Spyke
Salehreply
feddit.org

I didn't have any outside* help and started in a garage**

* my uncle gave me a few hundred thousand starting capital and got me in touch with investors. But everyone has access to that if they know how to present themselves.
**as the house of my parents had a second garage that was empty because they parked the second car in the driveway

22
lemmy.world

He passed them to the same mom who competes this race against him. then once he wins the prize, he tells her to pay her equal share

17

then once he wins the prize, he tells her to pay her equal share

What, no, that would be cruel! He rakes in thousands then magnanimously hands her the pre-agreed minimal wage for taking care of his kids. Isn't the trickle-down effect beautiful? 🥹

9
banzhaffreply
feddit.uk

You know, women aren't forced to have kids.

-12

Of course not. This is a highly simplified scenario based on what would be typical: brown vs. white, woman vs. man, poor vs rich etc.

9
Salehreply
feddit.org

You know, having children should not disadvantage you in society irrespective of gender. As you are contributing to the maintenance of society it should actually be rewarded.

7

Thought-terminating cliché right here. You're already convinced that a better world isn't possible for a set of vague reasons known only to you, but you're too intellectually lazy to give it any thought.

I ask you to elaborate on why, not because I want to hear it (I've probably heard it before), but because I want you to actually think about it.

3

No, just constantly questioned and shamed regardless of the choices they make

4
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

I'm not sure I understand what having equity when it comes to access to necessities would even look like. How would it be at all different than equality in that context?

4

Through the definition of the words, it would mean that everyone gets, for example, chemo meds, regardless of if they have cancer. So, it doesn't make much sense.

2

In this context:

  • Equality could mean everyone gets one sack of rice regardless of their circumstances.

  • Equity could mean each person is given a type and quantity of food that is appropriate to their dietary needs and living situation.

Equality is easier to achieve and may be just fine if your goal is just to make sure everyone is provided the minimum basic necessities of life. Equity is more complicated and way more involved in making sure that people are getting what they need to be on equal footing with regards to everyone else. One bag of rice will be worth more to some than others, after all.

2

I think equity would be better in all circumstances. Necessities such as food, water, housing, medical needs, and transportation all vary from person to person.

As far as i understand it, equality is a quick and dirty average, but equity addresses individual cases. Equality would be like giving all people the same food rations but equity would be able to factor in dietary restrictions as well as nutrition for different lifestyles.

1
lemmy.world

"also when the race starts, I'll start running but you gotta wait 400 years before you're allowed to run, ok?"

24
slrpnk.net

He cannot complete the race if he cannot move. He is nearer to you than the finish line or the nearest obstacle. They attached a maceflail to your leg. Perhaps today is a good day...

21
lemmy.world

A mace is a club with a heavy end. What she's got there is a flail.

14

And don't complain about the ball and chain or else I'll penalize you for DEI...and don't tell your kids, future generations or anyone else about this either since we will be telling them that no such hardship existed and will fucking engrain it into their small impressionable brains

9

I like this better. It clearly identifies that the issues are financial, and that it affects some races differently.

The cartoon screams identity politics which is like cocaine to right wing talking points.

3

You reached the end