DesideriScuri
Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kdsub DesideriScuri I believe the various, any, and all affirmative action programs of today can and should use economic standing and scholastic ability instead of race as the determining factor in applications for aid. For the most part, those are the metrics, not race. There are still scholarship programs for blacks/minorities. quote:
What should be the purpose of these programs today?.... Should it be to assure employment and education opportunities reflect the ethnic makeup of the area.... or... to help those that need it most regardless of racial makeup of the area? I believe there was a time when racial or ethnic factors were needed to help minorities recover from past discrimination.... It has worked wonderfully and the makeup of the both white and blue collar work force reflects this. The overall wealth of many minorities has been increased greatly. We agree that there was a time when AA programs were necessary. I truly believe AA programs based solely on race are no longer needed. quote:
I also believe there is still work to be done in minority communities but the political and economic situation in America will force the end of affirmative action as it is used today...and it should. Now is the time to remove the racial requirement but instead of throwing an excellent program away I believe we should continue using economics... That is if America is willing to continue helping those less fortunate. Government aid is a contentious subject in these poor economic times... I understand this. This means that any program we keep must serve a needed purpose that is temporary and efficient and will in the end produce more than it costs. Education is and will continue to be the key to a prosperous future. Not only will we benefit from this generation but educated prosperous parents have a much better chance of producing prosperous, or at least self sufficient children. In the long run this program will strengthen our tax base and lessen government dependant aid... What can be bad about this? Yes it is not the end all catch all solution but it is a good step in that direction. Butch I agree with the bolded part, but, as we've already seen, most government aid programs are neither "temporary," nor "efficient." Many of the aid programs do more to continue the dependence. If we tag aid programs to, say, the bottom 25% of income earners, will there ever be a time when we don't have a "bottom 25% of income earners?" There will never ever be a time when there isn't poverty in the US. Even if the government handed out $100k to every man woman and child in the US every year, you and I both know cost of goods will rise accordingly and what it costs for a family of 4 to live (I think that's the metric for the poverty line) will rise accordingly. I do think we need to help our fellow citizens who are not as fortunate as we are. I believe that's the Christian thing to do, too. I don't think Government is the best way to do that, though.
_____________________________
What I support: - A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
- Personal Responsibility
- Help for the truly needy
- Limited Government
- Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
|