I'm not talking of equality in the realm of equal standing among individuals in a slave/master sort of way. I'm not speaking of "rights" (define rights as you would see fit). I'm speaking of the opportunity to be "rich" or "poor".

We can all agree that the socio/economic strata that one is born into lends to advantages or disadvantages. If you're born into a family with significant financial backing, there are many opportunities for success. Good school, a home life where material concerns are not a point of stress, you name it. If you're born into a family without financial backing, there are precious few opportunities for success (if any exist). Are we as a society going to strive to take away those advantages and give them to the disadvantaged? Or are we going to let the advantaged have what they have, and try to help the disadvantaged? Maybe we decide to leave it alone and let what happens happen?

It is often pointed out those of society who are not successful (as measured by material wealth) are not necessarily there for lack of trying. It is also pointed out that the system that we have allows for some individuals to abuse the system.

Nossy, I believe, brought up the thought of what if the individual makes a mistake, or gets sick and that puts them in a financial hole next to impossible to drag themselves out of. I look at my own family and see those who dropped out of High School for <insert their reason here>. Or I see other family who are strung out on <insert their drug u choice here>. Where do we draw the line of the place a person is in life is due to the choices that they make? Where do we "save" them from themselves?

Is it the government's place to take care of us...feed us...clothe us...and give us something to do so that we don't become destructive? Where does a society balance compassion with tough love?

~Jeordam