Affirmative Action - The Distance

Wait until moderator 'bwana' sees the above comment :D you'll be banned 3 x over (racism, anti government comments etc etc)
 
Germany is a different kettle of fish (?) to SA... I agree, there are a lot of things we can learn from Germany, I'm currently studying it very intently as I think a some of what happened after the war there could happen here... Germany has taken 60 years to get here, and from a very educated base at that, something we've got a major problem with here. It's better to compare us to Germany 15 years after the Holocaust as that's where we are... And remember all the strikes and marches and bombs being planted in the 70s in Germany, it only started to calm down in the 90s, all their problems where because they didn't handle the Holocaust properly (plenty of press about it recently with the Baader-Meinhoff Complex and The Reader coming out)... So I'd hope we don't go down the line of Germany, that will be an absolute disaster with our demographics!!!

As for AA/BEE, I don't particularly like the implementation... but we've got a problem... forget about the past, stop living in it... look at the situation that we have now, we have huge inequalities between Blacks and Whites in terms of who's controlling the economy, who has access to services, who gets the better education etc. Yes, it was caused by the Apartheid regime (and the colonial one before it), so we do need to understand how it affects us now... but the problem is a current one... we knew in 1994 that if we couldn't address a large amount of the inequalities in ~20 years then the entire country would begin to destabilize (as history has shown us, Zim being our closest example)... Those that implemented the current AA/BEE didn't like it either but realized that the biggest threat to this country is that if we don't level the playing field within that ~20 years (at least to a reasonable level, I'll explain what that means just now), then it will be leveled for us.

Reasonable level means that we needed to get the majority of citizens (Black or White) into the middle class bracket within 20 years (from 1994). If that isn't the case (and the majority is still in poverty) then either via democratic means or via riots/armed struggle etc. the country will face a change from whatever we tried to do in the past (since 1994). Zim faced exactly the same situation 20 years on and it's middle class was too small, the lower classes where not appeased by what the government had been promising for ~20 years.

And SA's history in the 70s and 80s adds a whole ton of problems, as those kids that grow up only know one education (that of fighting and violence) are now adults! The xenophobic attacks are just the start of that, it's why we needed a grassroots man (Zuma) to step in urgently, someone who can get down to the masses because they are already stirring...
 
TooFastTim said:
Seeing you're so keen on "facts" Isede, try this one: AA is pushing out skills and replacing them with the unskilled. Fact. Here's another one: Eskom is in deep doo-doo because of: AA.

Still think AA is a good idea?
Click to expand...

Careful... Eskom in apartheid built dozens of power stations and then mothballed the lot of them. Basically flushing Rmillions down the drain and setting us back years later.

You need to have the right "facts"...fact...:sick:
 
AA, BEE or whatever does not achieve its goals. It never will. It cannot do so.

Those who would say otherwise need to look up labor policies and such on www.mises.org and learn some basic economics and understand causality.

The system that benefits people the most is the free market. In a free market the business that provides the best value for consumers (Price/Quality) will stay in business and make money.

In order to do this you need the best people regardless of race or gender. If you have second rate people... the business won't be as good and society loses out. Period.

The best is the best. Black....white.....green....doesn't matter. You want the best, employ the best.
 
WilD_CaT said:
AA, BEE or whatever does not achieve its goals. It never will. It cannot do so.

Those who would say otherwise need to look up labor policies and such on www.mises.org and learn some basic economics and understand causality.

The system that benefits people the most is the free market. In a free market the business that provides the best value for consumers (Price/Quality) will stay in business and make money.

In order to do this you need the best people regardless of race or gender. If you have second rate people... the business won't be as good and society loses out. Period.

The best is the best. Black....white.....green....doesn't matter. You want the best, employ the best.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
for me, who does not benefit in any way from aa or bee, i like them because they make you mad, they are sort of revenge, i am really sick of people who are ten times dumber than i am assuming that i am where i am because of aa, fortunately, my industry does not have a lot of dumbasses, i pity people who work as accountant and the like
 
mine_dump said:
for me, who does not benefit in any way from aa or bee, i like them because they make you mad, they are sort of revenge, i am really sick of people who are ten times dumber than i am assuming that i am where i am because of aa, fortunately, my industry does not have a lot of dumbasses, i pity people who work as accountant and the like
Click to expand...
In order for us to give an opinion on your comments, could you write it in English?


I wouldn't consider chartered accountants "dumbasses", if that's what you meant.
 
mine_dump said:
for me, who does not benefit in any way from aa or bee, i like them because they make you mad, they are sort of revenge, i am really sick of people who are ten times dumber than i am assuming that i am where i am because of aa, fortunately, my industry does not have a lot of dumbasses, i pity people who work as accountant and the like
Click to expand...

I can't make head or sense of what you are trying to say? :confused:
 
mine_dump said:
for me, who does not benefit in any way from aa or bee, i like them because they make you mad, they are sort of revenge, i am really sick of people who are ten times dumber than i am assuming that i am where i am because of aa, fortunately, my industry does not have a lot of dumbasses, i pity people who work as accountant and the like
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have automatically assumed you were an AA candidate, I usually determine it from statements like these.

Thanks for clarifying the matter.
 
WilD_CaT said:
AA, BEE or whatever does not achieve its goals. It never will. It cannot do so.

Those who would say otherwise need to look up labor policies and such on www.mises.org and learn some basic economics and understand causality.

The system that benefits people the most is the free market. In a free market the business that provides the best value for consumers (Price/Quality) will stay in business and make money.

In order to do this you need the best people regardless of race or gender. If you have second rate people... the business won't be as good and society loses out. Period.

The best is the best. Black....white.....green....doesn't matter. You want the best, employ the best.
Click to expand...
Simply not true. A semi-free market, i.e. one that includes appropriate regulation and counterbalances can work and be beneficial. There's good reason why you won't typically find free markets in the real world.

And of course affirmative action can work. It's unfortunately necessary. However affirmative action should not be about hiring someone purely based on their colour or sex. I'm not saying that doesn't happen. On the other hand hiring that person who needs to learn is often exactly the opening that person needs. Perhaps you're too young, but I remember a time when women were considered incapable of doing a job like engineering, and even with a degree and excellent marks she would struggle to get employment, and if she did get employment she'd struggle to get recognition for her work. You simply cannot redress that kind of discrimination by saying hire the best. The notion that companies hire only based on who is best for the job is itself a fantasy regardless of the existence of affirmative action.
 
noxibox said:
And of course affirmative action can work. It's unfortunately necessary. However affirmative action should not be about hiring someone purely based on their colour or sex. I'm not saying that doesn't happen. On the other hand hiring that person who needs to learn is often exactly the opening that person needs. Perhaps you're too young, but I remember a time when women were considered incapable of doing a job like engineering, and even with a degree and excellent marks she would struggle to get employment, and if she did get employment she'd struggle to get recognition for her work. You simply cannot redress that kind of discrimination by saying hire the best. The notion that companies hire only based on who is best for the job is itself a fantasy regardless of the existence of affirmative action.
Click to expand...

Well said. Companies should not be there purely to make money; upliftment should be part of it too.

Master Cain said:
My gripe is that we are discriminating against a certain population grouping namely whites.
Any form of discrimination is simply wrong in a democratic society.
Click to expand...

In an *equal* democratic country, yes - which we're not. And as for the poor whites being discriminated against - we whites have had it good for centuries, and even *after* 15 years of AA and BEE in SA, we're still at the top of the pile by any reasonable measure.

boramk said:
AA/BEE is only a a good idea on paper.
It fails in real life situations, and is highly inefficient. Efficiency comes from "the best man for the job", not that guy because he is black.
Click to expand...

"Efficiency" is not the be-all and end-all of companies. There are many other things to take into account.
 
Claymore said:
Well said. Companies should not be there purely to make money; upliftment should be part of it too.
Click to expand...

Claymore said:
"Efficiency" is not the be-all and end-all of companies. There are many other things to take into account.
Click to expand...

BS, companies only focus on "profits". Even doing charity - like things, the actions behind it is still the "profits" as the NUMBER 1 priority

if not, it is not a "company", it is a charity or non-profit organization.


Claymore said:
In an *equal* democratic country, yes - which we're not. And as for the poor whites being discriminated against - we whites have had it good for centuries, and even *after* 15 years of AA and BEE in SA, we're still at the top of the pile by any reasonable measure.
Click to expand...

consider yourself is in the "global village" ...........
 
DreamKing said:
BS, companies only focus on "profits". Even doing charity - like things, the actions behind it is still the "profits" as the NUMBER 1 priority

if not, it is not a "company", it is a charity or non-profit organization.




consider yourself is in the "global village" ...........
Click to expand...

It's true that a company's main goal is too make profits, but good companies will seek ways to make such profits in a sustainable manner. Companies that pursue profits to the detriment of everything else are not ideal.

I think responsible companies take into consideration the needs of those societies within which they operate. Remember that companies make products or provide services that ordinary people consume or utilise. Failing to uplift such a society could prove to be unsustainable in the long run. For e.g. companies have a reliance on a steady supply of skilled human resources. How sustainable is a situation where the majority of the population are poorly skilled?
How would you get the majority of the population skilled up if you maintained the status quo, i.e. best man for the job policy means the white person will get it all the time because he has the experience and the knowledge. This is of course due to the past policies of deliberately providing poor education opportunities for the black masses.

No one is born with the required skills and knowledge. The only way one can get skilled is if they are given the equal opportunity.
 
JungleBoy said:
I think responsible companies take into consideration the needs of those societies within which they operate. Remember that companies make products or provide services that ordinary people consume or utilise. Failing to uplift such a society could prove to be unsustainable in the long run. For e.g. companies have a reliance on a steady supply of skilled human resources. How sustainable is a situation where the majority of the population are poorly skilled?
How would you get the majority of the population skilled up if you maintained the status quo, i.e. best man for the job policy means the white person will get it all the time because he has the experience and the knowledge. This is of course due to the past policies of deliberately providing poor education opportunities for the black masses.

No one is born with the required skills and knowledge. The only way one can get skilled is if they are given the equal opportunity.
Click to expand...


Why the hell is it a companies responsibility to provide skills and training to people? Should they teach them basic reading and writing skills too?

Your saying to business, here, take the poorly skilled and uneducated, and now its your responsibility to train them. We don't care that you will probably become uncompetitive in your market. Does that sound fair to you?

Business has nothing to do with this. This is all down to government. They are responsible for schooling and skills development.

Do you realise that south africa isnt a little island, we are part of the global economy. People will not invest here, if we offer less capable, and sub par service offerings, they simply take their money somewhere else.

In business, its the best man for the job. Full stop. If that man happens to be white, then too bad. Dont blame business, blame this pathetic government we have and the education system that they have driven into the ground.
 
KillerX said:
Why the hell is it a companies responsibility to provide skills and training to people? Should they teach them basic reading and writing skills too?

Your saying to business, here, take the poorly skilled and uneducated, and now its your responsibility to train them. We don't care that you will probably become uncompetitive in your market. Does that sound fair to you?

Business has nothing to do with this. This is all down to government. They are responsible for schooling and skills development.

Do you realise that south africa isnt a little island, we are part of the global economy. People will not invest here, if we offer less capable, and sub par service offerings, they simply take their money somewhere else.

In business, its the best man for the job. Full stop. If that man happens to be white, then too bad. Dont blame business, blame this pathetic government we have and the education system that they have driven into the ground.
Click to expand...

Try to read first before you post random drivel.
 
WilD_CaT said:
Careful... Eskom in apartheid built dozens of power stations and then mothballed the lot of them. Basically flushing Rmillions down the drain and setting us back years later.

You need to have the right "facts"...fact...:sick:
Click to expand...

You would do well to do the same.

The mothballed stations were not required and were past their design lifetimes making them less efficient than the newer stations. Mothballing them was the right thing to do.

As to demothballing - ESKOM waited a little too long for that one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X