Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Affirmative Action based primarily on income would still benefit African Americans and latinos in disproportionate numbers. Some how, if this went into affect I feel that we would still be playing the world's smallest violin for some of you.
Do you think affirmative action should be used in businesses and universities? Do you think that affirmative action was necessary in the past? Is it necessary today?
Affirmative action, as it was created, was intended to make informaiton about the availability of jobs more widespread so minorities would know about opportunities.
Of course, that didn't work, because, of course, it can't, so they made it racial preferences in hiring, and that hasn't "worked" because, of course, it can't.
Facts are stubborn things, as they say.
End them all now as they set race upon race and fill good jobs with poor to lousy candidates in an attempt to make you know whats out of you know whats.
Affirmative Action based primarily on income would still benefit African Americans and latinos in disproportionate numbers. Some how, if this went into affect I feel that we would still be playing the world's smallest violin for some of you.
Per capita, sure. But at least it's fair. It's not the color of the person's skin that should be the basis for employment, but their lack of opportunity, which has a direct correlation with poverty - not race.
That is equal opportunity. So you can take your little violin and go away.
By the way, there are 25 million whites in the US living below the poverty line. THEY are the forgotten. They have no class nor racial advantage. Play your violin for them...
Per capita, sure. But at least it's fair. It's not the color of the person's skin that should be the basis for employment, but their lack of opportunity, which has a direct correlation with poverty - not race.
That is equal opportunity. So you can take your little violin and go away.
The underlying point is that regardless of what your perception of "equal" is, any benficial treatment awarded to minorities is automatically disadvantegous to anyone "white" in the minds of many. The moaning and groaning is nothing more than a thinly veiled scapegoat for bigotry and complaining.
Interestingly enough, you specifically chose to use the words "lack of opportunity", "poverty" and "race" as the basis for your stance. What's even more telling is that you can take ANY of the three of those concepts and manufacture an argument that one has a direct correlation with another and giving it the causal affect of the last. I can sit here and say that "race" and the "lack of opportunity" have a direct correlation with one another which creates "poverty" or I can say that "race" and "poverty" have a direct correlation with the "lack of opportunity" and to some extent they would all have valid reasoning. It's an argument where there are no wrong answers.
But that's besides the point though, people rarely get hired or accepted into anything purely on "race" or on true "merit." And the reality is, coming up short with one of the two normally works against the minority and not to their advantage, so we're back to square one and things aren't as "equal" as you are making them out to be.
All in all, regardless of what is said and done at the end of the day,...some of yall are not getting into Harvard and some of yall are not getting that 6 figure salary and it has nothing to do with minorities or affirmative action. So I'll continue playing the tiny violin.
The underlying point is that regardless of what your perception of "equal" is, any benficial treatment awarded to minorities is automatically disadvantegous to anyone "white" in the minds of many. The moaning and groaning is nothing more than a thinly veiled scapegoat for bigotry and complaining.
Of course there are bigots who will find any reason to take issue with any sort of minority assistance. Those bigots come in all races as well. But if this is your way of calling me a bigot, you are sadly mistaken, my friend. I'm as color blind as they get, I just know when to call bull****.
Quote:
Originally Posted by itshim
Interestingly enough, you specifically chose to use the words "lack of opportunity", "poverty" and "race" as the basis for your stance. What's even more telling is that you can take ANY of the three of those concepts and manufacture an argument that one has a direct correlation with another without having the causal affect of the last. I can sit here and say that "race" and the "lack of opportunity" have a direct correlation with one another without "poverty" or I can say that "race" and "poverty" have a direct correlation without the "lack of opportunity" and to some extent they would all have valid reasoning. It's an argument where there are no wrong answers.
Of course you could, but in the context of this conversation, the NEED is what is important. Everything else is debatable until you're blue in the face. 2 poor high school kids, each living on the same ghetto street. 1 Black, 1 White. They are both in need, but the government and society has deemed the black child as assistance worthy and the black child enters college not only with tuition, but cost of living wages, as well - but not the white kid. You see, that IS racism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by itshim
But that's besides the point though, people rarely get hired or accepted into anything purely on "race" or on true "merit." And the reality is, usually coming up short with one of the two normally works against the minority and not to their advantage, so we're back to square one.
All in all, regardless of what is said and done at the end of the day,...some of yall are not getting into Harvard and some of yall are not getting that 6 figure salary and it has nothing to do with minorities or affirmative action. So I'll continue playing the tiny violin.
Also, I'd also argue that affirmative action actually creates more bigotry against minorities in the work place or in academics.
Some of these places that abide by Affrimative Action hiring policies tend to "set aside" a number of seats for minorities. That being said, one has to wonder if the "buck stops" for "fair hiring" practices once those slots are filled up. Meaning, if the said hiring company or said school has met their "quota"..will they still allow minorities to engage in "equal opportunity" for additional seats...or will they simply say "enough" and stick a white person in there regardless of qualifications? After all, what's to stop them being that they have already filled their quota?
Also, I'd also argue that affirmative action actually creates more bigotry against minorities in the work place or in academics.
Some of these places that abide by Afrimative Action hiring policies tend to "set aside" a number of seats for minorities. That being said, one has to wonder if the "buck stops" for "fair hiring" practices once those slots are filled up. Meaning, if the said hiring company or said school has met their "quota"..will they still allow minorities to engage in "equal opportunities"...or with they simply say "enough" and stick an underqualified white in there because the minority demand has already been met.
Not sure.
I think the final opinion on this subject goes down to whether we, as a population, can give each other enough credit and moral kudos to allow them the responsibility to hire employees based on merit and skill sets, rather than race.
Being a small business owner myself, I know many other business owners who employ many different races. I have yet to notice and correlation between race and hiring.
I know it does exist, and surely isn't exclusive to whites, but I'm not sure AA does more good than the resentment it builds.
I think the final opinion on this subject goes down to whether we, as a population, can give each other enough credit and moral kudos to allow them the responsibility to hire employees based on merit and skill sets, rather than race.
Being a small business owner myself, I know many other business owners who employ many different races. I have yet to notice and correlation between race and hiring.
I know it does exist, and surely isn't exclusive to whites, but I'm not sure AA does more good than the resentment it builds.
Ah I see, however putting our livelyhood in the faith that white people will "do the right thing" doesn't exactly sit well with some of us. It didn't exactly work out the first time...
Ah I see, however putting our livelyhood in the faith that white people will "do the right thing" doesn't exactly sit well with some of us. It didn't exactly work out the first time...
We voted in a black president, times have obviously changed. However, if one race keeps insisting another is racist, then enjoy perpetual racism.
To add, when someone assumes or labels another as racist, you generally get a racist response. It's just kind of how the human psyche works.
While we are at it, I should point out that ethnic and racial issues have been around since the beginning of man, however, the US seems to be the only country to employ such social programs. I couldn't think of a better way to divide a society.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
