What is Occupy Wallstreet?

[kandrathe]

Again, no, it's not. If there is no opportunity, there is no chance for equality. You cannot say that just because there's no opportunity then it's equal to all. You have to have an opportunity to begin with to check on equality of such.

I think we are at an impasse on just even what an "opportunity" is or is not.

If the college where I work has room to admit 500 new freshmen, it is an opportunity of higher education for those who can afford it. If we subsidize those with low incomes, we create a more equal opportunity. I measure equality in that case to be when the subset (of new freshmen) represent the population we are drawing our students from (primarily Minnesota, and the surrounding states). I would still say there are barriers preventing "equality", but they are outside our organizations control. Mostly, they are factors in K-12 education run by the State of Minnesota.

When I was an employer, I would typically hire 20% of my work force per year (10% due to growth, and 10% due to turn over). In a recession, you can cut the hiring at least in half due to a lack of growth, and more as turnover also is reduced due to people's fears about being left without a chair when the music stops. It's not so bad for the employer, who now has 100 applications for every open position. But, if running an organization of say 1000 workers, going from 200 "opportunities" per year, to say 50, is still 50 more opportunities than zero.

We can argue about the equality of hiring practices -- but we won't resolve it without either statistical evidence to prove your case, or my mine. I still hold that current regulations, and anti-discrimination measures make rigging the system risky to the organization that engages in that type of practice. I feel it leaves them wide open to lawsuits, which over time would cull that behavior from corporations. It might happen more frequently in smaller organizations, and in areas of poorly managed ones.