Hopefully, Equal Opportunities Will Never Exist

[Berzerker]

To me equal opportunity means access to a decent education for all, unbiased hiring and unbiased financial opportunities.

So the Democrats who've run big cities for decades as their private fiefdoms hiring political party hacks to run the empire don't really believe in equal opportunity?

Boddington's point is valid in one way, once "equal opportunity"
begins to detract from an incentive based system like "capitalism", it becomes a drag on success and innovation.
However, I doubt a committed parent will stop trying to give their kids advantages even if the state insists on trying to sabatoge those advantages with "equal opportunity" programs.
But for those who are arguing that equal opportunity refers only to certain things like education and jobs, how is that equal opportunity unless you outlaw all private and home schooling if those alternatives to the government schools are more effective at educating children? The education would still be unequal, therefore, "equal opportunity" is a fiction. Maybe we shouldn't read "equal opportunity" literally...

[GePap]

But for those who are arguing that equal opportunity refers only to certain things like education and jobs, how is that equal opportunity unless you outlaw all private and home schooling if those alternatives to the government schools are more effective at educating children? The education would still be unequal, therefore, "equal opportunity" is a fiction. Maybe we shouldn't read "equal opportunity" literally...

The idea is that of the government making possible, not making mandatory. Take universal health care. In countires with it, if you are sick, you still have to get yourself to it, its not like they force you to go to the hospital. Same here. Parents most certainly would have the ability to opt out of the opportunities given to them, as long as they could show that what they were doing was not hurting the child (like keeping him from school and not educating him at all). Besides, home schooling is not that much of an advantage once one gets to higher education, which pasrents can not do on their own, one becuase the individual is now a free adult, and two becuase they are not accredited teaching institutions.

The idea is to give the safety net, so that if you need it , it is there.

[Al B. Sure!]

GePap:

you can get emergency medical attention in the US for free... just skip on the bill

and there's also clinics...

[GePap]

And? Unless someone calls for the emergency, you don't get the help. Help is offered, it is not mandatory.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
This troll was slow going up the kill, but now it's like a speeding bullet

i dont think bodd was trying to troll cause he's obviously not understanding what eq op is.

[Berzerker]

GePap -

The idea is that of the government making possible, not making mandatory.

Which is why equal opportunity is a fiction since the possibility cannot be realised for all unless we have the same education (and by extension, the same environment); therefore, private and home schooling must be done away with for equal opportunity to ostensibly exist.

[GePap]

Oh please...

And equal rights do not exist either since rich people and poor people exist: so lets kill all of one of them!

You want totally equal opportunity? then not only must home schooling be done away with, but all the Kids must learn form the same single individual existing at the same point in space time for all eternity! No deviation from this most ever be allowed! All kids, today and tommorrow, and yesterday must all be made to inhabit the same very point in space time to insure utter and complete equality. Anything less means equality is impossible!

Give me a break. Your point is a triviality, as it were, an absurdity.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Actually, there is one way to reach pure equal opportunity, but I don't think anybody would want it.
Simply put all children in State-Run orphanages where they are attended truly equally by nurses following a strict bureaucratic code. Of course, the parents are not to see their kids, to make sure they cannot skew the opportunities.

Also being a big equal-opportunityist, I don't support this option, go figure

Even in this case, shear physical differences could come into play in making sure opportunities are unequal. I suppose that this is the closest one can get to equal opportunity however.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You ever wish Spink's parents had an abortion?

One more like that from you, or anyone, will get a week off.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GePap


I would assume better from you MtG. The point Bodds makes is that people are only ambitious to give their kids a leg up. If they didn;t have such an ability, they would do nothing. This is obviously wrong.

Of course it's wrong to presume a single motivator for anything. I was just poking at your crap example. Egostistical and otherwise pointless drive and ambition isn't really to be preferred over some motivation for a better future condition, though, is it?

They are paragons of ambition and drive. Not of morality, but of ambition and drive, which are morally neutral things.

Ambition and drive without an appropriate object isn't a positive force.

Oh, and we do encourage selfishness and living for the today now a days.

With great results in so many areas.

You can't get on a moral high horse that does not currently exist here.

Why would I bother?

[Dis]

you know, I agree with Boddington's a lot of the time, but am afraid to admit it

I agree with his post completely. (though the thread title is wrong- what he is describing isn't equal opportunity- it is called socialism)

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Dissident
you know, I agree with Boddington's a lot of the time, but am afraid to admit it

That's frightening. Can you take something for that?

[Berzerker]

GePap -

Oh please...

Let me guess, that was a rebuttal?

And equal rights do not exist either since rich people and poor people exist: so lets kill all of one of them!

I want to kill people with less opportunity? Equal rights do exist, doesn't matter if you're rich or poor. A right is a legitimate, i.e., moral claim to act in accordance with the meaning of freedom.
If you're rich and I'm poor, how does that simple fact produce for me a lesser "right" to live than you?

You want totally equal opportunity?

Nope, I'd settle for a little truth in advertising. If ya'll want "equal opportunity" and chastise those who don't care for your agenda, I think it only fair to point out you don't want equal opportunity either. You want certain steps taken to bring us closer to equal opportunity, so does that mean people - communists - who want to take even more steps are better, more moral people?

then not only must home schooling be done away with, but all the Kids must learn form the same single individual existing at the same point in space time for all eternity!

Why? If the goal is "equal opportunity", we'd use whatever method was available to provide children with an equal education. I'm sure we can devise a system for ascertaining the abilities of all teachers, say, a series of tests, to make sure children don't get someone too smart or too stupid. Remember, it's a goal, so why stop reforming education when we have such obvious (not trivial) advantages for some children while the rest are dis-advantaged?

All kids, today and tommorrow, and yesterday must all be made to inhabit the same very point in space time to insure utter and complete equality. Anything less means equality is impossible!

Hmm...is this where I insert some latin term like reducto absurdum?

Give me a break. Your point is a triviality, as it were, an absurdity.

Funny, that was what I was just thinking. But you haven't answered my question. How will we achieve this equal opportunity if some of us get to give our kids advantages like private and home schooling? Doesn't seem trivial to me, and not to alot of liberals running public school systems. They are trying to outlaw home schooling already in certain states. Of course, they didn't introduce a law banning the practice, they are currently just trying to regulate it out of existence. If we see a voucher system, that'll be the way for liberals to ruin private schools too...

[Dis]

Originally posted by GePap


I would assume better from you MtG. The point Bodds makes is that people are only ambitious to give their kids a leg up. If they didn;t have such an ability, they would do nothing. This is obviously wrong.



They are paragons of ambition and drive. Not of morality, but of ambition and drive, which are morally neutral things. Oh, and we do encourage selfishness and living for the today now a days.

You can't get on a moral high horse that does not currently exist here.

Let me put it to you bluntly. Men strive to succeed to get chicks, not for their kids. The more successful a man is, the better women he can get.

It's just that simple.

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
i hope equal opportunities will never exist. only people of asian extraction should get good jobs. people of african, european, and american extraction can all do the grunt work and the labor with slave collars around their necks.

I agree completely.

Originally posted by Albert Speer
come on, boddingtons... I'm calling you a nut... me...