Here come the quotas..

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AllieBaba, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    Next we'll get the death panels.

    "What did I find but Section 342, which declares that race and gender employment ratios, if not quotas, must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with the government. In a major power grab, the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's financial industry.

    In addition to this bill's well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. This has had no coverage by the news media and has large implications.

    The Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...all would get their own Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.

    Each office would have its own director and staff to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency's workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.

    What would be the mission of this new corps of Federal monitors? The Dodd-Frank bill sets it forth succinctly and simply - all too simply. The mission, it says, is to assure "to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion" of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.

    How to define "fair" has bedeviled government administrators, university admissions officers, private employers, union shop stewards and all other supervisors since time immemorial - or at least since Congress first undertook to prohibit discrimination in employment.

    Sometimes, "fair" has been defined in relation to population numbers, for example, by the U.S. Department of Education in its enforcement of Title IX, passed in 1972 as an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which pertains to varsity athletic opportunities for male and female undergraduates.

    Title IX was intended to protect against sex discrimination, but not to allow the use of quotas. Indeed, it specifically prohibited arbitrary leveling of student numbers by gender.

    Yet in 1997 the courts essentially sided with an interpretation of the law promulgated by the Department of Education that left universities with no choice but to adopt a proportionality standard for college sports if they wished to avoid lawsuits. If 55% of the students are female, then 55% of the varsity sports slots have to go to women. Financial institutions might have to meet a similar proportionality standard.

    Lest there be any narrow interpretation of Congress's intent, either by agencies or eventually by the courts, the bill specifies that the "fair" employment test shall apply to "financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, asset management firms, brokers, dealers, financial services entities, underwriters, accountants, investment consultants and providers of legal services." That last would appear to rope in law firms working for financial entities.

    Contracts are defined expansively as "all contracts for business and activities of an agency, at all levels, including contracts for the issuance or guarantee of any debt, equity, or security, the sale of assets, the management of the assets of the agency, the making of equity investments by the agency, and the implementation by the agency of programs to address economic recovery."

    This latest attempt by Congress to dictate what "fair" employment means is likely to encourage administrators and managers, in government and in the private sector, to hire women and minorities for the sake of appearances, even if some new hires are less qualified than other applicants. The result is likely to be redundant hiring and a wasteful expansion of payroll overhead.

    If the director decides that a contractor has not made a good-faith effort to include women and minorities in its workforce, he is required to contact the agency administrator and recommend that the contractor be terminated."

    RealClearMarkets - Racial, Gender Quotas in the Financial Bill?
     
  2. Dont Taz Me Bro
    Offline

    Dont Taz Me Bro USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    31,566
    Thanks Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Ratings:
    +17,408
    Exactly how many affirmative action departments do we need to have in government and the private sector? Nobody should ever be given a job because of what gender or race they are. Legalizing discrimination against certain people isn't going to promote equality, it only stirs the flames more. We can't achieve a society free of discrimination if the government openly partakes in it. I don't know why this is so difficult for some of our elected "representatives" to understand.

    If this bill becomes law, this provision should be challenged and struck down as unconstitutional.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  3. bucs90
    Offline

    bucs90 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    26,548
    Thanks Received:
    5,995
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +19,210
    Government mandated racism and discrimination. Did you expect any less from the Obama administration? Of course not. Remember, Obama's self-proclaimed hero, FDR, built internment camps and rounded up 2 entire races of US citizens for indefinite detention with no probable cause of any criminal action.

    YAY HOPEY CHANGEY!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,217
    Thanks Received:
    2,072
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,265
    It's not just some of our representatives but many people still believe that open discrimination is somehow going to get rid of discrimination. It makes no sense. What these people do not realize is that the more affirmative action that there is the more racism is encouraged. Such laws bring attention to the fact that people are different races and require hiring based on race where that prejudice would normally be fading away. You are not born a bigot, you are taught to be one and these laws are one such avenue to learning bigotry.
     
  5. asaratis
    Offline

    asaratis Uppity Senior Citizen Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,285
    Thanks Received:
    2,647
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Stockbridge
    Ratings:
    +4,469
    ...dumbs down the action. In the construction industries, affirmative action assures us that inept and unaccomplished contractors will be overpaid to provide substandard performance of work which may have been ineptly designed by affirmative action fed architectural firms, all suckling the federal tit, voting for and contributing to the campaign funds of those crooks in office that procreate the 'system' of 'fairness' to all whose work would be related to the contracting business.

    It has led to cost overruns, substandard construction and endangerment of the public. That's all opinion, don't you see. I can't prove it to you. I've just watched it happen time after time after time.

    Affirmative Action is just another way for liberals to take from those that have and give to those that don't...while creating more government jobs to oversee the corruption and hide the actual costs....and the lawyers love it.
     
  6. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,669
    Thanks Received:
    6,600
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,022
    i think the op writer of the article should have given support for her contentions of what she thinks is in this bill....

    Also, I don't think hiring a woman MEANS they are less qualified than a man.... as all of you above seem to be mouthing off...
     
  7. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,217
    Thanks Received:
    2,072
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,265
    No, it does not mean that she is definitively less qualified. What the law DOES mean is that if you have 2 candidates and one is less qualified you may have to hire that one ANYWAY because you have a quota to fill. That is plain wrong. Another unintended side effect is that people KNOW that this law exists and when going up for an interview they sometimes believe they were not hired BECAUSE of these types of laws. I have experienced this within my own workplace where a minority woman was hired on and it was ASSUMED she was hired to fill a quota. That is what breeds bigotry and racism. Without that law, that sentiment will not exist or simply factor into the belief that the boss is racist, not that the ENTIRE SYSTEM is. That sentiment grows and is damaging over time. Everyone should be hired based SOLELY on qualifications, sex and race should NEVER be a determining factor.


    No, we are not mouthing off, do you have anything constructive here?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  8. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,669
    Thanks Received:
    6,600
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,022
    the laws of Equal OPPORTUNITY employment, only state that if you have EQUALLY QUALIFIED new hires, consideration should be given to the woman or minority....it does not force you to hire someone not as qualified?

    where do you get this from?
     
  9. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,375
    Thanks Received:
    5,397
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,253
    Out of his ass, just as all these people do.

    Problem is, that they want a free ride. If someone of a differant race or sex is hired instead of them, they immediatly blame affirmative action. For, in their minds, there is no way a minority or women could actually be better qualified than they are.
     
  10. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,375
    Thanks Received:
    5,397
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,253
    Ah yes, death panels. Allie, instead of this constant shit, why don't you have a look at the real death panels that are ran by the present Health Insurance Companies?
     

Share This Page