It seems to me that they did have the same opportunity to run the race until the camp counselor imposed artificial handicaps on them.
*sigh* And you already missed the point. Intentionally, I'll bet.
Perhaps that counselor should witness some marathons where the participants focus is to finish the race, not necessarily to win it. The takeaway from the camp example is, "Why even run if you can't win." Only one can win, but all should finish.
People's personal definitions of winning are certainly different. Unfortunately, people tend to impose their own definitions on others and treat them like losers if they don't fit their definition.
As has been said before equality of opportunity doesn't guarantee equality of outcome.
I come from a background that didn't lend itself to success, but I've done quite well. But for my immaturity early on I could have done even better. The problem is that many kids are given only limited choices of the routes to success, choices than continue to enrich the few, at their expense.
Ah, see. You do recognize the inequality in opportunity that exists in this country. So, your denial of it is intentional?
The rat in the woodpile is the cultivation by the elitists for the disdain of physical work, thus robbing many of the best opportunities for success.
Who are those elitists? What was their background? Do you think they had the same opportunities that you or I had presuming neither of us are "Elitists"?
If you are poor and undereducated that is the hand you've been dealt and you have to deal with it. You can still succeed (finish the race) but it will likely take longer and more effort will be required.
Certainly, I agree that individuals have to work with the hand they are dealt, what choice do they have? But I also think the system should work to level that playing field as much as possible so that people can have an equal opportunity at the same chance of success. That means programs and assistance to families that struggle like the scenario I stated above to give the child that grows up in that situation the same chance to be able to take advantage of opportunities as the child in Nebraska. It means educating people about diversity and their cultural biases so they are less likely to treat people different from themselves with disdain or like "losers" when they fail to meet their definition of success.
For, example, Juan from the inner-city and Billy from Nebraska both might appear to have the same opportunity to attend a state college. Except Juan's parents can't afford the tuition and Billy's dad makes over $100,000 a year and has saved up for his college tuition. This is the hand they were dealt, but are their opportunities really the same? Can the system do something to level out that opportunity so that
both Juan and Billy can attend college whether their parents would be able to afford it or not? YES, it can! It could, for example, use tax dollars it collects from the entire population to subsidize college tuition for both Billy and Juan, thereby giving both a more equal opportunity to succeed in their college education. Note, that either Billy or Juan could certainly goof-off, make bad decisions and waste that opportunity, but they both had the same chance at least (not withstanding many, many other factors that impact opportunity in general, like not having the same risk of being killed in a drive-by shooting while sitting on your couch watching TV, for example).
There's no good reason to allow suffering and hardship when it is perfectly within our power to alleviate it to some degree as a society and truly make people's opportunities equal.