4 ms·
> And that’s not even necessarily a bad thing. ...what? Are you suggesting it's a good thing that we bring back red lining and other discriminatory practices?
by EB66 8y ago
> And that’s not even necessarily a bad thing.
...what? Are you suggesting it's a good thing that we bring back red lining and other discriminatory practices?
- earloflexus 8y agoYeah - where'd Facebook get the idea that businesses should be able to choose who they work with? Is it any surprise that they who deplatformed Alex Jones allow landlords to discriminate as well?
- dwaltrip 8y agoReading charitably, perhaps they meant: it was bad in the case, but it isn't always a bad thing.
- mikec3010 8y agoIf you dont show someone an ad, that's not discrimination. It's just not advertising to a group of people.
- EB66 8y agoIt's a form of discrimination though admittedly not the most egregious form of discrimination. The HUD has explicit regulations and guidelines involving "Selective use of advertising media or content" and "Selective geographic advertisements". The legal threshold for discrimination is set a lot lower for housing than it is in other scenarios For good reason too -- the consequences of discriminated, for example, at a coffee shop are far less impactful than being discriminated for what housing you can find and obtain.
- SamReidHughes 8y ago> ...what? Are you suggesting it's a good thing that we bring back red lining and other discriminatory practices? Putting words into people's mouths like that is incredibly rude, and dishonest.
- pvg 8y agoThat might be phrased stridently but it's not 'putting words into someone's mouth'. It's a question.
- zaroth 8y agoI think OP could have found a better way to word it which wouldn’t seem so hostile and accusatory, if they spent another few seconds before clicking ‘reply’.
- pvg 8y agoI think there's something in the guidelines about how if you're going to yell at someone for being rude, you should take care to give them the most charitable and accurate yelling possible.
- cpkpad 8y agoI don't think that's what's being suggested. The idea that redlining should be reexamined by the courts every half century or so is what's being suggested. In 2018, courts ought to find its still illegal give facebook a book fine. In 2118? Hopefully we'll be past racism and courts will find the concept obsolete and antiquated. Or they may find racism is common but the tools needed to manage it are different. The Internet has a great search for secret closet racists, but they're pretty rare. For the most part, it makes sense to give people the benefit of the doubt.
- doctorless 8y agoHaving been in a mixed-race relationship where one partner is brown, I can tell you firsthandedly that if you think racism is rare, then you’re probably white or Asian or you have consistently lived in areas where racism is actually rare. I lived in places where when I was young, I never saw anyone engage in racist behaviors. This changed the moment I entered that relationship. It may have ended long ago, but it’s definitely made me more aware of the subtle ways that people show prejudice when it’s not outright. Is it a majority? No. At least one in ten? Much closer to reality. We’ve got a long way to go, even still. Don’t forget that schools were still segregated in America less than a century ago — there are leaders in government and industry that grew up in that environment. You’ve got at least two generations to die off before we can really say that the impacts of that era are negligible.
- iamdave 8y agoif you think racism is rare, then you’re probably white or Asian I sincerely hope this isn't an intimation that Asians are somehow immune from forms of racism or racially charged behavior? Would you be able to clarify this a bit? Maybe I've misunderstood you.
- doctorless 8y agoDefinitely not the implication. Everyone can receive racially charged behavior, however the outright hostility towards lighter-skinned Asians in the United States is significantly lower than towards other minority groups as well as darker-skinned Asians.
- vageli 8y agoHow do you think Uber and Airbnb became legal?
- dang 8y ago"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- exergy 8y agoI cannot conceive of a "stronger" explanation for what the GP stated. What kind of good faith argument could possibly be assumed in that guy asking that maybe reexamining Redline laws isn't the worst thing. It's a vile thing to say, and a statement made, I can only assume, in utter and wanton disregard of racial history of the United States. It's a bit shameful that you flagged the parent and not the grandparent, who seems to be playing devil's advocate purely for the sake of an argument.
- bodas 8y agoIt's very clear what they were saying, is that if one follows the law at all time there is no chance that a bad thing will "accidentally" happen. You are actually the one violating that policy.