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: TimF who wrote (158421)	1/19/2003 3:54:42 PM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1576882

Tim Re.If proportional representation is way out of whack it might be used as a reason to look for racism but should not itself be considered solid evidence of racism, let alone justification for trying to balance that racism with racism going the other way. Frankly, there are employers out there who are racist. However, the movement has taken on a life of its own, and has deemed any slight disproportional representation as evidence of racism. Frankly I look upon it as a two sided argument. If an employer is racist, and doesn't hire minorities, then he will obviously lose in the long run, because he is passing up the biggest reason an employer is successful; which is the quality of his employees. By forcing him to hire minorities, you are just keeping losers in business longer. On the flip side, the best way for minorities to overcome prejudice is to prove them wrong. AA just reinforces prejudices, saying to an employer, "This guy is handicapped, so you have to hire him" Or "you are prejudiced, so I will make you like him enough to give him a raise." Say what; whose business is this anyway. You can't legislate respect. Respect has to be earned; and that is why employers give raises, you respect what an employee can do for you, and in order to keep him earning money for you, you pay him. The point is that there are a lot of reasons for disproportional representation, racism is one. We all have prejudices. The problem is that liberals have broadened the use of the word racism to include common prejudices we all have; and then have demanded compensation based upon natural inclinations. Instead of eliminating racism, they have evoked the sword of an intrusive gov. to make us respect, rather than allow us respect their talents naturally. Busing hasn't caused racial harmony, why would the Michigan quota do what all others have failed to do. If the lawyers would just use AA to correct obvious racist examples, fine, but now they are into the fuzzy and arcane, trying to correct slight disproportional representation with overly disproportional gov. intrusion. . That is the problem.