View source for Talk:Affirmative Action

So it originally meant taking positive steps to ensure that discrimination would stop. Now it mostly means using discrimination in the present as a "remedy" for discrimination in the past: quotas, set asides, preferences. 

The object no longer is (if it ever was!) to make a level playing field - where each gets the results proportional to his skill and effort. Rather the definition is "equal outcomes", a [[socialist]] ideal where everyone gets the same whether they even bother to invest themselves or just sit around doing nothing. 

Let's explore the relationship of Liberal support for "affirmative action" with Liberal opposition to [[school vouchers]]. School vouchers favor parents who want to put their children in better schools so their effort will be rewarded with achievement. School voucher opponents want everyone to get the same quality of education - i.e., a low dull homogenized blah where mediocrity is the norm and excellence is stifled. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:23, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

We need to talk about court cases and stuff, like Bakke, and Michigan, and all that.

I, as a liberal, feel that AA is outdated and should be phased out totally in the next 5 to 10 years.  Personally I think that colleges need to be evened out more and jobs should be given to people from a rougher background (not necessarlily a race issue; but geographic).  If we educate and economically empower the people from a run down area hopefully they will return bringing back their knowledege and income helping the whole community --[[User:Snotbowst|Snotbowst]] 17:41, 28 February 2008 (EST)