America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 20 years ago by miluns. 60 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
Discrimination
Homebrew Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
Just speaking of asians,
Asian americans, have several things going for them that other racial minorites don't. If a newly emigrated Korean, wants to open a grocery store. He submits a buisness plan to an unliscensed Korean neighborhood bank, set up by Koreans, that have been here for awhile. He get's the loan, and opens the buisness, pays back the loan, and succeeds, here in America. Many on this board, would probably say that is racist. By the way, I can't back this up, my Korean ex-girlfriends father told me that that is how he got his start. He now has 13 grocery stores, in S. California. He employs only Koreans. Hmmmm Maybe it is racist. But he sees it as his way of paying it forward, to give other immigrants a foothold, here in the USA.
Later
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
tailgater Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Homebrew,
You are 100% correct.
And I made an earlier statement regarding the perceived evil when like-people migrate towards each other.
I don't have an issue when the Asians hire Asians, or when Jewish people promote other Jews.
And I don't suggest that white Americans push an all-white agenda.
But to FORCE less qualified individuals into positions based SOLELY on race, that is 100% wrong.
If the Race card is the "tie breaker" when other qualifications are equal, then THAT should be what true affirmative action is all about.
tailgater Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Spence,
Why does everybody jump on the Black QB issue?
You took my bait.
It's hilarious to see "statisticians" show how professional sports are still biased by showing the number of black QB's or black coaches vs the number of black players.
Couldn't the EXACT same logic be applied in reverse to "prove" that teams should be forced to hire more white positional players?
And I even heard this argument once regarding the lack of Black Owners of professional sports teams.
Owners!
Like the league would somehow prevent a black businessman from Paying for a team.

It's a joke, and the biggest losers are the people of color. Because BOGUS issues like this desensitize the public to the real issue of racism.

spence28 Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2003
Posts: 143
tailgaiter,
The reason I "took your bait" is because if you look at the coaching and qb (and even owner) situation and apply it to what I have been saying, it fits.
I would not try to argue any other positions fit. Like I said to DMV, i'm not talking about butchers and car salesmen (maybe lineman and recievers), I am talking about the people who make the real decisions (owners, coaches and qb's).

You can't call every job an apple. There are apples and oranges when it comes to jobs and they can't be compared. It is like saying If we compare the # of white CEO's to the # of black employees there is no difference.
That is why statisticians show "biased" stats.
miluns Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 01-06-2003
Posts: 199
Normally I don't get involved in these discussions, but I have a few cents to contribute.

I do a lot of hiring and firing at my job. Simply put you can fire a white man with very little reason or support for the reason. But to fire a minority (including female)you must have a lengthy paper trail to support the firing. If you have ever sat through arbitration hearings for unemployment or labor board violations then you know what I'm talking about, if you haven't then you don't have a clue. Reverse race/sex ism is alive and rampant. Every T must be crossed and every I dotted.
With that being said, how can you blame some companies for being leary about hiring minorities?
Fair? no. But until all people are treated EQUALLY there will always be problems. Race and sex need not be a factor for anything.

Pipe dream? probably.

Enough rambling, continue on

Mike
spence28 Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2003
Posts: 143
Miluns,
So what you just told me, or the way I read what you said is:

Companies are leary about hiring minorities and women, but race and sex should not be taken into account when hiring someone, and everyone should be treated equally, but minorities and women won't be.

Seems kind of contradictory...

I know what you are trying to say, but the contradiction is exactly my point as to why these policies are in place in the first place.
miluns Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 01-06-2003
Posts: 199
Spence,

Didn't make myself very clear did I? I need to proof read better.LOL

I basically meant, until everybody is treated equally at both ends of the process there will be problems.

Companies are required to hire certain percentages of minorities according the local demographics.

example: if your company is located where there are 70% white, 20% black, 10% hispanic. Then your employee percentages should reflect the same.

The problems arise when one of the minority employees are not performing up to par and the company releases them.

Hope this makes sense.

Mike

Now you know why I hate the paper trail!!!!
spence28 Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2003
Posts: 143
I thought using actual numbers ie/percentages was deemed to be unconstitutional....maybe not, but I thought that was the reason most institutions use methods more "open to interpretation" for hiring etc.?
Skatty2hotty Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
Spence. You are correct about the percentages. NO company can legally hire based on percentages. Being an Equal Opportunity employer means you have to take actions to extend your applicant pool. If you only hire from Northern New York where it's predominately white, than you need to expand your application process to bring about equal opportunities to apply for all. Limiting applications to an area that is predominately one race, color, or religion excludes others from the opportunity of your business.
miluns Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 01-06-2003
Posts: 199
Skatty,

You sir are correct, it does not have to be by the percentages, but that was the easiest way to get my point across.


Mike
miluns Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 01-06-2003
Posts: 199
Skatty,

You sir are correct, it does not have to be by the percentages, but that was the easiest way to get my point across.


Mike
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12