Equality - what is it?

Lotus 2 months ago

I've always thought it would be good to have a more equal society. I don't understand why people think it's ok for some to be rich due to inherited wealth or because of the family they were born into or what school they attended or because they got 'famous'. I also don't understand why most people just seem to accept the fact that there is such a huge discrepancy between the highest paid and lowest paid workers.

I'm a bit of a weirdo politics wise - I strongly support freedom and personal choice & independence, but I'm also a socialist in many ways as I believe a society should take care of its vulnerable members and I also like the idea of cooperatives and nationalised industries, where many benefit rather than a select few. I don't want to get into a politics debate, this is just to explain what some of my beliefs and ideas are behind my ponderings.

I know it's difficult to determine exactly what is meant by a fair and equal society. Is it fair that a doctor gets paid more than a builder? We need doctors, but we also need homes. Is it fair that someone gets paid loads because they are intelligent and got a law degree, while someone else with a lower IQ works two minimum wage jobs to just barely make ends meet? Should everyone be paid the same rate per hour? Is it ok for some to live in tiny cramped flats while others live in huge houses and some have multiple homes?

I'm not expecting anything to change - I've accepted that the world is what it is. But just as a theoretical exercise, if human society were to be re-started how would you structure it to make things more equal? Or do you think there shouldn't be equality - that some should be rewarded more for things like having a degree or being skilled at acting or playing a sport?

Parents

Billy87 2 months ago

This is a really fascinating question, thank you so much for posing it. Like you I have several different ideas on the topic.

Firstly, I think there is a distinction to be made between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity means that everyone would have the same chance in life, the same level of education and opportunity for advancement and achievement. Clearly this isn't the case in our society but it should be.

Equality of outcome, however, would mean everyone would have the same salary, success and achievement level regardless of the effort they put in or how skilled they were. For instance, if you and I both worked in the same office and you turned up at 8am every morning and worked your socks off until 5pm and I turned up late and then sat at my computer playing games all day, we would both be rewarded the same. That clearly isn't fair.

A fully equal society is never possible because some people will work harder than others and some people are more skilled than others. For instance, I will never be as good a footballer as Lionel Messi even if I practice football 12 hours a day every day. Doctors are paid more than cleaners because of supply and demand. I'm not in any way putting cleaners down, I have the utmost respect for them and have done similar jobs myself. However, the fact is most people are skilled enough to clean whereas very few people have the skills required to be a doctor so their skills are paid more highly.
If everyone was paid the same or had Universal Income there would be no incentive for anyone to work hard and society would soon, if not collapse, then certainly struggle.

What I firmly believe though is that the people in positions of wealth and influence should use that for good and NOT to oppress or exploit those below them. That's why I loath people like Mike Ashley, a billionaire who operates warehouses that resemble Victorian workhouses and treats his staff at Sports Direct appallingly. ( I used to work there myself) Jim Ratcliffe is another one like that

What I don't understand is how anyone could be rich and not want to help the poor. Sadly, there are many people like that it seems but it baffles me. If I was a billionaire I wouldn't be able to sleep at night for thinking of all the people who were homeless or struggling unless I was doing something to help them

I agree with you about renationalisation. One only has to look at train fares and energy bills to see that privatisation has not been a good thing

Reply

Billy87 2 months ago

This is a really fascinating question, thank you so much for posing it. Like you I have several different ideas on the topic.

Firstly, I think there is a distinction to be made between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity means that everyone would have the same chance in life, the same level of education and opportunity for advancement and achievement. Clearly this isn't the case in our society but it should be.

Equality of outcome, however, would mean everyone would have the same salary, success and achievement level regardless of the effort they put in or how skilled they were. For instance, if you and I both worked in the same office and you turned up at 8am every morning and worked your socks off until 5pm and I turned up late and then sat at my computer playing games all day, we would both be rewarded the same. That clearly isn't fair.

A fully equal society is never possible because some people will work harder than others and some people are more skilled than others. For instance, I will never be as good a footballer as Lionel Messi even if I practice football 12 hours a day every day. Doctors are paid more than cleaners because of supply and demand. I'm not in any way putting cleaners down, I have the utmost respect for them and have done similar jobs myself. However, the fact is most people are skilled enough to clean whereas very few people have the skills required to be a doctor so their skills are paid more highly.
If everyone was paid the same or had Universal Income there would be no incentive for anyone to work hard and society would soon, if not collapse, then certainly struggle.

What I firmly believe though is that the people in positions of wealth and influence should use that for good and NOT to oppress or exploit those below them. That's why I loath people like Mike Ashley, a billionaire who operates warehouses that resemble Victorian workhouses and treats his staff at Sports Direct appallingly. ( I used to work there myself) Jim Ratcliffe is another one like that

What I don't understand is how anyone could be rich and not want to help the poor. Sadly, there are many people like that it seems but it baffles me. If I was a billionaire I wouldn't be able to sleep at night for thinking of all the people who were homeless or struggling unless I was doing something to help them

I agree with you about renationalisation. One only has to look at train fares and energy bills to see that privatisation has not been a good thing

Children

No Data