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.