Equality vs Equity

Diamold

People tend to talk a lot about things they don't have a clue about. Usually saying that a fair world, would be a world with more equality in it. That is wrong in so many ways. First, learn the difference between equality and equity. A world with more equity... that would be a fair world.

Equality vs Equity

The image above shows a good example. Try to understand that. It's not hard.

Equality vs Equity
21
31
Add Opinion
21Girl Opinion
31Guy Opinion

Most Helpful Guy

  • Teyfet

    The tallest/richest ones don't need the kind of "equality" that helps them get further ahead (which is why they should be taxed [much] more). Everyone with a brain knows & admits that. The other 2 groups of people (middle & lower classes) definitely need a bit of aid (one box) to stay competitive. The problem that the majority of people generally have is in giving that additional aid/box to the lower class, because people foolishly think it's ridiculously easy to get ahead if you just try hard enough, because they just can't comprehend the struggle. Now, if the additional box comes as a kit - where they have to assemble it & figure out how to use it, so that they have to put effort in & aren't just given it outright, then it becomes more tolerable: affordable health insurance, affordable housing, affordable, quality schooling, easier-to-get-low-interest loans, affordable daycare, etc.

    Unfortunately, the rich have brainwashed too many into believing that government is bad, that anyone who wants to work can, that it's easy to get ahead if you just try... So many lies I can't even list them all.

    LikeDisagree 5 People
    Is this still revelant?

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

2130
  • OlderAndWiser

    "A world with more equity... that would be a fair world." Depends on the subject and how you propose that equity should be accomplished.

    Like 4 People
    Reply
    • SnowyOwl

      true. for example: given the little one can't see over the fence, how about cutting the other two people's legs so that they are all equally short, and they can all suffer equally?
      That is equity.
      No hate by the way, im just laying out some food for thought

    • @SnowyOwl Does the tall guy voluntarily give up his box to the short kid, or does some government agent come along and force him to do that?

    • SnowyOwl

      I would think that no one would even bother to protest if the case was that he did it voluntarily.
      If the authorities are forcing it though, then there's always people that will question it.
      But im just saying that there can be cases where equity means everyone will suffer. And to make sure everyone is at the same equitable level of suffering, there may be some that will have to pay a greater cost overall.

    • Show All
  • CrazyGirl2

    Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this style of reductive memes that are in no way illustrative of the extremely complex issues they proport to illustrate? Also, every time I see this picture, I can’t help but think… does anyone else wonder how the people, who worked very hard for the money to buy their tickets, feel about the “equity” of people essentially stealing from everybody by just watching the game for free by peeping over the fence?

    LikeDisagree 12 People
    Reply
    • For sure. But there's plenty more wrong with the picture once we ask yourselves what the wall, the boxes, and seeing the game actually represent.

    • Hshsbsb

      It's exactly how it's shown in the pictures. You're just too dumb.

    • So you want to take it at face value, but everyone else using their critical thinking skills are the dumb ones? Okay, you're insane.

    • Show All
  • FreyaRed

    The never asked question, who brings those boxes?
    Society?
    Why should the tall guy support society when he gets nothing as compensation for his efforts?
    Why isn't possible to lower the fence or removing it completely?

    A bunch of philosophical questions

    Like 10 People
    Reply
    • MrEiffel

      That's a very interesting question there... why should the tall guy support society when he doesn't reap any of the benefits that he's worked hard to supply.

    • Well the fence is nature. As the natural world exists humans require resources and there is a finite amount.

    • madgoat

      The tall guy only need understand that to live in a modern society, he has to support it. Typically in taxes. Then the system distributes it. But he may also feel a moral obligation.
      The fence can be reduced but typically this take time because widespread change in society takes time. But the system can create artificial support to speed this up. Typically through benefits or quotas.

    • Show All
  • Vickymoore9

    Life isn’t always fair we can’t build boxes for people who are lazy. People have to build their own boxes and take responsibility. In this country we have a rare opportunity that most other countries don’t have. We have the opportunity to change our futures change our way of life. You can’t do that in any Arab nation your either born into a royal family or your sleeping in caves. If he built boxes for everyone to see over the fence equally using let’s say the only thing tax money. Ok then let’s see maybe we all want everyone to have cars ok let’s get the tax money ok then we say education and back for the tax money ok let’s say housing ok back to the tax money. Hey how about health care holy shit we don’t have any tax money left. People are now out growing their box and made wanting a new box but we have no tax money. This doesn’t work no country has done of can ever sustain this kind of idiotology. This is how you create a overwhelmed system as we are doing. People have to take responsibility many are lazy and that’s their nest or situation they created.

    LikeDisagree 5 People
    Reply
    • And I love that system it collapses and real money comes back into power for those smart enough to hold it

    • @jamesgoldman The problem is you country drives itself into debt with other nations and the dollar isn’t worth shit. That’s why the federal reserve wants to regular who owns or how much gold citizens can own. That’s why I believe in buying gold coins because you never know what can happen

    • That's what I mean real money... pre-64 American dimes, quarters, halves and dollars... gold is good until you need bread and only have a krugerrand, silver is required as well so both are key

    • Show All
  • purplepoppy

    We already have both in abundance. There's already a legal requirement to provide them where practicable. As for the picture perhaps they should prove they're equal by paying for admission like everyone else.

    Like 5 People
    Reply
    • Pete671

      Or only allow a white person admission if they pay for a black person as well,

    • @Pete671 i would shoot any person who tried to force such a racist policy on me. i don't owe you money for being black

  • menina

    I've seen that image before. If I'm not mistaken, "equality" means giving everyone the same opportunities without taking their needs into consideration. While "equity" means giving everyone the same opportunities but based on their needs and conditions.
    You're right, many people talk about things they know nothing about. I don't like doing that, if I don't know I don't talk at all.

    Like 3 People
    Reply
  • zollo

    Well I suppose taking one step at a time and trying to first achieve Equality is when we can move on to Equity and then actually addressing the blatant problems that force people to have very specific accommodations.

    LikeDisagree 3 People
    Reply
    • equality cannot happen. some people are just plain better than others. some are born pretty, smart, smome with more imagination, and some with more determination than others. some just get lucky.

      thus since equality is impossible (and undesirable if you believe people have the right to better themselves) equity (aka equality of outcome) is likewise an evil idea. evil because it is anti freedom and insists we must have the same outcome even though we are different people

    • zollo

      @007kingifrit I don't mean equality in the sense of something like wealth where each person HAS to receive 20 $ from the state. I mean like every child should grow up in a home or grow up with clothing. It's a simple baseline that starts everyone off "equal". Someone can live in a mansion and have really nice clothing while someone else lives in an apartment and wears hand me downs, both still have a place to live and clothing for getting dressed. It could be better but that would at least raise the bar to a point where all children are able to have homes instead of living on the streets and they were able to have clothing. This is just an example by the way.

    • well i think we already have that in america. even homeless people have cloths and a shelter if they want it

  • BeMuse

    Yeah so fair when one person works their ass off just to eat while someone else does nothing and still gets the same amount of food. Remember how with slavery both the master and the slave got to eat, but one worked harder than the other? That was totally fair considering they both got to eat dinner at the end of the day right?

    Like 1 Person
    Reply
  • Dargil

    *Does that include "equity" of outcomes?
    *Should a person doing a lower tier job because they are at the limits of their capacity be paid the same as a high achiever?
    *Should Red and Purple play basketball on stilts for "equity" with Blue?
    *Who and/or what facilitates "equity"?

    Like 2 People
    Reply
  • exitseven

    The thing that I don't like is nobody ever really defines "equity". It means whatever they want it to mean that fits with their short term goals. I stopped listening to this crap a year ago. Its all made up to benefit certain politicians and blowhard community activists.

    Like 2 People
    Reply
    • yea its usually a sneaky term for equality of outcome... which is essentially communism

  • CalmYourTits

    First off, I hate pics like this because it is narrow minded. It really isn't the bigger picture.

    If I am a shorter person and I need two boxes, I either make more money to buy two boxes or I learn to drill a hole in the fence to watch the game.

    Also you are only showing one perspective!

    Why not show that airplane seats keep getting closer together and tall people are physically in pain because they refuse to accommodate them? How about the fact that some rides at the amusement park won't allow people who are too tall on them? A lot of cars on the "cheaper" end are designed for short people. So tall people just have to make more money to accomodate. How about some doors being built too short for them?

    There are two sides to every coin.

    When you take challenges away from people, you make them weak, entitled and complacent.

    LikeHelpfulDisagree 6 People
    Reply
  • Dchrls78104

    I support equality, not enabling.
    I support equity, not entitlement.
    Everyone should have an opportunity to make something of himself, but only you can use it to get where you want to go in life or to make your own choices; no one can do either for you.
    The strong should help the weak, but the weak are not owed the assistance of the strong.

    LikeDisagree 2 People
    Reply
    • so you used a lot of impossible word combinations here that sound nice but once we really understand them they don't work in the real world. equity means equality of outcome. you said you wanted equality of opportunity for people

      there are 2 problems with this:
      1. people are inherently unequal and thus can never have equal opportunities. some are smarter, some are prettier, some are more driven and thus will always be unequal
      2. one generation's equality of opportunity is the last generation's equality of outcome because we pass our wealth onto our kids. so equity and equality are really the same thing. both are impossible

  • PBandJ_Nerd

    From what I've heard equity is usually used to help people succeed (giving accommodations for example). I think we kind of do that along with equality in some ways.

    LikeDisagree 2 People
    Reply
    • equity means equality of outcome. which can never be realistic because humans are inherently better or worse than one another sometimes

  • t-8900

    nah equity ruins societies because it brings down the drive and ambitions of the top go getters. If everyone made the same amount of money why would people even bother going to school for a career that requires 4-6 years in university if they can just go right into the job market flipping burgers for the same pay without having any student loans or wasting their time with education when they can just go off and start getting their relationships, etc.

    Like 1 Person
    Reply
  • Aiko_E_Lara

    Equality and equal opportunity. Here's another one you're not showing from your image

    Equality vs Equity
    Like 1 Person
    Reply
    • Diamold

      We don't live full of conspiracy theories
      That's all in people's heads, because they can't find a logolical explanation for anything
      If you actually study in university, maybe you can start seeing through it

    • Diamold

      Logical*

    • So the point is? Im not even agreeing with what liberals in universities teach us these days. Tho what I said still stands. I support equality. Not equality. You have to earn your privilege

    • Show All
  • DCooper
    Equality vs Equity

    This is a better representation.

    Like 5 People
    Reply
  • MasterOfReality

    The problem with that is,... from whom do you take to give to another to achieve “equity?” Nothing in this world is free or generates spontaneously. What right does one have to confiscate the time, sweat, effort, etc of another? None. Equality of opportunity (not outcome) is the closest thing to “fair” as the human condition can or should allow.

    Like 1 Person
    Reply
  • JuneLady

    This is slightly flawed logic on one regard: People have no ability to control their height. For example, should someone who chooses to work only 20 hour weeks but has to pay a lot of bills for their diabetes really be paid more than someone who works 60+ hours but is in perfect health? Both have their basic needs covered, but there's something inherently unfair about it.
    In a society like this, that man who was working 60+ hours would drop to work as little as possible. After all, why work harder if you don't get more out of it? In a few communistic countries we can see this happening. I met with the founder of "I <3 Bulgaria" (an orphanage charity for Bulgarians), who informed me that the construction was taking 40+ years for very basic buildings simply because the workers had no reason to work any harder.
    However, on things that are entirely out of our control, equity is the superior method.

    LikeDisagree 6 People
    Reply
    • Hshsbsb

      Sorry but you're insane.

    • JuneLady

      @Hshsbsb Care to use rationality to back up that claim?

    • @Hshsbsb this is the 2nd time on this post you have responded to a long well thought out paragraph with a one sentence insult. if you're not smart enough to contribute detailed responses or at least thought provoking ones... maybe fuck off and let the adults converse?

    • Show All
  • crazyish

    I see where you're logic is going and it seems to be well intended. But equity takes away equality. Obviously every situation will be different and some will understandably need equity, but I believe that it's already being done in many aspects. But equity does not equal equality for everyone and causes other's to sacrifice more than they should. We are already living in a world of unequality and enforcing equity will only make it worse. That's why there are grants and nonprofit organizations. People are already choosing to give more to ensure equity. Most understand already that life isn't always fair. Enforcing equity will only make life unfair for all.

    Like 2 People
    Reply
    • jerdanro

      Absolutely. I also wonder how many will support this idea when they realize whay they personally have to give up to make it happen. "Okay kids, hand over your iPhones." Equality of opportunity is just. Helping those who are disadvantaged is moral. Insisting on equality of outcomes is niether.

    • crazyish

      Very well put. People will always have trouble seeing the bigger picture.

    • jerdanro

      Thank you. I agree.

  • TadCurious

    I support equality of opportunity but not the mandated equality of outcomes. The latter leads to utopianism which leads to totalitarianism.

    Like 1 Person
    Reply
    • sadly most people are fooled here: you have been fooled to

      equality of opportunity and equality of outcome mean the SAME THING once you really think about it. because one generation passes their wealth onto the next. one generation's equality of outcome is the next generation's equality of opportunity.

      you either have both. or you have neither... and they are impossible anyways

  • Show More (31)
Loading...