JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: A True Conservative on February 12, 2009, 08:40:30 PM
-
I'd like to get your thoughts on Affirmative Action. I think most forum members here would oppose it but I'd have to disagree. Some conservatives think people should be free to associate with who they want yet oppose Affirmative Action. If you believe in association with who you want then you shouldn't oppose Affirmative Action and Harvard should be free to accept unqualified Blacks. If you oppose Affirmative Action then you don't believe in free association. You can't believe in free association and oppose AA. The liberals are hypocrites because they practice AA yet oppose discrimination against minorities. I don't oppose AA if Whites can discriminate against minorities otherwise I oppose it.
-
I don't follow your logic. What does affirmative action have to do with freedom of association?
-
Didn't Affirmative Action result because of Government Legislation in the 1960's?
-
This topic makes little sense. What is the relationship between Affirmative Action {which is legislation which forces companies to hire certain minorities to fill quotas} and Freedom of Association? Maybe the poster didn't phrase the question properly?
-
I don't follow your logic. What does affirmative action have to do with freedom of association?
If you believe in freedom of association then employers and universities can practice their freedom of association by using AA. Practicing AA is discrimination which is freedom of association. If they are free they don't necessarily have to hire or accept the most qualified applicant.
-
I think affirmative action should be outlawed and not practiced at all. There is no reason I should lose a job to a minority all because of the color of their skin. Jobs and education should be based on the performance you give.
-
Affirmative Action has given us this arrogant sack of dog squeeze as our President. It is simply racism against poor white boys and the false promotion of unqualified blacks.
-
I'd like to get your thoughts on Affirmative Action. I think most forum members here would oppose it but I'd have to disagree. Some conservatives think people should be free to associate with who they want yet oppose Affirmative Action. If you believe in association with who you want then you shouldn't oppose Affirmative Action and Harvard should be free to accept unqualified Blacks. If you oppose Affirmative Action then you don't believe in free association. You can't believe in free association and oppose AA. The liberals are hypocrites because they practice AA yet oppose discrimination against minorities. I don't oppose AA if Whites can discriminate against minorities otherwise I oppose it.
I don't think you know what Affirmative Action is. It is forcing employers to hire unqualified minorities that have not been successful i.e blacks and arabs against there will versus hiring qualified whites,asians,jews and Cubans. Supposedly allot of militant blacks and self hating whites and jews thought that would be a good idea to have affirmative action. So you have a situation where you always have to hire these affirmative action morons though never fire them or else you would have lawsuits and boy cots against your company. The best you could pretty much do if you have one of them working at your company would just be to spend allot of time and energy correcting there mistakes. I have worked with some of these guys. they choose to spend there shift playing cards and being total gluten's by pigging out on Hungryman dinners and other fatty foods and almost never doing there work. no wonder why are economy is bad. Therefore I am totally against affirmative action!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I see no end to it with our current administration >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
I agree with Ranter and Abben. affirmative action goes hand in hand with political correctness.
-
"Affirmative" Action, is outright hostile racism against whites, nothing less.
-
New Yorker hit the nail on the head.
-
affirmative action shoudl only apply to all people who are poor but very intelligent and need a little push for recognition...not just for someone just becuase they are black skinned with afro hair and flat noses and talk and act like a baboon. those belong in a zoo...
-
I don't think you know what Affirmative Action is. It is forcing employers to hire unqualified minorities that have not been successful i.e blacks and arabs against there will versus hiring qualified whites,asians,jews and Cubans. Supposedly allot of militant blacks and self hating whites and jews thought that would be a good idea to have affirmative action. So you have a situation where you always have to hire these affirmative action morons though never fire them or else you would have lawsuits and boy cots against your company. The best you could pretty much do if you have one of them working at your company would just be to spend allot of time and energy correcting there mistakes. I have worked with some of these guys. they choose to spend there shift playing cards and being total gluten's by pigging out on Hungryman dinners and other fatty foods and almost never doing there work. no wonder why are economy is bad. Therefore I am totally against affirmative action!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I see no end to it with our current administration >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
That's not true. The government practices AA and forbids private companies to discriminate against minorities but doesn't force them to hire unqualified minorities. Instead it incites them to hire more minorities through tax breaks and government contract preferences. We can agree that the federal government and state/local governments end AA and stop inciting AA but I guarantee you that even if this were to happen there would still be companies like Verizon and schools like Harvard that would practice AA. The question is do you believe Harvard has the right to freely associate with unqualified Blacks? If you don't then why should White restaurant owners in Mississippi have the freedom to associate only with Whites. You can't have it both ways.
-
It's just the opposite really. Affirmative action forces you to hire or promote blacks over more qualified people. Free association says that if you didn't want to you wouldn't have to hire them at all.
-
True Conservative, your free association analogy makes no sense whatsoever.
Why would a prestigious university like Harvard deliberately accept unqualified minority students, without government coercion? Their reputation as one the best American universities would go down the toilet.
Also, why would average businesses deliberately hire unqualified minorities if there was no affirmative action? The purpose of businesses is to make money, not to act as a welfare organization. And hiring unqualified people of any race is a recipe for losing money.
You cite Verizon as an example. Yet they're a sort of government backed monopoly, much like the fictitious Taggart Transcontinental railroad in Ayn Rand's Magnum Opus "Atlas Shrugged." Try shopping around for telephone and internet service in parts of midtown Manhattan. Verizon is almost the only option available. So they can afford to practice affirmative action. The local governments will usually bail their donkeys out.
-
True Conservative, your free association analogy makes no sense whatsoever.
Why would a prestigious university like Harvard deliberately accept unqualified minority students, without government coercion? Their reputation as one the best American universities would go down the toilet.
Also, why would average businesses deliberately hire unqualified minorities if there was no affirmative action? The purpose of businesses is to make money, not to act as a welfare organization. And hiring unqualified people of any race is a recipe for losing money.
You cite Verizon as an example. Yet they're a sort of government backed monopoly, much like the fictitious Taggart Transcontinental railroad in Ayn Rand's Magnum Opus "Atlas Shrugged." Try shopping around for telephone and internet service in parts of midtown Manhattan. Verizon is almost the only option available. So they can afford to practice affirmative action. The local governments will usually bail their donkeys out.
Of course Harvard would do this. There are so many lefties from Harvard that have infiltrated the justice system and pushed for policies like AA. Are you telling me they wouldn't do it in their own school? I don't think small and medium businesses would do this without incitement but the big companies would care more about AA than profits because their executives are sick lefties.
-
If you think people care more about money than helping ungrateful, idiotic minorities then explain why most people who made $200,000 or more gave Obama a victory? Most people in this demographic are White and Jewish. Scroll down to vote by income: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
They know he's a Socialist and that he would tax them more but they were wiling to lose money to help the minority be President so they would also be willing to lose money in their business and help an unqualified minority by giving him/her a job.
-
but the big companies would care more about AA than profits because their executives are sick lefties.
I agree with that part of your post. But that's it.
As for those ultra rich Obama supporters, they're a different story. Extremely wealthy people have ways of hiding their money from the government. But the average middle class people do not. The base of the Democratic party is the ultra rich limousine liberals, trial lawyers, minorities, felons, welfare queens, and dead people.
These ultra rich don't want any competition from middle class people. That's why they push for socialism.
Take for example, William Henry Gates Senior and Warren Buffet, who are FOR the death tax. It turns out that part of what Warren Buffet does is advise ultra rich clients on how to shield their wealth from the estate/death tax. He makes money on these people. So if there was no death tax, he would have not be in business telling people how to avoid it.
-
First , Welcome to the Forum.
I think that your logic is a bit off on this topic. A.A. essentially forces the hiring of a specific percentage of people from a "minority" group. I am not quite clear from your posts what you mean by your use of the term associate, but that is not what AA is really about.
I think that people need to stop focusing on the past wrongs of slavery etc and look to what the situation today is. As Chaim has said, Minority groups could be brilliant if they simply cleaned out their own house and concentrated on being productive members of society. Some, like Bill Cosby etc have made the same observation and been raked over the coals for being against their own.
People should be hired on merit alone and not because they have a certain color skin. As for friendship or other associations, any righteous good person is welcome in my life.
-
I agree with that part of your post. But that's it.
As for those ultra rich Obama supporters, they're a different story. Extremely wealthy people have ways of hiding their money from the government. But the average middle class people do not. The base of the Democratic party is the ultra rich limousine liberals, trial lawyers, minorities, felons, welfare queens, and dead people.
These ultra rich don't want any competition from middle class people. That's why they push for socialism.
Take for example, William Henry Gates Senior and Warren Buffet, who are FOR the death tax. It turns out that part of what Warren Buffet does is advise ultra rich clients on how to shield their wealth from the estate/death tax. He makes money on these people. So if there was no death tax, he would have not be in business telling people how to avoid it.
I completely agree with the super-rich but I'm not talking about the super rich, who have tax shelters. Just people who make over $200,000 and even $75-100,000 gave him most of the vote. These people are doctors, small business owners, etc. This is proof that they don't care about profits and just wanted to help that minority become president. These same doctors would hire unqualified Black secretaries, who steal from them, just to give them a "helping hand." Just go to Williamsburg and see the Muslims and Blacks that the Jews have hired. Those Jewish quacks didn't care about profits either. This is why I believe AA would not be eliminated even if the government stopped forcing or pushing it. There would be private AA, companies and schools who help minorities out of sympathy.
I just want to know if you guys would object to "private AA" because if you would then it would it would be hypocritical to support White business owners who do business with their own. If the lefties aren't allowed to associate with less qualified minorities then why should the the business owners be allowed to associate with their own. The liberals are hypocrites because they want to associate with minorities in the NBA, schools, corporations, etc. yet oppose freedom of association for restaurant owners who don't want to serve Blacks.
-
Affirmative action is reverse racism. It is primarily designed to bring unqualified blacks to prominent positions.
Also white politicians use it as a means to present themselves as multi-culturalists. That was the reason W. appointed Colin Powell and Congolissa Rice to key positions, just to impress people.
Affirmative action as we know is counter-productive and with liberals expanding goverment like crazy a large number of lazy shvartzas will get prominent positions and the work flow process will become very inefficient.
This is one of the main reason blacks vote en masse for the democratic party. They know most of them do not want to come out of welfare if republicans are in control and if death penalty is enforced a large number of blacks in the prisons will be executed.
-
I agree with that part of your post. But that's it.
As for those ultra rich Obama supporters, they're a different story. Extremely wealthy people have ways of hiding their money from the government. But the average middle class people do not. The base of the Democratic party is the ultra rich limousine liberals, trial lawyers, minorities, felons, welfare queens, and dead people.
These ultra rich don't want any competition from middle class people. That's why they push for socialism.
Take for example, William Henry Gates Senior and Warren Buffet, who are FOR the death tax. It turns out that part of what Warren Buffet does is advise ultra rich clients on how to shield their wealth from the estate/death tax. He makes money on these people. So if there was no death tax, he would have not be in business telling people how to avoid it.
I completely agree with the super-rich but I'm not talking about the super rich, who have tax shelters. Just people who make over $200,000 and even $75-100,000 gave him most of the vote. These people are doctors, small business owners, etc. This is proof that they don't care about profits and just wanted to help that minority become president. These same doctors would hire unqualified Black secretaries, who steal from them, just to give them a "helping hand." Just go to Williamsburg and see the Muslims and Blacks that the Jews have hired. Those Jewish quacks didn't care about profits either. This is why I believe AA would not be eliminated even if the government stopped forcing or pushing it. There would be private AA, companies and schools who help minorities out of sympathy.
I just want to know if you guys would object to "private AA" because if you would then it would it would be hypocritical to support White business owners who do business with their own. If the lefties aren't allowed to associate with less qualified minorities then why should the the business owners be allowed to associate with their own. The liberals are hypocrites because they want to associate with minorities in the NBA, schools, corporations, etc. yet oppose freedom of association for restaurant owners who don't want to serve Blacks.
To be honest, I am not really sure what you are asking. Define "freedom of association". Do you mean that it would be OK for white business owners to deny services to a person simply due to skin color? To me that would be wrong.
It is also not a good idea to hire solely based on feeling sorry for someone. If they are not able to preform at the job you give them, both of you will be hurt in the end. You might take the time and effort to assist a person in finding a job that they would be good at, and that would serve them better.
For example, I wanted to be an ER doctor when I was a teen, and spent alot of time reading up on it, volunteering in a hospital etc. However, as I was born blind in one eye, It would have been a waste of time to pursue that. So, my family and friends steered me into Human Services, where I have built a wonderfull career helping Alzheimer's Patients.
I look at affirmative action in the same way. If a person is not qualified, to put them in a job is a bad idea and potently very dangerous.
-
Freedom of association means anyone can hire, promote, admit, or deny anyone for any reason. For example, if I'm a doctor with private practice I should be allowed to not treat ugly people. A college should be allowed to accept less qualified Blacks over better qualified Whites. I believe if AA were not imposed by the government discrimination against Whites would continue because leftists run these types of businesses and I've proven in my other posts that they don't care about profit as much as their evil agenda. I think it's fair for them to do this as long as the government doesn't get involved.
The liberals want to discriminate against Whites but won't allow White business owners to discriminate against minorities. The purpose of my thread was to know if you find it objectionable for businesses to discriminate against Whites in university admissions, employment, job promotions, etc assuming the government ended it's enforcement of AA on businesses. If you object then you are denying that business the right of freedom of association, specifically their right to associate with less qualified minorities. The next question would then be why should your business have the right to freedom of association, specifically your right to associate with White/Jews/Asians. If the lefties are forced to employ or grant university admissions by merit against their will then the same logic should apply to restaurant owners who don't want to serve Blacks.
-
Freedom of association means anyone can hire, promote, admit, or deny anyone for any reason. For example, if I'm a doctor with private practice I should be allowed to not treat ugly people. A college should be allowed to accept less qualified Blacks over better qualified Whites. I believe if AA were not imposed by the government discrimination against Whites would continue because leftists run these types of businesses and I've proven in my other posts that they don't care about profit as much as their evil agenda. I think it's fair for them to do this as long as the government doesn't get involved.
The liberals want to discriminate against Whites but won't allow White business owners to discriminate against minorities. The purpose of my thread was to know if you find it objectionable for businesses to discriminate against Whites in university admissions, employment, job promotions, etc assuming the government ended it's enforcement of AA on businesses. If you object then you are denying that business the right of freedom of association, specifically their right to associate with less qualified minorities. The next question would then be why should your business have the right to freedom of association, specifically your right to associate with White/Jews/Asians. If the lefties are forced to employ or grant university admissions by merit against their will then the same logic should apply to restaurant owners who don't want to serve Blacks.
I see your point... but I just don't agree with it. I'd just prefer that the evilness of using a race to pick an employee or student should be outlawed period. I understand the government does it... but as employers...Id prefer NOT to lower ourselves to that level.
-
I see your point... but I just don't agree with it. I'd just prefer that the evilness of using a race to pick an employee or student should be outlawed period. I understand the government does it... but as employers...Id prefer NOT to lower ourselves to that level.
If employers and colleges can't discriminate against Whites do you think diners should be allowed to not serve Blacks?
I don't see why it's evil to use race as criteria for these things as long as government doesn't force or incite it. If you're free to choose your spouse for good reasons, bad reasons, or no reason at all you should have the right to do business with whomever for good reasons, bad reasons, or no reasons at all.
-
Thanks to years of affirmative action we now have the America we are dealing with today. You can't get anything fixed or done correctly. G-d forbid you have an issue with one of the companies you deal with you have a snowballs chance in hell of getting it straightened out. The people in charge in most companies today are the product of an affirmative action education and most of them believe that affirmative action is the only game in town. Private business should be allowed to hire who they see fit. I as a white person running a business would be more comfortable dealing with people of my own kind who think as I do and have the same values. Why would I want to deal with race issues and resentment every time I had to tell someone to do something in my place of business. People doing the hiring for a company should be able to pick from the best of the applicants regardless of race. Today companies will hire the unqualified minority just not to have any static. If affirmative action was not in the picture some of the people today that now have positions in higher education and in the work place might actually have had to get there through some hard work.
-
"but the big companies would care more about AA than profits because their executives are sick lefties"
I hear the question a lot: "You think that you know more about running a major corporation than those execs. They support AA because it benefits the company."
In a sense, I guess. They're still hiring unqualified malcontents, but the real plus is this: Public support of AA by those execs buys silence from Jesse Jackson and other like racial ambulance-chasers.
37
-
I think I see what True Conservative is getting at.
Assuming there were no coercive affirmative action laws on the books, and a company wanted to deliberately hire unqualified minorities, or people of any race, then that's their own problem. I certainly don't agree with it. But it's their business to lose, and they can hire whomever they want.
Now in terms of a business denying service to a potential minority customer, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, a business owner can serve anyone he or she wants. They shouldn't be forced to take customers they don't want to deal with. On the flip side of it, why would anyone want to be served by a business owner that doesn't want them as a customer?
A few years ago, there was this hair salon that advertised "cute short haircuts." It was later discovered that the owner refused to have women over 40 as his customers. There was a whole big stink in the newspapers about it. And I never heard of that salon owner afterwards. I guess enough women found out about him, and boycotted his salon.
More recently, in New Zealand, there was this Muslim owner of a coffee bar who threw to Israeli womem out of his shop when he discovered they were speaking Hebrew. While I hate Hamas supporters with a passion, it was his business, and he could decide who he wanted to serve. As for the Jewish women, I heard they were going to sue, which I disagree with. They should have just boycotted his business, and encouraged others to do the same.