Some believe that because everyone needs a place to live, governments should provide houses for those who are too poor to afford their own. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1:

In recent years, there have been a number of everyday problems that people in big cities have to cope with. This essay will discuss two major problems, pollution and information overload, which I believe should lead governments to encourage people to move to regional areas.

These days, increased levels of pollution have been a great cause for concern among residents of big cities. Due to high volumes of traffic, large quantities of pollutants are being released into the atmosphere, causing the degradation of air quality, which is said to be a significant contributor to various types of respiratory disease, such as lung cancer. Additionally, people in big cities are being bombarded with too much information from the media, including TV, social media, and advertising, with a large proportion of this information being fake or exaggerated. This can lead to confusion or, in some cases, social anarchy.

In my opinion, governments should do what they can to encourage city residents to move to regional areas. Firstly, it will reduce the number of vehicles in cities, which will definitely reduce the levels of air pollution, which is hazardous to the health of citizens. Furthermore, fewer people living in big cities will relieve the pressure on the housing supply, where many people are forced to live in small, uncomfortable spaces. Studies have shown that people’s living spaces have a direct impact on their mental health and how they perform at work.

In conclusion, severe air pollution and a bombardment of information are among the most serious problems facing city residents nowadays, and personally, I feel that authorities should encourage people to relocate to other areas to live.

Sample 2:

It is true that nowadays city residents have to encounter a large number of problems, especially those concerning environmental and social factors. However, encouraging people to migrate to smaller provincial towns, in my opinion, is not a viable solution to these problems.

As living in a metropolis, people are confronted with high level of air pollution, which is caused mainly by the exhaust fumes released into the atmosphere from petrol-driven vehicles. The more populated the city is, the higher the demand for traveling becomes, and as a result, the higher the level of air pollution will be. Living in this environment for a long time is supposed to be detrimental to human’s health as polluted air is the main contributor to respiratory diseases. Another problem involves social aspects such as the issue of unemployment. As many people moving to big cities do not have any skills or qualifications, they are unlikely to find a job. This higher unemployment rate can give rise to the increased criminal activities threatening inhabitants’ life.

Since dwelling in urban centers can have negative impacts, some governments tend to encourage the citizens to relocate to smaller regional towns, but I do not think this will be effective. The first reason for my belief is that this policy cannot guarantee a reduction in air pollution because people still have to commute to their workplace, which is usually located in city center. Indeed, living far away from cities means that people even have to travel a much longer distance to work, which, in fact, can increase the amount of exhaust emissions. The second reason is that finding jobs in the countryside is certainly not easier than in urban areas. Job opportunities in these places are much lower and people usually have to do low-paid jobs if they work in smaller and less developed towns.

In conclusion, it is obvious that living in big cities can create a number of problems, but encouraging people to migrate to suburban areas is, in my opinion, totally not a viable measure at least when it comes to addressing the problems concerning pollution and unemployment.

Sample 3:

It is true that people in major cities are confronting a number of problems in their routine life. This essay will discuss some of these problems and explain the writer’s view that citizens should be encouraged to relocate to the countryside or regional towns.

The urban population is grappling against two main problems out of many. The first issue is the lower quality of life due to the increasingly heavier burden on the existing urban infrastructure. This is because rural immigrants in pursuit of employment opportunities keep inundating the downtown areas of most major cities. For example, most schools and hospitals located in XYZ city are frequently overloaded, making these services inaccessible to the majority of people of lower classes. The second issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic, particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

I think government should encourage citizens to move away from major cities. This is due to the fact that this would relieve the current pressure on the infrastructure. Fewer people would need public services such as hospitals or schools and the roads would be more spacious, ensuring a smooth traffic flow with its resultant fewer accidents for city dwellers. In addition, the resources in the countryside or other less developed regions would be better exploited as there might be available workforce there. For instance, there would be more laborers during harvesting time in the countryside, or skilled or knowledgeable people would help with the construction work in smaller regions, spurring the growth of the local area as well as the nation as a whole.

In conclusion, there are many problems that people in cities are facing, and it is advisable that government encourage the residents to consider relocation to smaller regional areas with a view to solving these issues.

Sample 4:

It is true that nowadays people are shifting to larger cities. There are several negative consequences of this moot issue, and to cope with the current problems, the authorities should encourage individuals to move to smaller cities or even to the countryside.

To begin with, an enormous number of people create problems. One negative consequence is that the urban population would go on increasing and cause housing problems. This leads to the creation of underdeveloped slum areas, where underprivileged individuals must live in poor living conditions like lacking medical care or even drinking water. Another issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

Governments should take steps to move a certain number of city dwellers to less populated areas. The main reason is that shifting people to towns or even the countryside helps to decrease the unemployment rate. This is because as more and more people apply for the same position within a company, it may intensify the competition among employees, making it significantly more difficult to be chosen. Towns, however, due to industrialization, are now able to provide different jobs for engineers or officers in new factories. Therefore, by encouraging job seekers to move to these newly developed areas, the government can lower the number of unemployed individuals in cities.

In conclusion, an increasing number of people living in cities certainly creates housing problems and traffic congestion, and governments should encourage its citizens to migrate to towns.

Sample 5:

More and more people live in cities today than at any point in the past and this trend will likely continue in the future. This has resulted in many problems including extreme overcrowding and governments should take measures to make living outside cities more attractive.

There are a wide range of drawbacks associated with the rise of modern cities but one of the most obvious issues is related to population density. The large number of people crammed into a relatively small area has caused expensive housing, increased traffic and severe pollution. For example, apartment prices in mega-cities like Tokyo and New York have soared to the point where only the wealthiest inhabitants can afford decent living standards. Regardless of financial status, all city dwellers have to deal with more and more traffic jams as the population increases while the area of cities remains fixed. Finally, all these people living and travelling in one place puts a tremendous strain on the environment and some cities, like Beijing in China, have become dangerously polluted.

In my opinion, governments have a duty to encourage citizens to move to more rural areas. If cities continue to expand unabated then the above problems will only get worse. We might one day find ourselves living in densely packed, heavily polluted cities that resemble scenes from a dystopian science fiction film. In order to prevent this from happening, the government can give tax breaks to companies that choose to locate offices and production facilities outside the city. This will provide more jobs for people who are willing to live in the countryside.

In conclusion, the concerns related to overcrowding in cities can and should be somewhat countered by governments incentivising living in rural areas. If this is done then we may still face problems related to cities in the future, but at least they will not be as serious.

Sample 6:

Residing in metropolitan cities has been stimulating some crucial issues in daily activities. Congestion and air pollution are problems related to living in big cities. Thus, these issues have to be tackled by governments through plausible actions such as enhancing numerous public transportations and controlling the price of basic needs instead of encouraging societies to relocate to smaller regional towns.

Societies face many issues in metropolitan cities as traffic jams and quality of air pollution. In big cities, some roads are dominated by private cars, then the number of people using these private cars is higher than in other cities. As a result, there is a phenomenon like congestion in the road that can occur with long duration. Mostly, people who are workers have to go to office and back home regularly using private cars. This situation has a bad impact on utilizing time because they spend more time just on the road and have a chance of becoming late to go to office. Another problem that has influenced widely on people is reducing air quality. When individuals live in larger cities is a risk to the respiratory system, an individual usually takes breath frequently which contains more emissions produced by private cars. Thus, individuals are able to get some diseases such as asthma.

What authorities should do is to deliver better public transportation. These facilities have to consider integration on reaching some ways, an efficiency of time and cost of transportation. If the government ponders this solution, individuals will use this type of transportation. For instance, after the government applied an integration of public transportation in Bandung, societies directly used public transportation. Therefore, the number of private cars has dropped.

To sum up, congestion and quality of air quality are common issues in metropolitan cities. Considering encouraging relocation to smaller cities is not the best solution, but governments can tackle some problems regarding living in metropolitan cities through improving of public transportation.

Sample 1:

The relationship between equality and personal accomplishments has gained significant attention in the last few years. Some claim that a fair society can encourage their people to succeed as they treat everyone in the same manner, while others oppose that personal achievement as a result of success and failure is based on their merits. I firmly believe that a combination of both equal and individualistic approaches is the key to success.

To begin with, gender equality is not only a fundamental right but also a necessary foundation for a peaceful and prosperous life. It is quite essential to utilize the full human potential for sustainable development. For example, in western countries, women are equally respected and given opportunities as men. However, in middle east countries or Eurasia, they do not have the same mindset, and women are still referred to be inferior to men. We observe an understandable difference in both western and eastern countries’ prosperity which gives us an understanding of the egalitarian society’s role in giving equal opportunities to men and women, to rich and poor, to upper class and lower class.

On the other hand, an individualistic approach is the second step after getting equal opportunities from an egalitarian society as it only creates favourable conditions, but an individual is responsible for taking the opportunity and making an effort to achieve the goal for its positive outcome. If we take an example of the ranking scoreboard, it can help evaluate the individuals’ performances on their merits.

To conclude, both equality and personal success are interdependent. Giving equal opportunities to all individuals is the first step to fair inclusion, and individual performance is the second step to thriving.

Sample 2:

There is a strong interest in equality and personal achievement in today’s world. In my opinion, these terms are different from each other. There must be equality in human beings’ rights, but equality in achievement can not be considered fair.

There must be quality in education for each person irrespective of their religion or family status. Everyone has the right to get a good education, and the government should provide facilities so that education will be free for all. If it is not free, then it should be less cheap so that no one hesitates to get an education. For example, to get admission to a well-known school/college, sometimes we need to pay some extra money, and it is not a good sign in our society, and due to this, some students cannot afford their expenses and miss the chance to join their preferred institute.

On the other hand, equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and one should get a prize as per their merits. For example, IT sector jobs have different roles, and everyone employed has to work as per their task assignments. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra effort to the work will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Also, if we give equal salary to each one, it may help maintain a good work environment, but it will be a disgrace for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to the others.

In conclusion, it is good to have equality in some areas, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge.

Sample 3:

According to the Ecological Systems Theory, the environment that a person lives in has the most significant influence on his/her personal development. Some argue that certain personal traits are closely associated with a person’s achievement. However, I will argue in this essay that social equality is the key to an individual’s success in general from two aspects: gender equality and education equality.

The roles that women play in societies often vary significantly among different regions of the world. Societies, that offer women more freedom in terms of educational and vocational choices, could possess more desirable opportunities to facilitate women in pursuing their dreams and achieving their potentials. Women in Australia, for example, where the equality between males and females is considerably advance, could be more likely to achieve higher personal successes than women in Pakistan where females often remain inferior to males in society.

Education equality is another effect that could largely influence on one’s accomplishment. As human society develops, the ability of literacy and the access to modern technologies become increasingly important in individuals’ personal development. Residents of regions where free fundamental education and better access to technologies, such as the internet and computers, are provided, could have increasing numbers of opportunities to exercise their personal traits, thus, to succeed in the fields of their choices.

To conclude, an egalitarian society can facilitate more achievements among individuals. The gender and education equalities are two fundamental ones that could ensure everyone in the society, both males and females, to have the relatively equal opportunity to succeed.

Sample 4:

The concern and ongoing debate in the relationship between equality and personal success have developed recently. Some are convinced that individuals have marvellous opportunities to gain their success in egalitarian societies where everyone is treated in the same manner no matter what their educational, economical and intellectual levels are. While the opponents conceive that the high level of attainment will happen only if the individuals are free to achieve both the success and failure based on their own capabilities. I entirely believe that there is a strong connection between equality and personal success and this essay aims to elaborate that the egalitarian society is the best option for people.

As the era is developing, some aspects among the general public are changing and equality is one of those aspects. The concept of equality has been spread in the whole world and it results in many successes in egalitarian communities. Egalitarian gives fantastic chance to people to gain their achievement since there is no restriction for people in order to reach their success. In this situation, skill and knowledge are the main factors to achieve it. In Indonesia, for example, it was hard for women to have positions in certain sectors such as politics and military because most people were convinced that it was not appropriate for women to become either politician or a defence personnel. Yet, as the people is more open-minded now, it is no longer an issue and women can achieve their success in any sectors based on their ability. Thus, the egalitarian trend has influenced the society’s achievement.

Besides, equal rights and opportunities trigger people to become more competitive in a positive way and have more spirit to achieve something. Furthermore, people can get motivation from their surrounding that has similar objectives. In a classroom, for instance, every pupil has the same rights to be the champ without be differentiated by the teacher. While the students are surrounded by spirited fellows, they will learn better. In this case, having equal opportunities and rights urge people to gain the best achievement. Therefore, egalitarian concepts provide more chance to every people to become successful.

In conclusion, equality motivates people to work together and help each other. In a society where discrimination is present, even based on people’s capability, greater good can never be achieved.

Sample 5:

Some people believe that an egalitarian society engenders greater personal achievements for its people. However, others reject this notion as they believe such achievements can only be obtained based on internal factors such as individual strengths. While there is a directly proportional relationship between equality and personal achievements, I only partly agree with this notion as equality can only contribute so much to an individual’s success.

Admittedly, a fair society does provide a good foundation for personal achievement. With every person being given the same opportunities and rights, everyone would have the appropriate foundation to try and excel at what they do. As such, people would likely be given the same career opportunities and privileges, which can facilitate an equal chance for success among them. The practicality of such a society can be seen in the case of Sweden and Norway, where tertiary education is provided equally and free of charge to citizens. With everyone being given the chance to pursue higher learning and by extension better job opportunities, the workforce of these two countries display a higher level of education and far better earnings compared to the average nation.

However, it is also my firm conviction that there are other individual factors contributing to personal accomplishments besides equality. This is because equality can only go so far as to offer an initial head start for people on the long road to greater accomplishment, which is not sufficient to guarantee their success. By contrast, individual qualities have a much more extensive and long-term impact on any individual’s career. Only with qualities such as perseverance and determination can a person be willing to try and fail over and over in order to gain experience and achieve what they want. This is precisely why among millions of people that are given an equal chance to succeed, only those who are truly determined and resilient can find success.

In conclusion, despite my acknowledgement of the positive relationship between an egalitarian society and the achievement of its people, I also contend that this correlation is limited due to the greater importance of individual merits. Since the prospect of an all-equal society is somewhat negligible, it is advisable that people strive to improve their personal qualities to stand a better chance of success.

Sample 6:

The connection between equality and personal success is a complex topic that has been extensively discussed. Some argue that individuals can accomplish more in societies that prioritize equal treatment, while others believe that personal achievement is only possible when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their abilities.

Some individuals argue that in egalitarian societies, people can achieve greater success. This is because when individuals are in a fair society, they can accomplish more with the assistance of others. Additionally, there are more opportunities available when society is fair in all aspects. An egalitarian society refers to a society where everyone is treated equally, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or age. For example, India is often seen as a representation of an egalitarian society due to its constitution and various practices that promote equality.

However, there are others who argue that individuals can only achieve significant personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities.  I personally share this viewpoint because in a society that is highly competitive, success can only be attained when individuals have the liberty to make their own choices. By being able to choose their own path and pursue their own aspirations rather than conforming to others' expectations, individuals can truly achieve self-fulfillment. This can only be accomplished through the utilization of one's full potential and dedication to hard work.

In conclusion, both viewpoints had equal advantages and disadvantages. However, I agree with the viewpoint that high levels of personal achievement are possible only if individuals are free to succeed or fail.

Sample 7:

An egalitarian society is one where all people are considered equal in everything such as rights and opportunities. For instance, education plays a crucial role in everyone’s life and their success. Everyone in society has the right to get free schooling, which is offered by the government of a nation. Personally, I believe that people living in such a society have the potential to accomplish more. 

Furthermore, attaining personal accomplishments will serve as a guide for enhancing ourselves and enable us to reach our utmost capabilities. Moreover, we can enhance different facets of our lives, including self-assurance, communication abilities, productivity, and more.

However, there are some individuals who hold the belief that individuals can only achieve high levels of personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities. I believe that equality does not hinder people's freedom to succeed or fail. In fact, I argue that individuals would be motivated and perform well in a society that promoted equality. Moreover, the inequality in a society will lead to social cohesion, negative impact on health and well being, economic growth, etc. 

To sum up, I think it is important to strike a balance between both perspectives as they have their own advantages and disadvantages. Also promoting equality in society can also positively impact an individual's personal accomplishments. 

Sample 8:

In today's world, the environment has a significant impact on people's growth in various ways. While some argue that personal success can only be attained when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their own abilities, I firmly believe that a fair society that highly values equality allows individuals to achieve even greater success.

Equality means that every individual should be considered of equal worth and should be treated fairly, regardless of their personal characteristics, skills, or way of life. This implies that everyone should have equal rights, opportunities, and be treated with the same level of respect. By promoting equality in society, individuals can benefit in various ways, including fair treatment, respect, access to opportunities, economic efficiency, and enhanced education. For instance, countries like Pakistan, Syria, Mauritania are considered as an unfair country because of various reasons, such as gender-based violence, discrimination. And in these countries still personal success is out of reach for women.

Furthermore, education significantly contributes to individual achievement. Despite the presence of social inequality, numerous countries continue to struggle with high levels of illiteracy. For example, nations such as Norway, North Korea, and Lithuania boast a 100% literacy rate, while countries like Niger, Armenia, and Azerbaijan have alarmingly high rates of illiteracy, with citizens unable to read, write, or comprehend. The disparity between possessing education and lacking it is immense, and it greatly impacts personal success.

To sum up, I firmly believe that people can accomplish greater things in a society that promotes equality. This is because when individuals have equal opportunities and fair treatment, they are able to achieve more.

Sample 9:

Many research studies have highlighted a causal connection between utopian societies and personal growth, which has prompted the contention that individuals can accomplish more in more egalitarian societies. In my opinion, one can only grow when given the liberty to commit to personal causes. 

A utopian society provides its constituents with sustenance but not necessarily individual growth. This can be evidenced both economically and socially. In developed countries, there is typically a social safety net in the form of food banks, soup kitchens, or free healthcare to support less privileged citizens. Though the unemployed or people living below the poverty line can rely on these benefits for sustenance, this arguably deprives individuals of personal incentives to exert themselves, find decent employment, and in part, escape from poverty. An egalitarian society can also stifle growth in the workforce. If companies around the world embraced a hypothetical system of equal pay for all employees, such a policy would likely cause economic stagnation, stifle innovation, damage companies’ reputations, and hamper personal motivation generally. 

As far as I am concerned, success is not linear, and one can only see high levels of achievement when granted the freedom to make mistakes. A relevant example would be Rishi Sunak, the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He was born into humble beginnings with both parents originally immigrants from India who sought asylum in the UK for the promise of a better life. Though the UK welcomed the family as asylum seekers and provided Rishi with education opportunities, he still applied himself, studying earnestly at school, securing quality employment at investment banks, and later entering the political world. Despite an early defeat in his bid to become prime minister against Liz Truss, Rishi continued to persevere with his campaigns and political beliefs, and finally managed to ascend to the position of Prime Minister after several debates. Similar instances of success can be seen in all industries, but the overlapping commonality is the liberty to pursue one’s purposes and the freedom to fail. 

In conclusion, high achievers tend to be those who are free to pursue their personal causes despite the safety net provided by an egalitarian society. One should try to capitalise on all opportunities being presented. 

Sample 10:

In the present era, emphasis is increasing towards equality in society and achieving success. Some argue that chances of success are higher in a society where everyone has equal rights and opportunities. In contrast, others think that it would be more beneficial if people had the freedom to achieve or fail according to their results. I believe that an egalitarian society is better as every person has a chance to succeed, regardless of gender or background.

A fair society that supports talent has a chance to achieve growth much better than a biased society. If society is biased towards some cast or wealthy people, then the only people who can achieve success are the ones who belong to affluent families. However, children from wealthy families don’t need to have more talent. It depends on the dedication and hard work of individuals. Suppose each individual has given a chance, then people will put more effort into achieving something. For instance, if admission to the university depends upon how individuals perform in exams instead of their background, people would work hard to succeed.

Furthermore, if society is biased and does not allow everyone to grow, there would be no harmony among the individuals in society. Such a society will always face struggles, and nobody will feel happy in such an environment. When people in the community feel they are not given equal rights, they start protesting, which affects the peace. To cite an example, a few years ago Patel community gathered and demanded their cast to be included in the minority because they felt that their community was not getting the same opportunity as compared to other communities, which led to massive destruction in some states of Gujarat. Moreover, if people do not have equal rights, they prefer to migrate to a place where they have equal opportunities.

To conclude, having equal opportunity to succeed is a fundamental human right, and if society wants to achieve something, then it must be unbiased and preference given to deserving people, regardless of their gender or religion.

Sample 11:

It is an irrefutable fact that equality plays an essential role in societies. Some populace thinks that individuals can achieve more success in an egalitarian society. In contrast, others think that a high level of success depends on an individual’s merits, hard work and dedication. However, I firmly believe both equality and personal merits play paramount roles among people. This essay will analyze both views using examples to demonstrate points and prove arguments.

On the one hand, equality is essential in many aspects, such as men and women. In the past, only men tend to go to school or do work at the office, while nowadays, the majority of women work. Anyone has the right to have an education and work, whether poor or rich. In other words, people have to judge them on their talent, not on their social status or family status. For instance, many higher-level schools take donations in order to get admission to that school. Therefore, poor people cannot get admission because of the financial crisis. At this moment, the government should provide free or low-budget education so that everyone can get an education. Thus, equality plays a significant role in order to become successful.

On the other hand, individual achievement is equally important because, without failure, they cannot learn and achieve new things. To be more precise, failure is the key to success. If the person does not go through failure, they do not know the value of success. We learn lesions as well as mistakes through failures. Not only failure but hard work and dedication are also equally important. Everyone should get merits for their hard work. To exemplify, the IT sector’s job has different roles, and every employee has to work on the task assigned to them. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Another thing is that if we give equal salary to each one, it may help to maintain a good workplace environment but, it will be a dishonour for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to others. Hence, only equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and also one should get a prize as per their merits.

To sum up, promoting an egalitarian society motivates individuals to strive for personal excellence, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge. Hence, both are equally important to achieving achievements in their life.

Sample 12:

In recent decades, there has been considerable debate about whether or not individual achievement is greater in egalitarian or more hierarchical societies. In my opinion, despite the benefits of egalitarianism as a political principle, it should not be pursued as a social ideal.

Those who argue egalitarian societies are better for achievement point out the benefits of opportunity. The most well-known examples of this are in socialist nations in Europe like France where income disparity is less pronounced than in more capitalist countries. In such liberal countries, a person can receive a good education, secure stable employment, receive unemployment benefits in the case of an economic downturn, and support the rest of society by paying high taxes. Being part of such a community is itself a motivation for individuals to perform well at work and pursue life goals. This is especially the case as a person will not have to feel anxious about the possibility of being left behind by society at large.

I would contend that when conditions are generally equal individuals should then be permitted to compete without considerable governmental regulation. The standout example for this situation would be in the United States. Although there are more problems related to income inequality, there is also greater innovation across a variety of sectors. One cause of this is that individuals are motivated by the desire to excel and earn the financial rewards that accompany success. A person is therefore encouraged to attain their own definition of success, or they might be forced to live on the fringes of society.

In conclusion, though there is a cruel element to competition, it is the best way to encourage innovation and growth in an individual and society as a whole. Naturally, such an approach is only possible when systemic problems related to discrimination have first been eliminated.

Sample 13:

In my opinion, an egalitarian society is one in which everyone has the same rights and the same opportunities. I completely agree that people can achieve more in this kind of society.

Education is an important factor with regard to personal success in life. I believe that all children should have access to free schooling, and higher education should be either free or affordable for all those who chose to pursue a university degree. In a society without free schooling or affordable higher education, only children and young adults from wealthier families would have access to the best learning opportunities, and they would therefore be better prepared for the job market. This kind of inequality would ensure the success of some but harm the prospects of others.

I would argue that equal rights and opportunities are not in conflict with people's freedom to succeed or fail. In other words, equality does not mean that people lose their motivation to succeed, or that they are not allowed to fail. On the contrary, I believe that most people would feel more motivated to work hard and reach their potential if they thought that they lived in a fair society. Those who did not make the same effort would know that they had wasted their opportunity. Inequality, on the other hand, would be more likely to demotivate people because they would know that the odds of success were stacked in favour of those from privileged backgrounds.

In conclusion, it seems to me that there is a positive relationship between equality and personal success.