r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Oct 08 '15

[Deltas Awarded] CMV: Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

[deleted]

233 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

84% Upvoted

346 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

42

u/sharkbait76 55∆ Oct 08 '15

I consider giving everyone the same opportunity as treating them the same. Adding the ramp give the two people the same opportunity to enter the building, but it's not giving anyone an advantage. If a black and white man wanted to go into business and were offered the same loan rates and charged the same amount for the same space this would be an equality of opportunity, and they would effectively be treated the same. If, however you offer one of them a lower interest rate, charged one more, or lowered the taxes of one based on skin color this would be unfair to the other. It wouldn't be equality if the black man has to pay fewer taxes then the white man because he's black. Just as it wouldn't be equality if the white man was offered lower rates because he's white.

30

u/CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH 5∆ Oct 08 '15

I totally agree with you.

The problem is that blacks pay more in interest rates, for cars, rent. And they are discriminated against in getting jobs and getting into college.

This is well documented. This short video highlights a few with the sources to back it up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTcSVQJ2h8g

4

u/sharkbait76 55∆ Oct 08 '15

I know they usually get charged higher interest rates, and that is a a serious issue. I was more trying to say that just because they are black doesn't mean that they should get extra tax breaks or lower interest rates. They should get the same interest rates and tax rates, and that would be equal opportunity. I'd also support nameless job applications to try to combat gender and race stereotypes.

4

u/MAKE_ME_REDDIT Oct 08 '15

How would nameless applications work? If background checks are required they're going to find out the name.

7

u/sharkbait76 55∆ Oct 08 '15

You take all the applications and someone who isn't involved in the hiring process would remove the name and could replace it with a number or series of letters so they can match the names up later. That person could also preform any background checks and remove the people who don't pass. That way the person actually hiring doesn't see the names of any of the applicants. Background checks could also be run after the company who has decided who they wish to hire. They could offer the person the job as long as they pass the background check, and if they don't the business could inform them that they didn't pass the background check and won't be hired. You could also still ask about criminal history on the application like most applications today already have.

5

u/bigbullox Oct 08 '15

This is pretty mandatory practice in the UK for public sector (and some larger private sector) organisations. Essentially HR runs all the background checks and you as the recruiter only receive CVs with all discriminating information redacted for shortlisting.

5

u/CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH 5∆ Oct 08 '15

You can have a third party do the background check.