Privately owned businesses should have the right to discriminate.
That's right. They should be able to discriminate based on any quality--skin color, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, and so on. If that means that the owner wants to put up a sign that says "NO COLOREDS" or "WHITES ONLY" in front, he should be able to do so.
Discuss why you disagree with me. Go.
I believe privately-owned businesses should only be able to do such things if their business is going for a certain image. For example, the deli that my girlfriend works at tends to hire only Italians or people with some Italian heritage. It's an Italian deli. It makes sense.
However, I don't think they should be able to turn people away due to gender or race or sexual preference (not that I think they would).
Discrimination should be reserved for 'do I think this person is going to improve my business through their work.' If you don't think they will, don't hire them.
What're your thoughts, Zeal?
Originally posted by REXXXX
I believe privately-owned businesses should only be able to do such things if their business is going for a certain image. For example, the deli that my girlfriend works at tends to hire only Italians or people with some Italian heritage. It's an Italian deli. It makes sense.However, I don't think they should be able to turn people away due to gender or race or sexual preference (not that I think they would).
Discrimination should be reserved for 'do I think this person is going to improve my business through their work.' If you don't think they will, don't hire them.
What're your thoughts, Zeal?
Again, this is more in line with what I think.
A Chinese restaurant that tries a bit harder to be authentic? They had better hire Chinese people.
Hooters? If there is a male waiter (which I've heard that some dude tried to sue cause they wouldn't hire him to be a waiter) in a tight shirt and shorts, I would punch him in his squished package when he gets to my table. (I've never been to hooters, BTW.)
A factory that doesn't have a public face? They had better hire the best qualified people and not even care about their looks.
Places that have a "product" to sell which could include "authenticity" should get to hire people that look like that "authenticity" if it comes to race, gender, religion, etc.
Places that don't base their products off of that authenticity, however, shouldn't.
Gray area: what about a place that hires only poor mothers and has a goal of doing only that? That's hard to decide...but if that's part of their "product appeal"...i.e. "All products made by single mothers.", then so be it.
Originally posted by REXXXX
I believe privately-owned businesses should only be able to do such things if their business is going for a certain image. For example, the deli that my girlfriend works at tends to hire only Italians or people with some Italian heritage. It's an Italian deli. It makes sense.However, I don't think they should be able to turn people away due to gender or race or sexual preference (not that I think they would).
Discrimination should be reserved for 'do I think this person is going to improve my business through their work.' If you don't think they will, don't hire them.
What're your thoughts, Zeal?
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
That's right. They should be able to discriminate based on any quality--skin color, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, and so on. If that means that the owner wants to put up a sign that says "NO COLOREDS" or "WHITES ONLY" in front, he should be able to do so.Discuss why you disagree with me. Go.
I don't disagree with you.
In a free market economy a person's ability to operate in society is dependent upon private business. Therefore it is appropriate for legislation to ensure that certain businesses (generally considered to be ones of 'public accommodation'😉 are obliged to provide their service without discrimination; those who do not want to do so should not be in that particular business.
Discussing hiring practices is a bit different.
Re: Privately owned businesses should have the right to discriminate.
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
That's right. They should be able to discriminate based on any quality--skin color, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, and so on. If that means that the owner wants to put up a sign that says "NO COLOREDS" or "WHITES ONLY" in front, he should be able to do so.Discuss why you disagree with me. Go.
Well I don't disagree with you entirely. I don't think they should be allowed to put up such signs but, yes, within a free market such discrimination should be allowed to a certain extent. The sweeping statement that all private businesses should be allowed to discriminate seems to be a bit much, at a minimum the bigger the business it the less it should be allowed.
it depends what you mean by "should".
should, as in, in a perfect world where we are talking about the rights of business owners, yes, they should.
should, as in, we live in the real world where racism exists and such policies will end up with economic stratification between two groups, no, they shouldn't.
Originally posted by inimalist
it depends what you mean by "should".should, as in, in a perfect world where we are talking about the rights of business owners, yes, they should.
should, as in, we live in the real world where racism exists and such policies will end up with economic stratification between two groups, no, they shouldn't.
Have you gotten a lot less libertarian lately?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Have you gotten a lot less libertarian lately?
in a sense
I'm not going to commit myself to socially damaging political policy because it is a tennant of something I supposedly believe.
Its like gun laws. I am totally in favor of private gun ownership, but the last thing I would want the Canadian government to do would be to implement even American style policies. Our social sphere would not be made any better by the introduction of military grade firearms, though I feel in a perfect world, people should be allowed to have them.
I have gotten really dissenfranchised with all forms of ideology. They have lots of answers, but only to the questions they pose and the interpretations of human behaviour they assume. Few present viable policy options for how to move from where we are now to a place where there is less overall suffering in society.
EDIT: its not that I'm any less anarchist or libertarian, just that there are few issues in the modern world that "get rid of government" solves as a rational political policy. this is only because, as you've said before, government is the size of Jupiter and has made itself necessary in most aspects of society. In terms of my more idealistic side, I feel we need to find a way to make people secure within the system, though without the direct need of government, then it would be possible to roll back it's influence.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't understand why British people don't like you, you are such a pleasant, open-minded person
Im not a homophobe or bigot, but i strongly feel that people should have the right to like or dislike whoever they want just as long as it doesn't get to out of hand which unfortunately sometimes it does