Lefora Free Forum
55 views

Minority Contractors

Page 1 · 2
< older posts 21–26 of 26
admin
5174 posts

Lee-cole, I can't really argue with anything you said there, but let me just note here that if we Southern Caucasian males continue to deny that our race and our gender have, for hundreds of years, given us a marked advantage in politics, in business, and in everyday life, we deserve to be considered "Neanderthals" by those who do recognize that simple fact.

The minority contractor effort does not give anybody an "advantage" in the process. It just encourages participation by those who, in the past, have declined to participate because they've been told, or they've come to understand through circumstances, that they don't have a snowball's chance in Hades of being successful in bidding on government projects.

I could elaborate on that, but I don't want to upset SSHM with "irrelevant analogies" (as in saying something like this is similar to youth sports league rules, where everybody gets to play, but nobody is guaranteed they'll start or win), and I certainly don't want to aggravate Hankey by talking about things that have actually happened in the past (as in my experience in dealing with minority contractors under CDBG and other Federal and state grant programs back in the 1990s - heaven knows I wouldn't want to confuse Hankey with actual facts and details of things that have actually happened.)

The minority contractor program we're discussing does two things: 1. It seeks to level the playing field by assuring minority business owners that, no matter what some local engineer or politico has told them in the past, they can bid, and they can get the contract if they turn in the lowest bid, and 2. As a result of (1), it encourages competition.

Lee, you know and I know that the more contractors who bid on a project, the more likely it is you'll get a good, low, fair price on the work (absent, of course, the invasive, punitive and outrageous requirements of the archaic Davis-Bacon Act, which we can discuss on another thread someday if you want to.)

I'm a conservative and a Republican, Lee. (Those two words are not always interchangeable, you know.) I'm not afraid of fair competition that may serve to save the taxpayers money. Are you?

member
111 posts

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2006: United States Population as of end of 2006: Male 144,188,000 Female  149,647,000 By what possible definition would a subset that outnumbers the next largest subset by more than 5 million in a total set of 294 million be considered a "minority?" I'm an English major, but, c'mon, even I know the definition of "greater than" (>) and "less than" (<) in mathmatics. And from a purely numerical standpoint, MEN, not women, are the minority gender in the United States. (Petunia, Blogger, Springs-sprung, Virginia ... slap me if you can catch me ...) [image]

-jdtippett

 

JD- let's be fair.  Women have been at a disadvantage in this country since it's inception, unless it was beneficial to men's policies (WWII) to allow women viable entry into the workplace.  Next question- are the census data adult men and women?

__________________
The single most exciting thing you encounter in government is competence, because it's so rare. - Daniel P. Moynihan
admin
5174 posts

Springs-sprung, males are in the majority in all age groups through age 29. In the 30-34 demographic, women overtake us and maintain the lead the rest of the way to eternity. (It's slightly earlier in the South, where the most common cause of death among 20-something males is something called a "Double-dog dare.")

The disparity gets more pronounced in later years. (Know why married men die sooner than married women? BECAUSE WE WANT TO.) Wink

And, in case you didn't catch it, I was being facetious with my post. I do understand the "glass ceiling." Really.

Throughout my career, I've had female bosses, and I've had female employees. It never much really mattered to me who's on top.

Hmmm. That didn't sound quite right, did it? Embarassed

member
1468 posts
JD; Begging your pardon, but women outlive men because they are not married to women. Watch and see what happens to mortality rates now after some of these ladies married other ladies. Mortality rates will sky rocket, IMO. Laughing  Innocent  Tongue out
__________________
Spare the advice: Wise Men don't need it; fools won't heed it. (Unsure)
admin
496 posts

No, no, no! Studies always show that married men live longer and are healtier than their single counterparts, but to quote Johnny Carson...

"Married men live longer than single men. But married men are a lot more willing to die."

Don't tell any of this to my boy. I'm trying to convince him to buy instead of lease.

admin
5174 posts

JD; Begging your pardon, but women outlive men because they are not married to women. Watch and see what happens to mortality rates now after some of these ladies married other ladies. Mortality rates will sky rocket, IMO. [image]   [image]   [image]

-ed-evans

That was my point exactly, Ed. Thanks for elaborating.

And, Virginia, I have a slightly different take on Carson's line. Married men don't REALLY live longer than single men. It just SEEMS like it's longer. The only real advantage we have related to longevity is that we married men have somebody to tell us it's probably not wise to eat the two-week-old mystery dish in the Tupperware container in the refrigerator - you know, the one with the really cool purple and green hair growing on it. (Tasted like chicken, but I'm still not sure. Thank God for Texas Pete.) Innocent

Page 1 · 2
< older posts 21–26 of 26

This Topic Is Locked To Guest Posts

It's been a while since this topic was active, if you'd like to get it going again, please post as a registered member

join now