Tag Archives: equality

May 2019 Agenda21course.com Newsletter

 Table of Contents

     Short summary of Agenda 21 and the goals and tactics of the Progressive Globalists

We Are a Republic, Not a Democracy

NPR Admits Plastic Bag Bans Pointless, Paper & Cloth Totes Worse For Environment

Equality vs. Equity

Is this peak vegan? Science professor wants you to try ‘tasty’ larvae sausages and locust ice cream

Great News: Trump to pull feds out of K-12 education

Inspirational: Two stranded teens in ocean rescued by boat named ‘Amen’
__________________________________________________ Continue reading

From the Author: Do You Know the Difference between Equality and Equity?

You hear these terms thrown around all day long, but do you really know the difference between these two critical terms?

Equality basically means everyone is treated equally under the law. You may not start out with as much as someone else, but with hard work, you should prosper based on your own skills and effort to create a maximized outcome. With equality there is no guarantee of an equal outcome for all but the individual has the ability to set his own goals, succeed or fail on his own merits and keep the fruits of his labors.

Equity means, if you start out in life with less than others, it is the responsibility of “others” to “elevate” you to the same level as everyone else. Equity would create an equal outcome for all. What that equal outcome would be is unclear and who is responsible for determining it is likely a bloated government meaning the individual has no control over the outcome.

 Synonyms for Equity include social justice, redistribution of wealth and socialism.

Here is a link to a really common visual depiction of the difference between equity and equality.

In the picture on the left three boys of different heights are attempting to look over a fence. All three boys are standing on a box of identical heights. The difference in the three boy’s height gives the tallest boy an advantage looking over the fence. This picture depicts “equality”.

 In the picture to the right the boy of middle height still stands on a single box, while the tallest boy has no box because his box has been added to the shortest boy, who now has two boxes on which to stand to see over the fence. Thus all of the boys have an equally good view over the fence. This picture depicts “equity”. The solution to the problem seems perfectly reasonable, right?

But does this analogy hold up for more complicated things? For example how will equity be established, if some people have more financial resources than others?

Let’s say two boys have different amounts of money in their pockets. The boy with more money could create equity by CHOOSING to give enough of his money to the other boy until they each have the same amount of money. To achieve equity the boy with the greater amount of money DONATED his money VOLUNTARILY to the other boy to create equity. This, too, seems perfectly reasonable. This is called compassion.

But what if some outside party becomes aware that one boy had more money than the other boy and FORCED the boy with the greater amount of money to give to the other boy the appropriate amount of money to create equity? This certainly will also by definition create equity/social justice/redistribution of wealth but some would be inclined to instead call it theft and say it is a great injustice. 

The reader should now see why every citizen needs to understand the difference between equity and equality. In a world run by equality every citizen should be equally protected by the law and able to make the greatest uses of their talents to enjoy life, liberty, and happiness. In a world run by equity those citizens, who have less, even if it is because they put no effort into improving their lives, would be entitled to reach into other citizens’ pockets to provide for their needs with the end result that everyone will be equally poor.

 Further in a system based on equity some of the citizens will have contributed more to the system than others but will have some of the fruits of their labor taken from them and given those who produced less. This ultimately eliminates the desire to excel.

It could be easily argued America has already implemented many equity-based social programs, which have moved her quite far down the path towards socialism. All that is needed is to fully implement the Black Lives Matter and/or the Green New Deal along with reparations to totally convert America into a Socialist country.

Which path America takes will be decided by which citizens, those who favor equality or those who believe in equity, are willing to work harder on a daily basis to achieve their goal.

Equality Is Not Enough

The Left is forever preaching the religion of social equity. Social equity is the need by society to give everyone everything they need to be equally successful in any given area. This in a perfect world would create equal outcome to every individual in society no matter the endeavor chosen.

In contrast equality provides everyone equal opportunity under law. It is then the individual’s responsibility to make of themselves what they will.

Today the liberals’ expound endlessly on the importance of providing every “victim of our unfair society” the opportunity to achieve an equal outcome through government sponsored programs. Unfortunately they rarely admit the only folks who are being showered with extra support are minorities and, since there is no free lunch, whoever is paying for this (those who are not minorities) become victim number one in this supposedly great equitable plan to save society. In reality equity is just another way to redistribute wealth.

Further, with all the propping up an equal outcome strategy requires a percentage of the “victims of our unfair society” being quota’d into colleges will graduate without a true competency in their chosen field. This creates victim number 2 and 3; the graduate who is woefully unprepared for the real world and anyone who is relying on the graduate to be competent.

Victim number 4 is the student attempting to get into specific colleges or specific schools within a specific college only to find the extra “points” minority students were given, prevents the non minority student from the acceptance they should have earned.

The fifth and final victim of social equity is government itself. The Constitution never intended for our government to become so embroiled with the individual that it was responsible for the happiness and success of every citizen. To burden the government with this responsibility is to destroy the very foundation on which our government was built; that of personal responsibility for our own actions.

Other than that there is nothing wrong or unfair about social equity/redistribution of wealth.

As you read the article please think about the dis-ingenuousness of its analogies. For example, when they talk about the three boys on the boxes keep in mind, while it makes sense, where the problem lies is in who provides the extra boxes needed by some of the boys. Should it be the boys responsibility to find boxes, someone else’s responsibilities (friends, family, private charities, etc.) or should it be the responsibility of the government? Your answer to that question will decide whether you are a liberal or a conservative.

To read this article, please click on this link.