Equality of opportunity

[doodle]

Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states and if not, what if anything should be done to ensure a more perfect meritocracy?

[Pointedstick]

"Equality of opportunity" is an asymptotic ideal that can never be reached as long as any amount of diversity is present. The question is not whether or not it exists, but if a sufficient quantity of it is present. This of course requires determining what amount is sufficient, ideal, and too much.

[Libertarian666]

Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states and if not, what if anything should be done to ensure a more perfect meritocracy?

The answers are: "No", and "Get rid of government", respectively.

[WildAboutHarry]

Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states

Absolutely.  Or at least substantially more so than most other places and most other times.

However, individuals differ in their willingness, need, and ability to pursue various opportunities.  And at each stage of life one's choices slowly preclude the ability to pursue some opportunities.  Pursuing one opportunity effectively eliminates other opportunities, etc. (as Yogi says, when you come to a fork in the road, take it).

I am reminded of the line from Pink Floyd's Time

And then the one day you find
Ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run
You missed the starting gun

[doodle]

Does equality of opportunity exist in the united states

Absolutely.  Or at least substantially more so than most other places and most other times.

However, individuals differ in their willingness, need, and ability to pursue various opportunities.  And at each stage of life one's choices slowly preclude the ability to pursue some opportunities.  Pursuing one opportunity effectively eliminates other opportunities, etc. (as Yogi says, when you come to a fork in the road, take it).

I am reminded of the line from Pink Floyd's Time

And then the one day you find
Ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run
You missed the starting gun

Then why this:

Several large studies of mobility in developed countries in recent years have found that the US among the lowest in mobility.[4][8] One study (“Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults?")[8][10][13] found that of nine developed countries, the United States and United Kingdom had the lowest intergenerational vertical social mobility with about half of the advantages of having a parent with a high income passed on to the next generation. The four countries with the lowest "intergenerational income elasticity", i.e. the highest social mobility, were Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Canada with less than 20% of advantages of having a high income parent passed on to their children.

At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.[14] Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent of the Danes. Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.[

]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-econ ... es#Decline

[Xan]

That doesn't necessarily demonstrate lack of mobility; it only (if true) demonstrates lack of motion.

[jacob_h]

Equality of opportunity is, like "work according to ability, reward according to needs", a misplaced ideal that can lead to many varied instances of evil.

For example, if I were carving a new wooden duck decoy, I would not give my toddler a block of wood and the same sharp knives and chisels and expect him to not cut his fingers even though it would represent an equality of opportunity for him.

Likewise, expecting all adults to prosper in college or all governments to be responsible with nuclear ICBM technology is a dumb idea.

***

It seems to me that the Industrial Revolution enabled one of the greatest means of upward mobility for humanity.  For example, a peasant farmer could move out of a timber and thatch house and into a sturdier brick one just through hard work and thrift.  For clues to increases upward mobility in the USA, we may want to look at the post-Restoration culture in England that spawned the Industrial Revolution.  But, we may not like what we find, because that culture was theocratic, hyper-capitalist, patriarchal, monarchical, mono-racial, pro-science, and generally very conservative.

Luckily for humanity's other diverse cultures, the principles of the Industrial Revolution could be extracted from the English society of the time and transplanted.  But, it is interesting to note that no other culture generated / discovered the Industrial Revolution.  It makes me wonder if we need a similar culture to reach the Singularity / Radical Abundance.

[doodle]

That doesn't necessarily demonstrate lack of mobility; it only (if true) demonstrates lack of motion.

True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system. Why is there a lack of motion between classes and is this a concern? If we believe that people should win or lose based on their individual merits....is it fair to expect people to start 50 yards behind in a race and really catch up? Does such a state of affairs not lead to increased anti-social behavior and cheating?

[Pointedstick]

True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

During the time of human civilizations, has this ever not been the case? Even if your premise is true, is it possible that this is the default state of affairs in civilization and our current state actually represents a fantastic improvement over the opportunities available to 99.9% of all humans ever to live?

I mean, I'm thinking of things like free libraries, incredibly inexpensive internet access, ridiculously low barriers to entry for starting most businesses… these represent unbelievable opportunities compared to past times when knowledge was hoarded by the elite, when accidents of one's birth order determined what profession one would be forced do follow for one's entire life, or when a king or president could force you off to war or make you a slave.

[doodle]

True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

During the time of human civilizations, has this ever not been true? Even if your premise is true, is it possible that this is the default state of affairs in civilization and our current state actually represents a fantastic improvement over the opportunities available to 99.9% of all humans ever to live?

I mean, I'm thinking of things like free libraries, incredibly inexpensive internet access, ridiculously low barriers to entry for starting most businesses… these represent unbelievable opportunities compared to past times when knowledge was hoarded by the elite, when accidents of one's birth order determined what profession one would be forced do follow for one's entire life, or when a king or president could force you off to war or make you a slave.

Wow! I didn't think a libertarian could write such a glowing review of our oppressive and totalitarian big government system. 

[Pointedstick]

Wow! I didn't think a libertarian could write such a glowing review of our oppressive and totalitarian big government system. 

What can I say? You've talked me out of being a libertarian… or at least an anarchist. The downside of course is that you don't get to post gloating, snarky quips like that anymore.

[Libertarian666]

True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system.

During the time of human civilizations, has this ever not been true? Even if your premise is true, is it possible that this is the default state of affairs in civilization and our current state actually represents a fantastic improvement over the opportunities available to 99.9% of all humans ever to live?

I mean, I'm thinking of things like free libraries, incredibly inexpensive internet access, ridiculously low barriers to entry for starting most businesses… these represent unbelievable opportunities compared to past times when knowledge was hoarded by the elite, when accidents of one's birth order determined what profession one would be forced do follow for one's entire life, or when a king or president could force you off to war or make you a slave.

Yes, it's a good thing that the president can't have people killed on his order, and that 18-year-olds don't have to register for the draft!

Oh, wait...

[Pointedstick]

Yes, it's a good thing that the president can't have people killed on his order, and that 18-year-olds don't have to register for the draft!

Oh, wait...

Sure, I could be called up at any time if they reinstated the draft. But they haven't. Similarly, they haven't bulldozed my house, confiscated all my money, kidnapped my child, or tortured me for believing the wrong religion.

Living in fear sucks. We have it pretty good today. Lots of bad things could happen to us, but most of them are easily avoidable and preventable with a modicum of common sense, as Harry Browne teaches.

[Tyler]

True, but at the end of the day what seems to be emerging is a wealth based de facto caste system. Why is there a lack of motion between classes and is this a concern? If we believe that people should win or lose based on their individual merits....is it fair to expect people to start 50 yards behind in a race and really catch up? Does such a state of affairs not lead to increased anti-social behavior and cheating?

What specific examples are you thinking of where there is clear unequal opportunity in the US?  Not the result (which could be caused by a myriad of factors), but the actual lack of opportunity?

Basically, what would you change?

[Libertarian666]

Yes, it's a good thing that the president can't have people killed on his order, and that 18-year-olds don't have to register for the draft!

Oh, wait...

Sure, I could be called up at any time if they reinstated the draft. But they haven't. Similarly, they haven't bulldozed my house, confiscated all my money, kidnapped my child, or tortured me for believing the wrong religion.

Living in fear sucks. We have it pretty good today. Lots of bad things could happen to us, but most of them are easily avoidable and preventable with a modicum of common sense, as Harry Browne teaches.

All of those things have happened to people in this "land of the free". Were all of those people careless, including the times when the police have shot people in a house at the wrong address? I think that would be pretty hard to prevent.

[Pointedstick]

All of those things have happened to people in this "land of the free". Were all of those people careless, including the times when the police have shot people in a house at the wrong address? I think that would be pretty hard to prevent.

Of course they have; I know that. But let's not lose sight of the fact that they're rare events, and it's impossible to live a risk-less life. I worry about this just like you do. Hell, I even have a link I send people whey they react to the possibility with incredulity: http://www.cato.org/raidmap

But the map shows how truly rare these events are: less than 20 per year in a country of 310 million people. If we assume that 10 times as many take place as are reported and collected, then's still less than 200 per year, and in most of those, people are "just" terrorized, not injured or killed.

Does it suck? Yes. Is it worth worrying too much about? Not really, in my opinion.

[Libertarian666]

All of those things have happened to people in this "land of the free". Were all of those people careless, including the times when the police have shot people in a house at the wrong address? I think that would be pretty hard to prevent.

Of course they have; I know that. But let's not lose sight of the fact that they're rare events, and it's impossible to live a risk-less life. I worry about this just like you do. Hell, I even have a link I send people whey they react to the possibility with incredulity: http://www.cato.org/raidmap

But the map shows how truly rare these events are: less than 20 per year in a country of 310 million people. If we assume that 10 times as many take place as are reported and collected, then's still less than 200 per year, and in most of those, people are "just" terrorized, not injured or killed.

Does it suck? Yes. Is it worth worrying too much about? Not really, in my opinion.

Those events aren't what I worry about. You were the one who brought them up, as not having happened to you; I was just responding to that.

[doodle]

I looked at that list....frankly, I'm surprised there aren't more incidents concerning how many outrageous situations police are called on to address on a daily basis. You can probably look up any surgeon in the united states who has been practicing for more that 10 years and find multiple lawsuits filed against him. We live in an imperfect world where accidents and stupid decisions are bound to happen....especially when your life is on the line.

Anyways, this is all a tangent from the original question....

[WildAboutHarry]

Then why this:

Quote
Several large studies of mobility in developed countries in recent years have found that the US among the lowest in mobility.[4][8] One study (“Do Poor Children Become Poor Adults?")[8][10][13] found that of nine developed countries, the United States and United Kingdom had the lowest intergenerational vertical social mobility with about half of the advantages of having a parent with a high income passed on to the next generation. The four countries with the lowest "intergenerational income elasticity", i.e. the highest social mobility, were Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Canada with less than 20% of advantages of having a high income parent passed on to their children.

At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.[14] Meanwhile, just 8 percent of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. That compares with 12 percent of the British and 14 percent of the Danes. Despite frequent references to the United States as a classless society, about 62 percent of Americans (male and female) raised in the top fifth of incomes stay in the top two-fifths, according to research by the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts. Similarly, 65 percent born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.[

]

There are relatively few social or structural barriers to opportunity (not the case for results!) in the U.S.  There are also plenty of "opportunities" for individual f-ups, laziness, lack of interest, bad choices, bad luck, bad parents, bad teachers, etc. that, when looked at through the lens of a life lived, can appear to show lack of opportunity. 

You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am