NATION

PASSWORD

Can I have a white taxi driver please?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Atlanticatia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5970
Founded: Mar 01, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Atlanticatia » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:04 pm

I'm not sure how I feel about this. obviously, it's fucked up, but i'm not sure if there should be a role for government.

One side of me says that it is extremely racist, discriminatory, and violates the principles of an inclusive society. No one should be seen differently or lesser because of their race, ethnicity, or culture. In a multicultural society, we can't tolerate things like this. It's extremely unreasonable for someone to demand a white taxi driver.

Another side of me says that it is a private business, and there's not direct discrimination by the employer.

so I'm undecided about whether or not the government should intervene.. if, somehow, it becomes a widespread thing where it's causing considerable discrimination, racism, or division between races then it should.

However if a business began offering taxi drivers of a certain ethnicity only, or only hired people of a certain ethnicity/race, then the government should definitely put a stop to it.
Last edited by Atlanticatia on Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.95

Pros: social democracy, LGBT+ rights, pro-choice, free education and health care, environmentalism, Nordic model, secularism, welfare state, multiculturalism
Cons: social conservatism, neoliberalism, hate speech, racism, sexism, 'right-to-work' laws, religious fundamentalism
i'm a dual american-new zealander previously lived in the northeast US, now living in new zealand. university student.
Social Democrat and Progressive.
Hanna Nilsen, Leader of the SDP. Equality, Prosperity, and Opportunity: The Social Democratic Party

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:05 pm

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:What law requires cab drivers to actually take customers?


No, the law requires cab drivers to not be arseholes about taking customers.

Oh, sure, you cannot take services for a reasonable thing, but the right to take customers or not is not unlimited.

Is it reasonable to demand a white cab driver? I don't think it is.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 164089
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:10 pm

New Aerios wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Well "There's no need" didn't really inspire me to eloquence.


Then why bother commenting?

Because I disagreed with you and felt like saying so.


Imperializt Russia wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I think there's something relevant here, that it's pretty basic:

Even if you have a business, that still doesn't give you a right to ignore the law and be an asshole.

What law requires cab drivers to actually take customers?

I doubt there is one. Bet there's a law requiring them not to give employees, such as their drivers, preferential treatment on account of their race, though.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Buse
Diplomat
 
Posts: 648
Founded: Sep 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Buse » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:11 pm

It is a normal reaction of people after being exposed to long term dictatorship of political corectness.
Kosova është Shqipëri

User avatar
Ieperithem
Diplomat
 
Posts: 573
Founded: Feb 04, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Ieperithem » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:14 pm

Brazilian People wrote: What if a driver just want to accept clients of a certain ethnicity?


They can already do that. A driver that doesn't want to take someone of some race is free to quit their job rather than do so. They would, of course, have to deal with nobody being willing to hire them afterwards.

Similarly, I believe a company should be free to authorise customers to request a driver based on whatever conditions they'd like, so long as they're willing to deal with customers opposed to such a policy taking their business elsewhere.
Last edited by Ieperithem on Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Political Spectrum Test
Economic Right: 69.8%
Social Libertarian: 29.3%
Foreign Policy Neoconservative: 36.0%
Cultural conservative: 22.6%
"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all."
-Theodore Roosevelt

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 164089
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:14 pm

Buse wrote:It is a normal reaction of people after being exposed to long term dictatorship of political corectness.

Shit, another one has gotten loose from the Daily Mail comments section.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:14 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
No, the law requires cab drivers to not be arseholes about taking customers.

Oh, sure, you cannot take services for a reasonable thing, but the right to take customers or not is not unlimited.

Is it reasonable to demand a white cab driver? I don't think it is.


I don't think it is either. Customers cannot act like pricks either, but neither can the business.

If a customer demands a white cab driver it is unreasonable to expect that the business will comply to the request, same as if businesses demand to just have white customers, it is also unreasonable to expect the government and society will comply to the request.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 164089
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:16 pm

Ieperithem wrote:
Brazilian People wrote: What if a driver just want to accept clients of a certain ethnicity?


They can already do that. A driver that doesn't want to take someone of some race is free to quit their job rather than do so. They would, of course, have to deal with nobody being willing to hire them afterwards.

Similarly, I believe a company should be free to authorise customers to request a driver based on whatever conditions they'd like, so long as they're willing to deal with customers opposed to such a policy taking their business elsewhere.

Alternatively, we could not allow businesses to be racist. That'd just be peachy.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Buse
Diplomat
 
Posts: 648
Founded: Sep 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Buse » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:19 pm

Ifreann wrote:
Buse wrote:It is a normal reaction of people after being exposed to long term dictatorship of political corectness.

Shit, another one has gotten loose from the Daily Mail comments section.

I know you will sorry for the Pakistanis because they cannot rape no more, but cut this bullshit.
Kosova është Shqipëri

User avatar
Buse
Diplomat
 
Posts: 648
Founded: Sep 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Buse » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:21 pm

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:Is it reasonable to demand a white cab driver? I don't think it is.


I don't think it is either. Customers cannot act like pricks either, but neither can the business.

If a customer demands a white cab driver it is unreasonable to expect that the business will comply to the request, same as if businesses demand to just have white customers, it is also unreasonable to expect the government and society will comply to the request.

Fine, the cutomer will find another taxy company and the problem is solved. That is how markets works.
Kosova është Shqipëri

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 42054
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:21 pm

Buse wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Shit, another one has gotten loose from the Daily Mail comments section.

I know you will sorry for the Pakistanis because they cannot rape no more, but cut this bullshit.


Are you aware of the concept of a double negative?

User avatar
Enfaru
Minister
 
Posts: 2921
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Enfaru » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:21 pm

Actually I think I revise my opinion. This is probably not that bad a decision...for instance.

Vulnerable women, for instance those who have been dometically abused, might ask for a 'female' taxi driver as they can't trust men. Is it wrong to deny them the service if you have spare female cab drivers? In the same instance, what about those people who have been abused by say, white men. Shouldn't they be allowed to ask for someone that they think they can trust, no matter how misguided. Instead of pushing our own agenda onto them?

Everyone has their own preferences...do you buy a black iphone or a white iphone, which would you feel more comfortable with? If the cab company have the resources spare, then imo, they should allow the customer to pick and choose even if there might be a longer wait or higher cost. After all, if they say "no, we don't allow customers to make a choice on that matter" or , "no we don't have anyone available", the customer is going to go somewhere where they can get that service and you're going to lose out on that repeat custom and perhaps a few word of mouth secondary customers as well.

I think we call that Civil Rights and Personal Freedoms.

Businesses on the other hand, should be able to make those same distinctions as they are there to maximise the amount of profit and they can't do that if they're being selective about their customers and therefore damaging the economy.
Sovereign Charter Quick Links
Factbook · Role-plays · RMB · Map (Origin | Quantum) · Chat · Members: 73
Myraxia: One does not learn to GM; One throws oneself in and prays they don't fuck up too badly.
Game Master
Founder of the Sovereign Charter,
4th President and,
Tutor of the College of Theatrics

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:24 pm

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:Is it reasonable to demand a white cab driver? I don't think it is.


I don't think it is either. Customers cannot act like pricks either, but neither can the business.

If a customer demands a white cab driver it is unreasonable to expect that the business will comply to the request, same as if businesses demand to just have white customers, it is also unreasonable to expect the government and society will comply to the request.

So...
What was being argued about exactly?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
WestRedMaple
Minister
 
Posts: 3068
Founded: Aug 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby WestRedMaple » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:24 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
WestRedMaple wrote:
You're still not thinking through your post before posting it. You got caught making up a line of bull. I'm still waiting for you to actually contribute anything.

Although, that you think supporting the rights of others needs a defense doesn't leave me very hopeful


So you can't defend your statement. Concession accepted.


I contend that there is no need to defend supporting rights. There is no concession, because you've yet to actually even address any of my posts.

User avatar
WestRedMaple
Minister
 
Posts: 3068
Founded: Aug 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby WestRedMaple » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:25 pm

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:What are you referring to here Iffy?
I was under the impression that service could be withheld as and when for no given reason.

Or is there a context from some posts previous that I haven't seen?


I think there's something relevant here, that it's pretty basic:

Even if you have a business, that still doesn't give you a right to ignore the law and be an asshole.


And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.

User avatar
Buse
Diplomat
 
Posts: 648
Founded: Sep 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Buse » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:26 pm

Sexual molesting of children is popular among westernes, they seem to see it a human right. "Look, gays made it, so can we"
Kosova është Shqipëri

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:27 pm

WestRedMaple wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I think there's something relevant here, that it's pretty basic:

Even if you have a business, that still doesn't give you a right to ignore the law and be an asshole.


And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.


actually you can if the consensual private transaction involves something illegal :-)
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 164089
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:29 pm

Buse wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Shit, another one has gotten loose from the Daily Mail comments section.

I know you will sorry for the Pakistanis because they cannot rape no more, but cut this bullshit.

You're one to talk about bullshit, mate.


WestRedMaple wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
So you can't defend your statement. Concession accepted.


I contend that there is no need to defend supporting rights. There is no concession, because you've yet to actually even address any of my posts.

That's almost as stupid as the "Hurr durr political correctness" bullshit from the other guy.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:29 pm

WestRedMaple wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I think there's something relevant here, that it's pretty basic:

Even if you have a business, that still doesn't give you a right to ignore the law and be an asshole.


And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.


So does that mean we have no right to interfere in a mafia circle?
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
WestRedMaple
Minister
 
Posts: 3068
Founded: Aug 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby WestRedMaple » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:29 pm

Alyakia wrote:
WestRedMaple wrote:
And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.


actually you can if the consensual private transaction involves something illegal :-)


You seem to be confusing the ability to do something with a right to do it

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:30 pm

WestRedMaple wrote:
Alyakia wrote:
actually you can if the consensual private transaction involves something illegal :-)


You seem to be confusing the ability to do something with a right to do it


We're not the ones arguing that consensual private transactions should all be legal, here.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
New Aerios
Minister
 
Posts: 2250
Founded: Apr 19, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby New Aerios » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:30 pm

Alyakia wrote:
WestRedMaple wrote:
And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.


actually you can if the consensual private transaction involves something illegal :-)


So, if selling socks while wearing a clown hat suddenly became illegal, you'd be completely supportive of arresting people for it, right?
-------------------------------I--M--P--E--R--I--V--M----N--O--V--A----A--E--R--I--O--S---------------------------------
"No matter how worthy the cause, it is robbery, theft, and injustice to confiscate the property of one person and give it to another to whom it does not belong"

"Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
WestRedMaple
Minister
 
Posts: 3068
Founded: Aug 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby WestRedMaple » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:30 pm

Ifreann wrote:
Buse wrote:I know you will sorry for the Pakistanis because they cannot rape no more, but cut this bullshit.

You're one to talk about bullshit, mate.


WestRedMaple wrote:
I contend that there is no need to defend supporting rights. There is no concession, because you've yet to actually even address any of my posts.

That's almost as stupid as the "Hurr durr political correctness" bullshit from the other guy.


Your inability to follow the discussion does not make my statement stupid.

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:31 pm

New Aerios wrote:
Alyakia wrote:
actually you can if the consensual private transaction involves something illegal :-)


So, if selling socks while wearing a clown hat suddenly became illegal, you'd be completely supportive of arresting people for it, right?


illegal doesn't only mean prison. It can also mean fines and restrictions for your business.

So, of course we'd have to follow the law. We might argue it's not fair, but generally laws don't border into the absurd. Generally.
Last edited by Soldati Senza Confini on Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
WestRedMaple
Minister
 
Posts: 3068
Founded: Aug 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby WestRedMaple » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:32 pm

Soldati senza confini wrote:
WestRedMaple wrote:
And there is no right to interfere in their consensual, private transactions.


So does that mean we have no right to interfere in a mafia circle?


Obviously not. The mafia harms other people. There is every right for us to protect ourselves from them.

Did you really miss the part about people deciding and consenting?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, Bear Stearns, Bovad, Eahland, Emotional Support Crocodile, Federation Of Ochima, Floofybit, Hidrandia, Lethinia, Maximum Imperium Rex, Norse Inuit Union, Nu Elysium, Philjia, Plan Neonie, Port Carverton, Ravemath, Shidei, Simonia, Solstice Isle, Uiiop

Advertisement

Remove ads