Thread: Double state taxes for the rich?

Originally Posted by brogers

You're guilty because you're white. Maybe "you" haven't directly done anything, but people in your race have in the past, and thus you need to suffer as well. That's the way to equality, punishing people because of the actions of others of the same skin color.

Well now, so why should white males be treated any differently than they treated the rest of the population? You want to be treated as an individual, yet have a glorious history of classifying others as 'groups" instead of individuals, excluding them from positions. But you should be treated on individual merit.

It's all well and good to claim that everyone should be treated according to their merits - until you want to rage about the "women" or the "blacks" or the "mexicans" or the "gays" and suddenly remove their individuality. Since most white males are in power positions to hire, how often do you think that attitude appears?

Originally Posted by brogers

No, no, no. That's how you end racism. You end it with policies that are applied only to people who have the correct skin color.

As I said before, this all makes perfect sense in the modern American liberal mind (which is full of white guilt).

Don't be such a baby. You can do like the Black Americans used to do...the lighter skinned ones who could "pass" managed to get ahead. Besides, the great conservative financial benefactor, Reverend Moon, told the Blacks that if they'd move to the North Pole for a couple of generations, they'd come back white as snow and there would be no problem. I spoze you could always just go to Africa to bake in just enough color for you to "pass". . .

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Well now, so why should white males be treated any differently than they treated the rest of the population? You want to be treated as an individual, yet have a glorious history of classifying others as 'groups" instead of individuals, excluding them from positions. But you should be treated on individual merit.

It's all well and good to claim that everyone should be treated according to their merits - until you want to rage about the "women" or the "blacks" or the "mexicans" or the "gays" and suddenly remove their individuality. Since most white males are in power positions to hire, how often do you think that attitude appears?

This from the guy who classifies people by sexual preference.

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Well, no wonder you are blaming affirmative action then, instead of the good ole boy network. You might have benefited because of your gender and skin color, especially for positions where a network wasn't nominating a candidate.

So you had no one write letters of recommendation, or needed to provide professional/personal references.

You are such a pompous windbag. Immediately we go from "more than willing to support institutionalized discrimination" to "might have benefited from you gender and skin color." Do you even see the disconnect?

Originally Posted by brogers

You're guilty because you're white. Maybe "you" haven't directly done anything, but people in your race have in the past, and thus you need to suffer as well. That's the way to equality, punishing people because of the actions of others of the same skin color.

I thought affirmative action was a way to balance against the mentality that is still prevalent today, that the darker your skin the lower your IQ, integrity and importance. Don't even try to tell me racism is dead cause I have seen it at it's worst and I have seen it in the least likely people. No one is being punished but I could see how a racist person could see being forced to employ or work with people of a shade darker than they prefer would view it as unfair punishment....

Originally Posted by maniclion

No one is being punished but I could see how a racist person could see being forced to employ or work with people of a shade darker than they prefer would view it as unfair punishment....

You don't think it could be construed as adverse, i.e. "punishment," to hold people to different standards based exclusively on race. A college will admit you if you have a 3.5 GPA and a 1450 SAT if your white, but if you are black you only need a 3.0 and a 1100 SAT? Do you think that is adverse to white people?

Originally Posted by clemson357

You don't think it could be construed as adverse, i.e. "punishment," to hold people to different standards based exclusively on race. A college will admit you if you have a 3.5 GPA and a 1450 SAT if your white, but if you are black you only need a 3.0 and a 1100 SAT? Do you think that is adverse to white people?

I doesn't sound like he does. It sounds like he, and quite a few others, are all for the bigotry of lowered expectations.