Affirmative Action

[GutshotApe]

President Bush stated recently that affirmative action, or race-based quotas, is wrong. Do you agree?

[Silver Hilton]

I'm not gonna vote, I don't think its as simple as that. I understand where GW is coming from, but I don't totally agree. I think the university is also out of line, however.

[fishing is life]

man we touch all the hot subjects here. but i think this is healthy discussion as long as we dont get emotional. i agree with GW here. it is wrong and unfair period. this nation was built on being the best and affirmative action does not reward the best people.

[GutshotApe]

Affirmative Action was just kicking in when I finished college in 1974 - and my job opportunities with state and federal agencies were significantly limited because I was not a "minority". Since then I've seen the damage A.A. inflicts on society and that is the effect it has on minorities who succeed thru their own hard work & initiative. With A.A., you always have to wonder whether the individual earned the position or had the skids greased for him/her by the government, at the expense of others who did nothing wrong, because of gender or ethnicity.

[1pump]

Affirmative Action is discrimination, period. I don't see how you can discourage discrimination by promoting it. :whazzup:

[STGRule]

Okay, lets look at it from a Non-W.A.S.P male point of view (mine, by the way). My minority comprises 51% of the population. My minority continues to make less than the other 49% of the population. When I was accepted into a limited-entry college program it was probably because of my sex. We made up 4% of the class at the beginning. Yet when we graduated, we were 14% of the graduating class. That means there were two women in a class of 50. When we graduated there were still two women in a class of 14. I graduated with honors. I will not believe that women are any less capable then men, yet we still make less money than men for doing the same job. If we really did treat everybody fairly we wouldn't need A.A.. Since we don't, .

[OldRedSled]

Afirmative action only gets you in the door, you still have to do the work once you get there. If you cant hack it your out and some white boy who had to take a summer job for a semester gets in..big whoop.

I think its funny that the progam of arfimative action is actually modeled off OLD RICH WHITE MEN DOING FAVORS FOR THERE SON'S; Some how we call that networking and and Arfimative action wrong. Take a look around (and in above posts) people racism is alive and well in this country..

G W Bush gets into YALE through his fathers connections.. HEY THATS OK.... some SO Calf brother gets into YALE through afirmative action.. OH god what a sin... reverse racism...


"If white people are loosing..then whos winning?... cause there is no white man alive who would trade places with me..and im F*ing rich....." CHRIS ROCK


ORS [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img]

[Straydog]

Oldresled,

Good points, I agree.

One exception, when Old Rich White Daddy gets you into Yale, you do not have to perform, daddy's influence will protect you all the way through............

I took a test and got the top score. The first three apprentice positions were filled by the sons of union members. The other two were filled by blacks for AA reasons. This was almost 30 years ago and I'm still ******.

[GutshotApe]

Two years ago I worked on Census 2000. Temporary jobs paying up to $19/hr were supposedly available, depending on test scores. Took the test and with my veteran's point bonus, scored 105%. Some census jobs paid less than $19 but all jobs were to be filled based on test scores. The basic door-to-door job paid $9.75/hr plus .34/mile and there were two intermediate positions between that and the $19/hr jobs.

I was never called until the last minute and then was offered only a $9.75/hr job. All but one or two of the temporary $12, $15 and $19 per hour jobs had been filled by women.........none of whom scored over 100%, several of whom turned out to be incompetent [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] and were replaced (some positions were replaced twice during the 6 week job). One of them was a recent middle-eastern immigrant whose English made it difficult for her to be understood in her job as one of our trainers .

I took the $9.75/hr enumerator job and had to laugh at the inept Census Bureau bureaucrats trying to run a bureaucracy staffed by affirmative action hires. What a laugh! Our tax dollars at work. This was the first federal govt. job I'd had in 30 yrs and things have not changed much.

[Kruechief]

6 of the 8 supervisors at my facility are women with 4 of them being self-proclaimed lesbians.

We have the highest incidents of staff assaults, youth on youth assaults and the dubious honor of being the only one of 5 facilities with a youth escape over the wall.

I actually had one of my lesbian supervisors tell me it was "useful" to have large men like me around to handle the "physical stuff" but besides that we were expendable!

Oh well,

When the riots were occurring it was my Neanderthal buddies and I who saved the bacon.

Krue

[OldRedSled]

Hey GUT-SHOT

..how did you become aware of other peoples test scores?? Were you prevy to some extra information or are u making up facts based off rumor or cynicism... neither of which are facts.

I have found that my value or my co-workers value is never determined by me (funny how that works huh?), because i am not the boss. While i may claim that someone is imcompotent, never-the-less their boss obviously feels otherwise. So it goes to say that your assesment of another persons job performance amounts to nothing, because your not the one in charge. ANd again since no one is a mind reader you dont know your boss's feelings toward another co-worker, then all you have left is rumor and cynicism...neither of which are fact.

Would'nt it be frightining if everyone used rumor and cynicism to base their "Facts".
We would live in a manic depresive culture were everyone was evil, except the person doing the condeming. Everyone was cheating because, the person speaking lost. Where every thing was unfair, except for the advantages the person speaking enjoyed. And every thing the person who's speaking said about others is fact, and everything said about that speaking person are lies....


oh yea we allready live in that culture. God i wonder what the "facts" are about me....?


ORS [img]graemlins/program.gif[/img]


ORS

[STGRule]

So Krue, I take your post to mean that there are actually 6 male-minded people that work with you. Two men and four lesbians (self-proclaimed? You think they wouldn't know that and needed somebody else to tell them they were?).
I'm also going to make a guess that the youths in your care are male (could be wrong on that one). If my guess is correct, young men did the assaults and the escape and the riots. Now I'm not quite sure how A.A. has anything to do with violent young men. You seem to be implying that the female section of your staff is responsible for violent young men. You're going to have substantiate that claim.

[Trophy]

Originally posted by 1pump:
If a woman gets paid less, and tolerates it, then she's part of the problem.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Your logic is simply stupendous.

Who’s function is it to pay their employees fairly? Do employees have the control of the wage he/she gets paid, or to change jobs whenever there is pay discrimination?

How about the following statements?

If a woman is abused in a relationship and tolerates it, then she is part of the problem.

If a minority is discriminated at a work place and tolerates it, then he/she is the part of the problem.

Are these fair statements?

-----------------------------------------------------------

There are many studies done that unequivocally substantiate disparity in gender wage, even for the same job descriptions. Just do a simple search in google or yahoo and you’re sure to get a ton of returns from all fields, including hard facts from academics, health industry and even from government and hi-tech sectors. The following is the overall gender wage gap based on the 2000 census data.

According to data released by the Census Bureau this year, women 25 and older who worked full-time year-round in 2001 made 75 percent of what men earned -- median annual earnings of $30,446 for women compared to median annual earnings of $41,317 for men. In fact, the wage ratio has changed little in the last few years and hovered between 70 and 75 percent throughout the 1990s. Despite increases in the percentage of women in the workforce and improvements in the educational attainment of women, the wage gap persists.

The wage ratio for women of color, aged 25 and over who worked full-time year-round in 2001 showed the same trend as for women overall. The wage ratio between Black women and white men was 66 percent and the wage gap between Hispanic women and white men was 54 percent.

2001 Median Annual Earnings of Year-Round, Full-Time Workers
(aged 25 and over)

All men $40,796 All women $30,446

Men Women
White $41,317 White $30,815
Black $32,180 Black $27,335
Hispanic $26,493 Hispanic $22,180

2001 Median Annual Earnings (Year-Round, Full-Time, Aged 25 and over) as a Percentage of White Men's
Men Women
White 100% White 75%
Black 78% Black 66%
Hispanic 64% Hispanic 54%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 2002, Table PINC-03.
------------------------------------------------------

Regarding the University of Michigan’s admissions policy, I believe it’s not a perfect system, but there has to be some mechanism to balance the unequal playing field for minorities. We have not yet achieved a color-blind society where everyone is treated equally. We’ve had a history of discrimination against minorities, especially against the African Americans.

A study by professors at the University of Chicago and MIT finds that resumes with so-called "white-sounding" names got 50 percent more responses than ones with so-called "black-sounding" names. The professors sent about 5,000 resumes in response to want ads in the Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune.

The researchers classified names like Neil, Brett, Emily and Jill as white-sounding names, while classifying names like Tamika, Ebony, Kareem and Tyrone as black-sounding.

They found that white-sounding applicants received one response for every 10 resumes sent out -- while black-sounding applicants with equal credentials received one response for every 15 resumes.

The study's authors say their findings indicate that substantial discrimination still exists in job recruitment.

So how do we combat these subtle yet significant discrimination which exist in all facets of our society, not just in job market. Much of this is a problem of the heart that’s not easily rooted out, and the evidence clearly shows that blacks with twice the unemployment rate of the whites and twice the poverty rate than the whites. The Affirmative Action has helped tremendously in closing the gap, as has the Title IX for women, but there has to be more progress for all of us to be able to say, “It’s FAIR.”

Trophy,
If a female is working at a company and doing the same work as males but is payed less it is her fault. All she has to do is contact the right government office and the discrimination WILL END. It just doesn't happen. Where the pay differance comes about is in the types work that women generaly end up doing.

The figures you posted are comparing apples to cow manure.

In my trade you rarely see women (heavy, dirty work doesn't attract them), the female millwrights that I've been around should have been given 1/2 the pay as the men (equal pay for equal work). I have been around female welders, instrument teks and electricians that more than pulled their weight.

[ 01-18-2003, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Trophy]

Keta,

As usual, your anecdotal reference ignores the overwhelming statistics compiled by every imaginable researcher that clearly indicate that there is a gender wage gap. Of course you’re not going to find much of this discrepancy in generic jobs, but the disparity exists in too many job markets. There are just too many references to list them here, so if you want you can just go to www.google.com and type in gender wage gap and read the facts for next 12 years, if you’re a fast reader.

If you don’t want to do it, I can suggest a few.

[GutshotApe]

OldRedSled - I wasn't privy to everyone's score but I did ask my supervisor and the two in levels above her. None of them scored over 100% let alone 105%. And it was obvious from the way things were run that several of these people were incompetent and not suited for their jobs. In the end, though, I found I really liked going around my rural neighborhood and meeting the people. It was a fun 6 week job and I look forward to doing it again in 2010.

Trophy,
It's the truth. The wage gap is (mostly, as there still is too much discrimination) a job driven situation in the trades. It might be different in the office and boardroom.

Do you think that the women and minorities are being payed less at McD's than white men?
WRONG! If they were it would only take a phone call.

[ 01-18-2003, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Snapset]

Wage discrimination tends to disappear in a union shop.

[Trophy]

Keta,

Is McDonalds the only place where women and minorities work? Besides, I have already stated that you're not going to find it in generic (read McDonalds, Wal Mart, etc.) jobs. Do you think that most private sector jobs are minimum, hourly waged positions where the salaries run even across the board?

Did you even bother to look at the facts presented by the government and private research on this wage gap? Once you have studied the empirical evidence on gender pay disparity, then you can ask some RELEVANT questions.

Here is what the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers concluded: LINK

Although the gap between women and men’s wages has narrowed substantially since the signing of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, there still exists a significant wage gap that cannot be explained by differences between male and female workers in labor market experience and in the characteristics of jobs they hold.

After hovering at about 60 percent since the mid-1950s, the ratio of women's to men's median pay began to rise in the late 1970s and reached about 70 percent by 1990. The gender pay ratio is currently on the rise again, surpassing 75 percent in 1997.

The gender gap has narrowed faster among younger women and among married women with children. The data that permit disaggregation by demographic groups show the overall gender pay ratio rising from 57 percent in 1969 to 68 percent in 1996 (the last year for which these data are available). In contrast, among women under 40, the gender pay ratio rose from 58 percent in 1969 to 74 percent in 1996. Among married women with children, the gender pay ratio (relative to all male workers) rose from 53 percent in 1969 to 68 percent in 1996. Relative to all male workers, wage gains have been faster for non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white women than for Hispanic women.

The most recent detailed longitudinal study found that in the late 1980s about one-third of the gender pay gap was explained by differences in the skills and experience that women bring to the labor market and about 28 percent was due to differences in industry, occupation, and union status among men and women. Accounting for these differences raised the female/male pay ratio in the late 1980s from about 72 percent to about 88 percent, leaving around 12 percent as an "unexplained" difference.

Over the last twenty years, increases in women’s accumulated labor market experience and their movement into higher-paying occupations have played a major role in increasing women’s wages relative to men’s. Changes in family status, in industry structure and in unionization also worked to narrow the gender pay gap, while increasing economic benefits from skills and increasing wage inequality would have, by themselves, widened the pay gap. In addition, the decrease in the pay gap that remains "unexplained" after controlling for measured differences between men and women has been a large contributor to the narrowing of the pay gap.

The evidence is that labor market discrimination against women persists, although it is difficult to determine precisely how much of the difference in female/male pay is due to discrimination and how much is due to differences in choices or preferences between women and men. One indirect and rough measure of the extent of discrimination remaining in the labor market is the "unexplained" difference in pay. Some studies have tried to measure discrimination directly by looking at pay differences among men and women in very similar jobs or by comparing pay to specific measures of productivity. These studies consistently find evidence of ongoing discrimination in the labor market and support the conclusion that women still face differential treatment on the job.


And the following is what EEOC found: EEOC link

"Women earn, on average, only about 75 cents for every dollar earned by men, and the earnings of African-Americans and Hispanics also lag behind," said Ms. Castro. "Comprehensive studies show that substantial portions of these pay gaps are unexplained by differences in occupations, skills, education, or other similar factors."

Two recent studies on the gender wage gap by the President's Council of Economic Advisers, for example, found that after accounting for measurable factors that affect employee compensation, there still is a 12% unexplained pay gap between men and women that could be due to employment discrimination.

Let me know if you want more facts.

[Gun Rod Bow]

The thing that has always puzzled me about this question,

In a free market, where competition is keen, every capitalist is looking for an edge, all workers in the market are currently doing more for less....

If a company could hire a group of people (any group, sex, race, whatever) and pay them less, and at the same time get more/same work...wouldn't a greedy capitalistic company do that in a heart beat?

We should be a color blind, race blind, performance based economy. No discrimination, no advantages, level playing field. That should be the extent of the law.

This is the land of opportunity...not the land of well ok, we'll take from them and give to you to make it FAAAIR.

my .02

GRB

[Kruechief]

STG,

What I am implying is that a team comprised mainly of females manages our facility that houses male felons from age 12 to 25. In comparison, the other identical facilities are ran by teams who are mainly comprised of males. The facility I work at is the "huge pus-filled cankerous sore" on the face of the agency I work for. This is due to the management team being incompetent, yet retained, due to their chosen lifestyles and gender.

It is called the peter principal. One rises to the level of their incompetence.

Krue

[ 01-19-2003, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: kruechief ]

[Kruechief]

Trophy,

We call arguments like yours, "proposals by the pound."

Please try to keep it to at least novel length.

Your perseverance to this matter will be greatly appreciated.

Krue

[Silver Hilton]

I have worked in the computer industry for the last 15 years. Women in my field get paid 100% of what the men get. I know, because I was executive management, and I made the hiring and salary decisions. In pure, performance oriented fields, of which programming is one and sales is another, women and minorities are absolutely paid what they are worth.

In the male/female variable, it is simplistic to compare salaries numerically and draw a conclusion. My wife makes 30% of what I used to make. Of course, she has chosen a path that lets her work 24 flexible hours a week. What is the value of that choice?

That said, in fields where the criteria are less objective, it would be stupid and close minded for us to deny that women and minorites don't trod an uphill track.

And, in some of the highly compensated fields, like sales, let's be real, it's harder for a womn to make the big bucks, because the sales targets aren't generally as easily sold by women, because of the clients' own prejudices.

The last company I worked for, the highest compensated peron was female. Karen made over 250k as a sales executive, because she produced. I will say, however, that she worked twice as hard as a man would have had to, to get there. So she earned every damn penny, more than twice over.

[ 01-18-2003, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: Silver Hilton ]

Trophy,
Equal pay for equal work is refering to the type of work, not the number of hours worked.

Should McD workers make the same as tradesmen (and women) that apprenticed for four or more years, do work that is destroying their health and have to own $8,000 to $20,000 in tools? I don't think they should.

Should a farm laborer earn the same?
Should a gas station attendant earn the same?

Like I posted earlier, in the trades there is equal pay and it's been that way for as long as I have been in them.

GRB,
One of the reasons we need unions.

[ 01-18-2003, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[Trophy]

Keta,

you're totally non sensical. BTW, what's up with you and MickyD analogies :whazzup:

You're simply not informed on the subject. When you base your opinions on personal and anecdotal experiences, you derive at unscientific and skewed conclusions. Don't be afraid to glance at the big picture. Go ahead and read some of my references or even better, go find some of your own as there is no lack of studies done in this debate. But please no more of your McD's experiences as a frame of reference.

[ 01-18-2003, 11:59 PM: Message edited by: Trophy ]

[Trophy]

kruechief,

I'd hardly call my 1-1/2 page post a novel length, but perhaps some of us prefer to draw conclusion from rhetorics and headliners. It's just not my way of having a debate.

If you think this is some sort of a filibuster, then perhaps you should take up speed reading.

[ 01-19-2003, 12:09 AM: Message edited by: Trophy ]

[1pump]

There was a time not all that long ago when AA was necessary to break the "glass ceiling" and other good ol' boy networks. I'm not denying these unfair practices still occur, especially among the unions and higher paying executive positions. I've never been of the opinion that women or minorities are any less capable than anyone else. I keep hearing that women make less money for doing the same job as men, but where's the facts to back it up? :whazzup: I've spent the last 20 years working in male-dominated professions with women, and they were paid the same as anybody else. If a woman gets paid less, and tolerates it, then she's part of the problem.

[Kruechief]

Trophy,

You are as obtuse as a bowling ball. I mean, wow, you do go on. However, your last post was ideal you barely bored me at all. :smile:

Thank you, [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Krue

PS: You make some really good points but I just get a little overwhelmed. I'll bet you were happy when you were assigned to read "War and Peace" in High School, huh?

[STGRule]

Krue: Your Freudian slip is showing. You keep using the spelling puss . As in:

The facility I work at is the "huge puss-filled cankerous sore" on the face of the agency I work for.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">and:

Krue --------------------
Team Eddie
Team No Puss Pockets

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I'll give the benefit of the doubt that you mean:
Pus n. A generally viscous, yellowish-white fluid formed in infected tissue, consisting of white blood cells, cellular debris, and necrotic tissue.

Because in the context that you used that spelling when referring to your work environment makes you appear to be a misogynic homophobe (while you may not be one in real life, you appear to be playing one on the internet).

[Straydog]

Maybe the definition of Pus was too long a read for the Kruemiester........ :grin:

[ 01-19-2003, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[ultralight]

I think we should avoid using words like definition for krue...we don't want him to strain his eye muscle reading such a long word :grin:

[Kruechief]

Thanks for the correction STG.

Hopefully when 28 doesn’t pass you will have less time to sit and ponder spelling mistakes. Still, thank you for pointing out my error as I have been displaying that spelling for a while and no one has seen fit to tell me of my mistake.

you appear to be a misogynic homophobe

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Wow, next I’ll be a racist. Right now, I wish I could go back and erase my time spent aboard a ship in the Mediterranean Sea. What was I thinking as an 18-year-old kid when I VOLUNTEERED to serve? When I read accusations like this

you appear to be a misogynic homophobe

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">and I think about the sacrifices that I made while serving this country I feel sad.

Anyway, I knew that when I criticized my female management team that I would catch heat. STG, SD, and UL, as is the norm for liberal America, you shift the focus to petty issues and while STG accuses me of being a

misogynic homophobe

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">the other two of you nod your heads like a couple of empty headed bobble dolls.

My criticism is not of the people but of their PERFORMANCE. Also, I criticize a system that is forced to maintain these incompetents due to the system being required to meet diversity requirements. Meanwhile, these incompetent managers continue to put the community, the staff and the youth we serve in jeopardy. If I had said my management team was comprised of white males that were incompetent I bet that you would have embraced the statement. But since this post is about AA, I felt that it was a forum to address the real dangers of forcing a system to recruit and retain workers based on their gender, ethnicity, or lifestyle choice instead of based on their human inventories.

Krue

[ 01-19-2003, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: kruechief ]

[STGRule]

Sorry Krue, I work on Federal funds.

And the point was you felt the need to point out that they are female and lesbians. Neither of which has any bearing on their ability to do a good or bad job. Your point would have been made had you left out any reference to gender. Although I will concede, probably not on this thread.
I fail to see any connection from your service to your country and A.A. My son also did his service to this country VOLUNTARILY. Your point?

I love your reference to lifestyle choices. As if.

[ 01-19-2003, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

[img]graemlins/lurk.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

[TheTexan]

AA is wrong! I agree with Bush!


STG, It's not a choice? :whazzup:

[Kruechief]

STG,

The reason that AA is dangerous is because it forces public systems to maintain people who fail to perform. Sometimes, it isn't a big deal. Like if one of the incompetents were working in an office or doing some type of over-budgeted non-essential research for the federal government.

However, when these people are in positions that place others in jeopardy then it is bad. I wonder if you were sitting in the space shuttle waiting to takeoff, would you want to be staking your life on a bunch of "D" students who got their job because of AA? Not me! I want the best. However, if the best person for the job also turns out to be female, homosexual, or a different ethnicity then white, then great.

I work every day with a lesbian parole officer. We have worked together for 5 years. She started off as a floor staff under my supervision. I nurtured her, coached her and respected her. Why, because she is intelligent, compassionate and PERFORMED well. Therefore, when the time came to make recommendation for advancement she was my choice. When I look at her I don't see a lesbian. I see a self-actualized person working hard to make her way.

My point about my military and civilian service is simple; I served so other might tout their ideals. I should have gone to college, became a mindless bobble head liberal and sat around and bashed people.

It seems to be the American way.

Krue

Trophy,
Replace McD with any other low paying company and it is the same, I just use McD because my sister-in-law works at one. You won't find much wage discrimination in hourly and union jobs as well as government jobs. Sales and management could be different.

The pay gap has more to do with the kind of work not the amount paid.

[STGRule]

The reason that AA is dangerous is because it forces public systems to maintain people who fail to perform. Sometimes, it isn't a big deal. Like if one of the incompetents were working in an office or doing some type of over-budgeted non-essential research for the federal government.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">If its broke, fix it, don't throw it away.

I work every day with a lesbian parole officer. We have worked together for 5 years. She started off as a floor staff under my supervision. I nurtured her, coached her and respected her. Why, because she is intelligent, compassionate and PERFORMED well. Therefore, when the time came to make recommendation for advancement she was my choice. When I look at her I don't see a lesbian. I see a self-actualized person working hard to make her way.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Good for you, all is not lost.

My point about my military and civilian service is simple; I served so other might tout their ideals

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">That is a noble reason. And yet you say...

Right now, I wish I could go back and erase my time spent aboard a ship in the Mediterranean Sea. What was I thinking as an 18-year-old kid when I VOLUNTEERED to serve?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

I should have gone to college , became a mindless bobble head liberal and sat around and bashed people .

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">You did, and you do.

as I am a double degree holder that graduated in the top 5%.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

Thank God he is retiring from politics as there is enough ignorant people in this state (Portland, Eugene, Ashland) to probably get this joke elected to the senate

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

They are sneaky on the left.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

Wow,
Liberals are so easy to hook!
If only Steelhead would take the bait this easy!

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">

[GutshotApe]

STG - But what about the basic unfairness of affirmative action which favors one person over another because of gender or race? Why is it right & proper to discriminate against people who look like me when I did nothing to deserve punishment? How long does the government-sponsored discrimination need to go on? Affirmative action has been with us for 30 years or more - how much is enough? The end does not justify the means no matter now noble the desired result may be. Affirmative action is unconstitutional and future generations of legal scholars will look back at AA and shake their heads at the injustice of it.

[ 01-19-2003, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

STG,
Discrimination is wrong. Affirmative action is unconstitutional.

[STGRule]

STG - But what about the basic unfairness of affirmative action which favors one person over another because of gender or race?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Subtract the words affirmative action and substitute the words "old-boy network" and you have my point of view.

Why is it right & proper to discriminate against people who look like me when I did nothing to deserve punishment?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Or from my point of view, look like me?

How long does the government-sponsored discrimination need to go on? Affirmative action has been with us for 30 years or more - how much is enough?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Until it is no longer needed. While it has gotten better in the last few years it is not good enough.

The end does not justify the means no matter now noble the desired result may be.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I respectfully disagree.

Affirmative action is unconstitutional

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I was unaware that any federal court had ruled that way.

and future generations of legal scholars will look back at AA and shake their heads at the injustice of it.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Or they won’t, as they will realize it was necessary to make the workforce more representative of the population. That is the reason it exists. And that people needed it in the first place to mitigate the injustice of it all.

Keta; again I was not aware that a federal court had ruled AA unconstitutional.

STG,
Hasn't been to the Supreme Court yet, however it doesn't have to go to a judge to be unconstitutional.

[STGRule]

I would like to add this as a note to the subject.
Fundamentally I agree that the AA could be changed. Not thrown out, just changed. I will guess that it was never the intention of AA to be used as a tool for incompetent people to hold a job they don't earn.
I do believe the work force should reflect the population. I work in a male dominated profession. It is changing, but management looks about the same as it did when I started 17 years ago. I still get reminded almost daily that America has a hard time respecting you if you are not a male. Even when you've earned it. Like I said, it is getting better. I can now walk into the auto parts store and purchase a water pump for my truck and not be as ignored or questioned as I used to be. I can walk in to the lumberyard and get helped most times when ordering supplies for my latest project. Unfortunately I still appear to be too stupid to purchase a long gun or a boat or a fishing rod and reel. I'm tired of the groans when I pull up to a crowded boat ramp (until I have the boat launched and the ramp cleared in less than 60 seconds).
I am glad that when I am at work I can apply for a promotion, volunteer to help other projects and agencies, make budget decisions, and plan and implement projects without the discrimination.

[STGRule]

Actually Keta, I think it does.

STG,
It is called "Ruled Unconstitutional".

Do auto parts clerks still give women the wrong parts on purpose? I think many do.

Here's what I see in the Constitution.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/amend.html

"...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"


Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting
the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for
the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive
and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such
state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in
rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of
such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or
hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a
member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or
judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or
rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of
each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment
of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the
United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against
the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall
be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

[ 01-19-2003, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]

[ultralight]

The Affirmative Action is not unconstitutional. I think Keta may be confusing 'quotas system' with AA.

I think there are enough people on both sides who have suffered wrongly because of the racial and gender devide we have in this country. If everything was truly fair and equal, then the AA policies clearly does not make any sense. But it's obvious to me that the playing field is still not level, so we've got to find an equitable way to make the system more fair.

Many argue that only merit should be considered in school admissions or job considerations, but that doesn't take into consideration the long history of discrimination and segregation against minorities and women for hundreds of years. And although we've made a tremendous progress in the last 30 years, the discriminatory legacy isn't absent, yet. So ask yourself, is the playing field completely level today? My answer is we're not there yet.

[ 01-19-2003, 04:44 PM: Message edited by: ultralight ]

UL,
I'm not confusing these here. Both treat people different and the government HAS to treat everyone the same.

It's time for AA to vanish and I hope that we'll all learn that it isn't your sex or race but what you are and what you do that matter.

[ultralight]

Keta,

Do you think the playing field is level?

UL,
:depressed: Not at all :depressed: There is still many places where things need to change.

[GutshotApe]

Ultralilght - No, unfortunately the playing field still isn't completely level - but affirmative action, as it is implemented in State and Federal bureaucracies, is far from an equitable solution on many levels and is not the best way to address the problem. AA as practiced is counter-productive, patently unfair and unconstitutional. Anytime gender or race is a deciding factor in a government action, it is wrong.

[ultralight]

Then what do you propose to fix the uneven playing field?

[ 01-19-2003, 06:36 PM: Message edited by: ultralight ]

You got me there UL :whazzup: We still have to honor the Bill of Rights or our country will be no better than Iraq.

[GutshotApe]

We need to get past the past, so to speak, and concentrate on resolving underlying reasons for some ethnic minorities' problems. Broken or nonexistent families produces many, many young school dropouts who no amount of AA will ever help join the mainstream. I don't know what the solution - but two wrongs never made a right and that's what AA amounts to.

As for gender equality, I believe in equal pay for equal work and ability of the employee to contribute to the employer's enterprise, whether private or public.

[riverraider]

Affirmative action is discrimination. Pure and simple.
Anyone for "affirmative action" is really saying they are for "preferencial treatment"

[ultralight]

I'm assuming that you who favor an end to AA here are all whites, and perhaps even all males. You acknowledge that there is an uneven playing field, yet you want to halt the program which has proven to have made a difference in helping level the playing field, without even having any alternative solution to the existing problem.

I feel that there has been a major progress in this arena, but it's clear that strict quotas or racial preference (or gender) is not the answer today. But without an adequate system to remedy the prejudice and bias, aren't we, in a way, digressing back to the old system of inequality?

I fully agree that we need to do a better job of providing more help to minorities and other economically disadvantaged children, especially the inner city kids where there seems to be a concentrated problem, before they even apply to colleges and jobs. But mere words don’t do a thing for the injustice others are suffering.

UL,
Rural schools need help too. The grade school that my kids went to had over 75% of the kids qualifying for the free lunch program.

I might look male and "white" (my dad looks native) but I'm an Americian. Part Osage part Cherokee plus Irish, Scotish and Dane (I won't admit to the French)

[ultralight]

Keta,

No wonder you seem to be having an identity crisis :grin: Or is that a middle-life crisis

And getting back to the topic, that's exactly what I would like to see, some sort of mechanism to help those who are disadvantaged...whether they be minorities, women, poor, etc. And I think we should come up with an improved system than the AA, before tearing it down.

Anyway, the court will review the case and I look forward to their verdict this summer. It looks to be an exciting couple of years for the Supreme Court observers as some expect few (up to 3 :shocked: ) justices to retire in that time period and Bush to replace them with pro-life judges.

[ 01-19-2003, 09:13 PM: Message edited by: ultralight ]

[STGRule]

riverraider:

Affirmative action is discrimination. Pure and simple.
Anyone for "affirmative action" is really saying they are for "preferencial treatment"

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Yes, that is the point. Preferential treatment until the inequity is gone. If you don't like it, change it. Devise a better idea. I will listen to anything you have to suggest short of "there never was a problem to begin with".

STG,
It's still wrong.