Affirmative Action Explained

[dre]

The most common excuse of unsucessful or lazy people.

For example is Hungary the "right geographical location"?

Did old Mrs. Soros have special uterus? (Billionaire Soros came here with nothing - and no English)

Is Croatia "right geographical location"?

Did old Mrs. Herjovec have special uterus? (Robert Herjovec came here with 20 bucks - for the whole family)

It all depends on luck. And as one entepreneur descibed luck; "the harder I work the more I get of it"

Did old Mrs. Soros have special uterus?

Youre now the third person to trot out anecdotal evidence trying to make this case.

You guys realized you should have learned by about grade 4 why thats logical fallacy right?

[Saipan]

Theres no GUARANTEE that the son of a multi million air will be wealthier than the black, lesbian daughter of a welfare recipient. But statistically its extremely likely.

There's no one to blame but the welfare recipient and the lesbian daughter.

[Bonam]

Youre now the third person to trot out anecdotal evidence trying to make this case.

You guys realized you should have learned by about grade 4 why thats logical fallacy right?

A big enough pile of anecdotal evidence ceases to be anecdotal. Anyway, anecdotes are better evidence than the mere incongruous moralizing that goes into the ideas behind affirmative action.

[dre]

This still does not support the need for race-based affirmative action, which is the main thrust of the debate in this thread.

The thread evolved into a discussion about whether or not we live in a meritocracy and whether or not thats even possible.

[Bonam]

The thread evolved into a discussion about whether or not we live in a meritocracy and whether or not thats even possible.

In that case my standpoint would be that while pure meritocracy is impossible (chance and parenting will always play a role), we live in a society where merit (which of course is partly shaped by parenting) is strongly enough correlated with outcome as to be satisfactory.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Bonam

[wyly]

dre is correct...

it helps to be smart it helps much much more to smart and have rich parents...if you don't get any breaks in life all the smarts in the world aren't going to help you...but if daddy is willing to bankroll your education and business ventures you're much more likely to succeed even if you're only average intelligence...

it's a nice dream to think anyone can succeed but the reality is the vast majority of the poor and their children do not...

I had an acquaintance years back who was very successful all my friends were envious of his entrepreneurial skill; building condos, drilling for oil, shares in a golf course at age 27... but really he only had one advantage that the rest of us didn't, his father was a wealthy farmer who gave jr a couple sections of prime farmland...so, imagine two 23yr olds both go to the bank for a business loan of a .5 million to build condos, one has a job for $12 per hr the other the same $12 per hr but with 2 sections of land and daddy to co-sign, who do you suppose is going to get the loan?

[Saipan]

Youre now the third person to trot out anecdotal evidence trying to make this case.

While you have only your opinion.

[DogOnPorch]

wtf is 'to succeed'?

[Bonam]

wtf is 'to succeed'?

Evidently it is to acquire material possessions of a certain unspecified value so that others classify you as "rich".

[Shwa]

This still does not support the need for race-based affirmative action, which is the main thrust of the debate in this thread.

Exactly how is affirmative action "race based?" Oh, wait, I know your answer: how isn't it? But at least I see you have backed down from "institutionalized racism" to "race-based." That's a good start Bonam. Progress as it were.

[Bonam]

Exactly how is affirmative action "race based?"

Sorry but what planet did you just fall to Earth from? If you need to ask questions like "exactly how is 2+2=4" you shouldn't participate in serious discussions.

The answer to your question is plainly self-evident to everyone else in the thread, including those who support affirmative action.

[Saipan]

it helps to be smart

It's what really counts.

the reality is the vast majority of the poor and their children do not...

They are NOT smart.

Most will open a beer and watch games on weekend, instead work.

[Shwa]

Sorry but what planet did you just fall to Earth from? If you need to ask questions like "exactly how is 2+2=4" you shouldn't participate in serious discussions.

The answer to your question is plainly self-evident to everyone else in the thread, including those who support affirmative action.

So you can't prove your assertion, instead you are relying on "everyone else" to prove your point for you. Somehow. Like 2+2=4. Self-evident something. Like the tinfoil on your head right now.

The question still stands Bonam, exactly how is affirmative action "institutionalized racism?" If you can't answer, fine just man-up about it, but if you choose not to then you are an lying idiot trying for the artful dodge, but doing a face plant instead. Both are "self-evident."

[Bonam]

So you can't prove your assertion, instead you are relying on "everyone else" to prove your point for you. Somehow. Like 2+2=4. Self-evident something. Like the tinfoil on your head right now.

The question still stands Bonam, exactly how is affirmative action "institutionalized racism?" If you can't answer, fine just man-up about it, but if you choose not to then you are an lying idiot trying for the artful dodge, but doing a face plant instead. Both are "self-evident."

Feel free to reread my prior post responding to your question on how it is institutionalized racism if you failed to understand it the first time.

Edited January 1, 2011 by Bonam

[Saipan]

exactly how is affirmative action "institutionalized racism?"

It's racism used by government institutions.

[Shwa]

Feel free to reread my prior post responding to your question on how it is institutionalized racism if you failed to understand it the first time.

I have read your prior posts and all you are doing is simply re-iterating an absurd declaration without proof or substance which you can't even back up with any sort of reason or rational explanation. Instead you say, its self-evident and everyone knows this, no need to ask. As if Bonam, get real.

But the fact is, as it stands right now, you can't prove that affirmative action is "institutionalized racism" no matter how many lame get-out-of-jail-free cards you try to lay down on the table.

Just man up about it Bonam, no one will respect you any less. Just admit you don't know what you are talking about. No shame in being honest.

[Shwa]

It's racism used by government institutions.

Ah, the 'Saipan Method' makes an appearance. Whew, for a minute there I thought the court jester was starting to become self-aware. Nope.

[Bonam]

I have read your prior posts and all you are doing is simply re-iterating an absurd declaration without proof or substance which you can't even back up with any sort of reason or rational explanation. Instead you say, its self-evident and everyone knows this, no need to ask. As if Bonam, get real.

But the fact is, as it stands right now, you can't prove that affirmative action is "institutionalized racism" no matter how many lame get-out-of-jail-free cards you try to lay down on the table.

Just man up about it Bonam, no one will respect you any less. Just admit you don't know what you are talking about. No shame in being honest.

Evidently, you still haven't read the post, since you failed to address it here.

[Shwa]

Evidently, you still haven't read the post, since you failed to address it here.

Really? Then what "skin colour" is a visible minority? What "race" is a visible minority or a female?

[Saipan]

Ah, the 'Saipan Method' makes an appearance. Whew, for a minute there I thought the court jester was starting to become self-aware. Nope.

Quite a contorted way to say you don't believe it's racism, because

[Bonam]

Really? Then what "skin colour" is a visible minority? What "race" is a visible minority or a female?

Visible minorities include people of many ethnicities, including blacks, Asians (even though they are no longer minorities in some Canadian cities), etc. You know this, so I don't know why you are asking about it. Affirmative action that helps these people get jobs ahead of Caucasians is race based. There are also other types of affirmative action, such as based on gender.

More on this:

Over five million Canadians identified themselves as a member of a visible minority group in the 2006 Census, accounting for 16.2% of the total population. This was an increase from 2001 where visible minorities accounted for 13.4% of the total population; an increase from 1996 when the proportion was 11.2%; and a major increase over 1991 (9.4%) and 1981 (4.7%). The increase represents a significant shift in Canada's demographics since the advent of that country's multiculturalism policies.

Of the provinces, British Columbia had the highest proportion of visible minorities, representing 24.8% of its population, followed by Ontario at 22.8%. In the 2006 census, South Asian Canadians overtook ethnic Chinese as Canada’s largest visible minority group. In 2006, Statistics Canada estimated that there were 1.3 million South Asian people in Canada compared with 1.2 million Chinese.[2] In 2001, there were approximately 1 million Chinese Canadians representing 3.5% of the country’s population, followed by South Asian Canadians (3.1%) and Black Canadians (2.2%).

According to the Employment Equity Act of 1995, the definition of visible minority is:

“members of visible minorities” means persons, other than aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour;[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_minority

Edited January 1, 2011 by Bonam

[Shwa]

Visible minorities include people of many ethnicities, including blacks, Asians (even though they are no longer minorities in some Canadian cities), etc. You know this, so I don't know why you are asking about it. Affirmative action that helps these people get jobs ahead of Caucasians is race based. There are also other types of affirmative action, such as based on gender.

No, you are dodging again, I asked what "race" was a visible minority and you give me some schlop about "include people." So in fact, you are admitting that a visible minority is not a race, nor is any affimative action program targeted at visible minorities, racist. That is basically what you are saying isn't it?

Because if only a visible minority is taken for the job - because of an affimative action process - this means that non-visible minorities are not allowed. So let me ask you - what "race" is a non-visible minority?

[Bonam]

Because if only a visible minority is taken for the job - because of an affimative action process - this means that non-visible minorities are not allowed. So let me ask you - what "race" is a non-visible minority?

People that are not considered visible minorities are white people, as specified explicitly in the definition of a visible minority, which I quoted above.

Policies that favor visible minorities are discriminatory against people that are not visible minorities, that is, they are racist against Caucasians.

[dre]

Evidently it is to acquire material possessions of a certain unspecified value so that others classify you as "rich".

Theres more to "success" than the pursuit of wealth but wealth is certain the 800lb geurilla in that room especially in our society.

Wealth people are healthier, and live longer, and more comfortably... the following presentation shows the undeniable correlation between wealth, health, and life expectancy.

Success is partially subjective and personal though, and it really just means you do whatever you TRY to do well.

Edited January 1, 2011 by dre

[Shwa]

People that are not considered visible minorities are white people, as specified explicitly in the definition of a visible minority, which I quoted above.

Well no son, here is where you are dead wrong and where your whole construct comes down like house of cards. In fact, non-visible-minorties include aboriginals and, since 'visible minority' is self-declared, anyone else of any other skin colour, eye configuration or ethnicity who chooses not to declare themselves a visible minority. You didn't know that did you?

So let me ask, then what "skin colour" are aboriginals, heck, what "race" are aboriginals? Do you have any idea about that?

Policies that favor visible minorities are discriminatory against people that are not visible minorities, that is, they are racist against Caucasians.

So no, you are wrong because non-visible-minority is not a race. Therefore affirmative action is not "institutionalized racism" and never was. So whomever was feeding you that line that it is or ever was "institutionalized racism" is talking out of their ass.