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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (49831)	6/10/2004 10:07:06 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794018

If by "diversity," however, you mean racial quotas, for which a perfectly good word has been co-opted as a euphemism, then, yes, I have a problem with that. Boy does that sentence take us down some seriously slippery slopes. I don't know anyone who favors racial quotas. But who knows what is meant by the term, it's so politicized. I favor four arguments in all this. The first is that when all other criteria are equal the job, position, admission, whatever, goes to affirmative action criteria. Second, the more diversity at every level of institutional activity, the better (no doubt, someone will point out some glaring exception to that huge generalization). Three, aggressive recruiting activities to increase the numbers in admission, job application, pools. Fourth, aggressive activities to improve the feeder social locations (urban ghetto public schools (and, for that matter, some rural schools as well) for colleges; parallel for jobs. So, where do you come down in all this?