Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26
7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2076086 20-Aug-2018 10:49
Send private message quote this post

MikeAqua:

 

I don't see the relevance of your ethical investment examples.  That is an investment company choosing where to buy, not who to sell to.

 

 

I don't see the relevance of that.  There are two parties to a contract agreeing to exchange a for b.  If money is involved, then the direction the money flows "changes everything" wrt being allowed to discriminate?  I really don't think so.

 

 


5081 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2068


  Reply # 2076128 20-Aug-2018 11:58
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

MikeAqua:

 

I don't see the relevance of your ethical investment examples.  That is an investment company choosing where to buy, not who to sell to.

 

 

I don't see the relevance of that.  There are two parties to a contract agreeing to exchange a for b.  If money is involved, then the direction the money flows "changes everything" wrt being allowed to discriminate?  I really don't think so.

 

 

Under the HRA it's illegal to refusal a sale (s44), refuse service (s44) or refuse admission (s42); based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination. 

 

Can you point to a section that outlaws refusal to purchase good or services (other than employment), refusal to invest or refusal enter a venue, based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination?

 

A practical example: A business can't refuse to sell to person because they are Asian (s44 HRA).  A customer could (hypothetically) refuse to shop at businesses where the proprietors or staff are Asian.

 

When it comes to business to business transactions, I'm not sure if the HRA applies at all

 

 

 

 





Mike

7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2076172 20-Aug-2018 12:39
Send private message quote this post

MikeAqua:

 

A practical example: A business can't refuse to sell to person because they are Asian (s44 HRA).  A customer could (hypothetically) refuse to shop at businesses where the proprietors or staff are Asian.

 

 

People actually do that - refuse to accept offers of goods and services because of race or whatever.  It's quite common for them to be vocal about it - "don't want to be treated by the <xyz race> doctor", teacher etc.

 

While that's not behaviour specifically covered by the HRA, it does seem to be covered by the BoR.


5081 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2068


  Reply # 2076940 21-Aug-2018 16:06
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

People actually do that - refuse to accept offers of goods and services because of race or whatever.  It's quite common for them to be vocal about it - "don't want to be treated by the <xyz race> doctor", teacher etc.

 

While that's not behaviour specifically covered by the HRA, it does seem to be covered by the BoR.

 

 

While appalling, I don't think the behaviour described is illegal.  I'm pretty sure consumers can be as prejudiced as they like.

 

All the  BoR does is outline a right to freedom from discrimination as defined by the HRA.

 

The BoR is also a gummy shark.  People only seem to run foul of it while exercising powers conferred by other statutes.





Mike

7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2076966 21-Aug-2018 17:10
Send private message quote this post

In practice, even if it was illegal it's not going to be easy to prove - unless they stepped too far and it could be prosecuted as hate speech, so they'll continue to get away with it. 

 

People need to speak out.

 

 


Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2076969 21-Aug-2018 17:23
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

People need to speak out.

 

 

Isn't that what we are doing here? This thread is not fun for me but I feel that I have to make a stand where I can. People let this sh!t wash over them and Trump gets elected. Right-wing echo chambers need to be challenged. 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


702 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 563


  Reply # 2076987 21-Aug-2018 17:38
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Rikkitic:

 

Fred99:

 

People need to speak out.

 

 

Isn't that what we are doing here? This thread is not fun for me but I feel that I have to make a stand where I can. People let this sh!t wash over them and Trump gets elected. Right-wing echo chambers need to be challenged. 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile, one of the key concerns put forward by these speakers quietly comes into effect...

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12110366


7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2076993 21-Aug-2018 18:05
Send private message quote this post

6FIEND:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Fred99:

 

People need to speak out.

 

 

Isn't that what we are doing here? This thread is not fun for me but I feel that I have to make a stand where I can. People let this sh!t wash over them and Trump gets elected. Right-wing echo chambers need to be challenged. 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile, one of the key concerns put forward by these speakers quietly comes into effect...

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12110366

 

 

The NZ Herald should be flogged for printing a fake news story from white genocide conspiracy theorists.  Idiots.

 

A more accurate version of the story:

 

https://www.newsweek.com/south-africa-begins-seizure-land-game-farmers-1081286

 

The South African government has begun the process of seizing land from owners in cases where the negotiation for compensation has stalled.

 

Leaving out what I highlighted makes a hell of a difference.  Our government can compulsorily acquire land through the Public Works Act, and disputes over valuation are normal.

 

 

 

 


Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2077000 21-Aug-2018 18:27
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

I didn't want to make a knee-jerk response to this so I did some quick reading. I still don't know nearly enough for an informed comment, but unsurprisingly, there is much more to this and it is far more complex than suggested by the less than substantial Herald report.

 

Will South Africa head down the path that Zimbabwe took? I certainly don't know enough to say but I suppose it can't entirely be ruled out. But at this stage it is nowhere near that point and there is no reason to think it will get there. Posting a link like this in this manner is mischievous because it suggests and implies things that are not warranted by the actual facts and it most certainly does not serve to provide any kind of legitimacy at all for the vile notions put forward by the Canadian speakers, if that is who is being referred to.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2077011 21-Aug-2018 18:54
Send private message quote this post

I read that Herald article earlier, and was going to post it in the dumb headlines thread in the "Off Topic" forum, but probably better to just ignore it - or keep a sh*t-fight in here.

 

Point number one, if indeed SA turns out like Zimbabwe and those farmers are driven from their land, I'm not going to get my knickers in a knot because they're white! That's ludicrous.  Next thing I expect we'll be seeing people arguing that they should be given special access to NZ as refugees, when they're "economic" refugees of no greater status than any of the millions of others who aren't white and don't qualify for refugee status either.

 

Point number two - the land is apparently being acquired as it's got coal underneath.  We can own land in NZ, but like most countries the state owns resources under your land, and could acquire it if it's determined to be in the national interest.  I don't like coal and I don't like Regulus.  I'm more annoyed that because the SA Government is broke, digging up more coal is seen as the solution.

 


7348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3841


  Reply # 2077012 21-Aug-2018 18:56
Send private message quote this post

Rikkitic: it is far more complex than suggested by the less than substantial Herald report.

 

 

The Herald report is absolutely "fake news" - with shreds of fact to arouse at least one two morons.


Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2077019 21-Aug-2018 19:13
Send private message quote this post

Yeah, the +1 trolls don't waste any opportunity, do they? So easy to click a button.

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


Glurp
8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3780

Subscriber

  Reply # 2077023 21-Aug-2018 19:24
Send private message quote this post

For those prepared to take the trouble to actually inform themselves a little about this issue, here is a link that provides some interesting perspectives from both sides. 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1080 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 63

Trusted

  Reply # 2077096 21-Aug-2018 21:50
Send private message quote this post

Fred99: Point number two - the land is apparently being acquired as it's got coal underneath.

 

In that particular case, yes, maybe. However, my understanding - and freely admit I could be wrong - is that the primary reason for the change in constitution (to enable land expropriation without compensation), and the general reason for expropriating any given piece of land, is related to addressing historical injustices and attempting to improve equity.

 

Fred99: The South African government has begun the process of seizing land from owners in cases where the negotiation for compensation has stalled.

 

Leaving out what I highlighted makes a hell of a difference.  Our government can compulsorily acquire land through the Public Works Act, and disputes over valuation are normal.

 

Sure, true. In that farmer's position I would walk away from negotiations too if I was offered one tenth of what I thought the land was reasonably worth... and I would be very concerned when the constitution was changed to enable expropriation of the land for zero compensation.


5081 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2068


  Reply # 2077200 22-Aug-2018 08:03
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Rikkitic:

 

Right-wing echo chambers need to be challenged. 

 

 

All echo chambers need to be challenged, left right or somewhere in between.  Echo chambers cause polarisation and entrenchment, which are the death of debate. 

 

Forget about politics being a contest of ideas.   It's a contest of tweets, dog whistles and virtue signalling; all across the spectrum.  Common sense is mostly heard from retired politicians.





Mike

1 | ... | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.