North Carolina Lot Says No Parking for Obama Supporters

[akdiver 3]

Doesn't seem much smart anyway... I mean- whomever wins, he's obviously discriminatory towards one group of people, meaning he could do without their business. You would think in this economy that would be the case. People are supposedly driving less.

So, you think it's OK to sacrifice your principles and beliefs for the sake of profit? You know, there is more to life than money.

Why would you exclude an SUV from a parking lot?

Maybe he wants to make a statement about the evils of SUVs and/or gas consumption in America? Maybe he just wants to cram more cars on the lot. Who knows? Who cares?

[akdiver 3]

FWIW, I certainly do not believe that government has any business dictating who a private individual or company must do business with. If someone does not want to do business with you FOR ANY REASON, that should be completely up to that individual.

[HAL 9000 96]

Looks to me a bit like panic. Gibsonville is in the bluest part of North Carolina. North Carolina hasn't voted for a Democrat for president since Jimmy Carter. It should be solid red, but isn't. Right now it is undecided but trending toward Obama.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/labe...day%27s%20polls

If some guy in a blue part of NC opposed to Obama can make it a little harder for people to visualize Obama support, it does go to support McCain in a tight race. To me, this looks like an amusing bit of desperation on the part of a property owner who worries he'd have to start paying his fair share under a Obama administration.

Doesn't seem much smart anyway... I mean- whomever wins, he's obviously discriminatory towards one group of people, meaning he could do without their business. You would think in this economy that would be the case. People are supposedly driving less.

Man... if the guy is making at least $250K per year from running a parking lot then I am going to leave science and get into that line of work. At least at mine I wouldn't be stupid enough to discriminate against Republicans.

Sorry to break to you, Maviwaro, but if your in science for the money, you've made a mistake. You'll probably make a decent living but you are unlikely to get wealthy. (I know you're just starting -- and I've been working in industry for 20 years since I finished my postdoc.) I've seen lots of business owners and managers who don't have the intellect to be successful in science do very well in business. Selection pressures are different. From what I've seen, selection pressures promoting greed, amorality, and ruthlessness are much more powerful in business than in science.

I was joking novotul. Whether or not I stay in academia or move on to industry... I'll have done so out of love more than anything. At least my PI is very well off and very well respected in his field. He's a pretty good person to model my methodology and ethics as far as science is concerned- even if I end up in industry.

But yeah... we should really look at the parking lot industry as a start-up alternative or to have on the side since even in this economy it seems to be quite profitable.

[HAL 9000 96]

Doesn't seem much smart anyway... I mean- whomever wins, he's obviously discriminatory towards one group of people, meaning he could do without their business. You would think in this economy that would be the case. People are supposedly driving less.

So, you think it's OK to sacrifice your principles and beliefs for the sake of profit? You know, there is more to life than money.

Why would you exclude an SUV from a parking lot?

Maybe he wants to make a statement about the evils of SUVs and/or gas consumption in America? Maybe he just wants to cram more cars on the lot. Who knows? Who cares?

No, not really. I probably wouldn't be silly enough to judge my customers in that case.

A parking lot is a parking lot, not a political debate forum, and even in a debate, I still wouldn't be stupid enough to want to silence my opposition.

[pedroh 21]

FWIW, I certainly do not believe that government has any business dictating who a private individual or company must do business with. If someone does not want to do business with you FOR ANY REASON, that should be completely up to that individual.

so are you ok with businesses not catering to people because of their color, nationality or sexual preference? discrimination is ok in the private sector?

[IAMX 3,055]

FWIW, I certainly do not believe that government has any business dictating who a private individual or company must do business with. If someone does not want to do business with you FOR ANY REASON, that should be completely up to that individual.

so are you ok with businesses not catering to people because of their color, nationality or sexual preference? discrimination is ok in the private sector?

Actually, I see no problem with it at all. If they want to lose business and their own bottom line, who am I to stop them from such stupidity? Bright people won't discriminate in such manners against customers who pay money.

[mendeleev 69]

Looks to me a bit like panic. Gibsonville is in the bluest part of North Carolina. North Carolina hasn't voted for a Democrat for president since Jimmy Carter. It should be solid red, but isn't. Right now it is undecided but trending toward Obama.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/labe...day%27s%20polls

If some guy in a blue part of NC opposed to Obama can make it a little harder for people to visualize Obama support, it does go to support McCain in a tight race. To me, this looks like an amusing bit of desperation on the part of a property owner who worries he'd have to start paying his fair share under a Obama administration.

Doesn't seem much smart anyway... I mean- whomever wins, he's obviously discriminatory towards one group of people, meaning he could do without their business. You would think in this economy that would be the case. People are supposedly driving less.

Man... if the guy is making at least $250K per year from running a parking lot then I am going to leave science and get into that line of work. At least at mine I wouldn't be stupid enough to discriminate against Republicans.

Sorry to break to you, Maviwaro, but if your in science for the money, you've made a mistake. You'll probably make a decent living but you are unlikely to get wealthy. (I know you're just starting -- and I've been working in industry for 20 years since I finished my postdoc.) I've seen lots of business owners and managers who don't have the intellect to be successful in science do very well in business. Selection pressures are different. From what I've seen, selection pressures promoting greed, amorality, and ruthlessness are much more powerful in business than in science.

I was joking novotul. Whether or not I stay in academia or move on to industry... I'll have done so out of love more than anything. At least my PI is very well off and very well respected in his field. He's a pretty good person to model my methodology and ethics as far as science is concerned- even if I end up in industry.

But yeah... we should really look at the parking lot industry as a start-up alternative or to have on the side since even in this economy it seems to be quite profitable.

I understand that you're joking. But it pays to keep in mind -- the selection pressures for success in science and business are very different.

[HAL 9000 96]

FWIW, I certainly do not believe that government has any business dictating who a private individual or company must do business with. If someone does not want to do business with you FOR ANY REASON, that should be completely up to that individual.

Reasons that are discriminatory... not good. Its not about a government telling people whom they can do business with. Its about people not being freaking stupid to the point of necessitating a government intervention in the first place. Perhaps that's why there's laws and rights in place.

[HAL 9000 96]

FWIW, I certainly do not believe that government has any business dictating who a private individual or company must do business with. If someone does not want to do business with you FOR ANY REASON, that should be completely up to that individual.

so are you ok with businesses not catering to people because of their color, nationality or sexual preference? discrimination is ok in the private sector?

Actually, I see no problem with it at all. If they want to lose business and their own bottom line, who am I to stop them from such stupidity? Bright people won't discriminate in such manners against customers who pay money.

Similarly I could give this anarchistic approach to running a society some credit in the similar light that the government can also fund a public campaign calling out such idiotic behavior such that the moron's competitors are given government benefits for not being so freakin stupid.

Money for TV ads too. Stating how Parking Lot X doesn't discriminate for the most stupid of reasons.

So ok. The government won't tax, punish, or push against the discriminating business... No... we don't want that kind of intrusion into private sectors. The government can just reward those businesses that don't act like complete morons. As will an increasing number of customers.

[HAL 9000 96]

Looks to me a bit like panic. Gibsonville is in the bluest part of North Carolina. North Carolina hasn't voted for a Democrat for president since Jimmy Carter. It should be solid red, but isn't. Right now it is undecided but trending toward Obama.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/labe...day%27s%20polls

If some guy in a blue part of NC opposed to Obama can make it a little harder for people to visualize Obama support, it does go to support McCain in a tight race. To me, this looks like an amusing bit of desperation on the part of a property owner who worries he'd have to start paying his fair share under a Obama administration.

Doesn't seem much smart anyway... I mean- whomever wins, he's obviously discriminatory towards one group of people, meaning he could do without their business. You would think in this economy that would be the case. People are supposedly driving less.

Man... if the guy is making at least $250K per year from running a parking lot then I am going to leave science and get into that line of work. At least at mine I wouldn't be stupid enough to discriminate against Republicans.

Sorry to break to you, Maviwaro, but if your in science for the money, you've made a mistake. You'll probably make a decent living but you are unlikely to get wealthy. (I know you're just starting -- and I've been working in industry for 20 years since I finished my postdoc.) I've seen lots of business owners and managers who don't have the intellect to be successful in science do very well in business. Selection pressures are different. From what I've seen, selection pressures promoting greed, amorality, and ruthlessness are much more powerful in business than in science.

I was joking novotul. Whether or not I stay in academia or move on to industry... I'll have done so out of love more than anything. At least my PI is very well off and very well respected in his field. He's a pretty good person to model my methodology and ethics as far as science is concerned- even if I end up in industry.

But yeah... we should really look at the parking lot industry as a start-up alternative or to have on the side since even in this economy it seems to be quite profitable.

I understand that you're joking. But it pays to keep in mind -- the selection pressures for success in science and business are very different.

But of course mon amie. My current current position involves being a third party investigator for both academic and industrial research projects. Quite frequently I've seen that the business pressures have resulted in some folks unfortunately losing their jobs for making claims that have been a bit overstated.

[IAMX 3,055]

Similarly I could give this anarchistic approach to running a society some credit in the similar light that the government can also fund a public campaign calling out such idiotic behavior such that the moron's competitors are given government benefits for not being so freakin stupid.

Money for TV ads too. Stating how Parking Lot X doesn't discriminate for the most stupid of reasons.

So ok. The government won't tax, punish, or push against the discriminating business... No... we don't want that kind of intrusion into private sectors. The government can just reward those businesses that don't act like complete morons. As will an increasing number of customers.

The government has no business telling people who they should do business with in their own service-based company. Much akin to the government not telling people who to befriend. Even though business may be open to the public, and is regulated in other ways, like employment and safety, these issues that have to do with society need to be corrected by society. As in, protest the owner of this lot, run private ads on TV slamming this person, whatever. This is brushing aside the straw man emphasis of anarchy, of course -- impossible to give that one any credit.

[akdiver 3]

so are you ok with businesses not catering to people because of their color, nationality or sexual preference? discrimination is ok in the private sector?

Absolutely. If I don't want to serve white people in my restaurant, then that should be completely up to me. I dunno why people would want to eat at my restaurant if I don't want them there anyway.

[HAL 9000 96]

Similarly I could give this anarchistic approach to running a society some credit in the similar light that the government can also fund a public campaign calling out such idiotic behavior such that the moron's competitors are given government benefits for not being so freakin stupid.

Money for TV ads too. Stating how Parking Lot X doesn't discriminate for the most stupid of reasons.

So ok. The government won't tax, punish, or push against the discriminating business... No... we don't want that kind of intrusion into private sectors. The government can just reward those businesses that don't act like complete morons. As will an increasing number of customers.

The government has no business telling people who they should do business with in their own service-based company. Much akin to the government not telling people who to befriend. Even though business may be open to the public, and is regulated in other ways, like employment and safety, these issues that have to do with society need to be corrected by society. As in, protest the owner of this lot, run private ads on TV slamming this person, whatever. This is brushing aside the straw man emphasis of anarchy, of course -- impossible to give that one any credit.

And I agree. I do not believe the government should encourage or limit patronage either. What the government CAN and SHOULD do is encourage ethical behavior, including funding educated choices without implicitly pinpointing single businesses enacting ridiculously stupid business practices.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

so are you ok with businesses not catering to people because of their color, nationality or sexual preference? discrimination is ok in the private sector?

Absolutely. If I don't want to serve white people in my restaurant, then that should be completely up to me. I dunno why people would want to eat at my restaurant if I don't want them there anyway.

It is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of race, ethnicity and sexual preference in businesses of public accommodation (such as a restaurant).

[IAMX 3,055]

And I agree. I do not believe the government should encourage or limit patronage either. What the government CAN and SHOULD do is encourage ethical behavior, including funding educated choices without implicitly pinpointing single businesses enacting ridiculously stupid business practices.

That can be taught in education for those in high school and college, like econ/business majors (cough), but I don't see why the government should waste time and money re-educating adults on how to do business when if they want to lose money, they'll discriminate against customers. Likewise, should the government tell you who to have as friends? This doesn't seem like education, it looks far more like social engineering. Society does a good job on it's own dictating what is or isn't acceptable when it comes to simple issues like this.

I agree that the government should have the power to regulate business, but this is more of a social issue. The business part in this case regulates itself because discrimination means less customers, thus less money. I have yet to see a business owner hate money.

Edited October 13, 2008 by SRVT