View Single Post
  #26  
Old June 10th, 2005, 06:12 PM
Stan de SD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Merlin Dorfman" wrote in message
...
In ba.transportation Stan de SD wrote:

"Disgruntled Customer" wrote in message
...


...

Diablo Range so that people have an alternative.


You're assuming minorities are universally less qualified; that is,

you're
saying they're inferior.


Funny, but I favor hiring people based on their individual

qualifications,
not to meet some "diversity" quota. The fact that Lefty Liberals feel
compelled to force racial quotas is an admission that they themselves

don't
believe that those people can make it on merit.


I don't know anybody who favors quotas...do you? (Or is that an
admission that there are no "Lefty Liberals"?)
Methods like Affirmative Action are used, not because their
advocates feel minorities can't "make it on merit," but because
hiring is not based on merit in the real world.
It's clear that, in the real world, minorities do not hold
jobs in many areas in proportion to their population. If you
believe that hiring does in fact take place on merit, does that
mean that minorities are in fact of lower merit?


In some cases, yes. There is plenty of data out there that shows that
certain minorities have lower levels of hs/college graduation, have lower
standardized test scores, etc. than the white majority. Conversely, there is
data that other minorities have higher test/graduation levels, than the
white majority. Is it a coincidence that the groups that statistically
perform better are "overrepresented", while those that statistically perform
worse are "underrepresented"? Is it "racism"? Or is it merely a logical
outcome based on the inputs?