Sorry, but if someone has to have their hand held as an adult then they are not worth the trouble nor the cost of helping them, sure people stumble and giving a temporary hand up is beneficial to the people and the country but, a permanent hand holding weakens folks over all, it encourages weakness.

Kris, AA programs typically are helping-hand situations. Most of them are not meant to do anything more than lubricate some doors which some individuals typically find sticky due to their race, ethnicity or socioeconomic status.

Ever use a steak knife to cut something other than steak? Just because its purpose is supposed to be short term does not mean that people are using it short term. AA's designs and thoughts were good ones on paper, but then you added the human factor. The human factor turns it into something that weakens the human not help it. People use these programs as permanent wheelchairs not temporary crutches. We humans tend to take a mile when we are given an inch. The AA programs are doing nothing but creating dependence.


Oh and good, I was hoping you would get back here I do enjoy this type of argument/debate it is a challenge. i hope some of the others jump in to this.

Kris, can you give me an example of an AA initiative that you are opposed to? I am all for debating the heart of the matter, but I think our points may be ships passing one another in the night here in this thread.

As for my devil's advocate stance, I am simply holding the position that quotas and race-based acceptance/hiring criteria are an acceptable, perhaps desirable, form of discrimination, particularly when the history and development of our nation has precluded some from stepping on an equal playing field.

Ok, minority hiring. Say you are the token minority in a company. By federal law that company has to have your butt there especially if there are no other choices within your minority. The law protects your job. There is no incentive for you to better yourself, you are secure. No competition means that you can slide. This weakens you mentally and you become dependent upon others to protect you. AA has a good heart but, it is a handicap to a nation and its people. If you remove actual competition from minorities then you weaken your country. A majority will always hold the majority of jobs. A minority that does not have to compete for survival is facing a dead end. No innovation, no incentive, no actual thinking,, all stop progress for that minority.

Now lets take a look at what the majority about the minority. There is resentment with in the company. The majority sees that minority is not pulling their weight. The majority are not secure, they must fight for their job. Major resentment is bred. This injures the minority and the majority and the economic status of all. That company will have economic problems due to resentment. Humans tend to lash out in ways that harm themselves when they are angry or bear resentment,,, we can be a very stupid species thanks to our emotions, you know that.

Kris, you are making an assumption that shouldn't be made. Simply because a company is compelled to hire a minority doesn't mean that it is going to hire an imbecile. In fact, since companies typically seek profit, it is unlikely that it will hire anything less than the best minority applicant it can find. And referring to this employee as the "token minority", when the employee could easily turn out to be top notch, is exhibiting the type of cavalier treatment of non-Caucasians that brought us slavery in the first place.

No, Yopele not an imbecile, just a normal human. If you do not have to be your best and there is no incentive to even try , why do it? Why push when you do not have to. We take the easiest path.
No competition means no incentive. Besides, you asked only for one example.

AA programs remove incentive to be better. It may "level" the playing field but, it does not give the minority a real chance to improve. Its like this,
A golf course has a couple of different places to Tee off at each hole. A long one and a short one. The minorities with AA use the short one, the majority with AA have to use the long one. Both knock a hole in one, but who did the harder shot and who is the better? Who is working harder and so improving at a faster rate?

Or ;two people are doing push ups the minority only has to do fifty and the majority has to do 100, who will be stronger eventually?

AA handicaps, it helps, but, it hurts in the long run because people become dependent upon its handicapping.
We are all humans and our instinct is to take the easiest path. AA makes people dependent and weaker. If I were a bigot and in the majority, I would approve AA programs. In the long run they could only improve my kind. Hmmm,,,, could they be a diablolical plot by the Good Ole boys network

Just to fuck up the thread....

What Kris is saying is supported in both federal and state welfare programs. What was meant to be a helping hand when someone was blindsided by unfortuitous circumstances, and a short-term program for the individual, has been grossly abused by too many. The 3rd and 4th generation welfare people prove this. Moreover, welfare-wise users will actually move to states with higher "benefits" and they know exactly how to apply for welfare, food stamps, and a state issued medical card. It's off the subject, but it is part and parcel of our good intentions not exactly working out the way we intended. I can understand the need for AA when it was first introduced, but we didn't put a sunset clause on the programs, and so we now have a beauracracy and client relationship, both eating off the same platter. The caucasian majority did exactly what the minorities are doing. Taking advantage of whatever is offered for free - except free is whatever government decides the taxpayers will pay for.

And that proves my point exactly it makes those that use these programs weaker and more dependent. Look at Socialist countries. How independent are they and how free are they? Is a socialist country truly socialist when the leaders are better off then the population and dictate all laws?

So getting a job as a result of an AA program completely removes the incentive to work or achieve.

What about getting a raise, or a promotion, or even personal pride or satisfaction? Aren't these incentives to continue to work to the best of one's ability. I believe they are. Not everyone is lazy and merely does what it takes to get by. Some people have an inner drive, a desire to achieve.

Besides, labor unions provide more protection for the individual workers than does a typical AA program. With most AA programs the focus is not on the individual, only the race that is under-represented. Just because Joe African American got the job because a company needed another black employee doesn't mean that same company can't fire Joe African American and hire Jack African American if Joe performs poorly on the job.

Few reasons to post exist that are more highly exalted than is the chance to fuck up a thread. I applaud you making the effort. Well done, JT. Well done. Hero good work.


but as someone who should know better...
???

OK. FINE.

Time for me to try to correct this fucked up thread ...



I'm not going to defend welfare here other than to say that sentencing the poor and --temporarily or not-- downtrodden to death by not providing a viable means to nourish themselves is criminal. Our nation has the resources to easily assure that no person that sleeps under the blanket of its protection will starve simply because the population is too callous or parochial in its viewpoint to understand that living in a society under a social contract means that you do, IN FACT, owe something to your neighbor. Whether what is owed extends to prolonging the neighbor's life when he's lost his job is debatable, but the point stands.

The real problem I see though, JT, is that welfare is not really comparable to AA. Welfare programs are indiscriminate economic bandages. AA programs are aimed specifically at discriminatory practices, and themselves are profoundly discriminatory. They are designed to enlighten, to highlight a history of past wrongs. They are not bandages, but red flags being waved violently in an effort to awaken those members of a society that would rather see someone die of starvation than receive a single benefit he did not have coming.

Yopele, all that you say is true but, it does not detract from the fact AA does create a dependency on the Gov't. Sure welfare is far worse but, AA while good intentioned still does not create a balance and it does not promote the caring and enlightenment it was intended to. If a person gets something handed to them then it makes them value it less. promotions are tied to this too. Joe Black does not get a promotion he will run crying to the nearest ACLU, NAACP or a damn good lawyer. These people do not care if Joe Black earned the promotion they will claim that he deserves it. They will claim discrimination. Which has happened many many times. And Companies go down. AA works for mor than just blacks it works for other minorities as well, Women. Female owned companies will get bids just because it is female owned. We work for such a company. Good for us, bad for other companies. Our Company has the best reputation around though to back up the female AA though.
Is this fair? no not at all Our comapny can bid higher and still get jobs because of AA. That is not fair, but it works for us in the company so hey what the hell right? See, AA is not about fair and even it puts one group above another and handicaps that group. the ones below fight harder and get better. the ones that do not have to work so hard stand a good chance of slacking off and getting worse. i would rather see even footing for all and get rid of AAs. The resentment and the intolerance is just spreading because of it and the weaknesses get weaker.

Try this; If the black population had to fight for their freedom would we have to have AA? If females were not so brainwashed by religious beliefs, would they have to have AA? How about our incoming South American illegal immigrants, they are getting everything just about handed to them. Is that fair to those that legally came here? AA is good intentioned but it sure causes more hackles to be raised then its worth.

We do not have obligations to feed anyone or secure a lfe for them, none what soever. That is just another control mechanism intended to control and make the population passive and weak. Give up your things and your rights so that others may have some. Bull ,that just weakens the species

Yo,

I wasn't as interested in fucking up the thread, as in pointing out that good intentions don't produce the results intended very often. There was a time for AA to get the process moving, but it should have ended a long time ago... just about the time the minorities began claiming it as a right, not an opportunity.

I ain't stupid. There isn't any system devised by man that can't be abused. if there were, we wouldn't need lawyers! At best, all that can be done is to keep the abuse down to a dull roar. But some systems outlive their usefulness, and it is time for AA to be phased out. The fact that minorities have to struggle isn't anything new. Here in Ideeho, we have a large hispanic population (relatively). I have no problem with those who come in to work, to have their family, to own a home. In short, to be the same sort of immigrant our great grandfathers were. But don't ask me what I think of the La Rasa crowd that come in looking for the SS office the minute they hit town and demand that we speak spanish. Same shit with the "Ebonics" flap a few years back. Awwww, poor babies! Can't speak enough english to post bail. I'm sick of all the abusers of any system, and I don't care if they are the minorities or whitey's "good 'ol boy" club.

The biggest problem I see with AA is that it is a system almost designed to be abused. It was good to get the ball rolling, but it needed to be gotten rid of before abuse became the rule. Remember how quickly AA had problems with minority "front men"? An example: My son-in-law wanted to start a small business. How did they set it up? My daughter started the business. He was actually doing all the work, but she got the preferential treatment for licenses, loans, and any other perks available under her AA "minority" status. Great for my family, but not so good for the guy who tried to do it without the AA preferential treatment.