Invisapeeps 2.0

Forty-two · Guru

s/o of Names...Quotas

RichardInTN · I believe in I.D.I.C.

Forty-two wrote:
RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.
This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. I cannot speak to college applications I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not.

And as long as there are quotas... it never will be.

What needs to happen is that those that are racist or sexist need to be allowed to BE racist and sexist... and need to be allowed to FAIL as business owners. Until that happens, color-blindness and gender-blindness CANNOT happen.

ETA: When the general public makes the decision to only support businesses that are color and gender blind, then that's all that will succeed. While the Government is propping everyone up with quotas, those that WOULD be racist or sexist are artificially color and gender "blind", and the general population doesn't know to NOT support them.

-- Edited by RichardInTN on Tuesday 21st of May 2013 07:48:09 PM

Forty-two · Guru

Richard, many, many corporations could run businesses for generations hiring only white men and be profoundly successful, if we were waiting for failure to turn the tide we (minorities and women) would be waiting a mighty damned long time. You say that when "the general public makes the decision to only support businesses that are color and gender blind, then that's all that will succeed." how on earth would the public know this? And I am betting those who care are a tiny minority.

-- Edited by Forty-two on Tuesday 21st of May 2013 07:46:29 PM

OpheliaDev1 · Guru

I think quotas served a necessary purpose to in helping women and racial groups to break through those barriers.

Here's my objection to your point - you specifically used a woman as an example. So in order for the quota system to be "fair", I think you'd need to have a quota of women, of men, of whites, blacks, Asians, mixed race, etc. Because whites aren't the only racists, and men are the only sexists.

This is one of those areas that capitalism will correct, if allowed to do so. If somebody decides not to hire people of x race or y gender, then they are limiting their talent pool, and inevitably their company will not thrive. Historically, cities/nations that were cosmopolitan and welcomed new people and ideas thrived, because they were able to grow, adapt and learn better than societies that rejected new ideas, new people, etc.

I watched a fascinatiing documentary on the History channel about a Nazi project to make a propoganda film about the sinking of the Titanic. Before the Nazi regime, Germany had been a major center of the budding film industry. However, when the Nazi ideology took hold, people who could leave did. Jewish film industry talents fled Germany and came to the US, and are a reason why Hollywood boomed and became the film capital of the world. "Casablanca" was actually a piece of anti-German propaganda.

Quotas prevent this process from happening.

Also, I think that quotas may have good intentions, but are often misused and often don't actually help the people they are meant to help. For example, my dad owns a small company. Proctor & Gamble had a program that is intended to help racial minorities, and have a quota that a certain portion of their business is supposed to go to companies owned by racial minorities. There are a whole lot fewer companies competing for this businesses. A group of black lawyers formed an LLC partnership. Their LLC purchased product from my dad's company and sold it to P&G. So this particular quota, which was intended to help manufacturing companies owned by racial minorities did not do that.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Thank you, Ophelia

Forty-two · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.

With sexism and racism we will always need it.

Forty-two · Guru

OD I have no problem with this it would be fair.

Here's my objection to your point - you specifically used a woman as an example. So in order for the quota system to be "fair", I think you'd need to have a quota of women, of men, of whites, blacks, Asians, mixed race, etc. Because whites aren't the only racists, and men are the only sexists.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.

Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.

However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
OD I have no problem with this it would be fair.

Here's my objection to your point - you specifically used a woman as an example. So in order for the quota system to be "fair", I think you'd need to have a quota of women, of men, of whites, blacks, Asians, mixed race, etc. Because whites aren't the only racists, and men are the only sexists.

What of short men? Balding men? Men with ADD and... other stuff....

If we designate protected classes we designate winners and losers. *NO.*

OpheliaDev1 · Guru

There will always be racism, sexism (and all other -isms) because there will always be part of humanity who are jerks. But I think that after a certain point, quotas help to perpetuate prejudice. At some point, quotas need to be dropped and we need to move as much as we can towards a pure meritocracy. In the US in 1970, it would have been incredibly hard, if not impossible, for a black woman to pursue (for example) a medical degree and become and doctor. Now? It's not at all uncommon. And even if that woman runs into one jerk who rejects her med school application b/c she is black and/or a woman, that's not the end of the line. There are multiple med schools out there.

As it stands now, the quota system values diversity over merit. And that's just a self-defeating system.

Forty-two · Guru

OD I hear you but today's system values preferences over merit.

OpheliaDev1 · Guru

It does to an extent, b/c that's just humanity. We all respond to people based on our preferences, whether we're aware of it or not. But I don't think quotas help with that problem. For example, in order to get United Way funding, the Girl Scouts have to meet certain racial quotas. So each troop leader has to record how many girls she has and what races they are (which to be honest I find gross). When they find that they are low on racial minorities, they go to an inner city school, wave the entry fee, and sign up entire grade levels of girls as scouts. Then they have a paid GS staff person hold meetings with these girls 4-6 times a year. They usually do a craft and earn one badge a year. That is not a quality Girl Scout experience, but it meets racial quotas.

Another facet of this is that good programs with low racial diversity are dumped. For example, Mariner Scouts was a very successful and popular program that actually turned a (small) profit. Since most GS camps operate at a loss, that's pretty darn successful. But it had very very few non-white participants. So it was dumped.

The quota system doesn't incentivize the Girl Scouts to build quality programs and draw minorities into those programs.

winds55 · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.
Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.
However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.

Until people are ALLOWED to rise or fall on their own, the need for anti-discrimination laws and quotas will be there. Until people like you crawl out from under the blanket of self-righteous arrogance you cover your lives with, racism and sexism wil always be a reality.

tigerlily · Guru

winds55 wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.
Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.
However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.
Until people are ALLOWED to rise or fall on their own, the need for anti-discrimination laws and quotas will be there. Until people like you crawl out from under the blanket of self-righteous arrogance you cover your lives with, racism and sexism wil always be a reality.

lol!!!

tigerlily · Guru

i also agree that quotas, as they are currently implemented, are not that helpful. There might be a need for something similar but better executed.

OpheliaDev1 · Guru

tigerlily wrote:
i also agree that quotas, as they are currently implemented, are not that helpful. There might be a need for something similar but better executed.

Rather than quotas, I would like to see programs that provide opportunities and/or reward companies and organizations for providing opportunities. And I think it should be based on socio-economic status and merit, rather than race. I don't think the child of two black doctors needs help any more than the child of two white doctors (for example). But the a hardworking and intelligent child of two poor black shiftworkers could really use a hand up.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

ucatiwinds55 wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.
Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.
However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.
Until people are ALLOWED to rise or fall on their own, the need for anti-discrimination laws and quotas will be there. Until people like you crawl out from under the blanket of self-righteous arrogance you cover your lives with, racism and sexism wil always be a reality.

Civil Rights Act became law in 1964. Brown v. Board of Education was settled (in court anyway) in 1955. So people have been *allowed* to whatever for quite awhile now.

Forty-two · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:
ucatiwinds55 wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.
Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.
However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.
Until people are ALLOWED to rise or fall on their own, the need for anti-discrimination laws and quotas will be there. Until people like you crawl out from under the blanket of self-righteous arrogance you cover your lives with, racism and sexism wil always be a reality.
Civil Rights Act became law in 1964. Brown v. Board of Education was settled (in court anyway) in 1955. So people have been *allowed* to whatever for quite awhile now.

Racist and sexist people have not allowed people to truly rise and fall on their own. I go back to my friend, she won't even look at hiring a guy she automatically thinks they are less competent than women, she is not allowing that potential candidate to rise and fall on his own.

RichardInTN · I believe in I.D.I.C.

As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.

Forty-two · Guru

RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.

This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. I cannot speak to college applications I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not.

RichardInTN · I believe in I.D.I.C.

Forty-two wrote:
Richard, many, many corporations could run businesses for generations hiring only white men and be profoundly successful, if we were waiting for failure to turn the tide we (minorities and women) would be waiting a mighty damned long time. You say that when "the general public makes the decision to only support businesses that are color and gender blind, then that's all that will succeed." how on earth would the public know this? And I am betting those who care are a tiny minority.

-- Edited by Forty-two on Tuesday 21st of May 2013 07:46:29 PM

If that's true, then we, as a society, are not ready yet. Sad. I hate being ahead of my time.

Forty-two · Guru

Richard, we (America at large) don't give a **** if our products are made by child sweat shop workers or our yard work is done by criminals (illegal aliens) why the hell would anyone care if qualified women and minorities are represented in the work force? I don't think of you as naive but seriously????

RichardInTN · I believe in I.D.I.C.

Forty-two wrote:
Richard, we (America at large) don't give a **** if our products are made by child sweat shop workers or our yard work is done by criminals (illegal aliens) why the hell would anyone care if qualified women and minorities are represented in the work force? I don't think of you as naive but seriously????

There's a saying: "You can't legislate morality".

True evolution takes time, it CANNOT be forced.

Forty-two · Guru

tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.
This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. I cannot speak to college applications I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not.
But it does happen that sometimes a better qualified person is overlooked because of a need to fill quotas. Or the quotas are artificially met as in Ophelia's examples. To automatically judge that argument as racist seems...narrowminded. And to turn around and give your own experienced example which clearly states that the black people at your work are generally more qualified than whites seems just as racist.
I don't agree that businesses should just fail or succeed on their own. I like OpheliaDev's idea or something similar. I have seen management 'coincidentally' make personnel choices that just happen to reduce the female and/or black workers in their department. It's not ok and they aren't 'failing' on their own. They are getting promoted and given more power. Something needs to stay in place and quotas are the only current option.

How is stating my personal observation, where the blacks have more degrees from better schools or more experience racist? confuse

-- Edited by Forty-two on Wednesday 22nd of May 2013 08:54:24 AM

Forty-two · Guru

Lily do you work in place with quotas? Is it working? do they have at least 40% women there? Do they have even close to parity of women in upper management to men?

-- Edited by Forty-two on Wednesday 22nd of May 2013 10:27:54 AM

tigerlily · Guru

Forty-two wrote:
RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.
This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. I cannot speak to college applications I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not.

But it does happen that sometimes a better qualified person is overlooked because of a need to fill quotas. Or the quotas are artificially met as in Ophelia's examples. To automatically judge that argument as racist seems...narrowminded. And to turn around and give your own experienced example which clearly states that the black people at your work are generally more qualified than whites seems just as racist.

I don't agree that businesses should just fail or succeed on their own. I like OpheliaDev's idea or something similar. I have seen management 'coincidentally' make personnel choices that just happen to reduce the female and/or black workers in their department. It's not ok and they aren't 'failing' on their own. They are getting promoted and given more power. Something needs to stay in place and quotas are the only current option.

tigerlily · Guru

RichardInTN wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Richard, we (America at large) don't give a **** if our products are made by child sweat shop workers or our yard work is done by criminals (illegal aliens) why the hell would anyone care if qualified women and minorities are represented in the work force? I don't think of you as naive but seriously????
There's a saying: "You can't legislate morality".
True evolution takes time, it CANNOT be forced.

Isn't that what most of our laws are based on? Don't steal, don't kill, don't commit fraud, etc. We legislate based on what is 'wrong'. Why not allow companies to hire 5 yr olds and work in sweatshops since those will 'fail' on their own? We have laws to protect workers precisely because companies have abused and discriminated in the past given the opportunity.

True evolution can't be forced, but until it happens, we need fake/simulated/encouraged evolution. The only reason we're even at this point now is because of laws which were meant to force evolution on those who resisted.

RichardInTN · I believe in I.D.I.C.

I believe that quotas are detrimental to society, our country, and our growth as a species. I have nothing against non-discrimination laws in and of themselves (but I'd rather that society self-correct, by the public not supporting discriminatory businesses).

The difference between the two is that (as has been pointed out) quotas eliminate options of having the best employee for the job. If you HAVE to pass up a well qualified candidate because you already have all that race/gender you are allowed to have... then you lose out on gaining that person's superior abilities for your {whatever}.

-- Edited by RichardInTN on Wednesday 22nd of May 2013 05:11:54 PM

tigerlily · Guru

Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.
This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. I cannot speak to college applications I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not.
But it does happen that sometimes a better qualified person is overlooked because of a need to fill quotas. Or the quotas are artificially met as in Ophelia's examples. To automatically judge that argument as racist seems...narrowminded. And to turn around and give your own experienced example which clearly states that the black people at your work are generally more qualified than whites seems just as racist.
I don't agree that businesses should just fail or succeed on their own. I like OpheliaDev's idea or something similar. I have seen management 'coincidentally' make personnel choices that just happen to reduce the female and/or black workers in their department. It's not ok and they aren't 'failing' on their own. They are getting promoted and given more power. Something needs to stay in place and quotas are the only current option.
How is stating an observation, where the blacks have more degrees from better schools or more experience racist?

How is stating an observation, where sometimes a quota applicant is less qualified than a non-quota applicant racist?

I was going by your bolded response to Richard, which sounded like you called his observation a racist argument against quotas.

Forty-two · Guru

No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
ucatiwinds55 wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
As long as we have quotas, racism (and perhaps sexism) will always be there.
With sexism and racism we will always need it.
Nobody ever "needs" quotas. People need to be able to rise or fall on their own, and adjust plans for that.
However if quotas are always present, discrimination (and concomitant resentment) will always be a reality.
Until people are ALLOWED to rise or fall on their own, the need for anti-discrimination laws and quotas will be there. Until people like you crawl out from under the blanket of self-righteous arrogance you cover your lives with, racism and sexism wil always be a reality.
Civil Rights Act became law in 1964. Brown v. Board of Education was settled (in court anyway) in 1955. So people have been *allowed* to whatever for quite awhile now.
Racist and sexist people have not allowed people to truly rise and fall on their own. I go back to my friend, she won't even look at hiring a guy she automatically thinks they are less competent than women, she is not allowing that potential candidate to rise and fall on his own.

Then another company will hire him instead.

The plural of anecdote is not data. Just because your friend does something bigoted does not mean institutional bigotry is out there. And as I say, within my lifetime institutional bigotry has not existed, except in academia.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
RichardInTN wrote:
As long as quotas allow for lesser qualified people to take the place of more qualified people... quotas will be a bad idea.

Perfect example: If a college applicant with outstanding test scores is denied admission because a quota must be met and a quota fulfilling applicant with barely adequate test scores is put in that person's place, then the quota allowed a lesser qualified person to take the place of a more qualified person. The world needs to be color-blind and gender-blind... and that cannot happen with quotas.
This seems like the standard argument that people use and what I have heard racist people say to black people. (1) I cannot speak to college applications (2) I can only speak to workforce hiring and I now that every black person I know in Director-level or above is equally qualified and in more cases than not more qualified than their white peers. (3) There is something inherently racist with the assumption that the minority is somehow inferior. (4) I wish the world was color and gender blind but it certainly is not. (5)

1. A stopped clock is still right twice a day.

2. Then don't!

3. Great, but that demonstrates nothing.

4. Exactly what I'm saying, and that's exactly what academia also says in its admissions. (We're getting there.)

5. And it won't be until policies and laws are color-blind.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

All I'm reading, 42, is "I've had certain experiences and certain observations in the workforce; therefore quotas in academia should remain."

Forty-two · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:
All I'm reading, 42, is "I've had certain experiences and certain observations in the workforce; therefore quotas in academia should remain."

I don't know where you are reading that but enjoy your read.

tigerlily · Guru

Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.

My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
All I'm reading, 42, is "I've had certain experiences and certain observations in the workforce; therefore quotas in academia should remain."
I don't know where you are reading that but enjoy your read.

I've been reading it for decades.

Nowhere on this thread (or anywhere else) do I read any hard evidence, fact, statistic, or logic that supports quotas as a good idea. The best I've ever read is that once upon a time (like the 60's), evidence was lacking to demonstrate quotas as a bad idea. But that was then. Now we know.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.

Thank you, Tigerlily.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

By-the-by, if David Duke says "2+2=4" that wouldn't disprove a thing. Something asserted to be true or false has to actually be demonstrated so, not just affirmed or discredited by association.

Forty-two · Guru

tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.

The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.

tigerlily · Guru

Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.

Which is that in your experience black people are more qualified than whites.

I guess I'm not really seeing your point. Quotas were put in place to avoid hiring people of certain races over equally/more qualifed people of certain races (discrimination) by requiring them to hire a people from certain races. In some cases that leads to more qualified people of other races not being hired/accepted. That might only be 5% of the cases. It might be 60% of the cases - I really have no idea other than that it can and does happen. Doesn't mean that certain races are inferior - it can be due to timing of job openings, discrimination during their education, etc. I also don't think that's reason enough to get rid of quotas in the absence of another method to avoid discrimination.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.

Exactly what was your point?

Papa Bear · Senior Member

tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.
Which is that in your experience black people are more qualified than whites.
I guess I'm not really seeing your point. Quotas were put in place to avoid hiring people of certain races over equally/more qualifed people of certain races (discrimination) by requiring them to hire a people from certain races. In some cases that leads to more qualified people of other races not being hired/accepted. That might only be 5% of the cases. It might be 60% of the cases - I really have no idea other than that it can and does happen. Doesn't mean that certain races are inferior - it can be due to timing of job openings, discrimination during their education, etc. I also don't think that's reason enough to get rid of quotas in the absence of another method to avoid discrimination.

Quotas are discrimination. That's my own point.

Forty-two · Guru

tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.
Which is that in your experience black people are more qualified than whites.
I guess I'm not really seeing your point. Quotas were put in place to avoid hiring people of certain races over equally/more qualifed people of certain races (discrimination) by requiring them to hire a people from certain races. In some cases that leads to more qualified people of other races not being hired/accepted. That might only be 5% of the cases. It might be 60% of the cases - I really have no idea other than that it can and does happen. Doesn't mean that certain races are inferior - it can be due to timing of job openings, discrimination during their education, etc. I also don't think that's reason enough to get rid of quotas in the absence of another method to avoid discrimination.

I agree with the bolded. I also have to say this is really an academic discussion for me because I have never worked in a place that had quotas.

tigerlily · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.
Which is that in your experience black people are more qualified than whites.
I guess I'm not really seeing your point. Quotas were put in place to avoid hiring people of certain races over equally/more qualifed people of certain races (discrimination) by requiring them to hire a people from certain races. In some cases that leads to more qualified people of other races not being hired/accepted. That might only be 5% of the cases. It might be 60% of the cases - I really have no idea other than that it can and does happen. Doesn't mean that certain races are inferior - it can be due to timing of job openings, discrimination during their education, etc. I also don't think that's reason enough to get rid of quotas in the absence of another method to avoid discrimination.
Quotas are discrimination. That's my own point.

I agree with you. I'd prefer an alternate method, but this is what we have. Even with quotas in place I've seen discrimination based on sex and race in the workforce and in school.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

tigerlily wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
tigerlily wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
No I said I have heard racist people make that argument.
My apologies then. I'm not sure what the point of "what I have heard racist people say to black people" was other than to imply the argument is a tool for racists.
The point of the statement was to transition from Richard's point to mine.
Which is that in your experience black people are more qualified than whites.
I guess I'm not really seeing your point. Quotas were put in place to avoid hiring people of certain races over equally/more qualifed people of certain races (discrimination) by requiring them to hire a people from certain races. In some cases that leads to more qualified people of other races not being hired/accepted. That might only be 5% of the cases. It might be 60% of the cases - I really have no idea other than that it can and does happen. Doesn't mean that certain races are inferior - it can be due to timing of job openings, discrimination during their education, etc. I also don't think that's reason enough to get rid of quotas in the absence of another method to avoid discrimination.
Quotas are discrimination. That's my own point.
I agree with you. I'd prefer an alternate method, but this is what we have. Even with quotas in place I've seen discrimination based on sex and race in the workforce and in school.

Because of quotas in place, I've seen discrimination based on sex and race in the workforce and in school. That's my point.

If we want racism to disappear, work to eliminate any rule or policy, everywhere, that recognizes race.

Forty-two · Guru

OpheliaDev1 wrote:
Forty-two wrote:
OpheliaDev1 wrote:
I think it's a very mixed message to try to teach people to not make judgements based on race, and yet have race-based quotas.
I don't understand this, well I understand what you are saying so I guess I should say I don't agree. I don't think it is necessarily about making judgments, I think many people hire who they are comfortable with. In a field where there are mostly men the men could keep hiring whomever they are comfortable with regardless if there are more qualified women out there. The women will never be appropriately represented.
At some point, though, it will even out. Because some people will prefer men, some women, some black, some Asian, some short, some vegetarian, some smokers, etc. We are slowly but surely working to the point where these the majority of people don't have these strong preferences you are concerned about.
I see your point about quotas serving a purpose in counterbalancing those preferences, but I think that good is outweighed by the fact that the existance of quotas is interpreted by people as one group need special protection, etc, and the fact that quotas some times lead to a less qualified candidate being chosen.

I don't blame quotas for less qualified people being hired I blame the hiring manager. I remember once a guy was complaining he could not find any good black entry-level candidates for a position. If you are looking to recruit black people go to black organizations it was so silly, as an example it was like he was going to NASCAR to find blacks versus going to a Tyler Perry moving opening. wink ETA: Unqualified people get hired all of the time when people hire who they are comfortable with instead of the most qualified. I don't understand why this is the biggest complaint people put forward for quotas when it happens all of the time without them. Is there any data out there to prove it is worse with quotas?

-- Edited by Forty-two on Wednesday 22nd of May 2013 06:11:22 PM

winds55 · Guru

Papa Bear wrote:

Then another company will hire him instead.
The plural of anecdote is not data. Just because your friend does something bigoted does not mean institutional bigotry is out there. And as I say, within my lifetime institutional bigotry has not existed, except in academia.

Just because you refuse to recognize something does NOT mean it doesn't exist.

Papa Bear · Senior Member

winds55 wrote:
Papa Bear wrote:

Then another company will hire him instead.
The plural of anecdote is not data. Just because your friend does something bigoted does not mean institutional bigotry is out there. And as I say, within my lifetime institutional bigotry has not existed, except in academia.
Just because you refuse to recognize something does NOT mean it doesn't exist.

Institutional bigotry, winds -- by which I mean bigotry by rule. Individual bigots will always be there; karma will always await them.

Besides affirmative action, can you name an example of racial discrimination by rule that has existed anywhere in the USA since 1980? Or even 1970?

tigerlily · Guru

Forty-two wrote:
Lily do you work in place with quotas? Is it working? do they have at least 40% women there? Do they have even close to parity of women in upper management to men?

-- Edited by Forty-two on Wednesday 22nd of May 2013 10:27:54 AM

We don't have any official quotas. My field has a lower number of females. My friends has a higher number of females. My company seems pretty diverse from what I can tell, but I don't have any actual numbers.

I don't know how one would consider it 'working'. Having more females and minorities is certainly not changing the problem people. I've seen both people who are racist/sexist and people who have given preferential treatment to minorities for no reason other than they are minorities. I don't like quotas. I don't like discrimination. I don't know how to fix any of it.