Affirmative Discrimination and Racism

[Bushmustgo]

Why don't you post the research on here, or links, who wrote them, who took the studies, and how the studies were set up, otherwise I think YOU have nothing to support YOUR views

Derek, Uhhhhhhh, I posted it on my previous post.

You have a good record of missing things........I can see how you don't seem to get it!

[Luigi71585]

What has happened to this forum? Ever since real, undebatable facts were posted by yours truly no one seems to be able to make a point one way or another. Is this a conservative or liberal victory?

I feel i have achieved a great victory. I killed a deabte by proving a point! This is like Vietnam but without the death and, this time, a victory for the home team.

Please continue the debate.

[RB]

well there is enough evidence posted already to support that some groups are descrimated against.

but do i sense some fear if AA continue to exist. what I meant is that some of the postings above are contending that there will be/ are:

-shifts of burden from one group to another.

-some in the disadvantage group emerges as better off than others

-the poorer you are the poorer you remain

well no worry at all, AA does not preclude any one group but strives for inclusion of groups that are discriminated against however blatant or subtle. laws intended for equality, discrimination, fairness do not just happen along. there are enough accumulation of evidence to suggest laws are needed to protect and pre-empt misgivings.

so now fairness should be given to groups that are consistently:

- disadvantaged

- under-represented as in:

-employment

(I don’t like the education link because I believe if groups can financially look after themselves they can access the correct education)

- are economically burden in a cycle such as an institutionalized social system

- are marginalized by the system

if you believe in equality like:

- equal opportunity

- a chance

- equal results

then all I can add is that preference really should be given in the short term to remedy a system, such that “fairness” rules are used improve the situation BUT not create an altogether new system

the only other alternative is to award fairness individually to those who need help the most rather group selection.

[Craig Read]

That is ridiculous. You want rules, mandates and quota's and exclusion or inclusion based on skin for supposed 'crimes of the past' and you believe that is inclusionary ??

What AA does is elevate group politics, group rights, group belief systems and group grievances above the Constitutional right of 'equality of opportunity' and the legal right of 'equality before the law.

These 2 main principles are now eroded by special interest groups that are divisive not inclusive.

They divide not unite and they create a society where every group will now coalesce and demand their 'positive rights'.

This is insane.

The Constitutional fathers in the States and in Britain [less so formally] understood diversity and its problems. In fact Madison grumbled many times about the competing and conflicting claims of the States, and their various groups with each other within a unified Federacy. Separation of powers and universal rights before the law and to have and express freedoms are the only answers.

Segmenting the world into 'groups' with 'grievances', who then posture and demand is madness.

[Derek]

Alright BMG im not going to seriously reply to crap that is well crap. This is trivial shit. Im talking about whites actually hiring whites over blacks. This name shit you came up with is gay. Companies have the right to hire whoever they want. Untill you get me ROCK HARD evidence that says WHITES HIRE WHITES OVER BLACKS i will not reply. What you posted is a joke. Names NAMES??? This study is crap. Im not replying to this because it doesn't to be talked about. AA however should be talked about. not this.

[Boydfish]

Throwing my hat into the ring here, I'll start by saying that I do not support affirmative action or affirmative action-type programs.

The first thing that needs to be understood is that people are not equal.

While some of the left-leaning are popping pills or changing their diapers in shock at that statement and some of the more extreme rightwingers are pumping their fists in agreement; let me explain: If we're all equal, we all must be the same. Since everybody has their own unique strengths and weaknesses, that means that anybody who tries telling you that we're all equal because some stupid snot wrote it on a piece of paper is using their mouth to do a wonderful imitation of flatulence. You're not equal to me, in fact, without tooting my horn excessively here, I'm a damn sight more talented in economically viable ways than most.

Setting aside the bits that are entirely controllable, like education and the fact that I don't commit serious crimes, some of them are just simple facts of life. My wife can crunch numbers in her head a damn sight faster and more accurately than me. I can crunch things a damn sight faster and more accurately than her. Does either make us "better" than the other? Nope. It just means that I'm better suited to certain jobs and she's better suited to other jobs.

I think that we as a civilization would be best served by abandoning the notion of "equal rights" and replacing it with a philosophy more aimed at not holding one person or group of people as being "better" than others. We'd have to be careful not to try for "equal pay for equal work" mutating into a socialist/communist doctrine of "equal pay for any work", but the quicker that we accept that humans have diverse skills and talents, as well as that the world "owes" you nothing, the happier we'll all be.

[Mr Farrius]

The first thing that needs to be understood is that people are not equal. 

What country are you from?? Your argument about equality is extremely bizarre. First of all, equality doesn't refer to the physical aspects of anybody. I hope you know that it mostly refers to opportunities and rights. Just because someone is less talented than someone else doesn't mean, they should not have the same opportunities.

We'd have to be careful not to try for "equal pay for equal work" mutating into a socialist/communist doctrine of "equal pay for any work",

You once again clearly misunderstand and I won't go on to explain.

[Luigi71585]

Listen Boyd. Im not a big fan of AA, but I am a fan of equality. I still hold that AA seperates, not unites. The simple fatc is, in the eyes of society and polotics, we ARE all equal. We all should have equality in the job market and in all facets of life. I just dont feel that AA accomplishes this. And as for this

We'd have to be careful not to try for "equal pay for equal work"

argument, id have to say that that sounds a literal intolerant. Borderline racist. Why would we not want equal pay for equal work? No ones suggesting that the mail room clerk be paid equal to the high-steel worker. But a black steel worker and white steel worker SHOULD be paid the same. Simple and true. To deny this is ludicrous.

Once again DEREK, i have provided you ample information to either support your argument or deny theirs, depending on how you spin it. You want names!? These studies are based on actual people!! NOT a persons ideas! Why do you keep ignoring this? Maybe you have no real argument...

The fact, ONCE AGAIN, is that whites have more jobs than blacks. Its on the facts. The odd thing is that the libs have been telling us that its like 90% more though. This is simply not true. Its closer to 12% more.

Here its is again: Stats

Try it out

[Boydfish]

What country are you from?

British Columbia.

First of all, equality doesn't refer to the physical aspects of anybody.

Except that most of our ability to function in society is tightly tied to factors that we often have little control over, both positive and negative. As much as society would love to see 110lb nose tackles in the NFL or 300lb ballerinas in the Kirov, the simple fact is that unless you're gifted with the correct body size to do so, you can't do those things professionally.

Even beyond the common physical aspects of size, proportion, manual dexterity and raw inate talent in a specific skill set, there is the simple matter of raw intelligence. Some people are smarter than others. Some are masters of nearly everything they try, others hunt a lifetime without success for even a simple task that they can master and others fall in various degrees in between.

I hope you know that it mostly refers to opportunities and rights.

Except that it's being applied to opportunities, especially as it pertains to "Affirmative Action" type programs. If somebody is the best suited to exploit an opportunity, they should be able to do so. If they are the best suited due to being naturally talented in that area, why should they be denied that opportunity? The entire premise of AA is that minorities cannot compete against "the majority" in a fair competition, so the process must have a slant in their favor. There are even numerous government agencies and quasi-government agencies that hold job competitions for "minorities only".

As well, there is no "right" to opportunity, or success for that matter. I can accept that all persons should be given a equal chance to compete for those opportunities, but that's it. All can apply, all can try and if you're the best candidate, you get the job. No points added or deducted for plumbing or skin tone.

You once again clearly misunderstand and I won't go on to explain.

I strongly doubt aside from being able to understand the appeal of TV shows like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" on a personal level, there is little that you understand as well as I do, let alone better than I do.

[Boydfish]

argument, id have to say that that sounds a literal intolerant. Borderline racist. Why would we not want equal pay for equal work? No ones suggesting that the mail room clerk be paid equal to the high-steel worker. But a black steel worker and white steel worker SHOULD be paid the same. Simple and true. To deny this is ludicrous.

Luigi, if you read the entire sentence, you'll note that I am actually supporting equal pay for equal work, but not if it leads to the socialist/communist doctrine of "equal pay for ANY work".

We'd have to be careful not to try for "equal pay for equal work" mutating into a socialist/communist doctrine of "equal pay for any work", but the quicker that we accept that humans have diverse skills and talents, as well as that the world "owes" you nothing, the happier we'll all be.

[Derek]

Um, that is what studies do. They ask, compare statisics, education levels, but all of that is lies isn't it derek, because you said so?

I did look up this stuff so you guys know this, im not going to look up more of the same stuff over and over again. These are broad studies. That don't factor in enough variables. WHITES are usually more educated than blacks. Im not racist i have many black friends. The fact is im tired of everybody thinking that studies like these are such big deals. The truth is we are out of the civil rights eras everybody is being treated "equal" There is still evil things out there like the KKK and white supremicists and stuff like that. But blacks and other minority groups also have groups of people who are racists. There was many black people in my town would swear at you behind your back just because the way i would look. Many black people are also racists. Im sure there are blacks hiring blacks over whites. Should there be affirmitive action there too? There is probably some whites that hire whites over blacks too. That makes me mad also. If you guys think most white employers hire whites over blacks is insane.

Even a conservative radio talk-show host:Rush Limbaugh has two minoritys and a woman on his staff. He doesnt have many staff also. Hardly any. He hired these people because they are good at what they do.

[RB]

craig

our charter of rights and freedom are clear when they offer listings of freedom regardless of age, color, creed, sex, religion etc.

there are no constitutional law that clears up a provision of:

- guaranteed income to people (min. wage is taken into consideration)

- political gap

- social disparity

- differences

aa attempts feebly to include groups into what is considered equal, and representation of groups for those latter reasons.

i didn't bring up history because i believe it is just that. well now all colors are allowed to vote, women juxtaposition second class has risen – really all boils down to minor events.

and what a finale, well now we have nothing else to do – so might as well add diversity to those events.

my feeling is that there are slight acceptances that there is separation of groups and a shift in paradigm has occurred but continues to exist in a psychological vacuum.

it is regretful you fellows just keep denying what is real

[Simmerinn]

I think what some people here are missing, is that opportunity and reward are two entities entirely. I believe that the idea of AA is solid, but not as a long term solution. 40 years ago, no matter how tipped the scales, a company would hire a white man over a black, or asian, or.....anyone not white. It's cold hard fact. AA was needed to force door open for minorities in the market place. Unfortunitly AA takes no requirements into mind outside of race. This is it's short comming, all AA will do in the end is open up an opportunity but the lucky few have to shoulder the responsibility from there. The job itself is not the reward, they must prove themselves to be invaluable to the work force, which won't happen till we improve the educational resources in our cities. If white society must, lawfully, employee a percentage of minority races wouldn't be in our best interest to make sure they receive a good education. I don't understand why my country would seemingly turn it's back on it's public schools (I present my spelling as proof).

A few posts backi noticed that someone mentioned his wife was making 50% more than he. 50%!? whatta chump. Also that our country has a large share of women CEOs. How many of the fortune 500 have a female CEO and out of those how many aren't truely run by a board of trusties which is 80% old white guys? gimme a break. this country has made leaps and bounds in the right direction, but it's still got a long way to go. AA is not the answer, education is, but AA is a strong tool and i don't believe we've run out of use for it.

[Simmerinn]

it's funny that when i get lunch 95% of the people serving me are black, but when i return to work, 95% of the people i serve are white. Just because you know there are 5 or 6 black guys and 9 or 10 women at the office that make more than you, doesn't mean there aren't 60 other white guys making more than all of you combined. Most companies hire just as many minority employees as they need to be socialy exeptable. not all, but most. There is no way that a major business located in any major city should have below a 20-40% minority employee base. Not unless something is very very wrong.

[Luigi71585]

Boydfish, im sincerely dounting that paying african americans equal wages is going to turn us into the Soviet union. Back a statement like that with some proof for gods sake.

QUOTE 

First of all, equality doesn't refer to the physical aspects of anybody. 

Except that most of our ability to function in society is tightly tied to factors that we often have little control over, both positive and negative. As much as society would love to see 110lb nose tackles in the NFL or 300lb ballerinas in the Kirov, the simple fact is that unless you're gifted with the correct body size to do so, you can't do those things professionally.

What are you saying here? That one race is more suited to certain professions than others!? Unless a race is gifted with managerial skills they shouldnt be??? This sounds like youre aplpying manifest destiny to race in the workforce. Rethink/rephrase that statement. It may not have meant this, but were talking about race so Rethink/rephrase that statement.

Thanks for the input and reasonable debate.

[Boydfish]

Boydfish, im sincerely dounting that paying african americans equal wages is going to turn us into the Soviet union. Back a statement like that with some proof for gods sake.

I'm not saying that equal pay for equal work is a bad thing, Luigi, I'm saying that in the past, that doctrine has been overplayed into "equal pay for ANY work". In order for a worker to remain motivated by reward, especially for difficult or complex jobs, there must be pay differences.

What are you saying here? That one race is more suited to certain professions than others!? Unless a race is gifted with managerial skills they shouldnt be??? This sounds like youre aplpying manifest destiny to race in the workforce. Rethink/rephrase that statement. It may not have meant this, but were talking about race so Rethink/rephrase that statement.

No, I'm saying that since race is generally a non-factor in employment, race shouldn't be a factor in the selection process, which is exactly what AA is. It literally comes down to two wrongs not making a right.

Thanks for the input and reasonable debate

Right back at ya!

[Bushmustgo]

People with white names have an advantage to finding a job over the rest....

Body,

Looks like you just speak out of your butt without doing any research. You think you're able to solve problems withouth reading into it based on your thoughts and theories. Research is done for a reason, if it weren't, we would have asprin that doesn't do anything because somebody just said, "this should work!"

Funny how you know nothing but, think you know it all!

[RB]

however much we would like to deny it, admitingly there are contamination in a selection process for hiring. these are some consistent ones:

initial screening here is what you can gather from a resume:

- sex of the applicant

- approx. age of applicant (say if you know a work history with dates, year graduated from college etc.) relatively easy to calculate

- not difficult to figure orgin of names like: Enrigue, Lui, Ahmad etc

- if they spoke other languages

- whether a stable worker

- maybe soical status based on school selection

the more subtle errors of contamination are:

- recency error, like a recent experience determines who get selected

- "i look like you syndrome"

- halo effects, e.g. shirt is not tucked in properly therefore you are not intelligent

- basic unconscienous prejudice

so there is a problem getting job opportunities firstly for certain folks.

then equal pay for equal work. most large companies have a band of pay structure which categorized where you start, and based on performance/"merit" it increases with in the band - there is lots of grumble here as those within the band might be doing the same work - but usually sort itself out. a distressing problem arises when the band is exhusted and there is competition for other opportunities who gets selected? and how high can they go?

[Craig Read]

I would love to know where all this racism exists in society ? Where are all these selfish white, Jewish dominated industrial sectors that preclude female and minority advancement ? Where are they all hiding ?

I need to know ! Every time i look around i see Women and minorities running companies, in politics, the best in sports, on Corporate Boards and in fact one is the Governor General !!

Show me ONE FACT on discrimination please.

Not rhetoric FACT.

You can list a hundred names just by reading the morning paper of these execrably treated, hand-tied, discriminated and no doubt tortured minorities in the headlines.

Hello time to wake up.

[RB]

just a couple of what is legal and adopted as law for you - i didn't search for more for the fear of wasting time, but just in case you are interested rather easy to find more @ www.lexum.umontreal.ca

Employment and racism

I was pleasantly surprise with this one Stephnie Payne sat on the TDSB board of trustee

she was discriminated against because she is a Black African Canadian Woman

Payne v. Ontario Human Rights Commission (May 9, 2000), (2000-05-09) ONCA C31619 Source: http://www.canlii.org/on/cas/onca/2000/200...000onca259.html

Sex and wage discrimation

-Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Syndicat des communications de Radio Canada, 2002

Docket(s): T-1219-00 Source: http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/fct/2002/2002fct793.html

-Reid v. Vancouver (City), 2003bcsc1348

Sex discrimination contrary to s. 6(1) of the Human Rights Act

-Janzen v. Platy enterprises ltd., [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1252

Source: http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1989/1989scc47.html

Age Discrimination

-Tiwana v. Canada (Human Rights Commission), (2000-11-29) FCT T-60-00 Source: http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/fct/2000/2000...00fct11378.html

and if you would like detailed explanation let me know

[Boydfish]

Body,

Looks like you just speak out of your butt without doing any research. You think you're able to solve problems withouth reading into it based on your thoughts and theories. Research is done for a reason, if it weren't, we would have asprin that doesn't do anything because somebody just said, "this should work!"

Funny how you know nothing but, think you know it all!

I'd refute your "arguement", but since all you managed to do was drivel on, you simply failed to come up with anything approaching an arguement.

I will note for you one thing lad: Unlike you, who is still probably trying to get weaned off of mommy's teat, I have sat on both sides of the equation of hiring people and thus have practical experience to base things on. Since you are probably not yet old enough to cross the street unescorted, I understand why the concept of experience is beyond your ability to grasp.

[Craig Read]

I think that we as a civilization would be best served by abandoning the notion of "equal rights" and replacing it with a philosophy more aimed at not holding one person or group of people as being "better" than others. We'd have to be careful not to try for "equal pay for equal work" mutating into a socialist/communist doctrine of "equal pay for any work", but the quicker that we accept that humans have diverse skills and talents, as well as that the world "owes" you nothing, the happier we'll all be.

Right on Boyd.

Equality before the law which gives rise to equality of chance and opportunity.

Like I stated before i have not seen any convincing evidence of all this discrimination, White-Jew control of all levels of society and their incipient hatred of color, diversity and race.

Every time i read the paper i discover more women and people of race doing better, going higher, contributing more.

Where is all this discrimination and women beating ?

[RB]

goodness grief - start promoting stuff like what is written above and guarantee some other diversion of the same lobbying group only now better mobilise, very specialised and will be funded by your own tax dollars.

no one denies that that women are not doing better, than say a 2 decades ago. rightfully so, they are much more liberated in their thoughts, and educated about rights as it relates to work. there has been a steady influx of women entering the marketplace for the past 10 years and occupying part-time, low level clerical or assembling, working two jobs to make ends meet etc. find themselves much later attach to a career and stumble even when we go with the good equality rule.

those few women you read about, who really make it in the news, are extra-ordinary, heroines really and are the only ones that you will remember because they are so few.

i am dismayed to read of much denial - makes me firm in the believe there is much work to be done, and much more changes needed to realise equality.

[Boydfish]

no one denies that that women are not doing better, than say a 2 decades ago. rightfully so, they are much more liberated in their thoughts, and educated about rights as it relates to work. there has been a steady influx of women entering the marketplace for the past 10 years and occupying part-time, low level clerical or assembling, working two jobs to make ends meet etc. find themselves much later attach to a career and stumble even when we go with the good equality rule.

those few women you read about, who really make it in the news, are extra-ordinary, heroines really and are the only ones that you will remember because they are so few.

That's the rub, tho', isn't it: It's not enough that people who would typically be on the positive end of AA getting an opportunity, they must also be successful at it.

People are not owed success, even those who work hard or try their best. Not every white, Anglo-Saxon male who enters the work force sits in an office tower being treated like a CEO; lots of them fail utterly in both the workplace and life.

There is nothing wrong with giving every person the same opportunity, there is something profoundly wrong with demanding that everybody is given the same successful benefits.

Using a favorite example, look at the A.V. Roe Arrow as an example. They had the best product, the best R&D(The most amazing feature of the Arrow wasn't it's high speed or fly-by-wire avionics that were decades ahead of their time, it was that the damn thing went from concept to production is two years. It takes the average high tech weapon system that long to choose a colour scheme, let alone build. I'm digressing...)and were skewered by a combination of unrelated bad advice and a snap political whim. Thousands lost their jobs and the Canadian economy lost trillions of dollars in the aerospace industry. Is that "fair"? Nope. Is it reality? 'Fraid so.

[Craig Read]

Boyd, sure ALL women must now succeed to atone for past crimes. Same with ALL minorities. This insidious policy is called social engineering and hacks at the very root of what makes a liberal constitutional society workable.