Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt
I was pretty surprised to read this to be honest. You think that equality outside of race and gender equality is a threat to your hopes and dreams?
Much of your life is good because you strive to achieve things? So those in Africa live in poverty because they don't strive and those around the world living in corruption are not hoping enough?
What are your hopes and dreams, to start an oil company in the Middle East or a copper mining company in Africa? (sarcasm)
I agree with most of what you said but I'm baffled by the bit I quoted above. Its basically the typical attitude I've observed in westerners when they discuss poverty or financial inequality on a global scale or even in their home countries when speaking about the lower-class. "they are lazy, I work hard for what I have and they've made mistakes and deserve what they are getting until they can learn how to be hard working and civilized like we are"
|
Let me be a bit more clear.
1. I don't think equality for equality's sake is good because it interferes with everyone's ability to improve in areas beyond the ones that are generally agreed on like race, gender, etc. There are other areas it's good too, those are just the ones that come to mind. I think this is just as true in the poorest areas of the world as the richest ones. Further, beyond wealth, say, for example, physical ability, a cripple may not be equal with someone who can walk easily on his own, but he can still dream and work towards making his condition less of a hindrance, so long as proper safety nets are in place.
2. I think we ought to strive for a minimum standard in many other areas. This is not equality though. The minimum standard has a long ways to go in many parts of the world before it's acceptable, but it's improving due to the efforts of groups like nothing but nets in combination with governments and organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.
3. I'm generally pro social safety net. I'm for this safety net because I'm not for any measure of enforced equality, but am for minimum standards, and achieving this means that a few mistakes should note leave anyone starving and homeless.
4. Being opposed to equality for equality's sake rather than for fairness sake doesn't mean I oppose a certain amount of wealth re-distributation through taxation. I think it's only fair that income beyond the necessities be taxed, and that income that goes beyond covering the basics, should be taxed at a higher rate again.
I hope this clears thing up.