Grantywanty
Registered Senior Member
Positive discrimination (hm)
Sure, I mean if a man who is rich should be positively treated. That's why he gets to pay for legal defense that is vastly superior not only to that of the poor, but also, often, stronger, than the prosecution's offense.
Rich people should get political advantages also. They should be able to influence politicians and have more power than their one vote via lobbyists, etc. Rich people need this extra help because they have more complicated problems than those people who are trying hoping to get by.
Powerful companies should get positively discriminated and be able to influence government spending. for example it is just fine that energy and arms corporations had vastly more influence than most smaller companies when it came to, say, the war in Iraq. These companies stand to make billions on their influence. They need that advantage. What little company could take such advantage of influence? No, the big companies need the positive discrimination.
And so on.
Sure, I mean if a man who is rich should be positively treated. That's why he gets to pay for legal defense that is vastly superior not only to that of the poor, but also, often, stronger, than the prosecution's offense.
Rich people should get political advantages also. They should be able to influence politicians and have more power than their one vote via lobbyists, etc. Rich people need this extra help because they have more complicated problems than those people who are trying hoping to get by.
Powerful companies should get positively discriminated and be able to influence government spending. for example it is just fine that energy and arms corporations had vastly more influence than most smaller companies when it came to, say, the war in Iraq. These companies stand to make billions on their influence. They need that advantage. What little company could take such advantage of influence? No, the big companies need the positive discrimination.
And so on.