The Trouble with Equity is it Always Gets Worse

It’s much easier to equalize by deterioration than by improvement. Theodore Dalrymple.

If classical liberalism once favored equality of opportunity, progressive liberals now favor equality of outcome, otherwise known as equity. This is generally illustrated by the cartoon below. The disadvantaged are raised to the level of the advantaged based on an underlying assumption that any discrepancy between individuals is due to multi-factorial oppression, not individual behavior. Recently, in a discussion about rock climbing, an anonymous individual posted this very illustration with the comment that she believes in equity; not that there was any doubt in anyone’s mind from her previous comments that this was the case. Everyone but the equity poster knew this implicitly. There is a certain simplicity of thought, frequently accompanied by talking in slogans (which reflects thinking in slogans), which readily identifies the equity believers.

The funny thing about equity is that no-one wants equity when there are real stakes at play. There is no-one alive who needs delicate, intricate and potentially devastating brain surgery who opts for the equity brain surgeon, at least not willingly. Neither does anyone want their house built by the equity builder, or their finances managed by the equity accountant. When real outcomes are at play, outcomes that we are forced to experience not play act on social media, we all want the best man or woman for the job, not the equity candidate.

The hypocrisy of the equity position notwithstanding, equity is simply impossible to achieve. If I give four people $1000 all four people have parity (assuming no-one had any money to start). Person A, puts their $1000 into a term deposit and earns 5% interest. In one year, person A will have $1050. Person B starts a business with their $1000 and the business is quite successful. In one year, their $1000 business investment has been built into a business which can be sold for $2000. Person C pursues a Hunter Biden strategy and snorts cocaine off sex workers breasts (I hope I have used the politically correct language) and within one week is completely broke, while Person D invests in some stocks which rise in value by 10% resulting in a value of $1100 after one year. What started as equity is now completely inequitable because people are not the same. We are all biologically and psychologically different. Some opt for instant gratification and immediate but fleeting pleasure while others chose to delay gratification and work towards some larger goal.

In order to return to equity, we should give Person A $950, Person B nothing, Person D $900, while Person C hits the jackpot and gets $2000 which would enable Person C to snort double the amount of cocaine off larger breasts. Unfortunately, within two weeks, the situation would again be inequitable, and we would have to begin the cycle of equalizing outcomes all over again.

It has to be clear to anyone who understands even a modicum of economics, not to mention human behavior that there is simply no-way to achieve equity. Equity drifts off over the horizon like an over-turned kayak blown by an off-shore wind. The more resources you throw at equity the less equal things become. The cocaine snorter begins to consume an ever larger share of resources which benefits only the cocaine dealer and the pimp. Person C certainly doesn’t benefit, and it’s debatable that even the sex worker benefits. The sex worker would probably rather get $1000 to start a different business!