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 (158453)	1/20/2003 2:12:21 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586653

You don't eliminate 200 years of abuse in 40. You eliminate 2000 years of abuse in a second. You just stop the abuse. You don't eliminate the effects of 200 years of abuse in 40, but its crazy to try to comepensate for all past abuse. You can never know when it is enough compensation some people will always ask for more. Also the compensation abuses people who are innocent of the original offense. We will know when its enough. Liberals are smart enough to know that coddling people only makes them dependent. For a group that is smart enough to know that to often they do coddle people or support the idea of coddling people. It must look that way........my take on it is that its mostly doing the fair/right thing but like with most groups, there are some who take it too far and coddle. However, its not as widespread as conservatives would have us believe. That's not true.......before drugs were plentiful in this country, the level of alcoholism was higher in minority groups than the mainstream white population. It is true, the overall drug problem (including alchahol as a drug) was not as bad and illegitmacy was not close to being as bad, as each problem is now. Drug and alcohol addiction has always been higher in non white populations. It looks like we are arguing two different points. There are societal wrongs committed by the society at large and then there are individual wrongs.....crimes committed by individuals. Please, lets not dumb down here. If you can't make a convincing case, concede that point and move on.......please. Its not dumbing anything down. Any crime or wrong is commited by an idividual or a lot of individuals. If a majorit of indivudals in the past commited a particular crime that doesn't mean individuals born after the crimes ended are responsible for it just because they come from the same society. That may be your opinion but its not the reality. Just a few years ago, the Swiss courts ruled that Holocaust Jews were entitled to retribution and are in the process of disbursing to the Jews funds placed in Switzerland by the Nazis. When the crimes against a particular group are severe enough, the courts will rule that the current generation must make some form of retribution. But like I've said before, its to everyone's benefit if past crimes are ameliorated by some form of retribution. Where have you seen AA demand retribution from descendants of slave owners? I've seen it argued that way a number of times both directly and more indirectly saying that blacks are worse off because of slavery (sometimes "because of slavery and jom crow) so we need to give them this as compensation. It may be argued but it hasn't happen. Its only a valid point for this discussion if it actually happens. "Should the son of Colin Powell get bonus points over some white person from a poor backwater in apalachia? No because you're not comparing apples to apples. As for comparing appels to apples I comparing some people who may or may not get bonus points to other people who may or may not get such points. Obvisouly all these people will be different but I am comparing the same fact about all of them. You can do that......but the experiences of blacks is not the same as Appalachian whites. App. whites were not held back by societal prejudices but rather I think it was all those cousin intermarriages that screwed them up. <g> The experiences that got the poor whites of Appalachia to where they are are not the same as those of poor blacks. And the experience of a poor black girl from the Mississippi is different from that of a poor black boy from Harlem, but both of them and the poor white person from Appalachia are all disadvanged. Once again everything is black and white. If you look at it that way, then AA is unfair to the App. whites. But the histories are different and therefore, the responses are different. If I remember correctly, blacks make up over 11% of the population. Now lets see.....there is one Secretary in the president's cabinet....out of 14 or 7%. And one National Sec. Advisor.......do you still want to talk about tokenism? Wrong 2 cabinet members that makes about the same percent as the general population. Actually slightly higher. whitehouse.gov; I forgot about Paige. Nonetheless, the point still stands......and the situation is much worse in corp. America as I pointed out. Nice story? You tell your version to the poor, elitist. What kind of argument is that? You say that schools are straved of resources as white kids move to private school. i point out that their resources have increased (and I would add that most white students do not go to private school), and your argument is to call me an elitist. Maybe middle class whites out East are not sending their kids to private schools, but many are doing so here in the West. There was a big brouhaha when Chelsea went to private schools. I can't tell you how many of my friends are sending their kids to private schools even though some live in upper middle class suburbs with excellent public school districts. But whatever the case, its well known that many public school systems are deeply troubled and in poor financial health due to a lack of funds. You're stuck, aren't you? Is that by intent, or is there real confusion on your part? Again you fail to actually develop a logical argument for your idea. The only diference now is that instead of being "elitist" I am instead "stuck". Look.......this is a forum for discussion. You make these points but you don't always support them with factual data. On this issue re the schools, I am not coming up with something from left field. American public schools, particularly in the cities, are in serious trouble.....often if the parents want their kids to have a school band or some extra activity that used to be a typical offering in the past, the parents have to find a way to raise the money to buy the instruments or whatever it is they want. Even football programs have been cut back and they are usually a sacred cow. There aren't enough books and the teachers are leaving for private schools 'cause they can't get a raise. Now if you want to dispute it.....find a way to support your case because it runs in the face of what is happening. ted