Is equality a bad thing?

[Seperates]

Miss Piggy would like a word.

Last time I went near her I ended up legless. Do you want to be responsible for my arms?

Hey, don't shoot the messenger.

Or kick the messenger into a pit.

Allow me to clarify. Do not harm, or incarcerate, the messanger in any way, shape, or form. Kapeesh?

[Individuality-ness]

But this is NSG. If we don't put on the intellectual pretense to make our arguments seem better by style, what else are we supposed to do to show off our elitism?

...Formulate arguments that actually have some weight on their own without, and I apologize for this, "Slapping lipstick on a pig"?

You and Neo Art should get together and do an NSG Debate Renascence or something.

Miss Piggy would like a word.

Uh oh.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Last time I went near her I ended up legless. Do you want to be responsible for my arms?

Hey, don't shoot the messenger.

Or kick the messenger into a pit.

Allow me to clarify. Do not harm, or incarcerate, the messanger in any way, shape, or form. Kapeesh?

*Sets down the pack containing ice cubes, rubber bands, and a weasel*

Fine.

Spoilsport.

[United States of America Under Dodes]

North Stradia is probably my main source of humor from this forum.

[Seperates]

Hey, don't shoot the messenger.

Or kick the messenger into a pit.

Allow me to clarify. Do not harm, or incarcerate, the messanger in any way, shape, or form. Kapeesh?

*Sets down the pack containing ice cubes, rubber bands, and a weasel*

Fine.

Spoilsport.

Dodged a weasel on that one.

[Stanisburg]

No. Because the government enacted and enforced anti-discrimination laws.

Exactly, people wouldn't stand for it this day an age. I am not supportive of discrimination, but I see no reason why someone should not be allowed to open a restaurant or whatever just for a certain group.

Biggest logic fail in the whole thread. I am in awe.

[Wielki Lechia]

Equality is a great thing up until the point you step on someone else's rights to achieve it.

[Individuality-ness]

Equality is a great thing up until the point you step on someone else's rights to achieve it.

Are you for equality of opportunity then?

[Wielki Lechia]

Equality is a great thing up until the point you step on someone else's rights to achieve it.

Are you for equality of opportunity then?

Not really, no. Do I agree with it's goal? Most definitely. However, hiring someone to meet a quota other than their ability for the actual position is just another form of discrimination. I don't know of a replacement to create equal opportunity, though, as you can never get rid of prejudice out of a work place.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

Equality is a great thing up until the point you step on someone else's rights to achieve it.

Unfortunately real equality will always require that you harm the most productive among us.

[Individuality-ness]

Are you for equality of opportunity then?

Not really, no. Do I agree with it's goal? Most definitely. However, hiring someone to meet a quota other than their ability for the actual position is just another form of discrimination. I don't know of a replacement to create equal opportunity, though, as you can never get rid of prejudice out of a work place.

You do realize that using quotas to achieve AA is illegal, right?

[Wielki Lechia]

Not really, no. Do I agree with it's goal? Most definitely. However, hiring someone to meet a quota other than their ability for the actual position is just another form of discrimination. I don't know of a replacement to create equal opportunity, though, as you can never get rid of prejudice out of a work place.

You do realize that using quotas to achieve AA is illegal, right?

And? How do you prove it otherwise?

[Tulija]

Equality of opportunity? of course not. Of outcome? Yes. Of expectation? Yes.

Hierarchy is required to provide us with something to work toward, something to strive to be, otherwise success and work would be moot.

[Inky Noodles]

It can become progressively bad once we lose the the values of each individual.

[Rereumrari]

It's noble in purpose, but in the end, it always tips the balance of the scale to the other side instead of making things better. In order to make things equal, you have to take from someone else who has an unequal amount and give it to someone that has a negative amount, then the first person ends up in the negative and the other one in the positive. For example, say someone is getting a solid A in math class while another guy is getting an F. Obviously, there is some inequality, but if you were to take his grade and lower it to a C, then you take the second guy and raise his grade to a C, everything is "equal", but the first guy lost what he earned while the second guy gained a few marks for being a failure. It encourages failure and punishes success.

[Individuality-ness]

You do realize that using quotas to achieve AA is illegal, right?

And? How do you prove it otherwise?

Things like point systems, for example. Checking hiring practices. Etc.

Equality of opportunity? of course not. Of outcome? Yes. Of expectation? Yes.

Hierarchy is required to provide us with something to work toward, something to strive to be, otherwise success and work would be moot.

Dear, I think you're confused. Equality of opportunity means that everyone has the same opportunities to try to achieve, equality of outcome means that everyone ends up with the same result, no matter how much you try.

[Individuality-ness]

It's noble in purpose, but in the end, it always tips the balance of the scale to the other side instead of making things better. In order to make things equal, you have to take from someone else who has an unequal amount and give it to someone that has a negative amount, then the first person ends up in the negative and the other one in the positive. For example, say someone is getting a solid A in math class while another guy is getting an F. Obviously, there is some inequality, but if you were to take his grade and lower it to a C, then you take the second guy and raise his grade to a C, everything is "equal", but the first guy lost what he earned while the second guy gained a few marks for being a failure. It encourages failure and punishes success.

That's describing equality of results, not equality of opportunity.

[The Emerald Dawn]

It's noble in purpose, but in the end, it always tips the balance of the scale to the other side instead of making things better. In order to make things equal, you have to take from someone else who has an unequal amount and give it to someone that has a negative amount, then the first person ends up in the negative and the other one in the positive. For example, say someone is getting a solid A in math class while another guy is getting an F. Obviously, there is some inequality, but if you were to take his grade and lower it to a C, then you take the second guy and raise his grade to a C, everything is "equal", but the first guy lost what he earned while the second guy gained a few marks for being a failure. It encourages failure and punishes success.

Except that's not how it works, because the goal is to give both the opportunity to do well, not force one person down to build another up.

[Wielki Lechia]

And? How do you prove it otherwise?

Things like point systems, for example. Checking hiring practices. Etc.

All require more money than anyone is willing to spend when "more pressing things" are on the table. It is all good in theory, but how efficient are they in practice?

[Individuality-ness]

Things like point systems, for example. Checking hiring practices. Etc.

All require more money than anyone is willing to spend when "more pressing things" are on the table. It is all good in theory, but how efficient are they in practice?

Very efficient if you do simple things like not requiring race/gender on the application form and assigning every applicant with a unique ID number during the hiring process. It's not hard.

[Conscentia]

I want to ensure that this gets a response...

Anybody is able to get ahead in this world and successfully manipulate others has proven themselves to be worthy of praise.

Why do you think this?

Success deserves praise. Failure deserves contempt.

· Success & failure are subjective.
· Why do you think this?
· Even the success of an individual was at the expense of many others?

[Morganutopia]

"Equal treatment under the law"
is good pay has not a thing to do how the gov shod treat you

bob makes 1,000,000 a day he kills a man he go's to jail.
Jill makes 50 a day she kills a man he go's to jail.

that is equality that is good.

[The Emerald Dawn]

"Equal treatment under the law"
is good pay has not a thing to do how the gov shod treat you

bob makes 1,000,000 a day he kills a man he go's to jail.
Jill makes 50 a day she kills a man he go's to jail.

that is equality that is good.

[Orenica]

North Stradia:
Believes that wealth redistribution and equality are unfair.

Do you think equality is a good or bad thing?

I think it is a very bad thing. It discourages people from working hard, and it unfairly benefits the poor at the expense of the rich.

Thoughts?

Abhors fairness and wants it avoided at all costs.

Agreed. Fairness is something that should be avoided at all costs.

I get it now. He's a hard-line communist. Obviously.

[New Dragonia]

Equality is good because ethnic diversity plants the seed for nationalism, discrimination, and other issues of the sort. Gender equality is important because without it, one gender will remain unvoiced and reclusive. Income equality ensures that the career path people follow is a true path. You do not know how many people strive to be doctors and lawyers just because "they earn a lot of money."