I'm somewhere in the middle... Everyone doesn't have the same access to opportunities and it's fair to try and have an even playing field ... Not for equal outcomes but for equal starting point
oh sure oh sure. So in Big City New Zealand if you just get a 'starter gift' of 120k from your parents, inherit 150k, put 90k in KiwiSaver you can buy some lil wooden boxes to live in. Who wants to sleep outside? The Ayn Rand mob? The idiocracy? "DOCTORS" ? ?
I think that the premise that equitable approaches have been trending more towards equal outcomes vs equal opportunities is fallacious. And examples of affirmative action I believe provide a net positive on individuals and society. Your hypothetical is very hyperbolized. It's not like minority groups offered in said programs are similar to your level of tennis expertise compared to Serena Williams. Especially in education, things like the school lunch program heavily lean into ideals of equitable opportunity. Truly equal outcomes are impossible, of course, but it's obtuse to deny that approaches which seek them do make a difference and have positive outcomes for disadvantaged groups in society.
Yeah nah. Equity (Equality of outcomes) is being used to bludgeon organisations (Gov and Commercial) into accepting they are racist, sexist and other things. The impact is far more than you think it is. What they mean by "Equitable Approaches" is try to force an outcome based on their idealistic view of what should happen without consideration for personal preference or a myriad of other factors.
This seemed like a massive strawman arguument. I appreciate she had to condense her arguments, but she has critiqued a policy that any reasonable person would find ridiculous and then said that is the policy in effect. I dont think it is. I also find it frustrating that she did not offer any laternative. So how does Dr Derby think we should address the growing inequality in NZ? Lower taxes, small government, trickle down economics? That is all I ever hear from the centre right and I find those policies a lot less convincing. If this is the best the Common Room can come up with then I wont be engaged for long. I was hoping for some real innovative thinking, not just negativity.
@@goosoid No one has found a solution to inequality. To achieve equality of outcome you have to remove freedom of choice. This is where the Pareto principle came from.
@@davewilliams989 please point to where I said "solve". You are just throwing up another straw man argument. Inequality will always be with us as people are different and opportunities are different. But we need to reduce, not solve, inequality. There is a limit to how much inequality s society can bear. We are heading in the wrong direction with inequality growing consistently. In the past it was kept under control with taxation and regulation. That is now ideologically unacceptable to a portion of the electorate. And here we are with crime and disorder growing which is inevitable.
@@goosoid Inequality in NZ is an outcome of hundreds of complex issues. Attempts by our gov have made inequality worse. If you want to reduce unequal outcomes you need to target the underlying causes which in many cases are not what you think they are. So the question is how far can you go before you have to force people to comply against their will? Where is the line? Who enforces equality of outcomes? Who sets the rules? What if someone wont give up what they have earned through doing 60 hour weeks for years when the same category of person chose to work 20 hours of work wants the same lifestyle? The only viable and sustainable option is to ensure equality of opportunity. The only other pathway is making things worse (todays government) or Communist rule which unfortunately has proven in 20 different experiments of the 20th century to collapse into murder and death.
"mass social engineering programmes which will never work"?? Really? Proof/evidence to support that? And as for 01:46 where in NZ had this been proposed? 🤔
@@Josh-eu1vrthis is called positive discrimination. In any country that has put this in practice, it is not meant to stay. It is a temporary situation until it feels (or looks from stats for instance) that all social/ethnic groups have reached an equal opportunity level. I suggest you do a bit of introspection to determine what your personal circumstances were, when it comes to opportunities from birth!
Could have been a very interesting vid. On the contrary this korero feels very twisted intellectually from the start.. dropping the Equity concept because it is… too difficult to grasp (what?!). Undermining the concept (and consequently the implementation/funding/etc) of equality under the pretext that equal outcomes are ‘impossible’ shows an intellectually and morally wrong thinking/behaviour. No political party is advocating for all to become doctors, scientists, writers, artists, etc.. This korero eventually makes this Dr sound stupid!
So are you interested in the NZ HRC on equality and discrimination? Their position is that men are superior. They explain that discrimination is not bad and should be used in their push for equity. And yes they said equity.
Equity does not mean equal outcomes for all, so the whole argument falls over. Equity is about being fair and reasonable.
Yes it does. What is the point of DEI then?
I'm somewhere in the middle... Everyone doesn't have the same access to opportunities and it's fair to try and have an even playing field ... Not for equal outcomes but for equal starting point
Fantastic video, great channel. Unfortunately many people fail to understand it like this
her points beg the question, badly.
To be equal is to have nothing
oh sure oh sure.
So in Big City New Zealand if you just get a 'starter gift' of 120k from your parents, inherit 150k, put 90k in KiwiSaver you can buy some lil wooden boxes to live in.
Who wants to sleep outside? The Ayn Rand mob? The idiocracy? "DOCTORS" ? ?
I think that the premise that equitable approaches have been trending more towards equal outcomes vs equal opportunities is fallacious. And examples of affirmative action I believe provide a net positive on individuals and society. Your hypothetical is very hyperbolized. It's not like minority groups offered in said programs are similar to your level of tennis expertise compared to Serena Williams. Especially in education, things like the school lunch program heavily lean into ideals of equitable opportunity. Truly equal outcomes are impossible, of course, but it's obtuse to deny that approaches which seek them do make a difference and have positive outcomes for disadvantaged groups in society.
Yeah nah. Equity (Equality of outcomes) is being used to bludgeon organisations (Gov and Commercial) into accepting they are racist, sexist and other things. The impact is far more than you think it is. What they mean by "Equitable Approaches" is try to force an outcome based on their idealistic view of what should happen without consideration for personal preference or a myriad of other factors.
This seemed like a massive strawman arguument. I appreciate she had to condense her arguments, but she has critiqued a policy that any reasonable person would find ridiculous and then said that is the policy in effect. I dont think it is. I also find it frustrating that she did not offer any laternative. So how does Dr Derby think we should address the growing inequality in NZ? Lower taxes, small government, trickle down economics? That is all I ever hear from the centre right and I find those policies a lot less convincing.
If this is the best the Common Room can come up with then I wont be engaged for long. I was hoping for some real innovative thinking, not just negativity.
@@goosoid No one has found a solution to inequality. To achieve equality of outcome you have to remove freedom of choice. This is where the Pareto principle came from.
@@davewilliams989 please point to where I said "solve". You are just throwing up another straw man argument. Inequality will always be with us as people are different and opportunities are different. But we need to reduce, not solve, inequality. There is a limit to how much inequality s society can bear. We are heading in the wrong direction with inequality growing consistently. In the past it was kept under control with taxation and regulation. That is now ideologically unacceptable to a portion of the electorate. And here we are with crime and disorder growing which is inevitable.
@@goosoid Inequality in NZ is an outcome of hundreds of complex issues. Attempts by our gov have made inequality worse. If you want to reduce unequal outcomes you need to target the underlying causes which in many cases are not what you think they are. So the question is how far can you go before you have to force people to comply against their will? Where is the line? Who enforces equality of outcomes? Who sets the rules? What if someone wont give up what they have earned through doing 60 hour weeks for years when the same category of person chose to work 20 hours of work wants the same lifestyle? The only viable and sustainable option is to ensure equality of opportunity. The only other pathway is making things worse (todays government) or Communist rule which unfortunately has proven in 20 different experiments of the 20th century to collapse into murder and death.
"mass social engineering programmes which will never work"?? Really? Proof/evidence to support that?
And as for 01:46 where in NZ had this been proposed? 🤔
affirmaive action at universities for example medical schools accepting by ethnicity over skills
@@Josh-eu1vr and they've never worked? Is that what you're saying? 🤔
@@Josh-eu1vrthis is called positive discrimination. In any country that has put this in practice, it is not meant to stay. It is a temporary situation until it feels (or looks from stats for instance) that all social/ethnic groups have reached an equal opportunity level. I suggest you do a bit of introspection to determine what your personal circumstances were, when it comes to opportunities from birth!
just assume the FSU audience have no idea how the political economy or asset management works in this country.
@@datkinson1635 👍
The only way to be like Serena Williams is to bring her down to your level 😂😂😂😂
Thomas Sowell = subbed!
Facts lol instant sub
*Judging by this video appointing Melissa Derby as Race Commissioner is a very strange decision.*
What an excellent video !
Good stuff. It will make all the right people angry, and hopefully spread some common sense to the rest.
Equity is not possible and has never been achieved anywhere or any time in history..... T. Sowell.
Love what you guys are doing. This is chicken soup for the NZ populace.
Dumb and dumber with Free Speech Union ninny "Dr" Melissa Derby.
(HAVING A POSTGRAD FROM CANTERBURY DOESN'T REALLY MEAN "DOCTOR", OKAY ? ?)
Could have been a very interesting vid. On the contrary this korero feels very twisted intellectually from the start.. dropping the Equity concept because it is… too difficult to grasp (what?!). Undermining the concept (and consequently the implementation/funding/etc) of equality under the pretext that equal outcomes are ‘impossible’ shows an intellectually and morally wrong thinking/behaviour. No political party is advocating for all to become doctors, scientists, writers, artists, etc.. This korero eventually makes this Dr sound stupid!
Melissa Derby vs Serena Williams
What a load of...false equivalence.
We don't have equality in NZ and equity is built into life so its irrelevant.
So are you interested in the NZ HRC on equality and discrimination? Their position is that men are superior. They explain that discrimination is not bad and should be used in their push for equity. And yes they said equity.