Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Subject	Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.
Date	2017-04-19 12:00 -0700
Message-ID	<D51D01EF.A0558%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <op.yyqrbqgmjs98qf@red.lan> <D517B02F.9F261%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yyyen9o8js98qf@red.lan> <D51CF48B.A0528%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <op.yyyg34ivjs98qf@red.lan>

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/19/17, 11:46 AM, in article op.yyyg34ivjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:

...
>>>> You have a right to demand special entitlements... but others are not
>>>> obligated to give them to you.
>>> 
>>> Now apply that to wogs.
>> 
>> Now apply it to EVERYONE.
>> 
>> Where things do get a bit complex is in trying to find some level of balance
>> for those who have clear obstacles in front of them that those in control do
>> not. We know, for example, that just having a name that sounds "black" leads
>> to resumes being less successful. Do we create a preference system to try to
>> balance that... something like affirmative action? Some on the left are very
>> strongly for that but I do not see it as being effective and in practice
>> when do you deem it no longer worth it, how do you balance it fairly, etc.
>> 
>> Those on the right just want to pretend the issue of discrimination does not
>> exist (or they focus on absurd things like claims of a war on Christmas).
>> That is also not going to really move things forward in a useful way.
>> 
>> No good answers for some of those things... and plenty of room for reasoned
>> debate. But the general principle of equal rights over special entitlements
>> is, to me, a no-brainer.
> 
> Equal rights doesn't work.

Not for those who insist they want more than "equal", such as those who
demand special entitlements.

> You end up with companies being required to have a certain percentage of
> blacks, women, etc, even though they aren't necessarily the best for the job.

Did you read my comments, above? I talked about this challenge. If you have
a good solution for it I would love to hear it.

I do think we can look at those who are from poor neighborhoods and work to
equalize things there ... black, white, or green, does not matter. And stop
funding school districts with property taxes... that is stupid and leads to
problems that last for generations.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-15 15:46 +0100
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-15 11:10 -0700
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-19 18:53 +0100
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-19 11:03 -0700
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-19 19:46 +0100
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-19 12:00 -0700
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Fakey's Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-19 17:06 -0500
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-19 15:10 -0700
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2017-04-19 16:45 -0700

csiph-web