I specifically stated "if you believe there are no biological differences". Cultural differences cannot justify different outcomes as every difference can be framed as "cultural" and consequently no comparison would be possible. — Echarmion

Describe the differences in demographics however you like, makes no difference to my point.

That's exactly the answer I expected to get. Ok then, give me one specific case and sketch the different methods. — Echarmion

Why did you ask the question then? And why wouldn’t you just ask for a specific example if that’s what you wanted?
I explained the concept to you, do you not understand it and need an example or are you just asking leading questions so you can play gotcha?

As I have told you before, Trump is who he is, but you think he is a loser? Well, let's compare your resume to his. What have you accomplished in this life? — synthesis

Who knows what James could have accomplished if he inherited nearly half a billion dollars.

The accountability of democratic governments is strictly higher than that of non-democratic coroporations. — Echarmion

:100: That cannot be overstated.

Government, for all it's failings, is (or should be) accountable to more than the next quarter bottom line fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. Some conservatives will actually champion the inefficiency or incompetence of government (Trumpettes) because they believe they will be left alone to pursue their own selfish interests. Then, when government demonstrates inefficiency or incompetence, they say "See!"

Regardless, I'd rather the trains not run on time, than have corporate trains taking us to work on schedule. And there is something insidious about the Plutocracy picking and choosing which government functions they will assume via philanthropy. We end up having to choose sides between the Plutocracy and cartels, whilst leaving government, emasculated, as a punching bag; diverting the anger of the masses away from the Plutocracy and the cartels.

Two lessons I've learned, in contravention of conservative principles:

Government can indeed be the solution;
Trickle down is BS.

(I remember the now-conservative wag, Dennis Miller, once said something to the effect: If 'trickle down' is not fair warning that you are about to get pissed on, I don't know what is.

Describe the differences in demographics however you like, makes no difference to my point. — DingoJones

Your point is that different outcomes mapping to, say, ethnic groups is not a sign of a problem, even if we assume there are no fundamental biological differences between the groups?

Why did you ask the question then? And why wouldn’t you just ask for a specific example if that’s what you wanted?
I explained the concept to you, do you not understand it and need an example or are you just asking leading questions so you can play gotcha? — DingoJones

My claim is that "equality of opportunity" and "equality of outcome" describe different judgements of an outcome. You claim that they describe different methods. I obviously don't believe that, so I don't believe you can actually describe any method. So I expected you to not do that, and instead claim that you cannot do so in the abstract. So now I am asking you to do it in the concrete then, though I expect you cannot do that either, because that would prove me wrong, while I think I am right.

Regardless, I'd rather the trains not run on time, than have corporate trains taking us to work on schedule. And there is something insidious about the Plutocracy picking and choosing which government functions they will assume via philanthropy. We end up having to choose sides between the Plutocracy and cartels, whilst leaving government, emasculated, as a punching bag; diverting the anger of the masses away from the Plutocracy and the cartels. — James Riley

Yep, that's exactly the argument againts philantropy I find convincing as well.

Your point is that different outcomes mapping to, say, ethnic groups is not a sign of a problem, even if we assume there are no fundamental biological differences between the groups? — Echarmion

There are fundamental biological differences among some groups. I don’t recall agreeing to the assumption there isn’t.

My claim is that "equality of opportunity" and "equality of outcome" describe different judgements of an outcome. You claim that they describe different methods. — Echarmion

Those are not mutually exclusive, they can describe both can’t they? Again, I don’t much care what you want to call it.

I obviously don't believe that, so I don't believe you can actually describe any method. So I expected you to not do that, and instead claim that you cannot do so in the abstract. So now I am asking you to do it in the concrete then, though I expect you cannot do that either, because that would prove me wrong, while I think I am right. — Echarmion

It’s generally a good idea to not reach conclusions to questions that haven’t been answered yet, and extra not good to draw conclusions based on questions you haven’t asked yet based on answers you don’t have yet.
Lol, ok, so a game of gotcha it was. Nice to have that confirmed, thanks.
I could use many different examples, but let’s start with something obvious. I want to hire someone to do heavy lifting. I put out the call to whoever in the land can lift the most weight to all demographics. That would be equality of opportunity, everyone gets to try out for the job. All the strongest people from all the demographics show up. If I’m hiring 10 people for the job, it’s going to be men in the top ten position from those demographics because the top ten strongest men are going to be way stronger than the top 10 women. So the demographic for whose doing my heavy lifting job is going to skew to men.
Equality of outcome would be to look at the top 10 strongest and see they are men and then replace a number of men with women so the demographics of the heavy lifting job look more like the demographics of the general population.
There are many such examples, certain demographics skew to certain jobs and career paths. Not just between men and women but between different different cultures, ethnicities, religions and race as well. The degree to which these are factors vary, but that these factors have a statistical trend based on demographics is supported by the data.

There are fundamental biological differences among some groups. I don’t recall agreeing to the assumption there isn’t. — DingoJones

I didn't ask you to agree with any such assumption. I posited that in a situation where this is the case, then going "this group has worse outcomes, therefore it's being discriminated against somehow" is a viable first approximation. For reference, we can assume the ethnic groups are french and germans, or New York and Chicago citizens.

That's what I thought.

Before you criticize other people, consider your own body of work.

Like him or not, the guy defied all odds and went from being a game show host to POTUS. If you don't understand what an incredible accomplishment that is (regardless of your opinion of him), then you need to re-evaluate some things.

When a better system is possible, people will use it. Why wouldn't they?
— synthesis

Because implementing a better system is a question of political power, among other things. According to you, the economic system should always have been the best possible one from the start, but that clearly isn't the case. — Echarmion

Look at how fast people adapt to new technology. When a better system becomes available, it will be adopted (albeit not with some struggle from legacy interests) but this takes place constantly (look at what happened to land-line telephone service/ATT).

Remember, the elite ALWAYS win, so it is in their interest (above everybody else's) to adopt more efficient/effective means. For example, if crypto's do become accepted globally (as a medium of exchange), who do you think is going to end up profiting the most?

I didn't ask you to agree with any such assumption. I posited that in a situation where this is the case, then going "this group has worse outcomes, therefore it's being discriminated against somehow" is a viable first approximation. For reference, we can assume the ethnic groups are french and germans, or New York and Chicago citizens. — Echarmion

Sorry I accidentally hit the post button, there was more to my last comment.
Anyway, worse outcomes=discrimination needs to be backed up with some evidence of discrimination. Sometimes that can be demonstrated, and other times it cannot. If it cannot, then we shouldn’t assume discrimination. That seems pretty straightforward to me.

I did. You still don't have credibility.

Like him or not, the guy defied all odds and went from being a game show host to POTUS. If you don't understand what an incredible accomplishment that is (regardless of your opinion of him), then you need to re-evaluate some things. — synthesis

He was in a reality TV show, and arguably never ceased that occupation. James strikes me as someone having too much integrity to become POTUS in the same manner as Trump. I think most people do, actually. Aside from that, I imagine it's not too much trouble to buy and bankrupt a casino or two, if you've got enough of daddy's money to burn.

James strikes me as someone having too much integrity to become POTUS in the same manner as Trump. — praxis

It would help had I been born with a silver spoon in my mouth, if I was a liar, and a narcissist. I read some wag who said Trump is a poor man's idea of a rich man, a weak man's idea of a strong man, and stupid man's idea of a wise man. That wag about nailed it. I might qualify it by saying "some" but he about nailed it.

You need to move beyond putting other people down. — synthesis

You’re choosing to play the fool, synth, I’m merely indulging you.