Policies for equality

Answer

Redistribution (tax, welfare, public services — moving resources) and recognition (rights, anti-discrimination law, affirmative action — equal standing and protection).

Answer

Opportunity = a fair chance to compete (e.g. free schooling), accepting unequal results; outcome = reducing the gaps in actual results (e.g. incomes).

Answer

Using taxes, transfers and public services to move resources from richer to poorer, reducing inequality of outcome.

Answer

Granting equal rights, standing and protection from discrimination — e.g. anti-discrimination law, equal rights, affirmative action.

Answer

Policies that actively favour disadvantaged groups (quotas, targets) to correct past discrimination. Supporters: corrects structural disadvantage quickly; critics: can be unfair to individuals and entrench group categories.

Answer

It reduces inequality of outcome but critics argue it can blunt incentives; supporters reply it funds the opportunities that make markets fairer and the incentive effect is often overstated.

Answer

UN Sustainable Development Goals — global targets, including reducing inequality within and between countries; they bring the international level into equality policy.

Answer

Because inequality exists between countries as well as within them, so aid, debt relief, the SDGs and fair trade rules are part of the toolkit.

Answer

Large inequality harms cohesion, health, mobility and democracy, and 'opportunity' is hollow when people start from vastly unequal positions — so active redistribution and recognition are needed.

Answer

Heavy redistribution may blunt incentives, affirmative action can be seen as unfair, and growth plus opportunity may lift the poor without coercive equalising.

Answer

Some active policy is justified, but the mix and degree matter — combine redistribution and recognition, make opportunity real while cushioning outcomes, and weigh equality against efficiency and fairness.