• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What about affirmative action? [W:275,418]

thinkforyoursel said:
NO OTHER GROUP BENEFITTED MORE FROM AFFIRMATIVE ACTION .....THAN WHITE WOMEN!!
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter who "benefits" the most. It is exclusionary and arbitrary and dilutes the workforce.

Skills, knowledge and aptitude should be the only criteria.

thinkforyoursel said:
And if skill and aptitude were really the criteria ...America would have many many more Chinese in the work place.
Click to expand...

That's news to me.
Prove it.
How many chinese are unemployed? Why are they unemployed?


thinkforyoursel said:
Again....the next time you feel jilted in a job opportunity ....look at your mother, wife, sister if you really want to absolve yourself of responsibility.
But almost always ....the real problem is what face you in the mirror.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with me being "jilted" or my dead mother... and I have no sister.


Doesn't matter who "benefits" the most. It is exclusionary and arbitrary and dilutes the workforce.

Skills, knowledge and aptitude should be the only criteria.
 
GottaGo said:
When one person is selected over another solely based on a physical characteristic (race, skin color, gender, height, weight etc.) rather than knowledge and ability to do the job, it's discrimination.

It damages the other people for something they have no control over.
Click to expand...

You realize it isn't "solely" based on that don't you? You realize that it does not "actually" play out that way.....don't you?
 
windowdressing said:
it beats the nearly 100% quota we've had for white males for most of our history ...
Click to expand...

In a nutshell that's what racism has always been about. Whites fighting to protect a quota that favors them only because of race.
The lazy un-accomplished whites are especially sensitive to this, because all their lives they've been benefitting from this bias.
 
opendebate said:
You realize it isn't "solely" based on that don't you? You realize that it does not "actually" play out that way.....don't you?
Click to expand...

Post the rules and support your assertion, then.
Merely saying "nuh uh" isn't a rebuttal.
 
GottaGo said:
And, if you believe it doesn't then was is the actual point of AA?
Click to expand...

Well, it's not like they're gonna grab some black dude off the street and hire him to be an engineer just because he's a black dude. I believe it leans more towards, two qualified applicants one is black and one is not. Whomever makes the hiring decision may chose the qualified black candidate in order to create a more balanced work force.
 
P. Kersey said:
We've poured trillions down the rathole of government/union run DOE. How much more?
Click to expand...

Well, it should be poured into non-union doe.
That's why unions hate school choice, they hate the idea that they can be sidestepped by parents when they fail to provide a good education.
 
thinkforyoursel said:
In a nutshell that's what racism has always been about. Whites fighting to protect a quota that favors them only because of race.
The lazy un-accomplished whites are especially sensitive to this, because all their lives they've been benefitting from this bias.
Click to expand...

Jack said my post was useless :( ... I hope he's kinder to you ...
 
opendebate said:
Well, it's not like they're gonna grab some black dude off the street and hire him to be an engineer just because he's a black dude. I believe it leans more towards, two qualified applicants one is black and one is not. Whomever makes the hiring decision may chose the qualified black candidate in order to create a more balanced work force.
Click to expand...

LOL...good point. This is a clear example of how these people mentally still live in the 60's. In today's economic environment...where corporations are fighting to stay afloat...where would they get the luxury to hire somebody because of their race? The people here complaining about affirmative action ...are doing this because of their own personal failures. They don't want to account for their short comings ...so they look for a way to blame others....that's simply it.
 
thinkforyoursel said:
LOL...good point. This is a clear example of how these people mentally still live in the 60's. In today's economic environment...where corporations are fighting to stay afloat...where would they get the luxury to hire somebody because of their race? The people here complaining about affirmative action ...are doing this because of their own personal failures. They don't want to account for their short comings ...so they look for a way to blame others....that's simply it.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the "personal failures" part but they are surely looking at it through the privileged lenses they were born with; not recognizing how it clouds their view and understanding.
 
ReformCollege said:
Well, it should be poured into non-union doe.
That's why unions hate school choice, they hate the idea that they can be sidestepped by parents when they fail to provide a good education.
Click to expand...

The DOE is as much at fault as the unionized "teachers".

Show me a single, government run program that isn't a bloated, mismanaged, intransient, rapacious, corrupt abuser of tax dollars.
 
opendebate said:
Well, it's not like they're gonna grab some black dude off the street and hire him to be an engineer just because he's a black dude. I believe it leans more towards, two qualified applicants one is black and one is not. Whomever makes the hiring decision may chose the qualified black candidate in order to create a more balanced work force.
Click to expand...


What ratio do you approve of in order to make a "more balanced workforce"?
Should everything be 50-50?
 
Jack Hays said:
On the contrary. I am but a servant of the data.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that you try to be, but sometimes you appear to have a difficult time ascertaining what is good, or useful, or bad (useless) data I'm afraid ...
 
P. Kersey said:
The DOE is as much at fault as the unionized "teachers".

Show me a single, government run program that isn't a bloated, mismanaged, intransient, rapacious, corrupt abuser of tax dollars.
Click to expand...

The FDA in my opinion is pretty well run. Not perfect no, but it works well to test safety and efficiency of new drugs coming on the market.
 
windowdressing said:
I have no doubt that you try to be, but sometimes you appear to have a difficult time ascertaining what is good, or useful, or bad (useless) data I'm afraid ...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the performance review. Care to comment on the topic?
 
P. Kersey said:
Doesn't matter who "benefits" the most. It is exclusionary and arbitrary and dilutes the workforce.

Skills, knowledge and aptitude should be the only criteria.



That's news to me.
Prove it.
How many chinese are unemployed? Why are they unemployed?




This has nothing to do with me being "jilted" or my dead mother... and I have no sister.


Doesn't matter who "benefits" the most. It is exclusionary and arbitrary and dilutes the workforce.

Skills, knowledge and aptitude should be the only criteria.
Click to expand...


Whatever....you people are obviously bitter people ...it's very very clear.

And my recommendation to you is ...look in the mirror and seriously decide to be a better person. Instead of spending your time google-ing all sort of tripe....use that energy to actually better yourself. The black guy you see and think he's some sort of quota..I bet is smarter and more educated than you.

When I post on this board ...I'm in the middle of a study break ...or I'm doing my exercise and I'm between reps.
Pretty pathetic to do this because you have nothing better to do.
 
thinkforyoursel said:
In a nutshell that's what racism has always been about. Whites fighting to protect a quota that favors them only because of race.
.........all their lives they've been benefitting from this bias.
Click to expand...

ding ding ding ding ding.....give the....gender not disclosed his/her prize!!
 
thinkforyoursel said:
LOL...good point. This is a clear example of how these people mentally still live in the 60's. In today's economic environment...where corporations are fighting to stay afloat...where would they get the luxury to hire somebody because of their race? The people here complaining about affirmative action ...are doing this because of their own personal failures. They don't want to account for their short comings ...so they look for a way to blame others....that's simply it.
Click to expand...

it's called white privilege, and many white folks, and especially many white men (white women were the principal beneficiaries of affirmative action), are scared ... between 2000 and 2010, Latinas/os acounted for over 50% of the population growth in this country ... we elected a black man president (and we see the reaction to that on these threads every day) ... last election, blacks voted at a higher rate than whites (for the first time ever) ... the majority of people in the country support same-sex marriages ... they are scared, and those of us (black, white, Latino, Asian, gays/lesbians, etc.) who know it's much ado about nothing, need to be more sensitive to their fear, and reassure them that everything will be fine ... we just need to work together, be more open, embrace change, not be so closed minded ...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
My view of affirmative action (AA) is that it is being used as the "remedy" for an eternal class action in which neither the members of the plaintiff class nor the members of the defendent class were ever clearly defined and are constantly changing.

How can someone not yet even born when the AA "class action" event occurred possibly be in either in the plaintiff class or the defendent class?

If a person was not even in the U.S. when whatever "wrong" occured that required AA as the remedy then how can they be included in the "remedy"?

It seems to me that all white folks are (somehow) in the defendent class and that all non-white folks (except asians? somehow) are in the plaintiff class and that the "settlement" is that "good" discrimination (AA?) is allowed under the broad terms of AA remedy and may continue forever.
Click to expand...

Is it possible that your perspective on this is tainted because, in effect, you are losing an advantage because of it? Does that create an unavoidable preference to maintain the status quo?

When you view this as you seem to here, as reparations, as opposed to an effort at righting an ages long inequity....I can't help but wonder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom