When we think about society, especially the capital world where we live, one of the themes that gains notoriety and is defended by many is meritocracy.
In my vain philosophies, I reflected a lot on this, until I reached the conclusion that there is no way to talk about meritocracy without thinking about equal opportunities.
It’s quite simple to support what I’m saying: imagine two people. One is born very rich and the other in a favela without the minimum necessary to live.
Can you see that the starting point is very uneven, so who will arrive faster at the finish line? Look, I know that those who are born into adversity, just as I was born, can go even further, but the path is much more tortuous.
And what is the solution to change?
I see that equality of opportunities cannot exist without a strong arm of the State for this. What I mean? Everyone needs access to basic services such as health, education, security, sanitation and even food.
Therefore, the State plays a fundamental role in this process, through the implementation of public policies that guarantee equal access to basic resources for all.
But this is not just a role for the state. It is important that companies get involved in this process, promoting diversity and inclusion in their staff and adopting internal policies that favor equal opportunities.
Affirmative actions should not only be promoted in the public initiative, but also in the private initiative itself. Only then can we change this situation.
Reducing inequality depends on who is at the top
One point that I see, and I usually even study a lot, is in relation to the amount of money that circulates in an economy. In general, the amount of money in circulation is not unlimited, but there is a certain amount every year.
Therefore, if this is not an unlimited value, for some to have much, it is necessary that many have few. Imagine a very basic example, in a society with 100 people.
Now imagine that the current currency in this economy is 100,000 bills and that each person needs 500 bills to have access to the basics to live well.
Consider, however, that 10 of these people have 60,000 bills. That is, each of them has 6 thousand notes. Now imagine that 10 more people have 2,000 bills each, thus adding up to 20,000 bills.
Another 30 people have 500 notes, leaving only 5 thousand notes to be distributed to the other 50 people who have 100 notes each. However, as I said, the basics for living in this city are 500 bills.
What will happen in this hypothetical city? The children of those who have 6,000 bills and up to 2,000 bills will be much more likely to grow in life.
However, if there was awareness and money was more evenly distributed, everyone would have 1,000 bills, living on 500 bills each, and still have 500 bills left over for security.
And what is the moral of the story?
Well, what I want to show is that as long as there is human greed in the accumulation of millions, without this being reverted to society in the generation of decent jobs with a decent income, there will be great inequality in the world.
Note that the State has an important role, but the economic elite of a country has an even more primordial role, as it is up to it to create measures to minimize inequality through the generation of employment and income.
What’s more, it’s up to her to create affirmative action programs in companies to ensure that those at the bottom have an opportunity to grow.
Therefore, what I see is that we ourselves are to blame for the lack of equality of opportunity, and it is up to each one of us to engage in actions to reverse this situation.
