Tags audio adrenaline lyrics i don& ;t censor me extended play remixes out of print in stock free audio adrenalin…

(1) The federal government should not give business to employers who discriminate.

(2) This includes preference for traditionally disadvantaged races/genders.

(3) The federal government should do LESS contracting, period. This trumps point #2.

Not necessarily. I will say that the government cannot discriminate in terms of public accomodation. I’d go further to say that I would support the government mandating that anyone who receives a contract from them must not discriminate in terms of accomodation. This would be energy companies, cable companies, garbage haulers and the like. Although I wouldn’t necessarily apply it to the hiring practices. For contracts such as these it’s the governments job to find the best company for the community regardless of who/how they hire.

Good point, RE: Microsoft, etc. I was thinking primarily of retail businesses with the “Whites Only” type of signs. If you want to fight over whether or not companies should be allowed to discriminate against racial minorities in their hiring, promotion, etc., we can have that argument. But are you conceding that they should not be allowed to in terms of public accomodation?

The points that SMN is making are valid, but you are blaming the wrong culprit. The real culrpit is the collectivist attitude that we Americans “deserve” jobs. This is best embodied by the nationalist protectionists in the CP. They want to turn the U.S. into France.

Try to walk into Microsoft. Try to walk into the plant of your local energy company.

LOL. Where do you come up with this?

“It is not hard to fire people. If you think it is, then you have a real disconnect with the economy.”

I happen to work for a Fortune 500 company. In my 10-plus years here I have seen layoffs due to budget cutbacks and I’ve seen firings due to illegal activity. I have never seen a firing due to incompetence, unprofessional conduct, etc. Instead what will happen is HR will hold countless meetings and the employee winds up getting transferred to a different department where they spread their cancer.

5 years ago while managing a project I discovered that one of the employees was intentionally sabotaging the project in order to create a crisis where he could ‘save the day’. I had irrefutable proof, incriminating testimony from others and I documented it all thouroughly. I submitted it all to my superiors, who also thought it was a fireable offense. The solution: Take him off the project and ship him to a different area.

Bull. You CANNOT just walk into my business. Its my private property. I own the property, I own the building. I own everything there.
And if I remember correctly, you praised the Jefferson Republican Party’s boycott. Then when you found out it was going to be government enforced…called them fascists. Fascist.

Trent – The sit-ins, protests, etc. are a waste of energy. The personal and economic realms are not one in the same, and while I’m not sure of the warrant requirements for businesses vs. personal residences, one major difference is that I can just walk in to a business, whereas I cannot just walk in to your home.

SNM - Please. It is not hard to fire people. If you think it is, then you have a real disconnect with the economy. This is not France (thank the imaginary God). Most employees are at-will, which means that they can be fired for no reason whatsoever – so long as the reason is not racial, etc. Where are all of these lawsuits? When has a black employee ever sued, say, McDonalds for racial discrimination and won? How many blacks do you think are going to get fired from McDonalds this year? Hundreds? Maybe thousands? Where are the suits? No lawyer will take them because they cannot win. The employees are being fired for reasons that have nothing to do with race, and as Cody points out, there are probably numerous racial firings, passovers for promotions, non-hires, that are disguised as legitimate.

This is just more of the “woe is me, the white man is oppressed” brand of anticapitalism being peddled so aggressivley by the Hard Right these days.

This causes employers to either hang onto non-productive employees or fire them and risk spending their money defending themselves from tons of frivilous lawsuits.

The legal fees that employers must pay to answer each lawsuit then gets passed onto the consumer. Or if the non-productive employee is retained then the consumer receives an inferior product.

This is not good capitalism.

While I don’t think its prudent of someone to hang a “white’s only” sign in front of their coffee shop, nor do I think it’s smart, it IS their right. They have the right to refuse service to ANYONE or ANY grounds. Unless it is a public institution,that right still holds.

But why use the force of government here GE? Sit-ins, protests, boycotts are all FAR more effective in swaying public opinion. Also, the mere fact that an employer is limiting his sales options and employer options, and therefor not reaping the full benefits of the market, will eventually come back to bit him. If he uses such openly racist tactics, he will not be met with approval (yes, even in the south). In fact, in my hometown, Denham Springs Louisiana there was a small coffee shop which had to close after the owner made a racist statement on Television. He got blacklisted basically. No one went there, the place got boycotted, I personally sat outside the place alongside a throng of 35 or so people who were protesting his racism.

That’s how some bigoted employers usually operate, and it’s hard to prove.