Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

Geoff332 · Nov 5, 2003, 06:28 pm

Anges,
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
you tried to establish the link between talent and genes.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
You however, throw the results in there to suggest that some might be better off taking a good look on themselves and desisting.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>Where did I try to do those things? Give me the specific words that I used from which you inferred those were my ideas.

Rebel,
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Rebel)
Your fourth post says that it isn't entirely their environment, and that there are "broader social dynamics."<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Geoff332)
It is not a direct product of education or the individual's socio-economic status, but a product of broader social dynamics.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>I never said it wasn't their environment, I said it wasn't a direct product of their education or socio-economic status. The latter is a subset of the former. The main thing I was getting at was that simply changing the education system -- the solution implied by your original statement -- is not likely to have a significant effect on ethnic or minority entrepreneurship unless there are other changes as well. I never said it wasn't discrimination; I said that discrimination wasn't merely a product of education nor merely manifest in education, nor is the lack of success in entrepreneurship solely a product of discrimination.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
because there weren't enough professionals in their "ecological proximity," not that I know whatever the fuck that means - but it apparently means they can't hire White lawyers.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Having a founding team of people you know and trust is critical to the success of most start-up businesses. It is a great deal more complicated than "hiring a white lawyer"; it is finding a small group of people you know and trust and working with them to found a business. If you know fewer people who are capable of being a part of this team, you are less likely to build a strong team, and your business is less likely to succeed. The first clause of the previous sentance is ecological proximity. It is partially a product of education and of socio-economics, but it is also partially a product of individual choices about where you live, who your work with, who you socialise with, where your kids go to school, where you go to church, how you relate to people and so on. Is this discrimination? In part, yes. Is this merely a product of education, as you originally wrote? Not even close.

Let's look at one scenario. A successful white male professional decides that they want to help a small business get started. They are busy in their professional life, so they decide they only have time to work with one small business. Are they more likely to help the young (white male) cousin of their wife's friend or some black guy who they've never met before? That decision is not based on your education, on any discriminatory attitudes, or on any personal characteristics of the two individuals trying to start their new business. It is based solely on the fact that they have some connection, however tenuous, to one of the people rather than the other.

Trying to educate people out of this situation is at best, a very long-term solution (there are plenty of other very good reasons for looking at education; but this one comes well down the list). It is also not certain to have a significant effect.

Nov 5, 2003, 06:28 pm	#52 (permalink) (top)
Geoff332 Igneous Magma Location: New Zealand Posts: 309	Anges, </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by you tried to establish the link between talent and genes.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by You however, throw the results in there to suggest that some might be better off taking a good look on themselves and desisting.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>Where did I try to do those things? Give me the specific words that I used from which you inferred those were my ideas. Rebel, </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Rebel) Your fourth post says that it isn't entirely their environment, and that there are "broader social dynamics."<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Geoff332) It is not a direct product of education or the individual's socio-economic status, but a product of broader social dynamics.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>I never said it wasn't their environment, I said it wasn't a direct product of their education or socio-economic status. The latter is a subset of the former. The main thing I was getting at was that simply changing the education system -- the solution implied by your original statement -- is not likely to have a significant effect on ethnic or minority entrepreneurship unless there are other changes as well. I never said it wasn't discrimination; I said that discrimination wasn't merely a product of education nor merely manifest in education, nor is the lack of success in entrepreneurship solely a product of discrimination. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by because there weren't enough professionals in their "ecological proximity," not that I know whatever the fuck that means - but it apparently means they can't hire White lawyers.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Having a founding team of people you know and trust is critical to the success of most start-up businesses. It is a great deal more complicated than "hiring a white lawyer"; it is finding a small group of people you know and trust and working with them to found a business. If you know fewer people who are capable of being a part of this team, you are less likely to build a strong team, and your business is less likely to succeed. The first clause of the previous sentance is ecological proximity. It is partially a product of education and of socio-economics, but it is also partially a product of individual choices about where you live, who your work with, who you socialise with, where your kids go to school, where you go to church, how you relate to people and so on. Is this discrimination? In part, yes. Is this merely a product of education, as you originally wrote? Not even close. Let's look at one scenario. A successful white male professional decides that they want to help a small business get started. They are busy in their professional life, so they decide they only have time to work with one small business. Are they more likely to help the young (white male) cousin of their wife's friend or some black guy who they've never met before? That decision is not based on your education, on any discriminatory attitudes, or on any personal characteristics of the two individuals trying to start their new business. It is based solely on the fact that they have some connection, however tenuous, to one of the people rather than the other. Trying to educate people out of this situation is at best, a very long-term solution (there are plenty of other very good reasons for looking at education; but this one comes well down the list). It is also not certain to have a significant effect.