Equality vs Equity


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
Add 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.
    Is this still revelant?
    • Diamold

      Thank you for your comment
      Good to see someone else who actually knows what's going on ✌

    • Anyone who wants to work can. If you dont have a job your job is applying for jobs. Full time 40 hours a week filling out applications. You should have a job in about one or two days if you actually do that.

    • I couldn't agree with you less

    • Show All

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • 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.
    • 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?
    • 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?
    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
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
  • 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.
    • 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

  • 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"?
  • 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.
    • yea its usually a sneaky term for equality of outcome... which is essentially communism

  • 007kingifrit
    equality is a left wing bigot term for equality of outcome. equality of outcome is evil because people are inherently unequal and don't deserve the same outcome as someone better than them. Freedom requires unequal outcomes because freedom lets people make their own choices... some will choose badly. to be pro equity is to be against all freedom in the end.

    instead... lets learn what fairness really is; fairness vs equality

    equality is when everyone gets the same thing (the first slide of your image is right) but fairness is when everyone gets an outcome determined by their input. a person deserves more if they are worth more. if they do more, if they get lucky, if they have a more impressive skillset. some people just accomplish better things. We should reward the best among us with MORE so as to incentivize a race to the top. as opposed to equity which incentivizes meandering in our own filth because we will get the same outcome as others anyways

    in short equity is another word for equality of outcome and its a communist idea for weak greedy people
    • Diamold

      So let's talk about health care
      Which clearly is unbalanced af
      Comparing for exame Europe with Africa
      If there was any equity, Africa would have better health care and support
      Instead, people are dying there with no proper life conditions
      And you still think equity is bs
      Bullshit is living with no conditions at all
      Some people don't even have the chance to habe any education
      They just come to this world to die
      Unlucky af
      If you still think that it's fair like that, cool

    • equity IS still bs because i don't want to help the people of africa. there aren't enough resources in the world for everyone. i can share them and make everyone poor or i can hoard them for my own civilization and keep enjoying great healthcare... yea, im gana do the second one.

      you're right the world is unequal. but that's fair because my ancestors did more to acquire those resources

    • Diamold

      What you want to say is that back in the day some people enslaved other people and used them for their own benefit
      And i am quite sure you just entered a dangerous field
      You don't even know for sure who are your ancestors
      Maybe be you even have ancestors who were the slaves
      So that's nonsense now

    • Show All
  • 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.
    • 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.
    • equity means equality of outcome. which can never be realistic because humans are inherently better or worse than one another sometimes

  • 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?
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Aiko_E_Lara
    Equality and equal opportunity. Here's another one you're not showing from your imageEquality vs Equity
    • 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


    • 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 EquityThis is a better representation.
  • 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.
  • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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

  • ILoveAnime
    I see what you mean. But in either cases it will be hard to reach.
    • not just hard to reach; impossible. and its good we never reach it. equality of outcome is wrong because people are inherently unequal. and in a free society we need to let people rise and fall by their own choices and qualities. a free society is always unequal and that's good.

  • Weasly
    Right now, there is such an uneven balance if freedom and power, so equality is the first major step. Once that has been achieved, then additional privileges can be carfuly given to those with various disadvantages to give them the boosts they need.

    One of the big problems right now, is there are so many voices trying to fix so many wrongs that need to be fixed, that the focus is split to much and progress on everything is to slow. Pick the big issue, fix that then move onto the new biggest issue.
    • you are wrong on so many levels

      1. equality will never exist. freedom is anti equality because it rewards people based on who they are. some will rise and some will fall. you can't get to equality as long as people are free... and i like being free

      2. if people are going to get advantages for being inferior... everyone will stop working hard. equity is a race to the bottom

  • MountAverage
    True, but I think this is mostly a semantics issue. Usually people mean "equity" when they talk about "equality" in this context.
  • ObscuredBeyond
    No one is entitled to that view. If you need more crates, you earn more crates, or be a decent human being and rely on charity.

    You don't act entitled to steal someone else's crate because of envy. THOU SHALT NOT COVET! That is not that hard to understand!

    But don't be deceived : the current mob most talking about "equity" have made clear to me that they aren't even content with your illustration's definition.

    Their definition, is that they take all the crates from everyone who isn't them, beat the tall guy to death, gorge on his flesh like a zombie horde , and use his bones sharpened into daggers to impale anyone who complains!

    Equity like that is of the Devil!
  • I guess I agree, but i would call the right side equality too. Like our tax system. The % is less for the poor and higher for the rich.
  • _no_one_
    Equity all the way,
    Equality in some ways can ruin the world order.
    • ok first off... the world today has less poverty in it than at any other time in history... do you want to ruin that world order?

    We actually need both bro.


    Equality for the social understanding to be fair and impartial but equity to realize that just because we have different gifts and needs does not mean one is better than the other.
    • we need neither. they are synonymes. equality means equality of opportunity and equity means equality of outcome and we need to realize that people pass their outcome onto their kids and so both equality of outcome and equality of opportunity and the same thing. if you don't have both you have neither... and you can't have either because people are inherently unequal

      yes some people ARE better than one another

  • JackSmy
    But WHO makes it "Equitable"? Do we all have to settle, for a lower level of boxes, or do the shorter people figure out how to make their own boxes? What if the 'boxes' cost money?
    Should I be 'Taxed', and that money used to buy 'boxes' for the hypothetical 'shorter' people, so that they can compete, on what some seem to think is an EQUAL field?
    Sounds a lot like "Affirmative Action" when some under-qualified were hired into positions, to fill some 'quota' based on what? A government 'standard' based on, what?
  • Based on the picture equity is the right way to go.
    • pictures are misleading. equity is always a lie because... who brings the boxes? why are the boxes there if the tall person doesn't need them.

      in the real world am i going to bring a box to you if you spent your entire life doing nothing of value. remember that the boxes symbolize your tax dollars in this picture... do you want to spend your tax dollars on an art student who spent 50k on a degree they don't use? that's equity. equity is equality of outcome... and you don't deserve an equal outcome to me if you don't work the same as me and have the same inherent skills

  • joeldalton
    “Equity” is impossible to achieve and evil. Equality is noble and just.
    • you're right about equity but wrong about equality. equality is bad too. equality is equal opportunity but even that isn't realistic because some people are just born better or worse than one another

      so in reality what we should strive for is "fairness" or meritocracy

    • @007kingifrit Equal opportunity just means everyone can try out for the same thing. Doesn’t mean they’ll get it.

    • i don't think that's what most people mean by equal opportunity. they mean the SAME starting point as in, the exact same starting resources.

      what you are talking about is the right to pursue happiness

    • Show All
  • J2ohhhhh
    There's a family who basically owns the whole town centre here. One of the members gave an interview to financial times and when they asked what advice he'd give to people who want to repeat his success he said "you better have some ancestors being mate with William the conqueror." The fuckers kept inheriting money for like a thousand years, which is to be fair a little impressive that noone fucked it up, but still it isn't equality. I don't want equity I want hierarchy, but the condition of hierarchy should not be based on where we were born, but how capable we are.
  • Nachowedgie
    Equity is even worse than this "equality" the left parrot on about
    • t-8900

      for some people nothing is ever enough. They would take and take until the rivers ran dry and the crops failed. People living only in the moment without any plans for the future. This is the reality of our hedonistic society today.

  • sixtyeightplusone
    whats the point of getting up early and working hard if someone will give me trophy for staying in bed?
    • exactly. equity (or equality of outcome) is a race to the bottom

  • HollyF
    I think they should all pay for a ticket
    • CrazyGirl2

      ABSOLUTELY! I literally just posted that point myself!

  • Why not let them buy tickets to the game? Why are you keeping them out of the game?
  • volleyball_bigirl
    Seen this one before, great example
    • well its not a good example in real life because... who brings the boxes? those boxes are my tax dollars. or job opportunities. Do i deserve to not get a job because someone else in my skin color already got hired this month? even if im the best candidate?

      do i deserve to pay more in taxes because some junkie spent 40k on their art degree and now is starving? seems like their stupid choice to me.

      equity is another term for equality of outcome. and nobody deserves the same outcome as me just for existing

    • @007kingifrit I said it was a great example to distinguish the defined difference of the two words.

      You comments are valid but not what I was speaking to.

  • wittymilf
    Amen, it’s a good clear way to explain it.
  • Nazgol
    Agree 100%
    • its childish to agree with this. equity is just another term for equality of outcome and you can't have equality of outcome. some people are born better than others. some prettier, some smarter. some just plain lucky. that's not something to fix. its called individuality

  • collie22
    very good
    • is it? is a system where other people who work half as hard as you or make bad choices in life still get equal outcome... very good?

  • Kelly6
    Well explained
  • Yeah that's great
  • Anonymous
    yeah I learned all about this equity bullshit yesterday when American Airlines said they want to make 50% of the pilots they hire over the next 10 years people of color and women. Take a bite of your big brain cereal and think about that for one second.

    They aren't interested in who passes the flight tests and does the best in their flight simulations, they're interested in your skin color and what's between your legs when deciding who will be responsible for flying millions of people safely across the world. Sorry to say, but if you don't hire the most qualified candidates in this particular situation, it will cost lives.

    I wonder if you also like the idea of forcing professional sports to have more white, hispanic, and Asian players, since things like the NBA are over 75% black and other sports have similar "unequitable" numbers. Or in this situation do you think the best qualified players should get the jobs regardless of skin color? If so, your decision about what's equitable and not is skewed.
    • Diamold

      First of all
      That is not equity
      Sorry but i'm not going to lose more of my time trying to explain, because some people are miles away from understanding the point
      And don't even put an effort into trying to
      Peace ✌

    • @Diamold the example he gave was indeed equity; its giving more "boxes" to black and female pilots to get them to the height of the "fence" (hiring %). his understanding of equity is clearly superior to yours

      and he correctly points out why equity is a bad idea

  • Anonymous
    Why waste time and resources on those who can't succeed on their own? The issue in our country is that we try to pretend that 'every life matters' when in reality, we could do away with about 25% of our population and IMPROVE as a society. Instead of wasting money on the poor, that money could be used to research better ways of living for those actually contributing to our society.

    We honestly just need to set up an island country for the poor to be shipped. They would be given plant seeds, wood and basic resources to survive on their own, but they have to grow their own crops and maintain their own shelters. It would be the USPA... United States of Poor America.
  • Anonymous
    The picture is a terrible example.

    Or rather it's a good example of misunderstanding the nature of the world and why that doesn't work.

    Seriously, you see no important details in that picture which highlight the challenge of equity?
    • yea lol. memes are simple pictures for simple minds but in reality... who brings the boxes? cuz if the short person knows they are going to do this its their problem to bring the boxes. im not bringing him those boxes if its hard for me to do.

  • Anonymous
    • wanting equality of outcome is inherently evil. it prevents people from bettering themselves. equity is an anti freedom idea

    • Anonymous

      Okay @007kingifrit

    • ofc the anonymous poster puts zero effort into her posts

  • Anonymous
    I guess what is implied with equality is normally equality of opportunity.
    And with that an implicit acknowledgement that people are not the same and you're allowing a meritocrlsy to determine how successful people actually become. Trusting in both the people and the system.
    For some, that's not enough and they want to game the system (perhaps because they feel the system is biased or they don't trust people to make the 'right' decisions) in order to achieve the outcome for their favoured group that they want. This is not a meritocrlsy. This is equality of outcome.
    I think many would accept some level of equality of outcome because some people do need more help them others but that this kind of help does not elevate those in need above those that can do it for themselves. So both forms of equality can then apply.
  • Anonymous
    Equality of outcome is just tired old Marxism being recycled in today's world. It's a complete disaster in practice. Ask the people of Venezuela how the paradise is working out for them.
  • Anonymous
    That meme is pretty cliché by now, and it doesn't represent the reality of the issue. Like anything related to equality or equality, the devil is in the details.

    The so called gender pay gap is a great example. Women have it within their power to earn as much as men do, but their life choices lead to women earning less on average than men. Should we achieve equity by paying women more when they choose to study less demanding majors and choose to go into social studies rather that law, medicine or science? I think not.
  • Anonymous
    A society with equity in it also would mean that no matter how hard a person works, they will get no more benefit than the person that does the minimum.. Sorry i dont want equity i want equality, because with equality people can stand out and see the rewards of hard work while those that do less, or the minimum get left behind... As they should.