Affirmative Action bake sale sparks controversy

[kellychaos]

I think that "affirmative action" is an anachronism nowadays. It was a nice "jump start" in the days of inequality but I think that the playing field's become fairly level ... not perfectly but more so than it used to be. Frankly, were I a < insert race > that were hired only on a quota system and not by my own merits, I'd be rather insulted.

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by mburbank

I'm sure that's laudible, but what do you think about the state of things right now? Do you see the playing field as being level? If not, how do you combat lingering entrenched racism in the workplace and in education and how do you redress the effects of poverty on education?

You do realize that any successful business owner will generally want to hire the most qualified person?

Futhermore, you do realize that rascism in the workplace and education is barely existant?

Even more so, if you support AA on the basis inequal education, why don't you support more fair education and/or affirmative action for poverty level rather than race?

Perhaps the silliest thing I find about your viewpoint is that you seem to believe that advancement of minorities is a necessity. This is pointless. People should be viewed as individuals, not as groups.

[ziggytrix]

Futhermore, you do realize that rascism in the workplace and education is barely existant?

That's laughable. I wish it were true, but it just isn't.

[Perndog]

Originally Posted by OAO

Perhaps the silliest thing I find about your viewpoint is that you seem to believe that advancement of minorities is a necessity. This is pointless. People should be viewed as individuals, not as groups.

BINGO!

[mburbank]

I agree wholeheartedly with that last statement. When we as a society start viewing minorities, the poor, the homeless and women as individuals, get back to me.

The idea that AA is quotas is in most cases ridiculous and where applicable, a missreading of what it's for. Racial preference should be for equally qualified candidates.

"Futhermore, you do realize that rascism in the workplace and education is barely existant? "
That is such a huge load of steaming crap I can only assume it's some of your pillow talk with the Cato institute.

"Even more so, if you support AA on the basis inequal education, why don't you support more fair education and/or affirmative action for poverty level rather than race? "
I do. The Government does not, and associates such attempts with 'class warfare'.

"advancement of minorities is a necessity". Not 'advancement'. Fairness and redress. But you think racism, gender preference, etc. is a thing of te past so its hard to talk about a level playing field.

Don't you think we already have unoficial 'affirmative' action for rich white connected males? Or are you, like Vinth, going to Argue that folks like W. get into Harvard and Yale on the strength of their transcripts?

[Emu]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Futhermore, you do realize that rascism in the workplace and education is barely existant?

If by racism you mean cross burnings and public lynchings, then maybe. But racial preference prevails.

[mburbank]

We're still not at Equal pay for Equal time for women.

[The One and Only...]

And you think that the government should enforce it? Heck, it only makes sense that women would be payed less working labor jobs.

Don't make me pull out those statistics showing that Affirmative Action keeps out lower-income white children in favor of higher-income minority children.

Racial preference in hiring? Hardly. Perhaps in commercial fields, but then, why should we stop corporations from marketing the image they want?

The rich are supposed to have an advantage in these things. That's the point of being rich. That doesn't justify Affirmative Action. Exceptionally intelligent children can still get into Ivy League colleges, they just have to pay off their loans.

You want to give lower income children a better chance to succeed? Fine. Privatize the education system and stop granting money to colleges. Maybe then colleges will stop putting up goodies that have nothing to do with education.

[Bennett]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

And you think that the government should enforce it? Heck, it only makes sense that women would be payed less working labor jobs.

I can't wait until you are out of middle school. I appreciate the fact that you try to inform yourself, and seem well spoken, but your world view is completely fucked.

[The One and Only...]

I'm out of middle school.

Think about it. Men are generally stronger; thus, they are more able to work certain bluecollar jobs over women. Hence, they are more productive, and greater productivity leads to higher pay.

That doesn't mean that the hiring company is sexist.

[Perndog]

Bennett

That really needed to be said.

You can't talk about individuals and statistics in the same breath, not to mention that statistics are often only good for persuading gullible people.

But Max, the preference to rich white connected males has a lot more to do with them being rich and connected than white and male, because I'm a white male and I'm not getting free rides anywhere (well, except through college, but this school is too liberal for that to depend on my race).

Oh, and another thing they can do to improve education is take all the money that's going toward athletics and put it into academics. High school sports don't help enough people to justify the amount of money that's spent on them, and if a kid's going to be a star athlete he'll play outside of school anyway.

[Bennett]

Women get less pay at office jobs, not just at the steel mill.

[The One and Only...]

I know that. I just disagree with the notion that a blanket regulation will make all our problems go away.

[Bennett]

you sometimes seem resigned to the fact that all of our problems will never go away... do you believe that to be true of yourself?

[The One and Only...]

I believe they will go away, but not thanks to government intervention.

[mburbank]

Well, suppose someone wants to kill you and sell your organs. Should the government intervene there? Extreme, I know, but my point is we all, even you, think there is a purpose to a social contract and government. We all draw a line at what they should do. I absolutely think Equal pay for Equal time should be law. I absolutely belive that companies would keep slaves if they were allowed to, work people for only as much food as it took to keep them alive if they were allowed to, Kidnap and grind pople up for pet food if they were allowed to. I believe the strong would use the weak for carpets and a lot of this country would kill the poor if it was socially exceptable.

Government is our group effort to reinforce our better selves. What that means is open to debate, but I'm all in favor of the effort. I far rather rely on the efforts of a representative government with a series of check and balances built in than hope for the altruism of a free market.

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Extreme, I know, but my point is we all, even you, think there is a purpose to a social contract and government.

I don't believe in any sort of "social contract" theory. I believe in the government, but for different reasons.

I absolutely think Equal pay for Equal time should be law.

Please elaborate on exactly what you mean. Within the same company? Over all companies? Over all jobs?

In any case, have fun with your labor theory of value and efficiency losses, as well as throwing several men into unescapeable debt.

Government is our group effort to reinforce our better selves.

This is where we disagree. Government is simply the combined effort of several interest groups to turn the interaction of humans in their favor. Most support unified military and police; therefore, few complain about the government stealing their money through taxation and having it allocated to such functions. However, differences in opinions lead to political lobbying and parties, and, after much deliberation, a consensus is reached to create a basic governmental framework that allows for policy to be changed without bloodshed. That is how a republic forms.

[mburbank]

Within each employers company.


Explain to me why in your societal theory Someone shouldn't kill you to sell your kidneys?

[The One and Only...]

Big men with guns will come and take you to prison.

Remember, I am in favor of government. I just disagree with the notion of societal contract and that actions made by government are any less morally apprehensable because they are done by the government. Taxation is still theft - it's just tolerated, or supported by the people.

[mburbank]

So what about Government re you in favor of? Your Kidneys being protected from organ stealers? Cause I like my lungs being protected by a functional EPA.

[The One and Only...]

I don't advocate the repeal of all environmental laws. In fact, I support the passage of a law that respects emission rights, the end of soviergn immunity, and tax credits for entrepeneurs that start up gaming ranches and wilderness reserves (I believed I already pointed out that they can actually increase biodiversity). I just think we need to seriously consider how and to what extent we protect the environment.

Only a fool would advocate the repeal of all regulation, no matter what the cost. I'm a libertarian, not some freaky market anarchist that hangs out in the basement all day.

[AChimp]

OAO, if you ever graduate and make it through business school, you will see how wrong you are in every aspect.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

I'm out of middle school.

Think about it. Men are generally stronger; thus, they are more able to work certain bluecollar jobs over women. Hence, they are more productive, and greater productivity leads to higher pay.

That doesn't mean that the hiring company is sexist.

You OBVIOUSLY haven't worked in the labor industry. I've seem some women who can do all the physical work that most men can do. Granted, they look like offensive linemen but they're not getting paid for their looks. Now, if you were ammend your comment to state "equal pay for those who merit it", I'd buy into that.

[The One and Only...]

I was speaking in general terms. Of course women who are better at their field deserve more pay.

[kahljorn]

Women(who are capable) should definitley be allowed to do muscly work, like construction work(how often do you see a woman sandbagging). Just like any man who can cook, clean and give birth should be able to stay at home and be housewives.