Just us Straight White Males are, the rest of them are fags....
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Double state taxes for the rich?
- Thread starter min0 lee
- Start date
Just us Straight White Males are, the rest of them are fags....
That's right...but even the "fags" learned a long time ago they'll get a-head by pretending to be straight white males.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
As far as I know, I've never supported anything that was explicitly discriminatory. Sorry you can't say the same.
I'm sure you have an amazing track record of standing up for the disadvantaged. Just as amazing as your ability to imagine walking a few steps in someone else's shoes.
don't the lawmakers understand that if this law passed, all the people making 250,00 or more would just move out of state; thereby hurting Illinois even more?
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
Which is what I said in the first reply in this thread.
What happens is that the law makers get, with a touch of irony, get greedy. All they can see is the potential revenue and not any loss that may occur.
The same thing happened a few years ago when federal lawmakers created a "luxury tax." That tax was aimed solely at luxury items like yachts and such. They figured that since those sort of items weren't essential, that they'd tax them more.
What actually happened was that the rich stopped buying the items that they were getting penalized for. This resulted in a horrible trickle-down effect.
For example, since the rich stopped buying yachts. Yachts makers had to make less which resulted in loss of profit and layoffs. The same thing happened to the salesmen, the mechanics, the yacht battery makers, the docs were the yachts were berthed, the yacht accessory market, and so on.
By punishing the rich for spending their money, it ended up hurting a lot of middle class people.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
I'm sure you have an amazing track record of standing up for the disadvantaged. Just as amazing as your ability to imagine walking a few steps in someone else's shoes.
Well, if I was liberal I'd start by assuming that all blacks are disadvantaged. Of course that isn't racist at all, because liberals have a monopoly on race politics.
No, if you were a liberal you'd start by assuming that hiring on the basis of job qualification is the ideal, and realize that it hasn't been (and still isn't) the norm in this society.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
Which justifies facially racist discriminatory policies, which bear no relation to socio-economic standing or actual hardship. Kind of like an eye for an eye, right?
The way to end racial discrimination is to treat one race differently from another race. It makes perfect sense (in the mind of liberal).
Chief Justice Roberts stated the obvious (to the sane):
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race"
DUH!
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
The way to end racial discrimination is to treat one race differently from another race. It makes perfect sense (in the mind of liberal).
Chief Justice Roberts stated the obvious (to the sane):
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race"
DUH!
Shit like Affirmative Action creates more racism that it will ever "solve."
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race"
It really is horribly painfully simple.
The greatest part is that the politicians who are peddling this garbage Affirmative Action and similar programs know the truth, they are just buying votes. Plenty of the people voting for it know its garbage, they are just looking out for their best interests. Then you have the occasional wacko who actually buys it hook, line, and sinker.
You libertarian whiners. Communist pig dogs in Holland have already raised progressive taxes up to 52%.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
Sounds like its time for a revolution in Holland.
Someone has to pay for all those Moroccan immigrants' welfare.
The way to end racial discrimination is to treat one race differently from another race. It makes perfect sense (in the mind of liberal).
Chief Justice Roberts stated the obvious (to the sane):
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race"
DUH!
That was essentially the public policy of straight white males throughout American history. Segregation? Using the bible to explain why God placed different races on separate continents for a reason and how they shouldn't mix? Using "science" to explain that one race was created for manual labor because their head measurements indicated less ability to perform intelligent tasks?
Treating a class of people "differently" in terms of supplying opportunity by recognizing their experience is different than the dominant group does make some sense. If social networking is key to achievement, and attitudes about the inferiority of one race is passed along by generations through religion, indoctrination and cultural standing, obviously the history isn't changed overnight. How many polls are still taken about whether Americans are "ready" for an African-American or woman president? Yet I've seen no polls asking Americans if we are ready for another old straight white male president. Obviously, the assumption in this culture is that there are still barriers. Conservatives prefer to pretend to ignore this reality, generally opposing anti-discrimination laws in employment. We wouldn't have to seek to END racial discrimination if it never was institutionalized in the first place. But the laws don't cover the good ole boy networks, which remain the last bastion of favoritism based on social classes.
Do you have a list of occupations in which your social/racial/gender class has a history of not being allowed access?
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
You can spare yourself the trouble of writing interrogatories. The point that you keep dancing around is that you support explicitly racist policies. Can you deny that? I happen to believe that discrimination on the basis of race is wrong. It was wrong in 1865 when Lincoln gave the emancipation proclamation, it was wrong in the 1940's when the holocaust went on, and it was wrong in the 1970s through today when millions of people have been given preferential educational admissions, scholarships, government preference contracts, preferential hiring in government and private sector, etc.
Race is an arbitrary social distinction, an immutable characteristic upon which people should not be judged. The fact that you think you are evening the score makes no fucking difference.
Race is an arbitrary social distinction, an immutable characteristic upon which people should not be judged. The fact that you think you are evening the score makes no fucking difference.
Who said the "score" was evened? Obviously you are oblivious to the notion that the major positions of power in this country are still overwhelmingly controlled by one minority racial and gender group - the same ones who created the segregated system favoring themselves from the beginning of this country's history. It's reality. While it is nice that you don't believe in preferential treatment (though I suspect you suddenly made this discovery when you started thinking YOUR group was getting shafted), you continue to do your own toe-tapping number around the established custom of the good ole boy's network. That network is far more influential in securing positions and is, once again, dominated by the same minority straight white male group. Conservatives defend that tradition by claiming it isn't about race or gender, it's just who you "choose" to be friends with - and we all know that people help their peeps out far more easily than some stranger who might talk or look differently.
If we take your idea of "earning" as policy, then the issue here is why companies don't add things like "must love to play golf" onto their list of job qualifications - aren't a lot of deals made on the golf course?
As for being against discrimination, it is curious that conservatives regularly launch into business-defense mode when states are asked to pass job non-discrimination laws on the basis of sexual orientation today. Their defense? A business shouldn't be held accountable for the personal prejudices of its owner. . .meaning, they shouldn't be held responsible for bypassing the most qualified person for one who meets some other, unrelated standard.
You know the history of institutionalized discrimination in this country, and yet you pretend it doesn't exist today except against YOUR minority, even though your own political party continues to oppose laws which provide recourse. But the same laws passed originally to protect the rights of others also apply to your group.
You still avoided the question. Surely there is a list of occupations in which members of your minority is restricted.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
So, the solution to counter racist attitudes in individuals is to create racist laws at the federal level?
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
The funny thing is, as absolutely abysmally pathetic as you are, I actually envy you. My conscience would be a lot clearer if I could blame all my shortcomings on others, like you do.
I don't pretend anything. I'm well aware of the history of this country. I just choose not to support institutionalized racism, you do. I choose not to believe that a handout is the answer for every problem. The discriminatory programs you support accomplishes nothing except breeding contempt.
In the long run, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference to me. I earn what I get by my own efforts, despite any racist assumptions some rabidly-bitter old gay liberal makes about me.
By the way, just because I rag on liberals doesn't make me a conservative. I actually am more libertarian than anything. But if you want to stereotype all white heterosexual southern males into being conservatives, go ahead, racist.
I'm really curious, do any of you actually know what it means to be conservative or to be liberal? Not the stereotypes involved, just purely what the difference in the belief structures are.
As for Affirmative Action, I will say that in one position I was applying for I had a better GPA, more raw knowledge, and more experience than one of the people I was competing against. He got the job because of his skin. Is that fair? Not that it matters, in the end I landed a position that I think in the long run will be more enjoyable than the other one, although the other did pay better.
As for Affirmative Action, I will say that in one position I was applying for I had a better GPA, more raw knowledge, and more experience than one of the people I was competing against. He got the job because of his skin. Is that fair? Not that it matters, in the end I landed a position that I think in the long run will be more enjoyable than the other one, although the other did pay better.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
Danzik, you are clearly one of the good ole boys, thus the reverse discrimination was fair.
This is where you present the saddest, most pathetic kind of argument. You are more than willing to support institutionalized discrimination against a whole lot of Americans, especially if your own group benefits. That's part of our heritage - both religion and the Republican party uses it against the gays today. The issue here is your definition of "earning". . .and you continue to deflect that discussion point, choosing to attempt to be personal in lieu of having a valid argument.
Are you "earning" your position by playing a good game of golf? Or can you "earn" your position by meeting the right kind of person at a company cocktail party who likes you? Do you "earn" your position by taking advantage of friends in your social and professional network to get ahead, even if the next person is better qualified but isn't in the network? Does that mean you are "earning" YOUR handout, much in the same way you accepted the handout from the taxpayers who financed your education, even though some of them will never get to go to college? Has anyone earned their way to a promotion with sex? You certainly don't seem to mind handouts, as long as they are going into your own pocket.
You can't even list an occupation in which your minority is restricted. Yet you consistently support political candidates who maintain policies restricting other Americans, and apparently try to ignore the more subtle ways in which discrimination is still institutionalized, pretending that everyone has "changed." Republicans don't like non-discrimination laws because they feel it restricts the "freedom" of business owners, not because they really believe everyone should be treated on their professional merit. If they really believed everyone should be treated on merit, they'd make sure there was legal recourse when it doesn't happen - and they adamantly oppose it.
As for your bitchy little remark about "rabidly bitter old gay liberal," spare me the golden-peepee-breeding-entitled-to-superiority complex. The rest of the world isn't "bitter" just because a crowd won't gather 'round and worship every time you scratch a couple of inches.
So now you're not a conservative.
Hmm..and I was denied a newspaper job once because I didn't attend the "right" church...which I was told later from one of the interviewers. I know three women who were drummed out of their jobs as utility service technicians because the men would actually sabotage their work. And one gay guy who was denied a promotion to the same work because some of the straight guys threatened to sabotage his company truck.
I've seen three cases in the last two years where the applicants were more experienced, better qualified, had updated training and were turned down because they were over 40 - one was told the company wouldn't feel "right" about asking the older person to work at a reduced pay rate.
Now you say someone got the job because of the color of their skin. Was that your assessment or the assessment of the company? One of the most common excuses used is the "must communicate and work well with others" to eliminate some people, a subjective judgement in which subtle decisions can influence the process. You are fortunate you aren't a woman - it's been shown that an overweight woman with better qualifications is often overlooked for one who is more attractive to the men in the office, even if her experience is weaker.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
You live if fairytale land, old man. I was born after Affirmative Action was in full force. I have never worked a job in which I knew someone when I started, much less been hired by someone I knew. I have never had any say in any employment decision effecting someone else, i.e. hiring, firing, promoting, interviewing. Please explain to me how I am "more than willing to support institutionalized discrimination."
Oh, I forgot. All heterosexual white males are villains.
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.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
That's all justification that the morons need to push through racist laws.
Thereby creating more racism.
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).
