Are SA laws really unjust?

sox63 said:
Nope, whites are not excluded in owning a business. However there are differing levels of contribution to BEE, and thus to rate higher, you almost certainly have to have Black ownership in the business.

And not all businesses have to have black ownership. If your revenue is below a certain point, IIRC R 20 mil, then ownership is not taken into consideration, they then look at your spending on other empowered businesses.
Click to expand...

Ah so basically they're filtering the poor sods out first.
 
Too much about the past not enough about the future.
The current laws are going to have serious, negative repercussions on future generations.
They finally have it right in sport: train up the youngsters to be able to **earn** their rightful place in a non discriminatory environment based on **merit**.
Its not the positions that matter, that is cosmetic (like to frikken many things in this country IMO) what matters is the education and training and thusly the opportunity to prove your worth.
You cannot claim to be worthy of this or worthy of that based on past injustices its illogical and absurd.
 
Actually lack of government contracts is certainly not a problem that we have to deal with atm.

You're trying to make a comparison where there isn't one - there is a lot that is unsatisfactory about current AA/EE legislation, but when you start comparing it to apartheid, it is difficult to have a rational debate.
 
chiskop said:
Actually lack of government contracts is certainly not a problem that we have to deal with atm.

You're trying to make a comparison where there isn't one - there is a lot that is unsatisfactory about current AA/EE legislation, but when you start comparing it to apartheid, it is difficult to have a rational debate.
Click to expand...

You're right, apartheid at least had the illusion of separate development. This is unvarnished economic discrimination on the basis of race.
 
alloytoo said:
You're right, apartheid at least had the illusion of separate development. This is unvarnished economic discrimination on the basis of race.
Click to expand...

I've made it clear I don't support BEE/AA but come on, its just stupid to say its worse than Apartheid.
 
alloytoo said:
You're right, apartheid at least had the illusion of separate development. This is unvarnished economic discrimination on the basis of race.
Click to expand...

Right. Pls point out to me all the black owners of JSE-listed companies prior to 1994 and then let's compare it to all white owners of JSE-listed companies post 94. (Feel free to choose any other comparison of economic status)

Which do you think will be the longer list?
 
Syndyre said:
I've made it clear I don't support BEE/AA but come on, its just stupid to say its worse than Apartheid.
Click to expand...

In some respects it is, clothed in the respectability of the so called democracy and the cunning guise of "correcting" the wrongs of the past.

When it fact it's a quick rich scheme for "comrades" and family, it's alienating capital and skills and worse of all it's failing to address the true issues of poverty in this country.

Fact: the majority are poorer than in 1994.
 
alloytoo said:
When it fact it's a quick rich scheme for "comrades" and family, it's alienating capital and skills and worse of all it's failing to address the true issues of poverty in this country.

Fact: the majority are poorer than in 1994.
Click to expand...

Agreed with some of the second part of your post.

Let go of the whole apartheid 2000 nonsense and we can have an interesting discussion about it.
 
chiskop said:
Right. Pls point out to me all the black owners of JSE-listed companies prior to 1994 and then let's compare it to all white owners of JSE-listed companies post 94. (Feel free to choose any other comparison of economic status)

Which do you think will be the longer list?
Click to expand...

It's an interesting statistic. White Afrikaaners (alas I am not one) own more of the JSE now than in 1994, despite these raciest policies.

So, not only have they chased all my school chums to other shores, they simply don't work.
 
Way I see it is that with AA / BBBEE etc. we are trying to squeeze 38mil+ ppl into 5mil+ ppl's jobs.

There should be more focus on job creation instead of trying to replace one person with another.
 
alloytoo said:
How should we describe the government's racist policies?
Click to expand...
Well you sure seem to battle to understand what apartheid was. Or perhaps more accurately, you prefer to ignore it in order to make this highly, highly exagerated comparison.

Firstly, government does not forbid a person from working at certain jobs, places etc because of race. What they do is require companies to hire certain numbers of certain races. There is a subtle but significant difference there.

Try and understand this. Companies are required to hire more blacks / women because pretty much all the good / managerial jobs are occupied overwhelmingly by white males. Why is this? Because it was under apartheid, illegal to hire blacks for anything much more than menial labour. No quotas, not timeframes etc. Just flat out illegal. This was made worse by the fact that government policy was to deny black children a decent education wherever possible (and to shoot them if they complained).

Now along come the right wing who created this situation screaming that it is racist to undo the effects of their racism and establish a normal society. It's like a bank robber who has received a pardon demanding that he be allowed to keep his loot.
 
Unfortunatly you will always have a large portion of the population being less well off as the middle to upper classes. It is that way all over the world.

Solution... If I knew I would run for a political office. ;) AA/BEE/EE is just buying time for the current overlords. :(
 
alloytoo said:
Apologies, the number of people living beneath the breadline has doubled.
Click to expand...
Again not true.

Yes I know about the dubious analysis you are basing this on. Two things you should know about the institues survey. The results of that analysis conflict with all other economic data we have available. The methods they used to reach these conclusions are not available either. Immediate cause for a rational reader to raise an eyebrow in suspicion.

What the survey / analysis actually found was that the number of people living on less than x US dollars a day has increased. This arbitrarily pegs the dollar as the unit for determining poverty and ignores the fact that the exchange rate has changed radically in this time period. Now if the poor were buying bread in the US this would mean a lot more, but the fact is they are not. We don't know what else may be wrong about the survey as, like I said, they don't want to tell how it was done.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.
 
Jase said:
Way I see it is that with AA / BBBEE etc. we are trying to squeeze 38mil+ ppl into 5mil+ ppl's jobs.

There should be more focus on job creation instead of trying to replace one person with another.
Click to expand...
We are definitely failing in job creation. If we were creating sufficient jobs noboddy would care about AA. You are on far better ground to criticise our dismal job creation record than the AA policy.
 
vespax said:
Unfortunatly you will always have a large portion of the population being less well off as the middle to upper classes. It is that way all over the world.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is true. However in other parts of the world it hasn't happened as the result of generations of discrimination like it has here. Nobody is suggesting that AA/EE or the abolishment of them will result in a equal society where everyone is suddenly earning the same.

AA/EE are an attempt to correct the imbalances of the past. You can argue that it is being implemented in the wrong way, and I'd support some of what you said. You could argue that this is not the way to redress things - but it'ld take a lot of chutzpah to suggest that no kind of rebalancing is required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X