I think the difference between equity and equality is in the outcome and how that outcome is achieved. Equality means that everyone should be afforded the same opportunities and recognizes that even with equal treatment, some people will achieve more and the outcome might not be equitable. Equity as applied in a socialist concept tries to achieve equal outcomes by manipulating the opportunities or even the outcomes to achieve equitable outcomes. This is based on the assumption that not all people have equal opportunities and that only by an unequal distribution of opportunities will truly equal starting points be achieved. Usually there will also be a redistribution of outcome to move assets from the high achievers to the lower achievers. This is already the case in the U.S. where the higher your income is the higher your tax bracket. That is a form of socialist redistribution.
This is partially correct, but the discourse around equality vs. equity has largely been tainted by bad-faith representations from right-wing, “classical liberal” types. The idea behind equity isn’t simple redistribution of opportunities and achievements from the top end to the bottom. It’s redistribution with the aim of constructing a meritocracy where the bottom doesn’t leave people unhoused, starving, and sick. This means more profits produced by labor going to laborers rather than owners, and more taxes funding public social infrastructure rather than imperialism or trickle-down policies. We’re not looking for an even distribution of opportunities or outcomes. We’re looking for a more natural, meritocratic distribution. Currently there are too many systemic barriers to economic mobility causing a stickiness at the ends for that to exist.
I agree with your thoughts here; but you might want to look up "Shelby County vs. Holder". It is a famous Supreme Court decision that struck down the federal preclearance requirements on state voting laws as outlined in the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The court ruled that while there was a need for a federal effort in 1965 to achieve equity in voting rights that to apply these same rules in 2013 was no longer responsive to current needs. So efforts at equity can be just as sticky as systemic poverty and unequity.
I like the way that out of all the forums I visit this one is the only one where I regularly read the word ‘blacks’ in the opening message of a thread.
Perhaps, but the issue is that there are inequalities in our society and how do you address those. If you look at the support systems that are in place for the homeless, the hungry, etc., political solutions have been a joke. The idea of throwing money at the problems just don't work. The more successful solutions that at least meet the immediate needs of these people are from churches, charities, and local people who have devoted their lives to these causes. These are the heroes in this effort and have been for centuries. Unfortunately, our current political environment makes it taboo to talk about the real causes of these issues, like drug use and dropping out of school. They would rather make this a race issue. I work as an engineer and in a long career have found that unless you attack the root cause of a problem, you will never really fix it.
