Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (144437)	9/29/2001 12:10:04 PM
From: willcousa	Respond to of 186894

Elmer, nicely put. Your reading is the same as mine as to M's "model".

To: Elmer who wrote (144437)	9/29/2001 12:28:05 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Elmer,<<<The model basically says this, all populations are of equal potential given a level playing field they will achieve more or less equal results. Any unequal results must therefore be the result of unequal opportunities or an unlevel field. We as a society are obligated to tilt the field to any degree necessary to produce the expected outcome and we will then call that the new definition of "level". Implied in this definition is that everything that caused the unlevel field is someone elses fault. This model must not be questioned and to do so is to cause the field to once again become unlevel. Storm troopers will be expected to silence any discussion.>>> This thread is really a good way for people to vent their anger and open up issues to discussion in some civil manner. I think, in some ways, you are right about closing off discussions. That leads a lot of people to believe they have made some important observations and discovered Truths that other people want to suppress. It is only through open discussions where we can find out if these Thoughts have merit. We have already seen a lot of hidden anger expressed in writing on this thread. My feelings are they have very little support. Up until then, people were kind of nudging each other and winking in hidden coded language to indicate I understand . Now that they have been expressed, I am certain most will say that is not what they really had in mind. And, do not want to be put into that camp. The same I believe is true with some of your thoughts. First off, by population you probably mean race. If you meant some other socio-economic indicators then the between the lines hatred would disappear along with a lot of other emotional baggage that goes with it. If you mean by population as by Race , then you are making up a false model. A model that is surrounded by a philosophy of hate disguised by statements of reality . The real model says that there is no scientific definition for race. You can't support any definition of race using knowledge that we have gained through the study of DNA or any branch of science (biology, chemistry, physics). So all this hatred stuff is based on nothing. This is not to say there are no social problems. Social problems are just that. Problems that need to be solved. But, you can't solve these problems, if you insist on, making up definitions that have no basis. Mary

To: Elmer who wrote (144437)	9/30/2001 3:32:52 PM
From: muzosi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

I remember the people of California being called racist ... no, i don't call that racist. economically misinformed and misguided certainly but not racist. what i call racist is this where is the proof that all populations are of equal potential in all fields? which assumes that black people are inferior basically because of their skin color ignoring all the historical baggage they are forced to carry to this day. under this logic is the one which enslaved them by declaring them untermensch. We as a society are obligated to tilt the field... this conveniently ignores the history. you're starting from an assumed "fair" level and then claiming that blacks can't succeed not because of past/current discrimination but their inherent inability. even if you manage to delude yourself that there is no discrimination today, to claim that the field is level and needs no changes assumes that all the past oppression has been corrected. the society has an obligation (we the people ...) to have a level playing field for a time relative to the life cycle of itself. accumulation of wealth is an integrative process. if you disrupt it for hundreds of years, you can't assume that things are equal when you fix the problem half-assed for fourty years. this will be my last post on the subject. i think i heard all arguments the other side (on this forum) holds and found them bereft of logic. i also put forward what i think and didn't see any valid counter arguments. i am still open to discussion in private.

To: Elmer who wrote (144437)	10/1/2001 3:37:40 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

OT OT RE: "muzosi who wrote (144426) From: Elmer Saturday, Sep 29, 2001 11:33 AM "Muzosi,...you do your storm trooper..."EP --------------------------------- Elmer, It's a bit ironic to see you call Muzosi a Storm Trooper, when he was attempting to protect the rights of Jewish people in his post where he said, "your questioning the model reminds me of people questioning the holocaust... given overwhelming historical facts you still find the logic to question stuff." Definition of Storm Trooper: "A member of the Nazi militia noted for brutality and violence. One who resembles or behaves like a member of the Nazi militia." I don't think you should name-call Muzosi a Storm Trooper. SI is a forum that discourages name-calling. Amy J