a lock-up there, coming to a conclusion?
others have asked you to explain that what you meant again no one was offended.
