0
1

[–] daskapitalist 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

And in the background we have everyone who earned the right to watch the game by purchasing a ticket instead of freeloading.

0
2

[–] Zaqwert 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

This analogy only works if these people stumble across the boxes.

In reality, some people build lots of boxes for themselves out of hard work and dedication, while some people just demand boxes be given to them.

3
0

[–] Apathy 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

And how exactly do you remove the barrier when the barrier is a low IQ (different races have different IQ's), ambition, and capability (see men vs women). You can't make people smarter. You can't make them less violent (without castrating them or drugging them, but that's a whole different issue) and you can't force them to become more motivated/inventive/creative. So although the analogy is nice, there are certain barriers that you can't remove.

Moving on to the equality and equity part. Why help others? Because it's nice? Because we should? Okay, but guess what, this is a zero sum game. Meaning that when we pay to help others, we are taking from people who don't require help. Why should person B and C get aid, while person A has to pay for it? How is that fair? How is that "equal"?

True equality would mean everyone gets the same aid, the same privileges, the same everything regardless of gender or race. Unfortunately this will never happen, because we live in a society where we have bullshit like affirmative action trying to make some people more equal than others.

0
1

[–] Crux 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Except what is happening now adays is the tall guy is getting sliced off at the knees so the short guy has something to stand on or play catch with.

0
7

[–] Claudius 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

I'm a man in the ~89.6% height percentile. I'm taller than 99.89% of women. Therefore, I require more food to survive than 99.89% of women. If we're going to start enforcing equity, I should be paid more than almost every woman to accommodate my individual food needs.

0
1

[–] Gake_The_Cake 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

This is an excellent argument. Most men make more money, but they also spend more on food and water due to biological needs.

0
3

[–] Had 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Men make almost the same when you control for education, experience, etc. If women make less, why not hire all women? The pay gap people spout has been debunked so many times that I can't believe it is still out there as a "fact".

0
1

[–] Troll 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

What if the barrier is not a systemic one, as in an oppressive regime, but a biological one, as in different levels of testosterone? Are we supposed to remove weights heavier than 50lbs from the gyms because most women can't lift those?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] ghotioninabarrel 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

In this case the fairness is not fairness of what is given, but fairness of effect.

The first distribution only really benefits the middle guy. The second benefits both the middle guy and the short guy. Switching from the first distribution to the second doesn't hurt the tall guy in any significant way.

That last bit is the really important bit imo. It's why the analogy breaks down when people try to use it to justify quotas etc, because in those cases the benefit to the (assumed) disadvantaged is in fact coming at the expense of the (assumed) advantaged.

The third setup is obviously superior to the other two, it's also the hardest to make happen.

0
0

[–] TremorAcePV ago  (edited ago)

is at all fair

The results are the same. That seems to be what is used to discern what is "fair" in that situation.

0
4

[–] dv1155 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

The fence is a metaphor for the Democrat party and liberalism.

load more comments ▼ (2 remaining)