Klingsor
Worshipped Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2011
- Posts
- 10,888
- Media
- 4
- Likes
- 11,638
- Points
- 293
- Location
- Champaign (Illinois, United States)
- Sexuality
- 80% Straight, 20% Gay
- Gender
- Male
As a private business owner, I'd like to be able to legally defend my decision-making when hedging against losses (and going out of business) when I take business risks. If I can't say "I won't award a contract to this company because they have a horrible track record" because they happen to be minority owned and have the right to sue me for discrimination, you've basically killed incentives for profit making behaviors. We're looking at just a different flavor of Soviet Russia in its heyday.
Of course you can legally defend your decision, and nothing stops you from pointing out that the other company has a horrible track record. If that is in fact the case, you should win any lawsuit.
Furthermore, the problem is self-correcting. Over time, fewer and fewer of such frivolous cases would gain any traction, and only the most egregious examples of discrimination would make it to trial.
The alternative would leave you and other owners free to discriminate against a company *solely* because it was minority owned. And that, as history shows, is a situation that does *not* correct itself over time.
(What any of the above has to do with Soviet Russia is beyond me.)