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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (7482)	1/25/2012 8:12:09 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Welll?? <<and I read the majority are still against interracial marriage. Reading fiction I see. We asked voters on this poll whether they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal- 46% of Mississippi Republicans said it should be illegal to just 40% who think it should be legal. For the most part there aren't any huge divides in how voters view the candidates or who they support for the nomination based on their attitudes about interracial marriage but there are a few exceptions. publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com

To: TimF who wrote (7482)	2/11/2012 5:06:04 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 85487

Andrew_M_Garland writes: Thomas Sowell pointed out that southern streetcar companies before 1900 did not discriminate against blacks, but did separate smokers and non-smokers. Separation by smoking met a market need. Separation by color would have angered customers with no increase in profit. Further, streetcar companies resisted state and city laws requiring discrimination and separated seating. So, if companies have to pay for their discriminatory intent, they would rather have the money than be discriminatory. Competition opposes discrimination, other than for economic reasons. Discrimination in the south on streetcars and buses only took hold after the government bought and monopolized those services. Those governments then imposed separate seating regardless of the cost. Does this sound familiar? Government imposes a monopoly (rules and regulations), then enforces them regardless of the cost. People forget that oppressive, effective discrimination was only possible through government power. Reference (search for "When streetcars") econlog.econlib.org