- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Structural/Systemic Injustice
Posted on 10/28/25 at 11:36 pm to 4cubbies
Posted on 10/28/25 at 11:36 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Why don't "we" absolve women of their sins like we do these men?
Asked and answered.
Sandy is presented here with her hand out for taxpayer money. Baby Daddy isn't.
This really isn't complicated.
0
Posted on 10/28/25 at 11:56 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
We should not expect to live in a fair society. Is that your argument?
He didn't answer you, so I will.
There are certain things we can control, and that are appropriate to standardize. We can control at least to some significant degree whether people are treated equally under the law, for example, and striving for as much fairness as possible on that metric doesn't make things unfair for anyone else. We all benefit equally in that scenario.
There are other things that we either have little or no control over, and those would be the things about which someone asks, "Didn't your mother tell you that life's not fair?" or which are inherently inappropriate to attempt to standardize because they cost one person in order to benefit someone else.
In other words, in the process of making life more fair for person A, life was made less fair for person B.
Often the things you post about are not about fairness, anyway. You typically advocate for people who behave relatively irresponsibly and contribute to or cause their own problems to be treated better than what is actually fair for them.
What's actually fair is that everybody makes their own bed and then lies in it.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 2:02 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
that there are very clearly groups that are disadvantaged through no fault of their own in our society.
I’m not of the belief that it is necessarily government’s role to solve these things, but….
A child born into the bottom 20% of household incomes has only about a 1 in 10 chance of reaching the top 20% as an adult. (Source: Pew Economic Mobility Project / Chetty et al., 2014–2020.
Around 40% of children born in poverty remain poor as adults (Chetty et al., Harvard Opportunity Insights).
Intergenerational income elasticity and wealth elasticity in US are very high -.45 to .55. Meaning what you earn is very much influenced by what your parents earned.
In 1940, blacks made 50% of what whites make, 1960 it was 55%, 1980 it was 61%, 2000 it was 65% and currently it’s around 70%.
Why do you think this number is going up?
I think there is a lot of danger to telling people they are disadvantaged and can’t succeed, but you also don’t have to be an ostrich.
This post was edited on 10/29/25 at 2:06 am
Posted on 10/29/25 at 2:16 am to 4cubbies
Looks like you were asking for genuine engagement, so I don't get all the downvotes. Also, I'm not reading all 13 pages of this, so maybe someone said something similar to what I'm going to say here.
Anyway, the term "justice" means so many different things to so many different people, that talking about "structural injustice" can be interpreted in countless numbers of ways.
"Struggling" is not in and of itself "injustice". "Comfort" is not in and of itself "justice". I'm not reading the whole link, but in what you supplied, that seems to be what's argued here.
The way I look at justice is just having individual and property rights upheld. In that story, she's a renter. She doesn't own the building, so her having to move isn't some injustice at all. It's an inconvenience, and maybe more than that, but not an injustice.
Now, do we live under a system that constantly impedes on individual and property rights? Absolutely. But I have a strong feeling that the writer of this paper would be just fine w/ impeding more on people's individual and property rights just to help those people who are struggling more in the name of "justice". So, in reality, creating more injustices in the name of justice.
Anyway, the term "justice" means so many different things to so many different people, that talking about "structural injustice" can be interpreted in countless numbers of ways.
"Struggling" is not in and of itself "injustice". "Comfort" is not in and of itself "justice". I'm not reading the whole link, but in what you supplied, that seems to be what's argued here.
The way I look at justice is just having individual and property rights upheld. In that story, she's a renter. She doesn't own the building, so her having to move isn't some injustice at all. It's an inconvenience, and maybe more than that, but not an injustice.
Now, do we live under a system that constantly impedes on individual and property rights? Absolutely. But I have a strong feeling that the writer of this paper would be just fine w/ impeding more on people's individual and property rights just to help those people who are struggling more in the name of "justice". So, in reality, creating more injustices in the name of justice.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 2:53 am to 4cubbies
quote:
consider that there are very clearly groups that are disadvantaged through no fault of their own in our society.
People do consider that, everybody has their crosses to bear, almost everybody has battles. There are only a very very small percentage of people in this world that grow up without a care in the world. I wonder what that's like? I would never know. We all have to grow up with differing degrees of difficulties. You can either let it define you, or you can put work them. Hard work and dedication are both free, everybody can have that no matter where you grow up, how poor you are, or how smart you are. I work two jobs right now, probably about 14-15 hours a day right now 4 days a week, with 1 day off if i'm lucky. Do I need to? No, I've technically got money. Some people would love to have my life as it is right now. I don't let that deter me. I've worked my arse off the hard way to get where I am now. I've got 20+ years left before I reach retirement age, and I want to be financially ready in the next 10 years, so that way if anything comes out of left field, im prepared for it. It's not easy, but i'm planning ahead, and i should be able to really enjoy retirement. People may look at me then and think, "must be nice to have it that easy." Hopefully it will be, but what they won't see is the decades of me busting my arse to get there. We all have choices, the choices we make are what makes us who we are. Not where we come from or our socioeconomic status, not unless you let it.
This post was edited on 10/29/25 at 2:55 am
Posted on 10/29/25 at 3:32 am to 4cubbies
Must be Calvinism…
Posted on 10/29/25 at 4:18 am to 4cubbies
quote:deadbeats?
How did she cause the father of her children to be a deadbeat?
Why did she choose to have kids with a deadbeat?
Posted on 10/29/25 at 6:02 am to 4cubbies
Certifiable. 
Posted on 10/29/25 at 6:36 am to 4cubbies
quote:That is a premise warranting discussion. Certainly by global standards, it's a false premise.
there are very clearly groups that are disadvantaged through no fault of their own in our society
In terms of our society, what is the advantaged-disadvantaged demarcation. Obviously, we can't all be born into vast wealth, with movie star looks, and Einstein's intellect. Certainly a kid born into a middle class household could be considered disadvantaged by comparison to one born into a billionaire family.
Is a kid born into a middle class household considered disadvantaged though? The same questions arise regarding physical characteristics ... attractiveness, personality, athleticism. Ditto for intellect. What of that rates as disadvantage?
Posted on 10/29/25 at 6:45 am to Hester5452007
quote:
Around 40% of children born in poverty remain poor as adults (Chetty et al., Harvard Opportunity Insights).
This means over half get out of poverty though. Glass more than half full outlook.
And the number is still skewed by older generations who lacked the technology that makes access to education easier. Pre tech boom that number is higher.
And what brought innovation that allowed for easier access to education? Oh yeah that pesky capitalism.
This post was edited on 10/29/25 at 6:49 am
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:34 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
We need to do better!
But who and how? There's never or very rarely discussion about actionable ways we/society can be better. We just make vague suggestions so nothing seems to improve.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:35 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
My impression is cubbies sees this first hand in some of her work.
did you google me?
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:35 am to 4cubbies
quote:
But who and how? There's never or very rarely discussion about actionable ways we/society can be better.
Like the female/male incarceration rate I've asked about 8 times now in this thread.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:38 am to Bard
quote:
just because something unfortunate happens to someone it isn't necessarily an "injustice."
Stubbing one's toe - not an injustice/"chaos of life."
Not having access to affordable housing, or a decent public education, etc. = injustice.
quote:
that's just the chaos of life.
I appreciate you naming this.
quote:
Nope. The structural/systemic qualifier defines the "injustice" as being part of society, thus it's setting one class of the society against another.
I interpret it differently. Not pitting classes against each other but acknowledging that society is structured in a way that ensures winners and losers.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:40 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No one has mentioned the father walking around with his hand held out, only Sandy.
Well, Sandy is caring for the children that the father appears to have abandoned.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:42 am to stuntman
quote:
Looks like you were asking for genuine engagement, so I don't get all the downvotes
She isnt. She's a bigass liar.
I have asked her the same question regarding systematic injustice 8 times jus tin this thread, a half dozen times in others and she refuses to answer.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 9:46 am to dukkbill
quote:
How does that apply in this context? In the general hypothetical that you responded to, are you suggesting there are no persons having achievement that they can use for case studies?
Maybe it doesn't apply to that specific situation, given the information that was provided, but as the discussion evolved, it needed to be called out.
quote:
The prolification of identity politics has not appeared to have had any measurable impact on poverty. Its impact on achievement does not appear to be statistically significant. It has had the isolated areas of achievement for.some persons that may have been part of underutilized classes, but these are just the victors of the new systems and not the leaders of any true equitable movement
I'm not talking about identify politics. If someone's parents are high school dropouts who don't value education, chances are that person will not finish high school and will not value education. It's just reality. We are products of our environments, for the most part.
quote:Absolutely 100%
Stress, poverty, feelings of victimization can actually induce irrational decision making
quote:
not the range of all choices that could be made.
How would that help Sandy?
quote:
For these reasons, I do think the micro-interventions advocated and performed by Durflo and Banerjee have far more potential than some of these top down systems
I'll look into this. Thanks for putting on my radar.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 10:08 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
cubbies, I didn't read the entire 22 page lecture. Was there any delineation of 'Sandy's' job income, spending habits, or lead-up decisions?
The Sandy story was used to draw the reader in, I believe, not as a real case study.
Posted on 10/29/25 at 10:41 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Not having access to affordable housing, or a decent public education, etc. = injustice.
If it's pointedly done with that outcome in mind, sure there is room where that could be considered an injustice as the goal (whether wholly or in part) was to injure others.
When it's only an unintended by-product, then it's "chaos of life". The problem is the justice-focused crowd either don't make such a delineation or simply don't care to do so because it's not expedient for them and/or their cause.
There is a caveat there (using Sandy's landlord as an example of how the greater injustice is to force someone to capitulate to some malleable version of "fairness") but it's going to be different for each instance.
quote:
Not pitting classes against each other but acknowledging that society is structured in a way that ensures winners and losers.
That's a very fine line though as "structured" often includes "intent," and that intent (usually at least implied) is what ends up driving the conversation (and then is used to push a "fix").
In another line of thought: every society is structured to ensure certain winners and losers with the only difference being the criteria. In that vein, doing so is natural so not doing so is a constant fight against natural instincts (which is why it ebbs and flows not between some strict definition of "fair" vs "unfair" but between which group(s) gets to define what "fair" is).
Posted on 10/29/25 at 12:45 pm to 4cubbies
Not reading all 13 pages but much better approach and presentation of the topic. Down votes likely due to name and recent history.
Either way carry on and hopefully OP is also debating in good faith
Either way carry on and hopefully OP is also debating in good faith
Page 13 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News