The concept in political argument Equality of outcome

debate economic issues surrounding equality old civilization. painting: ancient greek philosophers plato (left) , aristotle raffaello sanzio (1509).

the concept of equality of outcome important 1 in battling between differing political positions, since concept of equality, overall, seen positive , important foundation embedded in fabric of modern politics. there political jousting on what, exactly, equality means. not new phenomenon; battling between so-called haves , have-nots has happened throughout human civilization, , focus of philosophers such aristotle in treatise politics. analyst julian glover in guardian wrote equality challenged both left-leaning , right-leaning positions, , suggested task of left-leaning advocates understand impossibility , undesirability of equality while task right-leaning advocates realise divided , hierarchical society cannot – in best sense of word – fair.

conservatives. conservatives believe in equality of opportunity not outcome. in view, life not fair, how is. criticize attempts try fight poverty redistributive methods ineffective since more serious cultural , behavioral problems lock poor people poverty. right-leaning positions have been criticized liberals over-simplifying meant term equality of outcome, , construing outcomes strictly mean precisely equal amounts everybody. commentator ed rooksby in guardian criticized right s tendency oversimplify, , suggested serious left-leaning advocates not construe equality mean absolute equality of . rooksby wrote marx favored position described in phrase each according ability, each according need , , argued did not imply strict equality of things, meant people required different things in different proportions in order flourish.


libertarians , advocates of economic liberalism such friedrich hayek , milton friedman tend see equality of outcome negatively , argue effort cause equal outcomes , unfortunately involve coercion government. friedman wrote striving equality of outcome leaves people without equality , without opportunity.
liberals. analyst glenn oliver suggested liberals believed in equality of opportunity , of outcome. 1 liberal position is simplistic define equality in strict outcomes since questions such being equalized huge differences in preferences , tastes , needs considerable. ask: being equalized? in 1960s in united states, mainstream liberal president lyndon johnson, examining plight of african americans locked in poverty, argued ending policies promoted segregation , discrimination steps end economic injustice turning equality of opportunity equality of outcome, is, programs transfer wealth in varying amounts. fairness emphasized; 1 writer expounding centrist position wrote people neither left fend nor guaranteed equality of outcome – given tools needed achieve american dream if worked hard. there has been cynicism expressed in media neither side, including mainstream political positions, wants substantive, nebulous term fairness used cloak inactivity because difficult measure what, in fact, fairness means. julian glover wrote fairness compels no action , compared atmospheric ideal, invisible gas, miasma, , use expression churchill, happy thought.


social democrats champion greater equality of outcome , opportunities within capitalism, promoted through redistributive social policies progressive taxation , provision of universal public services.
socialists believe in both inequality of opportunity , equality of outcome according oliver. see greater equality of outcome positive long-term goal achieved, individuals have equal access means of production , consumption. bernard shaw 1 of few socialist theorists advocate complete economic equality of outcome right @ beginning of world war one. vast majority of socialists view ideal economy 1 remuneration @ least proportional degree of effort , personal sacrifice expended individuals in productive process. latter concept expressed karl marx s famous maxim: each according contribution.




^ cite error: named reference twso26 invoked never defined (see page).
^ julian glover (10 october 2010). left should recognise equality undesirable: sounds horribly rightwing, fair society may 1 in people have right strive inequality . guardian. retrieved 2011-07-15. in days of new labour said media adviser whispered ambitious minister s ear after interview: don t equality, fairness. former reeked of socialism – taxes, empowerment schemes , regulation. latter inoffensive scented candle. can agree fair – problem. 
^ glenn oliver. difference between liberalism , socialism ? d appreciate general rather party political answers . guardian. retrieved 2011-07-15. conservatives believe in inequality of opportunity , inequality of outcome. liberals believe in equality of opportunity , inequality of outcome. socialists believe in inequality of opportunity , equality of outcome. 
^ cite error: named reference twso35 invoked never defined (see page).
^ cite error: named reference twso28 invoked never defined (see page).
^ cite error: named reference twso47 invoked never defined (see page).
^ cite error: named reference twso45 invoked never defined (see page).
^ kevin boyle (july 18, 2010). james t. patterson s freedom not enough, reviewed kevin boyle . washington post. retrieved 2011-07-15. ... time address economic injustice kept half black population below poverty line, turn equality of opportunity equality of outcome.... 
^ mark penn (january 31, 2011). how obama can find center . washington post. retrieved 2011-07-15. fundamental principle of centrism in 1990s people neither left fend nor guaranteed equality of outcome – given tools needed achieve american dream if worked hard.... 
^ cite error: named reference :0 invoked never defined (see page).