I'm hiring

[Jackson]

Everyone is avoiding the actual point. Why?

I think without justification, that you are being a racist.

 

[JoeMoma]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Did you read the rest of my statement? I think I explained the reasoning for it pretty clearly

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I see you also completely missed the point of the thread. Only read part way & went off half cocked with your response.
A bit ironic wouldn't you say based on what you wrote?

Lol

What would you call me if I hired the white guy over the black who is more qualified?

What to you do look at people's names on resumes and guess if they were a Mexican, black, Irish , Polack before reading on tard?



.

 

[Jackson]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Thank you for the warning! I still go with my gut, though. Thanks

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

 

[Jackson]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Did you read the rest of my statement? I think I explained the reasoning for it pretty clearly

Yes I did. It was temporary and still in effect for minorities and women. It's time for both of the segments of the population to stand on their laurels and skin color and genitals don't figure in.

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Thank you for the warning! I still go with my gut, though. Thanks

When you have generations of discrimination like we had in our country racial issues and inequality get ingrained into our culture and it takes generations work those out. An initiative like AA was believed to be a good idea in the aftermath of civil rights, then it gets weened off, not completely shut down, which I think is a responsible approach

 

[JoeMoma]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

Knowing why an initiative exists does not equate to agreeing that it should continue to exist.

 

[Jackson]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

If you were white and had extensive knowledge of welding, how would you feel if a black guy got hired for that $30 an hour job with no experience but came in on an "intern program?"

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Did you read the rest of my statement? I think I explained the reasoning for it pretty clearly

Yes I did. It was temporary and still in effect for minorities and women. It's time for both of the segments of the population to stand on their laurels and skin color and genitals don't figure in.

I agree with you and I think it is a good debate... at some point the bird needs to get pushed out of the nest so it can learn to fly and we need to be careful not to allow government to get to ingrained in our lives. That's why I like the dynamic between liberals and conservatives. When the two can communicate properly it creates a good system of checks and balances on issues like this.

 

[Jackson]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Thank you for the warning! I still go with my gut, though. Thanks

When you have generations of discrimination like we had in our country racial issues and inequality get ingrained into our culture and it takes generations work those out. An initiative like AA was believed to be a good idea in the aftermath of civil rights, then it gets weened off, not completely shut down, which I think is a responsible approach

Why "wean down"? If it is no longer an issue, hire the most capable. We have had reverse discrimination for too long. The pedulum belongs in the middle now.

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

Knowing why an initiative exists does not equate to agreeing that it should continue to exist.

That's what I said. People don't have to agree with me. I'm stating my opinion. But if you can't recognize our history of inequality that led to things like AA then you are not having an honest conversation.

 

[dblack]

What would you call me if I hired the white guy over the black who is more qualified?

I'd call you Grampa. Unless you told me that you hired the white guy because you hate blacks. Then I'd call you racist. More likely, at that point, I'd just not call you.

 

[JoeMoma]

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

Knowing why an initiative exists does not equate to agreeing that it should continue to exist.

That's what I said. People don't have to agree with me. I'm stating my opinion. But if you can't recognize our history of inequality that led to things like AA then you are not having an honest conversation.

Perhaps you should not ignorantly assume that someone that believes that it's time for AA to end is not aware of the history.

 

[Jackson]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Did you read the rest of my statement? I think I explained the reasoning for it pretty clearly

Yes I did. It was temporary and still in effect for minorities and women. It's time for both of the segments of the population to stand on their laurels and skin color and genitals don't figure in.

I agree with you and I think it is a good debate... at some point the bird needs to get pushed out of the nest so it can learn to fly and we need to be careful not to allow government to get to ingrained in our lives. That's why I like the dynamic between liberals and conservatives. When the two can communicate properly it creates a good system of checks and balances on issues like this.

Excellent points. Notice how we weere able to carry on a dialogue without name calling? It's refreshing.

I do believe that there still remainsn a hidden detriment, not only to blacks, but all those below the poverty level. It is their attitude that makes the difference.

As an example, I have lived a middle class existence. My son was brought up with the "School and grades are important and you will go to college." Never a question about that. All of the boys he hung around with didn't have that same family attitude. None of his friends went to college and "just got by in high school." They are still in and out of jobs while my son is making 6 figures as a Director in a national chain. They were all white, but their families had different attitudes than mine. Makes a big difference.

 

[Derelict_Drvr]

Old lady, my 50 years of working in large urban areas such as Chicago, New York and Houston tells me that those in favor of affirmative action after all this time are not looking for equal opportunity, but want EQUAL RESULTS.

The fact that that's beyond your comprehension speaks volumes.

I have to go, but I'm interested in why you think equal results aren't possible.

When equality is legislated you inevitably raise the so-called less equal to a status above the rest. If you make laws that say you have to hire over someone else because of perceived inequality employers will generally take extra careful precautions that will result in the almost, or early, qualified being hired over the definitely qualified.

 

[Jackson]

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

Knowing why an initiative exists does not equate to agreeing that it should continue to exist.

That's what I said. People don't have to agree with me. I'm stating my opinion. But if you can't recognize our history of inequality that led to things like AA then you are not having an honest conversation.

There definitely a history of inequality. A terrible and long history. This goverment addressed it and I believe addressed it well. Now we have to address the family units and expectations we have for our young.

 

[Slade3200]

Would you call it racist? And if so why does the program, Affirmative Action get a pass?

AA was a temporary measure put in place to try and help the tremendous imbalance that resulted from generations of oppressive and discriminatory policy that we had prior to the civil rights act. The black community had little to no opportunity to gain wealth, proper education, or achieve prosperity in the same way that whites did. You can't just change a law and expect everything to be even.

AA is no longer in effect which is a good thing, but some policies still exists that help minority races and also women gain more opportunity. You can call that racist against white men but that is an extremely narrow and ignorant POV when considering the big picture and our history.

Why are parts of it still existing? You say that AA is "no longer in effect and a good thing"?
That it racist when you intentionally select one race over another when their resume or skill set does not support it.

Careful! If you disagree, you have an extremely narrow and ignorant point of view dontchaknow!

Disagree all you want, I welcome good debate. Just don't deny reality and only tell half the story. Show at least a recognition as to why certain initiatives exist. Otherwise you are fitting the definition of ignorance.

If you were white and had extensive knowledge of welding, how would you feel if a black guy got hired for that $30 an hour job with no experience but came in on an "intern program?"

I'd be bummed

 

[Jackson]

Old lady, my 50 years of working in large urban areas such as Chicago, New York and Houston tells me that those in favor of affirmative action after all this time are not looking for equal opportunity, but want EQUAL RESULTS.

The fact that that's beyond your comprehension speaks volumes.

I have to go, but I'm interested in why you think equal results aren't possible.

When equality is legislated you inevitably raise the so-called less equal to a status above the rest. If you make laws that say you have to hire over someone else because of perceived inequality employers will generally take extra careful precautions that will result in the almost, or early, qualified being hired over the definitely qualified.

If done carefully, and that depends on the employer and their insight on the perspective hiree, you can take an individual who does not yet have the skills but will learn fast and be an asset to the firm.