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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (158322)	1/17/2003 8:50:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574214

"You come to a neutral position just by coming to a neutral position." Wouldn't that just perpetuate the status quo? No because being neutral would itself be a change. And it would be the most important change a change to justice and opportunity rather then an attempt to impose equal outcomes. Also no even if you are just looking at outcomes. Those on top don't stay on top forever. Many of the wealthiest people in the country had poor or middle class parents. Many children or at least great grand children of the rich are not themselves rich. I suppose that under a completely neutral policy the race representation would enter a random walk which may take it back to neutral results, but it would take a long time with the resulting tensions persisting until then. Affirmative actions will only increase the racial tensions. It rewards the struggle to be seen as the biggest victim more then the struggle to achieve. It makes people think of other people as part of a group instead of individuals to be looked at on their own merits. It causes more benefits to be doled out on the basis of a political fight and encourages a culture of entitlement in those it benefits and resentment, anger, and racism in those that it acts against. Tim