Commentary
Imagine you have two adult children, Alissa and Tony, who are twins. When they were born, you set up a trust account for them to receive when they turned 30. They are now 29 years old, happily married, and each with two children. Alissa is a neurosurgeon earning over $400,000 a year, while Tony is a violinist in a regional orchestra making significantly less.
Alissa has already accumulated a net worth of $1 million and is on track to become a decamillionaire before she turns 40. On the other hand, Tony has a net worth of zero with slim prospects of earning a substantial income. Despite this, he is content with his chosen path, and his family is thriving.
The trust account is worth $1 million, and if you follow the original plan, both Alissa and Tony will receive $500,000 each on their next birthday. This would result in Alissa having a net worth of $1.5 million and Tony with $500,000.
While this may seem like a fair outcome, considering Alissa’s advantages, one could argue that giving Tony the entire $1 million would be more equitable, as it would leave them both with a net worth of $1 million each.
However, it raises the question of fairness. Alissa worked hard to achieve her success in medicine, while Tony chose a lower-paying career in music. Giving Tony the same amount as Alissa might send the wrong message about entitlement and effort.
This scenario highlights a broader ethical and social debate in American culture today—equality versus equity.
Two Similar Words, Different Meanings
The concept of “equality” in the Declaration of Independence refers to the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all individuals. Over time, this definition has expanded to include various rights for different groups, such as minorities and women.
Similarly, “equitable” has evolved to mean fairness or justice in how people are treated, rather than just uniformity or equality.
While giving Alissa and Tony equal amounts would be equal, it may not necessarily be equitable. This distinction underpins many of the debates surrounding issues like affirmative action.
Historically, affirmative action aimed to provide equal opportunities for minorities who faced discrimination. However, the current interpretation of equity often means ensuring equal outcomes, not just equal opportunities.
Today, the debate around equity extends to guaranteeing equal finishes, not just equal starts. This shift in definition has implications for various aspects of society, including employment, education, and social justice.
And for those who support this ideology, it entails striving for equal outcomes in every aspect, from childhood competitions to test scores, hiring and promotions, and wealth.
This poses a significant issue.
The Only Measure of Achievement That Makes Sense
If our goal is equal outcomes, we must overlook all the critical factors that contribute to success in the real world, such as aptitude, ambition, hard work, persistence, as well as intellectual and emotional intelligence. We must also acknowledge that affirmative action and other initiatives aimed at assisting disadvantaged communities are insufficient as they do not lead to equal earnings.
Advocates for equal outcomes are akin to parents who believe it is fair to give one child a million and the other child nothing because they want both children to have equally fulfilling lives, equating happiness and fulfillment with equal net worth.
They fail to comprehend that giving each child the same amount does not equate to providing them with equal opportunities. While both children may be equally intelligent and capable, one child may have a significant advantage due to existing net worth and future earning potential.
They refuse to acknowledge the reality that unless unforeseen circumstances occur or one child decides to pursue a different path, disparities in wealth will persist between the two children.
They may temporarily make their children equal in terms of wealth, but they overlook the potential harm this can cause to both children and their relationship.
The ramifications of this approach are complex and deserve further exploration, but that discussion is best left for another day.
*Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and may not necessarily reflect those of The Epoch Times.*
Source link
