4 ms·

The legal limits of what? Market segmentation relative to race in a retail environment?

Grustaf 6y ago
Under what circumstances it is legal to racially discriminate. It seems to be legal in college admissions and funding allocation, but not if it’s about denying service in e.g. restaurants. So the line is drawn somewhere between those two, I just wonder where.
- ziaddotcom 6y ago
  You say that like it is going to be written once and for all with an instruction manual. America uses a common law system and case precedent over time. You seem rather concerned with college admissions, where is your concern for the fact that many if not most elite public American high schools would be out of reach for racial minorities even if their child has has perfect grades since Kindergarden. These kids can't simply 'apply' to whichever high school in the country they please. In Europe it is illegal to label a wine Champagne if the grape is the wrong color or not grown in a particular bespoke part of France. Yet, you are baffled the line for racial equity in America is somewhat gray, absurd.
  - Grustaf 6y ago
    No, I'm not baffled about it being ill defined, I presumed there were specific criteria stated somewhere. I was baffled that it's legal at all, under any circumstances. I do not for the record think it is strange that only wine made in Champagne can be called Champagne. What could be offensive about that? I talk about college admission because that's where discrimination seems to be legal. > out of reach for racial minorities even if their child has has perfect grades since Kindergarden As we know, when applying to college their race is actually an advantage, so why would they not be admitted, given their perfect grades? I think there should be systems in place to help all disadvantaged people, regardless of race. Since there are some black kids with wealthy parents, and many white kids with poor parents, it seems obvious that race is a very unfair basis, why not simply assist people that need assistance without looking at their skin colour?
    - ziaddotcom 6y ago
      Using words in a non racial way will not automatically deploy egalitarianism and meritocracy throughout the universe.
    - zacmcloud 6y ago
      They won't answer this question straight because it exposes the hypocrisy in identity politics. Recently one of the major colleges in the US released new admissions guidelines that are more vague than before and specifically designed to reduce the asian percentages being admissions. It seems the jokes about Asians being better in school are true, and this university wanted more "diversity" so it made the requirements more difficult for Asians (and to a lesser extent whites) while making it easier for the targeted ethnicities (I only remember "black" but I believe it included more than just that). For some reason the US has it in it's head that we can balance the scales by putting our thumbs on one group and lowering the bar for others. Weirdly they don't see the hypocrisy or outright foolishness behind "fixing" racism with more racism. Of course, like all things like this it has almost no effect on the ultra rich and truely privileged, and will negatively effect the underprivileged "whites" of all races (weirdly, just like every other race, white people are not just some big homogenous color but makeup diverse individual cultures with distinctive history). But I guess those privileged trailer trash should use their privilege to buy themselves access to an ivy league education. Honestly Apple's little PR stunt is the least insulting of this stuff recently. If you want to see really stupid, look at reddits CEO stepping down and saying his job will go to a black person (and it did). That is illegal but it was just ignored. Or the incoming US president who said he VP pick would be a "woman of color". Of course I'm sure someone will defend picking VPs based on their genetics and chromosome amounts by saying "we already pick that way anyway, its why its all white men in politics!". Because clearly you fix something by propagating it. The world is so upside down now that suggesting we be colorblind is racist.
      - ziaddotcom 6y ago
        Who is they? Me? I can't answer a question directly when you don't ask it directly. At least Grustaf and I have the fortitude to post with an account that wasn't created on the same day as the comment. Grustaf didn't address my question about high school directly, but zacmcloud, feel free to post a direct question to me and I'll reply. I can't read your mind, but your framing doesn't seem to match Grustaf in any meaningful way. If anything, Grustaf and I are finding a narrowing spectrum of disagreement, whereas your post is mostly a trite argument made against corporate PR of all kinds.

Under what circumstances it is legal to racially discriminate. It seems to be legal in college admissions and funding allocation, but not if it’s about denying service in e.g. restaurants. So the line is drawn somewhere between those two, I just wonder where.

ziaddotcom 6y ago
You say that like it is going to be written once and for all with an instruction manual. America uses a common law system and case precedent over time. You seem rather concerned with college admissions, where is your concern for the fact that many if not most elite public American high schools would be out of reach for racial minorities even if their child has has perfect grades since Kindergarden. These kids can't simply 'apply' to whichever high school in the country they please. In Europe it is illegal to label a wine Champagne if the grape is the wrong color or not grown in a particular bespoke part of France. Yet, you are baffled the line for racial equity in America is somewhat gray, absurd.
- Grustaf 6y ago
  No, I'm not baffled about it being ill defined, I presumed there were specific criteria stated somewhere. I was baffled that it's legal at all, under any circumstances. I do not for the record think it is strange that only wine made in Champagne can be called Champagne. What could be offensive about that? I talk about college admission because that's where discrimination seems to be legal. > out of reach for racial minorities even if their child has has perfect grades since Kindergarden As we know, when applying to college their race is actually an advantage, so why would they not be admitted, given their perfect grades? I think there should be systems in place to help all disadvantaged people, regardless of race. Since there are some black kids with wealthy parents, and many white kids with poor parents, it seems obvious that race is a very unfair basis, why not simply assist people that need assistance without looking at their skin colour?
  - ziaddotcom 6y ago
    Using words in a non racial way will not automatically deploy egalitarianism and meritocracy throughout the universe.
  - zacmcloud 6y ago
    They won't answer this question straight because it exposes the hypocrisy in identity politics. Recently one of the major colleges in the US released new admissions guidelines that are more vague than before and specifically designed to reduce the asian percentages being admissions. It seems the jokes about Asians being better in school are true, and this university wanted more "diversity" so it made the requirements more difficult for Asians (and to a lesser extent whites) while making it easier for the targeted ethnicities (I only remember "black" but I believe it included more than just that). For some reason the US has it in it's head that we can balance the scales by putting our thumbs on one group and lowering the bar for others. Weirdly they don't see the hypocrisy or outright foolishness behind "fixing" racism with more racism. Of course, like all things like this it has almost no effect on the ultra rich and truely privileged, and will negatively effect the underprivileged "whites" of all races (weirdly, just like every other race, white people are not just some big homogenous color but makeup diverse individual cultures with distinctive history). But I guess those privileged trailer trash should use their privilege to buy themselves access to an ivy league education. Honestly Apple's little PR stunt is the least insulting of this stuff recently. If you want to see really stupid, look at reddits CEO stepping down and saying his job will go to a black person (and it did). That is illegal but it was just ignored. Or the incoming US president who said he VP pick would be a "woman of color". Of course I'm sure someone will defend picking VPs based on their genetics and chromosome amounts by saying "we already pick that way anyway, its why its all white men in politics!". Because clearly you fix something by propagating it. The world is so upside down now that suggesting we be colorblind is racist.
    - ziaddotcom 6y ago
      Who is they? Me? I can't answer a question directly when you don't ask it directly. At least Grustaf and I have the fortitude to post with an account that wasn't created on the same day as the comment. Grustaf didn't address my question about high school directly, but zacmcloud, feel free to post a direct question to me and I'll reply. I can't read your mind, but your framing doesn't seem to match Grustaf in any meaningful way. If anything, Grustaf and I are finding a narrowing spectrum of disagreement, whereas your post is mostly a trite argument made against corporate PR of all kinds.