Rivendell's Black Reparations Pricing

[colker]

Originally Posted by Hilltopperny

You served the country and public through the military. This discount is being given strictly based on race. No dog in the fight, but these two discounts are not the same thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouldn´t redlining be the same ? Prices for black people would "real" but whites would buy w/a discount.

[colker]

Originally Posted by jpw

How is Riv going to know that an order for this 45% discount has been placed by a customer who qualifies for the discount?

They don´t ... but having white folks say "i am black" is already action. Language is the ultimate fighting ground.

[earlfoss]

Rivendell is trying to do a good thing. It may not be perfect, but it's their effort and it appears to be run with good hearts. Leave it to your fellow cyclists to find new and innovative ways to $hit all over it, even though it affects them in no way whatsoever.

[bthornt]

The law doesn't say all discounts are illegal. It simply says discounts based on race, ethnicity, and other personal characteristics are illegal. So, if a veteran gets a discount, that's ok. If a veteran of ethnicity A gets a discount and it is denied to a veteran of ethnicity B, that is illegal.

I'm not questioning Rivendell's motivations, or the goodness of their cause, I'm just saying the way they are dealing with this issue seems to be illegal, based on what I found on the ACLU web page. Once again, I'm not a lawyer, but there doesn't seem to be any ambiguity about this.

[joevers]

Originally Posted by Skenry

Ha, it actually works out though doesn't it? I live in an old sundown town, obviously Oakwood, Ohio isn't that way anymore but still very high taxes. But no crime, very safe, nationally ranked schools, the City comes to pick up my trash and they shovel my sidewalks, old treelined streets. It's a classic good place to live.

But everyone, pays the same price here.

Deleted what I originally said but-
This is derailing the conversation, it's divisive, it's inaccurate, and it's full of racist dogwhistles. This user has a history of saying divisive, sexist, and overly politcal comments in locked threads and offers very little to the bicycling side of this forum.
Moderators, how many chances are given to this user?

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by joevers

Deleted what I originally said but-
This is derailing the conversation, it's divisive, it's inaccurate, and it's full of racist dogwhistles. This user has a history of saying divisive, sexist, and overly politcal comments in locked threads.

And on top of that, he likes SRAM.

I have no idea what the impetus for Skenry’s remarks was, because, frankly, they weren’t that well-written. You might very well be right. But isn’t it a possibility that lobbing verbal grenades at someone might also get a thread locked?

BlackDog had a very civil response to Skenry’s comment. Flash made his point by citing historical circumstances, rather than by using the prefix “you.” Bthornt raised some interesting issues without being antagonistic or bombastic.

[joevers]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

And on top of that, he likes SRAM.

I have no idea what the impetus for Skenry’s remarks were, because, frankly, they weren’t that well-written. You might very well be right. But isn’t it a possibility that lobbing verbal grenades at someone might also get a thread locked?

BlackDog had a very civil response to Skenry’s comment. Flash made his point by citing historical circumstances, rather than by using the prefix “you.” Bthornt raised some interesting issues without being antagonistic or bombastic.

You're right, I'm backing off and hoping that the conversation steers back to rivendell and the program that they're running.

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

And on top of that, he likes SRAM.

I have no idea what the impetus for Skenry’s remarks were, because, frankly, they weren’t that well-written. You might very well be right. But isn’t it a possibility that lobbing verbal grenades at someone might also get a thread locked?

BlackDog had a very civil response to Skenry’s comment. Flash made his point by citing historical circumstances, rather than by using the prefix “you.” Bthornt raised some interesting issues without being antagonistic or bombastic.

The comment in question is a dog-whistle at best. It deserves to be called out.

[daker13]

Originally Posted by colker

Civil rights conscience happens way before things change on a big magnitude and it happens in spite of markets and sellers BUT... capitalism is both a destructive and a progressive force.
Slavery ended when a new economy based on industries and salaries was ready to take over.
Ethics are the pillars but the wheel of change speeds up due to economic pressure.
The push for consummerism brought down more tyrannies in the late 20th century than ethical thinking.

Uhh, strong disagree on this extremely questionable timeline. This is the ideological position known as "Neoliberalism."

Much to disagree with in this thread, both the reactionary stuff and the more middle-of-the-road "common sense" free market rah-rah stuff... but, it's getting locked, so why bother?

[cinema]

wonderful chance to expand your ignore list here guys! dont pass this opportunity up

[KonaSS]

This whole thread is odd. Just goes to show that no good deed goes unpunished.

[colker]

Originally Posted by daker13

Uhh, strong disagree on this extremely questionable timeline. This is the ideological position known as "Neoliberalism."

Much to disagree with in this thread, both the reactionary stuff and the more middle-of-the-road "common sense" free market rah-rah stuff... but, it's getting locked, so why bother?

Actually it´s pure marxist class struggle thinking. Ideals are apparently utopia when it´s class struggle and economy.

Marx showed that liberal ideas in the 19th century masquerade the new agenda of capitalism: salaried workers. No matter the color of skins, white or black will provide the same labour and become market for the goods produced.

The civil rights movement is rational and capitalist as much as ethically right.

[daker13]

Originally Posted by colker

Actually it´s pure marxist class struggle thinking. Ideals are apparently utopia when it´s class struggle and economy.

Marx showed that liberal ideas in the 19th century masquerade the new agenda of capitalism: salaried workers. No matter the color of skins, white or black will provide the same labour and become market for the goods produced.

The civil rights movement is rational and capitalist as much as ethically right.

Actually, this is a pretty severe misreading of some of Marx's ideas. It's true that Marx believed capitalism was a tremendous force for innovation... but that's about the end of it. Consumerism is not a mode of production. Marx would be horrified at the idea that first-world consumerism would be considered a force for good.

Originally Posted by colker

Ethics are the pillars but the wheel of change speeds up due to economic pressure.
The push for consummerism brought down more tyrannies in the late 20th century than ethical thinking.

But, I appreciate seeing Marx's name on a board that sometimes seems to think of the political ideology of the Koch brothers as neutral and apolitical. (I love the Paceline, but I'm one of the people who see a double standard when it comes to what is deemed political and what isn't.)

[AngryScientist]

Thread closed. Further actions pending.