Today President Bush proclaimed that the week of August 27 to September 2 be Minority Enterprise Week.
Throughout our country, minority entrepreneurs strengthen our economic growth and keep our Nation moving forward. As Ronald Reagan said, entrepreneurs are the "explorers of the modern era," and minority business owners help expand opportunities for their communities and their fellow citizens. A free society in which people have the opportunity to pursue their goals, no matter who they are or where they are from, is a stronger and more just society.
President Bush's policies have certainly been good for minority home ownership and business ownership, but the certfication of businesses as Minority Business Enteriprises (MBE) or Woman Business Enterprises (WBE) is affirmative action... plain and simple.
As someone in the field of architecture, I've personally been involved in the process of obtaining state work. I've never liked doing it, because the odds were always against my firm being awarded the job because we weren't a MBE or WBE. Similarly, when we tried for state work in collaboration with other architecture firms, it was no secret that the best way to get the job was not to pick the most qualified or prestigious firms, but to pick certified MBEs or WBEs. This kind of discrimination is dangerous because it has become an accepted form of racism and/or sexism done in the name of so-called social justice.
Posted by Matt at August 23, 2006 05:51 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/crawford.cgi/7743
Comments
You know what I say when it comes to this?
Level the playing field... let the market decide...
Posted by: Georgia Frawg at August 23, 2006 06:44 PM
*Chuckles*
Once again we're on the same page Georgia. I used to work for Arcata Associates when they had part of the contract here at Goldstone because they were a minority owned company. I never really understood why they should get it because of that, but they were a good company and I wished they were still my boss. (Smaller company and more personable help. That kind of thing.)
Besides, what does it matter who owns the bloody company? As long as the company does what it's supposed to do it shouldn't matter that woman runs it or a minority. It's just more stupid affirmative action BS and this "week" is just a stupid political statement.
Asian, Arab, Irish, Mexican, Black, what have you. If you're an American buisness owner you're an AMERICAN buisness owner. Not a minority buisness owner.
Posted by:
Gozer at August 23, 2006 07:04 PM
"If you're an American buisness owner you're an AMERICAN buisness owner."-Gozer
Hear! Hear!
:)
Posted by: Freedom1 at August 23, 2006 07:15 PM
In one business I owned, quite some time ago, a friend suggested I change the name on the letterhead to that of an African-American woman over 50 with a Hispanic surname and an adopted Asian-American child.
The fact is that many small businesses owned by minorities did face discrimination for years, this sounds like a celebration of the end of those bad old days. Maybe Dr. King’s children will be judged by the content of their character, and not the color of their skin.
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at August 23, 2006 07:28 PM
When is this site gonna work properly? It appears that only the donk troll's comments show up when posted--mine are always late or never...
Posted by: keefer at August 23, 2006 07:58 PM
While I applaud the growth of minority businesses, I find the minority-set-aside program to be confusing. Isn't owning your own business a sign that you're fairly well off? Yet, these business owners are still considered to be so badly oppressed that they need or deserve a form of affirmative action. What would make more sense is a set-aside program the depends on the size of the business, or (if you want to make race a factor) one that is based on the employess being minority, since the employees would more likely be less well off than the owners, and thus more likely to be truly disadvantaged.
Posted by: Bigfoot at August 23, 2006 10:12 PM
In the Fedral areana, I've seen "8A" business thrown to "minority" owned businesses for years. Many are "owned" by minority individuals who do little or nothing except have their name on the paperwork.
Posted by: Kahn at August 23, 2006 11:17 PM
One of the Unintended Consequences of affirmative action is the dismissal of genuine success, genuine talent, as merely the result of preferential treatment.
Example: It might be a bragging point to be accepted, for example, to the Harvard Business School. But for a minority person, this bragging right is lowered to an assumption that the person did not get accepted due to superior grades, talent, or academic potential---it is written off as a 'gift' based on skin color or gender.
It deprives the truly talented, truly successful, truly achieving, of their rightful status, and lowers them to a very inferior status---one of condescension and charity.
It says "this person could never make it on a level playing field---people of this color, or gender, are simply not capable of competing with the rest of us". It is, truly, the most insidious form of racism/sexism. It conveys the belief that these groups are so inherently inferior that they simly cannot succeed without a paternalistic, condescending, hand up----a hand up from, obviously, a more successful and talented group.
And every person of any minority status who does succeed on merit alone is penalized, assumed to have been given preferential treatment and not to have actually competed and won on merit or talent alone.
It is an Orwellian twist that those who oppose affirmative action because of a belief that all races and both genders have the ability to be equal are branded with labels of "racism" and "sexism" by those who actually exhibit these attitudes through their condescending approach to those of different races or sexes.
Posted by:
Almiranta at August 24, 2006 12:29 AM
Please report any inappropriate comments to abuse (at) blogsforbush (dot) com. Be sure to include the title of the blog entry, the name of the commenter, and the text of the offending comment.
Post a comment
You know what I say when it comes to this?
Level the playing field... let the market decide...
*Chuckles*
Once again we're on the same page Georgia. I used to work for Arcata Associates when they had part of the contract here at Goldstone because they were a minority owned company. I never really understood why they should get it because of that, but they were a good company and I wished they were still my boss. (Smaller company and more personable help. That kind of thing.)
Besides, what does it matter who owns the bloody company? As long as the company does what it's supposed to do it shouldn't matter that woman runs it or a minority. It's just more stupid affirmative action BS and this "week" is just a stupid political statement.
Asian, Arab, Irish, Mexican, Black, what have you. If you're an American buisness owner you're an AMERICAN buisness owner. Not a minority buisness owner.
"If you're an American buisness owner you're an AMERICAN buisness owner."-Gozer
Hear! Hear!
:)
In one business I owned, quite some time ago, a friend suggested I change the name on the letterhead to that of an African-American woman over 50 with a Hispanic surname and an adopted Asian-American child.
The fact is that many small businesses owned by minorities did face discrimination for years, this sounds like a celebration of the end of those bad old days. Maybe Dr. King’s children will be judged by the content of their character, and not the color of their skin.
When is this site gonna work properly? It appears that only the donk troll's comments show up when posted--mine are always late or never...
While I applaud the growth of minority businesses, I find the minority-set-aside program to be confusing. Isn't owning your own business a sign that you're fairly well off? Yet, these business owners are still considered to be so badly oppressed that they need or deserve a form of affirmative action. What would make more sense is a set-aside program the depends on the size of the business, or (if you want to make race a factor) one that is based on the employess being minority, since the employees would more likely be less well off than the owners, and thus more likely to be truly disadvantaged.
In the Fedral areana, I've seen "8A" business thrown to "minority" owned businesses for years. Many are "owned" by minority individuals who do little or nothing except have their name on the paperwork.
One of the Unintended Consequences of affirmative action is the dismissal of genuine success, genuine talent, as merely the result of preferential treatment.
Example: It might be a bragging point to be accepted, for example, to the Harvard Business School. But for a minority person, this bragging right is lowered to an assumption that the person did not get accepted due to superior grades, talent, or academic potential---it is written off as a 'gift' based on skin color or gender.
It deprives the truly talented, truly successful, truly achieving, of their rightful status, and lowers them to a very inferior status---one of condescension and charity.
It says "this person could never make it on a level playing field---people of this color, or gender, are simply not capable of competing with the rest of us". It is, truly, the most insidious form of racism/sexism. It conveys the belief that these groups are so inherently inferior that they simly cannot succeed without a paternalistic, condescending, hand up----a hand up from, obviously, a more successful and talented group.
And every person of any minority status who does succeed on merit alone is penalized, assumed to have been given preferential treatment and not to have actually competed and won on merit or talent alone.
It is an Orwellian twist that those who oppose affirmative action because of a belief that all races and both genders have the ability to be equal are branded with labels of "racism" and "sexism" by those who actually exhibit these attitudes through their condescending approach to those of different races or sexes.