Honda Agrees to $25 million Settlement for Widespread Discrimination Against Blacks (accuses, abuse)

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

The "law" they broke was the same one the NBA is currently breaking with it's hiring practices.

What does a law about credit ratings have to do with hiring practices ?????????

Disparate impact theory at work....selectively applied.

Honda paid to make this go away because the government would drag their reputation through the mud for years while it played out and can spend tons on lawyers without blinking.

The 25 million dollars is not a fine Honda agreed to pay, it is a settlement that would pay back the victims of discrimination in full.

[whogo]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

What does a law about credit ratings have to do with hiring practices ?????????



The 25 million dollars is not a fine Honda agreed to pay, it is a settlement that would pay back the victims of discrimination in full.

But if they were simply discriminating against the stupid stupid white people are not being compensated.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

It's not that complicated. They start with a high rate and see if you balk. Those that know better either talk them down on it or finance somewhere else.

Again, the rates didnt start off the same. So if you both talked them down 4%, at the high end, you would still be paying 2.25% more.

If the 2 people had started out on an even footing, you would have a point, but they didnt and that is how they broke the law. As you plainly put it, it isnt that complicated.

It works the same way as purchase price which is more commonly understood to be something you haggle over.

Therefore, by default you get younger people, dumber people and those that haven't taken time to (or care) check the internet or ask a friend about car buying strategies or shop around for financing.

No its not like purchase price because purchase price starts off at the same, the interest rates didnt.

I'm always shocked when you have people that can recognize that educational attainment for minorities is lower (due to history) but then can't connect the dots to them getting worse deals on transactions.

You know what they tried to do when my friend was car shopping and I was helping? I balked at the first number and they kept everything the same except increased the loan term from 60 to 84 months thus "lowering the payment". You think everyone has an equal ability to understand that is not a "savings"?

Of course not. Thats why there are millions of people who have signed up for Verizon Edge and ATT Next, BUT that isnt what we are talking about here.

The interest rate did not start out at the same amount for each customer, it was different from the beginning.

[mtl1]

Originally Posted by silverkris

So how does this affect you? It's like single sex marriage - if you don't like it - don't do it. What does African Americans getting a fair shake on financing have to do with affecting your life?

I've explained it to you 7 ways to Sunday. Progressive divide people into racial groups and not as diverse individuals. If some individuals', certainly not all in the white group, achievement brings group average up, whites are labeled "racist!". Then ALL the members of the nonwhite group are given an equal outcome.

Essentially any white achievement is labeled as bad and given to nonwhites unearned. This promotes failure, division and resentment. People should be treated as individuals and their success or failure should be analyzed individually.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by whogo

But if they were simply discriminating against the stupid stupid white people are not being compensated.

This has nothing to do with stupidity, it has to do with discrimination.

[mtl1]

[quote=dsjj251;40423771]Again, the rates didnt start off the same. So if you both talked them down 4%, at the high end, you would still be paying 2.25% more.

If the 2 people had started out on an even footing, you would have a point, but they didnt and that is how they broke the law. As you plainly put it, it isnt that complicated.

Proof? Prove that all whites were initially offered a lower interest rate with all relevant factors equal loan amount, down payment, credit score etc. You keep making this claim and have zero proof.

No its not like purchase price because purchase price starts off at the same,
the interest rates didnt.

No it does not. When you start the negotiation process they usually offer an initial price and interest rate.

The interest rate did not start out at the same amount for each customer, it was different from the beginning.

Of course it was different based on many factors. Prove that all blacks were offered a higher interest rate initially than all whites were. When something is negotiable it doesn't even matter where something starts at.

Just like the government you make claims and allegations and come to conclusions with no solid proof.

[mtl1]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

This has nothing to do with stupidity, it has to do with discrimination.

It has everything to do with not negotiating as well. But in this case the difference was so small it was not significant enough anyway.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by mtl1

Proof? Prove that all whites were initially offered a lower interest rate with all relevant factors equal loan amount, down payment, credit score etc. You keep making this claim and have zero proof.

Im pretty sure the DOJ has the specific numbers you are looking for

No it does not. When you start the negotiation process they usually offer an initial price and interest rate.

You are again wrong.

The initial price is the sticker price.

And as already stated, Honda offered different initial interest rates. Thats the problem.

Of course it was different based on many factors. Prove that all blacks were offered a higher interest rate initially than all whites were. When something is negotiable it doesn't even matter where something starts at.

Just like the government you make claims and allegations and come to conclusions with no solid proof.

The only one here who hasnt provided any proof is you. Your entire argument is based on assumptions because you dont want to believe discrimination exist.

[mtl1]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

Im pretty sure the DOJ has the specific numbers you are looking for

And I'm pretty sure they do not.

You are again wrong.





The initial price is the sticker price.





And as already stated, Honda offered different initial interest rates. Thats
the problem.

No the initial price offered is rarely the sticker price. The loan amount and interest rate are not initially fixed.

The only one here who hasnt provided any proof is you. Your entire argument is based on assumptions because you dont want to believe discrimination exist.

I don't need to make any assumptions. You are the one making the assumptions. The interest rate is based on several factors and is negotiable. It's the buyer's duty to negotiate the best interest rate as is the purchase price. Those are facts. I don't care if discrimination exists anyway. I believe people have a natural right to discriminate for every reason under the sun. The government is suppose to prove discrimination is because of 'skin color', but they did not, never do and don't have to. All the government has to do is show disparate impact/outcome. The groups are disparate in abilities and behaviors between groups and even within groups and always will have different outcomes. The government encourages disparate group behavior.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

What does a law about credit ratings have to do with hiring practices ?????????



The 25 million dollars is not a fine Honda agreed to pay, it is a settlement that would pay back the victims of discrimination in full.

1. Both use disparate impact as proof of bias. Disparate impact assumes that there is no underlying difference in education (among other assumptions) which is a lie. Now there IS racism involved in the problem but they're blaming the guy at the end for the result....not the guys at the beginning which ironically a big part of is the government itself.

2. There was no finding of discrimination, just a claim which was met by Honda essentially saying they're innocent but aren't going to spend as much or more money in legal fights with the bottomless pockets of the US govt. and also have their reputation maligned in the process.