/politics/ - News & Politics

>>4808

It's not quite quotas because those are illegal (thank goodness).

That being said, AA varies from state to state, it usually is found in the form of government agencies preferentially hiring minorities who will hold up your wait line at the DMV and said minorities needing lower (even sub-standard) scores to get into the same college as you.

There's no sources because we'd have to talk about a very specific situation to use sources.

It entirely depends on the affirmative action in question. If it's just a racial quota (which it often is, at least when it comes to college admissions) then that's nothing but racist bullshit. On the other hand, if it's a quota for taking in people based on low economic class, then it makes perfect sense and truly gets to the heart of inequality.

>>4814

>t's not quite quotas because those are illegal (thank goodness).

>That being said, AA varies from state to state, it usually is found in the form of government agencies preferentially hiring minorities

Please explain to me how these are different?

If the first line is true, then what is described in the second line is illegal (and racist, and a violation of the various anti-discrimination acts which don't single out a specific race, and therefore apply to whites as well)

>>4808

It's basically institutionalized bigotry against white males.

>>4920

Quotas are mandatory. "You must have X people."

Incentives are "we, the government, will give you X dollars in tax breaks to hire Y instead of Bill."

>>4808

You also can't have any sort of test which, even if it isn't inherently dicriminatory, produces 'unequal' results. For example you couldn't have an IQ test involved in applying for a job as blacks would do worse than whites. It's called 'disparate impact'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact

http://www.amren.com/news/2011/06/disparate_impac/

Hence even a completely meritocratic seleciton procedure could violate civil rights legislation.

>>4935

Giving incentives to discriminate against people because of their race is still a violation of anti-discrimination laws. Double-plus violation if it's the government.

>>4942

This bullshit precedent was set in a circuit court recently by cultural marxist activist judges. Thankfully the US Supreme court has just taken up a case due for ruling in 2016 which is likely to destroy this concept.

>>4943

Correction: kennedy on the supreme court ruled for the creation of this BS standard.

I look forward to the complete destruction of this in 2016 though as the full horrors of what he has unleashed dawn on him.

>>4808

Funnily enough , it actualy makes employers less likely to hire blacks.

Because it makes them riskier hires.