Republican Voter Suppression!

[sanantone]

The signs of this overcorrection are when the federal government takes money, property and the personal freedom of individual choice, unjustly, away from other people.
In other words, an American company should have the right to hire/fire who they want. Otherwise we no longer have free enterprise, but we instead have a socialist government whose only purpose is to control. So in nearly three hundred years America has come the full circle. We started out with a government designed to protect the individuals but more importantly to protect freedom under the law for all. Yet, we end up with a government that is attacking its own principles (free enterprise etc.) under the guise of ‘protecting the individual’. When there is an action there is always a reaction, or a cause and an effect. We may, as individuals, think that the government suing a company for AA violation is not hurting any ‘individuals’, but the truth is that it does affect other people, perhaps in the form of layoffs or a rise in product prices for the general public.

Regulation is not socialism, but the U.S. already has socialist elements mixed into its capitalist economy: Social Security and Medicare. The government wanting to control everything is called totalitarianism or authoritarianism, but to apply that term to our government would be a gross exaggeration. It is quite annoying how people these days like to slap "socialism" on everything without even knowing what it means.

How could blacks and Hispanics when their populations are smaller than white people’s? This is one example of the many factors that could cause disproportionality in ratios in the work force.

Oh gee! Here we go again. When I say higher employment rate I mean, for example, 86% of black people being employed vs. 93% of white people being employed. That means that 14% of black people are unemployed vs. 7% of white people being unemployed.

With your defenses of AA it seems you lay the blame all on racism, which you say causes discrimination. To which I have already conceded that both, can and do still exist, albeit in miniscule minorities. At any rate, why is racism/discrimination the only cause of these disproportions? After all apparently AA only attempts to correct racism/discrimination when in reality it cannot. I think objectively speaking, racism is a much smaller factor and there are other factors which play a significant role in societal race disproportions.

Where is your proof that racism is rare? Most Americans have an unfavorable view of black people. Most non-Hispanic white people hold anti-Hispanic sentiments. Then, there are the name studies that prove employers use names to try to guess an applicant's ethnicity.
Racial Views: Poll Shows Majority Harbor Prejudice Against Blacks

For example the divorce rates among blacks, whites and hispanics, could be and I believe is a factor.
divorce360.com | African-Americans and Marriage
This article indicates that blacks are more likely to divorce than whites and hispanics are more likely to do and in fact have a higher divorce rate. I think there are several reasons for this divorce rate not just poverty as is listed. I think the primary reason is that the man does not rise to the responsibility of leading his family.

What does this have to do with unemployment rates? Outside of when the immigration debate gets heated, I would say that black people face more racism than Hispanic people. Hispanics weren’t held as slaves and, while they did have to deal with some segregation laws, they didn’t face nearly the amount of harsh racism that black people did. Anyway, there are some cultural issues that need to be worked out, but this does not wipe away the disparities between EQUALLY qualified people. If you let employers discriminate against people because of their race, gender, disability, etc., expect to pay taxes for those people to live off of government assistance. That is more in line with socialism and infringing upon individual rights in my opinion.

Hispanics are in many cases even poorer than black Americans, yet they have lower divorce rates and yet they work hard. This is the kind of thing all Americans can take a lesson from. Where is our pioneer work ethic!?!? Why do we insist on getting something for nothing!?

They are also less likely to complete college than black people, but I guess that doesn’t count as work ethic to you. I guess earning a higher salary doesn't count as work ethic to you either. Many people work minimum wage jobs and are still a drain on the system because they qualify for and receive government assistance.

Is it a businesses fault that the applicant doesn’t have a college degree? No. Why should the company still be forced to hire them in order to meet the same proportion of, the perhaps more qualified minorities, that the company down the road from them has?

That is not how AA works. I don’t know how many times I have to tell you. Businesses are not forced to hire unqualified or less qualified people.

What about the white male/female business owners? Since when has it been a crime to be a white male or a white rich male?

I don’t know what this has to do with anything we’re talking about.

I would have to say that Affirmative action stacks up all its cards against the white, male business owner. Where are his rights of free choice? Each person’s rights/freedoms under law must be protected or there is no protection at all for anyone.

Does it really hurt a white male that much to hire an equally qualified minority? Gee!

There is a general trend towards feminizing everything in today’s society, and that is reflected in our laws. Women from any race get a shot at a benefit in the professional realm, which men don’t get. That’s also racist to men.

That’s called sexism, not racism; but men are still overrepresented in high-level positions even though there are more than enough females with college degrees out there and men usually make more money for the same positions.

Furthermore, regarding the troops,
The Veterans Today article is only one person’s opinion. I didn’t see anywhere where he cited his sources.
The first one apparently had a source but the source only appeared to indicate that the majority of civilians mistakenly think that most troops return with PTSD; however, the study did not support that, that misconception led to discrimination based from a stigma.
The author of this article didn’t offer any support for her statement that veterans have difficulty getting hired because of this stigma. Her source only indicated that misunderstanding of PTSD exists and that it had the possibility of affecting employment opportunities. It did not go on to prove that affect. Her source was actually a survey(poll) in other words a collection of other opinions, which lessens the facts and reliability.

Even though it doesn’t exactly prove discrimination, one of those articles refers to 1,500 cases of discrimination against veterans that were investigated in one year. Combining those complaints with the comments many veterans make online, many of them do believe they face discrimination. The veterans who are just coming home from Iraq or Afghanistan have a higher than average unemployment rate. The only way one can find out why employers aren’t hiring them is to ask them. That’s the point of the survey.

Again let me ask, why do we think we, Americans, should be guaranteed a job? We’re missing the point of our own history and how we got to be successful as a nation to begin with!

What law guarantees an American a job? Why do you continue to exaggerate on almost everything?

At this point a I think a lot of what I’ve said applies to what mrs.b was talking about. If I understood her right, she agrees with AA in theory not in practice. However, I disagree with AA in both because the goal, as she stated was to equalize things, or level the playing field. That leveling only leads to socialism and as ryoder indicated is therefore unconstitutional. The Revolution was fought for individuals to be individual not to be someone else’s standard of the perfect weight, wealth and wisdom

Again, this is not socialism. The playing field is being leveled for equally qualified people. Employers are not being forced to give jobs to unqualified people, everyone is not guaranteed a job, and employers aren’t forced to pay the same wage for different level positions.

Sorry if I repeated anything Mrs. B said. I was typing this up as she posted.