I guess this is meant to be a scare tactic: "equal treatment is equality of outcome." But people are (thankfully) becoming more sophisticated about this.

No one expects we all must eat the same ham sandwich, like the same stand up comic, have the same job, or degree...
(1/11)

...We are talking about equality of outcomes that lead to human flourishing (shoutout to @rasmansa). These include:

(1) Education
(2) Healthcare
(3) Internet access
(4) Transportation
(5) Access to law enforcement and emergency services

(2/11)

People who believe "equality of outcomes", to me, fall into two broad camps.

The first group may have the assumption that this will *force* people into something they don't want.

I suggest that equality of outcomes creates more freedom. How?

(3/11)

Many people in modern society are "forced" into 60-hour, low wage labor at the low end, and "forced" into 60-hour high wage labor at the high end. Both ends are subjected to inhumane conditions. Equality of outcomes blunts these inhumane forces.
(4/11)

Moreover, by releasing people from these inhumane conditions, people (contrary to popular belief) will then be *more creative* because they don't have to sit and click buttons all day just to eat (at one end) or maintain their elite position (at the other end). (5/11)

The second group believes that inequality is necessary because some people are more talented or hardworking, and the only moral system is one that rewards this inequality of outcome.

This is a philosophical argument not grounded in reality.

Why?
(6/11)

A thought experiment (or empirical analysis) of how people move from birth to adulthood will identify the myriad ways in which outside forces impacted the "merit" of the individual.

(1) Her parents gave her the genetic foundation upon which the environment acts...

(7/11)

(2) She may be born in a time in which her unique skills are valued (i.e. Lebron happened to be born at a time where 6'7" people can make a lot of money)

(3) Her current environment may foster in her patterns for success (often pointed out about Asians in the US)

(8/11)
...

Meritocracy is a nice ideal, but assuming it is real condemns those not lucky to be born into favorable conditions to believing they failed (humiliation). And gives winners a false sense they deserve what they have - leading to them to lord it over the unlucky (hubris).

(9/11)

Equality of outcomes cannot alleviate but can soften this unfavorable, and democracy destroying condition. If everyone - by right of being human - is awarded a certain base set of conditions, then everything is not contingent upon their ability to win in a competition.

(10/11)

In sum, "equal treatment is equality of outcome", far from being a scare tactic is more like a prescription for any responsible government in modern society.

It provides conditions for human flourishing and allows us to maintain this democracy that we love so much.

(11/11)