The major dilemma of most racial and ethnic minorities is that they do not have a universal measuring guide for arguing their case in court, in legislatures, congress concerning their political, social and economic inequalities.  Now they do when they use the three core values of social sustainability to compare their “inequality” to the “equality” of dominant majority groups.  

Quality of life.  If members of your ethnic group are living in a yurt, hogan or wikiup, not by choice but by economic necessity, when they would rather live in a traditional structure but with running water, electricity and/or natural gas, and sewage lines then they have a case to argue their inequality.  The interpretation of “quality of life” is determined as the individual specifies.  To measure the quality of life of one’s home is defined by the individual, as they choose.  

At this time the minimal socially sustainable definition of a home is one that protects the inhabitants from the weather.  It is able to keep them warm in cold weather and moderately cool in hot weather.  It has running water and is connected to sewage drain lines, electricity and natural gas (if available).  And it provides a reasonable square footage per person with “personal space” for them.  What the house looks like is irrelevant.  Those facilities could be available in a yurt, hogan, wikiup or a dugout sod house as was used even during the Great Depression, or a contemporary stick construction home.  Additional amenities beyond those minimums do not increase the quality of life of those who live there.  What is important is that these minimums be available to each individual.  

When these minimums for the quality of life, as described above for a home, are not available, society and all other people, suffer too.  Society suffers when children are raised in conditions with less than the minimum quality of life standards, who will eventually enter society as adults with the incomplete development of their innate potential.  They may enter society as socially, economically and politically abused (neglected) individuals with a chip on their shoulder.  Sound familiar? 

Consider the minimal social sustainability quality of life standards for nutrition, health care and educational development, (physical, mental, intellectual, emotional, social, cultural and spiritual).  In a society that has chosen to move toward social sustainability the symbiotic responsibilities of society and each individual become very clear.