• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Institutional Racism [W:344]

Does institutional racism currently exist in America?

  • Total voters
    56
AGENT J said:
sorry facts disagree with you and prove you wrong, companies/institutions have been fined and have had criminal action taken against them for quotas

OPPORTUNITY is what is required thats it
Click to expand...

Racial quotas in employment and education are numerical requirements for hiring, promoting, admitting and/or graduating members of a particular racial group. Racial quotas are often established as means of diminishing racial discrimination, addressing under-representation and evident racism against those racial groups. Some individuals consider racial quotas reverse racism. Racial quotas are closely linked to notions of group rights, and special rights.

These quotas may be determined by governmental authority and backed by governmental sanctions. When the total number of jobs or enrollment slots is fixed, this proportion may get translated to a specific number. In education, this kind of quota is also known as Numerus clausus.

Racial quota - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:2wave:
 
To those who are saying that there are racial quotas: Please show me evidence. I mean hardcore, irrefutable evidence that there are quotas, not twisting words or giving your 'interpretation' of what is being said/done, I just want hardcore in my face evidence that there are racial/gender quotas.
 
AGENT J said:
as usual you are 100% wrong and this is proven with facts.

QUOTAS are illegal in the US, this fact will not change

any QOUTAS a company sets up they are doing on thier own and they are breakign the law if caught, they can CALL it AA/EO all they want it is factually not true
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


AA is EO
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm


and AA/EO is
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm


The fact remains colleges and employers have broken the law and been found guilty for having quotas.
Sorry you simply dont understand what AA/EO is.
Click to expand...

So you go by something written on paper - wikipedia, at that.

You'd make a piss-poor lawyer. Believing that quotas don't exist, don't happen, and are illegal is naivete on a ridiculous scale.

Most workplaces do not have legally required percentages of minorities. Having said that, they will still hire minorities for many purposes, ranging from small tax breaks to public perception of fairness. This is why the term "token" was created.

If AA was used to completely level the playing field and make people based solely on merit instead of race, I'd be more than fine with it. However, it has been mutated greatly from its original concept and is now being used as a political tool and weapon.
 
Knowledge=power said:
Racial quotas in employment and education are numerical requirements for hiring, promoting, admitting and/or graduating members of a particular racial group. Racial quotas are often established as means of diminishing racial discrimination, addressing under-representation and evident racism against those racial groups. Some individuals consider racial quotas reverse racism. Racial quotas are closely linked to notions of group rights, and special rights.

These quotas may be determined by governmental authority and backed by governmental sanctions. When the total number of jobs or enrollment slots is fixed, this proportion may get translated to a specific number. In education, this kind of quota is also known as Numerus clausus.

Racial quota - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:2wave:
Click to expand...

wow thanks for looking up the definition of what they are LMAO

to bad they have nothing to do with AA/EO and they are illegal :laughat:

thanks for playing you lose

QUOTAS are illegal in the US, this fact will not change

any QOUTAS a company sets up they are doing on thier own and they are breakign the law if caught, they can CALL it AA/EO all they want it is factually not true
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Law regarding quotas and affirmative action varies widely from nation to nation. Caste based quotas are used in Reservation in India. However, they are illegal in the United States, where no employer, university, or other entity may create a set number required for each race.[6]
Click to expand...

AA is EO
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm
Executive Order numerical goals do not create set-asides for specific groups, nor are they designed to achieve proportional representation or equal results.
Click to expand...

and AA/EO is
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm
The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
Click to expand...

.
 
Gipper said:
So you go by something written on paper - wikipedia, at that.

You'd make a piss-poor lawyer. Believing that quotas don't exist, don't happen, and are illegal is naivete on a ridiculous scale.

Most workplaces do not have legally required percentages of minorities. Having said that, they will still hire minorities for many purposes, ranging from small tax breaks to public perception of fairness. This is why the term "token" was created.

If AA was used to completely level the playing field and make people based solely on merit instead of race, I'd be more than fine with it. However, it has been mutated greatly from its original concept and is now being used as a political tool and weapon.
Click to expand...

nope GOVERNMENT and LAW sites separately listed and linked by me
and if you like feel free to check out the links at the bottom of wiki that also go to governemtn and law sites

facts defeat you once again lol

also PLEASE stop lying i never said quotas dont exists and people dont use them that is a straight lie, i actually said thio does happen

what i said its NOT AA/EO and its illegal, try to keep up little gipper :)
 
th
 
AGENT J said:
wow thanks for looking up the definition of what they are LMAO

to bad they have nothing to do with AA/EO and they are illegal :laughat:

thanks for playing you lose

QUOTAS are illegal in the US, this fact will not change

any QOUTAS a company sets up they are doing on thier own and they are breakign the law if caught, they can CALL it AA/EO all they want it is factually not true
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


AA is EO
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm


and AA/EO is
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/aa.htm


.
Click to expand...

What part of "sanctioned by the government" do you not understand? Just because no actual number is named for the quota, that doesn't mean an implicit number is not required to avoid all manners of penalties and public defamation of whatever company is in question. The government can send someone into a business and tell them they lack diversity - guess what? You now have an implicit quota. AA / EO are the movements that whine to the government in the first place and the get the ball rolling.
 
Knowledge=power said:
What part of "sanctioned by the government" do you not understand? Just because no actual number is named for the quota, that doesn't mean an implicit number is not required to avoid all manners of penalties and public defamation of whatever company is in question. The government can send someone into a business and tell them they lack diversity - guess what? You now have an implicit quota. AA / EO are the movements that whine to the government in the first place and the get the ball rolling.
Click to expand...

what part of QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL dont you get LMAO
Im sorry facts prove you wrong and this upsets you but the facts wont change.

Yes the government can look into and find out if people are using unfair practices to hire
there is no NUMBER required only that you practice AA/EO which is OPPORTUNITY not EMPLOYMENT

maybe you should read all the info on those sites that prove you wrong so you understand the facts better
 
Gipper said:
th
Click to expand...

yep i provided facts that prove you wrong and you put your head in the sand and ignore them
this is your typical course of action :shrug:
 
AGENT J said:
as usual you are 100% wrong and this is proven with facts.

QUOTAS are illegal in the US, this fact will not change

any QOUTAS a company sets up they are doing on thier own and they are breakign the law if caught, they can CALL it AA/EO all they want it is factually not true
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

the article that the wikipedia entry is sourced from makes no mention of quotas, or their legality. Also, while it's true the term 'quota" has fallen in disfavor, you will find institutions simply use words like "target" "critical mass", or terms like 'preferences"
 
AGENT J said:
what part of QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL dont you get LMAO
Im sorry facts prove you wrong and this upsets you but the facts wont change.

Yes the government can look into and find out if people are using unfair practices to hire
there is no NUMBER required only that you practice AA/EO which is OPPORTUNITY not EMPLOYMENT

maybe you should read all the info on those sites that prove you wrong so you understand the facts better
Click to expand...

"The Obama Administration will make history by hiring the government’s first “Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity” to mastermind a multi-million-dollar effort that boosts the number of minorities in biomedical research and slashes discrimination in the federal grant process."

The $500 million initiative to racially diversify medical research was launched last year after a government-sanctioned study uncovered a “disturbing and disheartening” lack of racial diversity in the field. Especially troubling are Uncle Sam’s discriminatory funding practices when it comes to distributing federal research grants, the study found."

U.S. to Hire Chief of Scientific Workforce Diversity | Judicial Watch

head-up-ass1.jpg

even medical research...
 
AGENT J said:
sorry facts disagree with you and prove you wrong, companies/institutions have been fined and have had criminal action taken against them for quotas
Click to expand...

it's simply a quota system by another name

The school uses a "Top 10 Percent" plan, through which students in the top 10% of their high school graduating classes are automatically admitted to the state university of their choice. That has helped schools boost racial diversity, primarily because most of the state's public high schools are segregated by race and ethnicity.

But because that does not create a "critical mass" of racial groups, the school also considers race in filling out the rest of each year's class.
Click to expand...

Supreme Court weighs quotas in affirmative action case
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
the article that the wikipedia entry is sourced from makes no mention of quotas, or their legality. Also, while it's true the term 'quota" has fallen in disfavor, you will find institutions simply use words like "target" "critical mass", or terms like 'preferences"
Click to expand...

go through all the site i have listed them before quite a few mention how quotas are illegal and i have also presented cases where qoutas were discovered and criminal action was taken.

institutions can choose to use what ever word they want, they can also choose to practice what ever hiring they want, thats not the discussion

the fact im pointing out is that its not AA/EO they are practing and if they have quotas its illegal :shrug: this is the topic im discussing
 
Knowledge=power said:
"The Obama Administration will make history by hiring the government’s first “Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity” to mastermind a multi-million-dollar effort that boosts the number of minorities in biomedical research and slashes discrimination in the federal grant process."

The $500 million initiative to racially diversify medical research was launched last year after a government-sanctioned study uncovered a “disturbing and disheartening” lack of racial diversity in the field. Especially troubling are Uncle Sam’s discriminatory funding practices when it comes to distributing federal research grants, the study found."

U.S. to Hire Chief of Scientific Workforce Diversity | Judicial Watch

View attachment 67148239

even medical research...
Click to expand...

LMAO

you realize theres NOTHING you posted that changes the facts i posted, so yes the picture is true for you and your logic :lamo

I love when people are proven factually wrong, then try to lie, fail at that then make an entirely different argument/strawman up and try to argue against that LMAO

please wipe the egg off your face before you get burned.

Let me know when you have anything to prove the facts wrong lol
DO you even know what is being discussed? LMAO
 
AGENT J said:
the fact im pointing out is that its not AA/EO they are practing and if they have quotas its illegal :shrug: this is the topic im discussing
Click to expand...



I think the idea they are trying to impress on you is that the entire concept of AA creates a de facto quota system
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
I think the idea they are trying to impress on you is that the entire concept of AA creates a de facto quota system
Click to expand...

but AA/EO factually doesnt

people/orgs may CHOOSE to do it that way and if they break the law or have a quota system and get caught thats illegal

as i have said, these illegal practices do in fact happen, but the fact remains they are not AA/EO

this fact wont change and its the only facts i have pointed out, anything else people want to try and make up they can feel free :shrug:
 
AGENT J said:
LMAO

you realize theres NOTHING you posted that changes the facts i posted, so yes the picture is true for you and your logic :lamo

I love when people are proven factually wrong, then try to lie, fail at that then make an entirely different argument/strawman up and try to argue against that LMAO

please wipe the egg off your face before you get burned.

Let me know when you have anything to prove the facts wrong lol
DO you even know what is being discussed? LMAO
Click to expand...

There comes a point when you just have to let the parrot have the last word.
 
AGENT J said:
you understand this supports me right? lol
Click to expand...

Well, I tend to skim over most of what you write, but it seems that you are arguing that at the legal level, that quotas are discouraged. While that may be true, one would question the merits and intelligence involved in ignoring the de facto means of implementation in this discussion. So even if it does support you, it would likely be some inane point that lacked any intrinsic merit, or go beyond representing a view that has little impact on the discussion
 
Knowledge=power said:
There comes a point when you just have to let the parrot have the last word.
Click to expand...

its a good move to accept your defeat since facts support all the things i actually claimed and you have nothing to change that, thanks for playing
 
AGENT J said:
but AA/EO factually doesnt
Click to expand...

No, it can spell out in the law that a quota system is wrong, while still creating a necessity for a defacto quota system. it's a pretty recognizable point we all know you will ignore
 
AGENT J said:
its a good move to accept your defeat since facts support all the things i actually claimed and you have nothing to change that, thanks for playing
Click to expand...

I really do pity you.

Maybe one of these days, you'll wake the **** up.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
No, it can spell out in the law that a quota system is wrong, while still creating a necessity for a defacto quota system. it's a pretty recognizable point we all know you will ignore
Click to expand...

Check your watch chuckles, it's redundancy thirty.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
Well, I tend to skim over most of what you write,
2.) but it seems that you are arguing that at the legal level, that quotas are discouraged.
3.) While that may be true
4.) one would question the merits and intelligence involved in ignoring the de facto means of implementation in this discussion.
5.) So even if it does support you
6.) it would likely be some inane point that lacked any intrinsic merit, or go beyond representing a view that has little impact on the discussion
Click to expand...

1.) seems to make sense since you always get it wrong and just make stuff up
2.) i have no argument at all. I simply stated the fact that quotas are illegal and they have nothign to do with AA/EO
3.) not maybe, its a fact
4.) they arent being ignored at all, i just pointed out what people were labeling wrong.
5.) it does support the FACTS not me
6.) you are free to have that opinion but correcting a mistake and being accurate has an impact on discussions.

If one would like to talk about unfair practices people do that fine by me, but one you claim its AA/EO they are factually wrong.
 
Knowledge=power said:
I really do pity you.

Maybe one of these days, you'll wake the **** up.
Click to expand...

and here they come, the failed insults
this is what happen when dishonest posters cant logical defend their points and facts prove them wrong, they become uncivil

would you like to stick on topic or is this all you have left?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom