Should There Be A Right To Discriminate?

[San Lumen]

You still have not explained how my example is discrimination . If it is why has no one filled suit claiming as such?

I have. As have others. As to why nobody has sued, likely because it's not discrimination covered by the horrible laws you champion.

Have you considered that its simply not feasible or practical for a establishment to have a location in every municipality?

There is this thing called profit. The small town in Upstate New York my relatives live in has very little in terms of business. It simply would not be profitable for Subway or Olive Garden to open there.

Im not even sure the town board or residents would want it but of that I cannot be certain.

[Telconi]

I have. As have others. As to why nobody has sued, likely because it's not discrimination covered by the horrible laws you champion.

Have you considered that its simply not feasible or practical for a establishment to have a location in every municipality?

There is this thing called profit. The small town in Upstate New York my relatives live in has very little in terms of business. It simply would not be profitable for Subway or Denny's to open there.

Im not even sure the town board or residents would want it but of that I cannot be certain.

How is any of this relevant?

[San Lumen]

Have you considered that its simply not feasible or practical for a establishment to have a location in every municipality?

There is this thing called profit. The small town in Upstate New York my relatives live in has very little in terms of business. It simply would not be profitable for Subway or Denny's to open there.

Im not even sure the town board or residents would want it but of that I cannot be certain.

How is any of this relevant?

How is it not? Its a real world example from personal experience

[Telconi]

How is any of this relevant?

How is it not? Its a real world example from personal experience

Because none of it effects rather that choice is or isnt discrimination.

[San Lumen]

How is it not? Its a real world example from personal experience

Because none of it effects rather that choice is or isnt discrimination.

Do you consider it discrimination?

Its basic economics. Their town is so small it wouldn't be profitable for many of the places you likely have in your area to open a location.

[Telconi]

Because none of it effects rather that choice is or isnt discrimination.

Do you consider it discrimination?

Its basic economics. Their town is so small it wouldn't be profitable for many of the places you likely have in your area to open a location.

Yes.

What if I had a profit motive to refuse service to black folks? Does that make it not discrimination?

[San Lumen]

Do you consider it discrimination?

Its basic economics. Their town is so small it wouldn't be profitable for many of the places you likely have in your area to open a location.

Yes.

What if I had a profit motive to refuse service to black folks? Does that make it not discrimination?

How and what is your solution? Force them to open a location that wouldn't be profitable? Zoning and building permits are mostly a local issue not a federal one nor a state issue. I think there are few exceptions but im not sure.

How does that even make sense? How would it not be profitable to not serve blacks?

[Galloism]

How does that even make sense? How would it not be profitable to not serve blacks?

This was specifically argued by business owners in the south, that opening to black people would cause them to lose so many white customers they could not stay in business.

[Telconi]

Yes.

What if I had a profit motive to refuse service to black folks? Does that make it not discrimination?

How and what is your solution? Force them to open a location that wouldn't be profitable? Zoning and building permits are mostly a local issue not a federal one nor a state issue. I think there are few exceptions but im not sure.

How does that even make sense? How would it not be profitable to not serve blacks?

How is it discrimination? That's been explained, more than once already. I don't have a solution, because I dont generally invent solutions to things that aren't problems.

Maybe there's a lot of very wealthy KKK guys who I want to attract to my business? Who knows.

[Ors Might]

then leave it. Shrug and walk away.

Ors is the one claiming its discrimination

No I’m fucking not.

[San Lumen]

How does that even make sense? How would it not be profitable to not serve blacks?

This was specifically argued by business owners in the south, that opening to black people would cause them to lose so many white customers they could not stay in business.

That was likely used as a justification for their discrimination. It more than likely was untrue.

How and what is your solution? Force them to open a location that wouldn't be profitable? Zoning and building permits are mostly a local issue not a federal one nor a state issue. I think there are few exceptions but im not sure.

How does that even make sense? How would it not be profitable to not serve blacks?

How is it discrimination? That's been explained, more than once already. I don't have a solution, because I dont generally invent solutions to things that aren't problems.

Maybe there's a lot of very wealthy KKK guys who I want to attract to my business? Who knows.

You just said it was. Therefore its not problem to you?

I think you and others dont understand the concept of zoning and urban planning. It is a municipal issue. Not Federal or state one. They don't have jurisdiction in it. I dont think most counties have jurisdiction either. There might be a few exceptions but I doubt it.

If you as a individual or a corporation want to open a business or build a new structure you must first get a building permit. If a landlord wants to make alterations to a apartment building they must get a permit. Same goes for your house.

There may be a public hearing on it. It is then approved or denied. if you dont get that permit its not getting built.

Maybe Subway or Applebees's tried to open a location in my aunt and uncle's town and it get denied. Have you and others not considered that possibility?

[Telconi]

This was specifically argued by business owners in the south, that opening to black people would cause them to lose so many white customers they could not stay in business.

That was likely used as a justification for their discrimination. It more than likely was untrue.

How is it discrimination? That's been explained, more than once already. I don't have a solution, because I dont generally invent solutions to things that aren't problems.

Maybe there's a lot of very wealthy KKK guys who I want to attract to my business? Who knows.

You just said it was. Therefore its not problem to you?

I think you and others dont understand the concept of zoning and urban planning. It is a municipal issue. Not Federal or state one. They don't have jurisdiction in it. I dont think most counties have jurisdiction either. There might be a few exceptions but I doubt it.

If you as a individual or a corporation want to open a business or build a new structure you must first get a building permit. If a landlord wants to make alterations to a apartment building they must get a permit. Same goes for your house.

There may be a public hearing on it. It is then approved or denied. if you dont get that permit its not getting built.

Maybe Subway or Applebees's tried to open a location in my aunt and uncle's town and it get denied. Have you and others not considered that possibility?

A definition was provided, alongside an explanation of how not opening a store in a community believed to be a low profit market fit that definition.

Not one that the state should address.

The rest of your post is entirely irrelevant.

[San Lumen]

That was likely used as a justification for their discrimination. It more than likely was untrue.

You just said it was. Therefore its not problem to you?

I think you and others dont understand the concept of zoning and urban planning. It is a municipal issue. Not Federal or state one. They don't have jurisdiction in it. I dont think most counties have jurisdiction either. There might be a few exceptions but I doubt it.

If you as a individual or a corporation want to open a business or build a new structure you must first get a building permit. If a landlord wants to make alterations to a apartment building they must get a permit. Same goes for your house.

There may be a public hearing on it. It is then approved or denied. if you dont get that permit its not getting built.

Maybe Subway or Applebees's tried to open a location in my aunt and uncle's town and it get denied. Have you and others not considered that possibility?

A definition was provided, alongside an explanation of how not opening a store in a community believed to be a low profit market fit that definition.

Not one that the state should address.

The rest of your post is entirely irrelevant.

And they cannot be forced to open there. A bank is different from a Applebees

Its not irrelevant at at all.

[Galloism]

That was likely used as a justification for their discrimination. It more than likely was untrue.

Actually it was more than likely true. Many of those who literally served black people under cover of darkness from their car used the same excuse for discriminating in public during broad daylight - they feared the consequences if they didn't.

They were happy when the civil rights act passed, because they could blame the government. But even though they were doing their damndest to not discriminate, they feared not discriminating in broad daylight, as they felt that would be the end of their business.

Which is probably a good reason for something like the civil rights act - when businesses cannot survive without being discriminatory.

[Estanglia]

Oh, now I get it.

That comment was literally just there to prove one of my later points. On its own, it isn't much.

The meat of it is later, alongside the question I asked. Yeah, he skipped most of my post and its points.

I was explaining to you how it’s not discrimination to not have any restaurants or major stores in a small town.

The other points we have been over

I don't remember us going over how your arguments can be boiled down to you supporting the status quo because it is the status quo. Or us explaining (or at least you acknowledging) that you're using our arguments.

We’ve been over your discussions a thousand times before, have the same level of politeness.

I don’t see how I have a double standard

One of them I explained in that post. You switch from using our arguments to arguing against them in the span of a couple of posts. I can't see that as being anything other than a double standard: you treat one argument as a good one in one context, then immediately drop it and argue against it in another context.

You answered your own question, It's discrimination on the basis of population.

No it is not discrimination. The location in the small town of a few hundred likely isn’t going to generate enough profit

Is it not selecting customers on the basis of where they live?

You say you don't understand how you have a double standard, then you do shit like this. You say 'serve all', then admit to be willing to:
1) Not enforce it when it comes to location
2) Are willing to discriminate against bigots
3) Ignore the long list of legally allowed asterisks to that, with your only response being 'is there discrimination?', which either is dismissing the potential for discrimination there, or supporting the status quo.

[San Lumen]

I was explaining to you how it’s not discrimination to not have any restaurants or major stores in a small town.

The other points we have been over

I don't remember us going over how your arguments can be boiled down to you supporting the status quo because it is the status quo. Or us explaining (or at least you acknowledging) that you're using our arguments.

I don’t see how I have a double standard

One of them I explained in that post. You switch from using our arguments to arguing against them in the span of a couple of posts. I can't see that as being anything other than a double standard: you treat one argument as a good one in one context, then immediately drop it and argue against it in another context.

No it is not discrimination. The location in the small town of a few hundred likely isn’t going to generate enough profit

Is it not selecting customers on the basis of where they live?

You say you don't understand how you have a double standard, then you do shit like this. You say 'serve all', then admit to be willing to:
1) Not enforce it when it comes to location
2) Are willing to discriminate against bigots
3) Ignore the long list of legally allowed asterisks to that, with your only response being 'is there discrimination?', which either is dismissing the potential for discrimination there, or supporting the status quo.

I just laid out above how location for the most part is not discrimination

[Telconi]

A definition was provided, alongside an explanation of how not opening a store in a community believed to be a low profit market fit that definition.

Not one that the state should address.

The rest of your post is entirely irrelevant.

And they cannot be forced to open there. A bank is different from a Applebees

Its not irrelevant at at all.

They could be.

How are zoning laws relevant to rather profit motivated store locations constitute descrimination?

[Telconi]

I don't remember us going over how your arguments can be boiled down to you supporting the status quo because it is the status quo. Or us explaining (or at least you acknowledging) that you're using our arguments.



One of them I explained in that post. You switch from using our arguments to arguing against them in the span of a couple of posts. I can't see that as being anything other than a double standard: you treat one argument as a good one in one context, then immediately drop it and argue against it in another context.



Is it not selecting customers on the basis of where they live?

You say you don't understand how you have a double standard, then you do shit like this. You say 'serve all', then admit to be willing to:
1) Not enforce it when it comes to location
2) Are willing to discriminate against bigots
3) Ignore the long list of legally allowed asterisks to that, with your only response being 'is there discrimination?', which either is dismissing the potential for discrimination there, or supporting the status quo.

I just laid out above how location for the most part is not discrimination

No, you said it's not, despite it clearly being so.

[San Lumen]

And they cannot be forced to open there. A bank is different from a Applebees

Its not irrelevant at at all.

They could be.

How are zoning laws relevant to rather profit motivated store locations constitute descrimination?

How could you force them?

If any business wants to stay in operation it has to be profitable. In a small town like the one my aunt and uncle are in it simply wouldnt be. Thats not discrimination. Maybe they have tried to open there and the town board denied it. Are they discriminating against themselves?

[Tavutelle and Firdland]

It should be Nantucket

[Telconi]

They could be.

How are zoning laws relevant to rather profit motivated store locations constitute descrimination?

How could you force them?

If any business wants to stay in operation it has to be profitable. In a small town like the one my aunt and uncle are in it simply wouldnt be. Thats not discrimination. Maybe they have tried to open there and the town board denied it. Are they discriminating against themselves?

Fine them if they don't which is how other bans on discrimination are enforced.

You keep saying that, but you're still wrong.

[Galloism]

They could be.

How are zoning laws relevant to rather profit motivated store locations constitute descrimination?

How could you force them?

If any business wants to stay in operation it has to be profitable. In a small town like the one my aunt and uncle are in it simply wouldnt be. Thats not discrimination. Maybe they have tried to open there and the town board denied it. Are they discriminating against themselves?

I mean, for the bank we did it to, we threatened to fine them out the ass if they didn't.

[San Lumen]

How could you force them?

If any business wants to stay in operation it has to be profitable. In a small town like the one my aunt and uncle are in it simply wouldnt be. Thats not discrimination. Maybe they have tried to open there and the town board denied it. Are they discriminating against themselves?

Fine them if they don't which is how other bans on discrimination are enforced.

You keep saying that, but you're still wrong.

fine them for not having a location in every single municipality? Thats absurd

A business thats not making a profit can keep its doors open?

[San Lumen]

How could you force them?

If any business wants to stay in operation it has to be profitable. In a small town like the one my aunt and uncle are in it simply wouldnt be. Thats not discrimination. Maybe they have tried to open there and the town board denied it. Are they discriminating against themselves?

I mean, for the bank we did it to, we threatened to fine them out the ass if they didn't.

so why isnt this being done for restaurants or stores? A place like the town i mentioned is a prime example. Why is it not being done there?

[Galloism]

I mean, for the bank we did it to, we threatened to fine them out the ass if they didn't.

so why isnt this being done for restaurants or stores? A place like the town i mentioned is a prime example. Why is it not being done there?

Because we don't care about country folk, basically.