Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Just a few days ago, a kick that landed wide left in the final moments of a hard-fought game against an admirable opponent sent us, the Seahawks, into the next round of the playoffs. Two teams equal in athletic ability and access, one winner.

Now, imagine if the National Football League only gave the Seahawks access to helmets and pads, for instance, and not the Vikings. Two teams equal in athletic ability no longer equal in access. I can’t help but draw parallels as I sit and reflect on this fleeting game, and how it relates to life off the field.

Last week, I stumbled upon Y Combinator co-founder Paul Graham’s essay on economic inequality, which he argues is a good thing.

But for a man who has invested so much in others, Graham, your words leave me baffled: What happened to your first love? What happened to building up those people? I believe wealth has the potential to breed elitism. And I believe because of Graham’s success, he may have lost his way.

Some think working hard solves the problems of poverty and institutional oppression and the lack of social mobility. Some think that by sheer determination, one can overcome such issues.

But economic inequality isn’t the symptom; it’s the virus that attacks. You, Graham, like the rest of America, have been deceived. You are a victim of the American Dream, the belief that anyone who works hard can move up economically regardless of his or her social circumstances. American cultural optimism is one of the greatest lies ever told.

Economic inequality is sufficiently far from identical with the various problems that have it as a symptom that we'll probably only hit whichever of the two we aim at. If we aim at economic inequality, we won't fix these problems. So I say let's aim at the problems.

For example, let's attack poverty, and if necessary damage wealth in the process. That's much more likely to work than attacking wealth in the hope that you will thereby fix poverty. [9] And if there are people getting rich by tricking consumers or lobbying the government for anti-competitive regulations or tax loopholes, then let's stop them. Not because it's causing economic inequality, but because it's stealing. [10]

If all you have is statistics, it seems like that's what you need to fix. But behind a broad statistical measure like economic inequality there are some things that are good and some that are bad, some that are historical trends with immense momentum and others that are random accidents. If we want to fix the world behind the statistics, we have to understand it, and focus our efforts where they'll do the most good.

UNI88 wrote:On first read, it appears to me that they're talking about two different things that aren't really in conflict. I agree with both of them.

Too many liberals push for equal outcomes, which is incredibly short-sided and what Graham is arguing against. Our system of rewarding "doers" pushes us forward technologically and makes life better for all. Worried about climate change, dependency on foreign oil, etc., innovation is what we need to solve those problems (wind and solar isn't going to cut it). The poor in America in many ways are better off today than the rich were a 100+ years ago. Equal outcomes stifle ambition and innovation and leads to stagnation.

Okung IMO isn't arguing for equal outcomes, he's arguing for equal (or at least more equal) opportunities. The African American kid on the south side of Chicago is growing up surrounded by gangs and going to a poorly performing school and feels he/she has no chance to get out. It's a similar situation for the white kid growing up in a trailer park in Oklahoma. We need to find ways to truly give people the opportunity to improve their lives and the hope that goes with that. I support grass root efforts to do so but I don't support a one-size fits all federal government approach. That's just going to increase the size of the bureaucracy with high costs and limited results.

AZGrizFan wrote:How much of his wealth has Okung shared?

UNI88 wrote:On first read, it appears to me that they're talking about two different things that aren't really in conflict. I agree with both of them.

Too many liberals push for equal outcomes, which is incredibly short-sided and what Graham is arguing against. Our system of rewarding "doers" pushes us forward technologically and makes life better for all. Worried about climate change, dependency on foreign oil, etc., innovation is what we need to solve those problems (wind and solar isn't going to cut it). The poor in America in many ways are better off today than the rich were a 100+ years ago. Equal outcomes stifle ambition and innovation and leads to stagnation.

Okung IMO isn't arguing for equal outcomes, he's arguing for equal (or at least more equal) opportunities. The African American kid on the south side of Chicago is growing up surrounded by gangs and going to a poorly performing school and feels he/she has no chance to get out. It's a similar situation for the white kid growing up in a trailer park in Oklahoma. We need to find ways to truly give people the opportunity to improve their lives and the hope that goes with that. I support grass root efforts to do so but I don't support a one-size fits all federal government approach. That's just going to increase the size of the bureaucracy with high costs and limited results.

Nicholas Fitz writes that “By overemphasizing individual mobility, we ignore important social determinants of success like family inheritance, social connections, and structural discrimination.”

AZGrizFan wrote:How much of his wealth has Okung shared?

CID1990 wrote:Didn't Chitz just say in another thread that anything that comes out of the mouths of anyone on the Seahawks other than the QB is a bunch of crap?

Cluck U wrote:Maybe it is related to all the mercury in his sushi.

You, Graham, like the rest of America, have been deceived. You are a victim of the American Dream, the belief that anyone who works hard can move up economically regardless of his or her social circumstances. American cultural optimism is one of the greatest lies ever told.

89Hen wrote:

You, Graham, like the rest of America, have been deceived. You are a victim of the American Dream, the belief that anyone who works hard can move up economically regardless of his or her social circumstances. American cultural optimism is one of the greatest lies ever told.

This line has me a little perplexed. "Moving up economically" is all relative, no? I don't think there are many people who would argue that anyone and everyone can become a millionaire if they work hard enough. But IMO the "American Dream" is to take what is given to you and improve your situation. It's not always an easy task... for anyone, and that's where the hard work comes in.

Having college aged kids, I can tell you that there are a LOT of opportunities for kids of people who have lesser means to go to schools that I could never afford to send my kids. My kids will be just fine as they have plenty of opportunities elsewhere, so I don't begrudge others and their opportunities.

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote: This line has me a little perplexed. "Moving up economically" is all relative, no? I don't think there are many people who would argue that anyone and everyone can become a millionaire if they work hard enough. But IMO the "American Dream" is to take what is given to you and improve your situation. It's not always an easy task... for anyone, and that's where the hard work comes in.

Having college aged kids, I can tell you that there are a LOT of opportunities for kids of people who have lesser means to go to schools that I could never afford to send my kids. My kids will be just fine as they have plenty of opportunities elsewhere, so I don't begrudge others and their opportunities.

Good post.

To defend Okung's comment I think there is a certain lack of gratitude among some of those who have made it. Given a middle class or better jumpstart has significant advantages and it ain't just a matter of 'work harder kid and you'll get yours' (as I kick the ladder away).

Luck (some of it born of privilege) and a middle class or better safety net play a role too.

89Hen wrote: I don't begrudge others and their opportunities.

AZGrizFan wrote:

89Hen wrote: I don't begrudge others and their opportunities.

That's where conservatives and liberals differ, Hen. Conservatives don't begrudge others their success. Liberals are envious of it and believed they are somehow entitled to share in it.

kalm wrote:

89Hen wrote: This line has me a little perplexed. "Moving up economically" is all relative, no? I don't think there are many people who would argue that anyone and everyone can become a millionaire if they work hard enough. But IMO the "American Dream" is to take what is given to you and improve your situation. It's not always an easy task... for anyone, and that's where the hard work comes in.

Having college aged kids, I can tell you that there are a LOT of opportunities for kids of people who have lesser means to go to schools that I could never afford to send my kids. My kids will be just fine as they have plenty of opportunities elsewhere, so I don't begrudge others and their opportunities.

Good post.

To defend Okung's comment I think there is a certain lack of gratitude among some of those who have made it. Given a middle class or better jumpstart has significant advantages and it ain't just a matter of 'work harder kid and you'll get yours' (as I kick the ladder away).

Luck (some of it born of privilege) and a middle class or better safety net play a role too.

ASUG8 wrote:If you're born into a bad home situation (i.e. druggie parents, abject poverty), then I think we as a country have an obligation to recognize that person's talent and help them break the cycle when possible.