Discussion about hot topics trending today

[aretood2]

It's not that simple. Consider the fact that the Black Americans in the workforce today are grandchildren of people who lived under Jim Crow laws; their fathers did not begin on a level playing field and neither did they. They do not, for the most part, have the wealth that runs in the family, or the networks of family connections that can advance them in life. Naturalized immigrants are at inherent economic disadvantage in many respects (I, for example, have spent 20 years having to work whichever job paid my rent, while people born in Israel lived with their parents until the army, then had their parents help them pay for their apartment until they finished uni and found the Good Job. The reason I still do more overtime than all other people in my department combined. Also the reason why I did not become a professional translator like I wanted - it's damn hard to combine full-time job and uni education). Other things being equal, they are much less likely - on average - to be able to afford the same education levels as white people of their generation, and they are more likely to be subjected to all kinds of residual stereotyping on behalf of employers. It's comforting to think that a rational businessman will hire the best programmer / travel agent / graphic designer based on their skills alone, but the truth of life is that people are not rational and discrimination of this kind happens all the time, sometimes even on a level the employer themselves is not fully aware of (if he has a subconscious dislike of a particular kind of people, he will spend more effort looking for flaws in their resume and character than he would if that person had a different skin color or ethnic origin or sexual orientation).

I can see some sense in affirmative action after a minority has been discriminated against for generations. It's not near-term fair, but there is a long-view fairness to it. Within sane limits, that is.

Just as a comparison...

As a first generation citizen (I was raise in the US but born in Mexico so I'm somewhat 1st generation American...but also immigrant) I did however have a better chance with my parent's support. But the network that natives have just wasn't there, nor did my parents know anything about college or applications or AP courses or anything to help point me in the right direction. Natives would have much of that information because their parents grew up in it. Not to mention that inherited wealth. Had my parents known about AP classes, they would have had me take at least one. Had they known about college scholarships they would have been able to help me get those. Had they had those long term multi generational connections...the list goes on.

The problem with immigrant minorities are very similar to those of African Americans. Then there are other things that make employers cringe. The moment the see "Sanchez" or "Lopez" or "Garcia" they may be reluctant to want to hire and look for flaws in resumes. Cookies for anyone who can figure out why. Affirmative action would force them to hire a Sanchez or a Garcia, so that would counter that reluctance. It doesn't mean that you'll hire someone is less qualified...unless you believe that Hispanics and black people don't have those qualifications. It means that an employer had to ensure that he finds a qualified Hispanic and a qualified Black person, and a qualified something.

It would be very strange and odd that if 100 Hispanic applicants apply for positions in a company and none get hired...ever. While for the same positions there were only say, 20 white non-Hispanic applicants for those same positions (and 50 black applicants and 20 Asian applicants) and the company hired 12 white non-Hispanics and one Asian and one Black person. Statistically, that's not possible and that would signal a bias preventing them from getting hired. That's what is happening and that's what affirmative action is meant to deal with.

There's a parody "news" article I read once (Linky) along these lines. It uses Ann Coulter as the fall guy for it.

In short, Coulter gets on a plane, see's a black pilot, freaks out because she doesn't feel safe on a plane flown by a pilot who only got the job via affirmative action (thus unqualified) and starts shouting about it until she is kicked of the plane with her final words "What's next? Mexican doctors?". Later she's told that the pilot was a well decorated air force pilot and the airline's best pilot. The moral of the parody is, just because affirmative action exist, it doesn't automatically mean that the people that get hired aren't qualified or highly qualified. They may even be more qualified than the guy who would have been hired because of the bias that exists in his favor.

[mad_gater]

It's not that simple. Consider the fact that the Black Americans in the workforce today are grandchildren of people who lived under Jim Crow laws; their fathers did not begin on a level playing field and neither did they. They do not, for the most part, have the wealth that runs in the family, or the networks of family connections that can advance them in life. Naturalized immigrants are at inherent economic disadvantage in many respects (I, for example, have spent 20 years having to work whichever job paid my rent, while people born in Israel lived with their parents until the army, then had their parents help them pay for their apartment until they finished uni and found the Good Job. The reason I still do more overtime than all other people in my department combined. Also the reason why I did not become a professional translator like I wanted - it's damn hard to combine full-time job and uni education). Other things being equal, they are much less likely - on average - to be able to afford the same education levels as white people of their generation, and they are more likely to be subjected to all kinds of residual stereotyping on behalf of employers. It's comforting to think that a rational businessman will hire the best programmer / travel agent / graphic designer based on their skills alone, but the truth of life is that people are not rational and discrimination of this kind happens all the time, sometimes even on a level the employer themselves is not fully aware of (if he has a subconscious dislike of a particular kind of people, he will spend more effort looking for flaws in their resume and character than he would if that person had a different skin color or ethnic origin or sexual orientation).

I can see some sense in affirmative action after a minority has been discriminated against for generations. It's not near-term fair, but there is a long-view fairness to it. Within sane limits, that is.

a system of policies designed to imply that minorities somehow are incapable of making it in the workforce based on their own merits, that minorities somehow cannot make it without the strong arm of the nanny state government forcing employers to abandon reasonable hiring practices and hire a certain number of people based solely on their skin color, is inherently racist by definition and is precisely what "affirmative action," while it may not have started out that way, has become

[garhkal]

"Fast and Furious"

Is that where all those guns went missing?

Not just missing, but WILLFULLY allowed to be sold to known criminals, all for the "Supposed purpose' of tracking down where they go...

SO that makes 5 stories now where guns from Fast and Furious have been used in CRIMINAL acts, and still not one government worker has been fired over it.

Perhaps you should stop whining and be glad that there are people out there who are willing to put their lives on the line for yours.

And how is 'whining about affirmative action', blocking someone being glad for first responders?

Excuse me? Aren't you always saying that various groups of people should be treated equally? I seem to recall you being quite strident about that.

So why are you defending discrimination?

How do you start to repair systemic, generational inequality?

You do it by leveling the field. NOT by discriminating in the other direction.

The military hasn't dropped their standards otherwise that would be a strange choice of words.

Not one requirement speaks of gender, religion or color of the skin:

And its not just the military we are on about where this is going on.. Its for Cops, Fire departments, schools..

Take a look at the following links.
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/prem...orities-unfair

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011...-armed-forces/

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/n...lice/21266899/

http://nypost.com/2014/12/11/fdny-dr...e-hiring-rate/

https://www.nancyonnorwalk.com/2015/...rity-recruits/

[Annoyed]

It's not that simple. Consider the fact that the Black Americans in the workforce today are grandchildren of people who lived under Jim Crow laws; their fathers did not begin on a level playing field and neither did they. They do not, for the most part, have the wealth that runs in the family, or the networks of family connections that can advance them in life. Naturalized immigrants are at inherent economic disadvantage in many respects (I, for example, have spent 20 years having to work whichever job paid my rent, while people born in Israel lived with their parents until the army, then had their parents help them pay for their apartment until they finished uni and found the Good Job. The reason I still do more overtime than all other people in my department combined. Also the reason why I did not become a professional translator like I wanted - it's damn hard to combine full-time job and uni education). Other things being equal, they are much less likely - on average - to be able to afford the same education levels as white people of their generation, and they are more likely to be subjected to all kinds of residual stereotyping on behalf of employers. It's comforting to think that a rational businessman will hire the best programmer / travel agent / graphic designer based on their skills alone, but the truth of life is that people are not rational and discrimination of this kind happens all the time, sometimes even on a level the employer themselves is not fully aware of (if he has a subconscious dislike of a particular kind of people, he will spend more effort looking for flaws in their resume and character than he would if that person had a different skin color or ethnic origin or sexual orientation).

I can see some sense in affirmative action after a minority has been discriminated against for generations. It's not near-term fair, but there is a long-view fairness to it. Within sane limits, that is.

Ok, your assertion is that because of their lower "starting point" on the economic ladder, they are handicapped. What about white folks like myself, whose parents were of modest means? I certainly didn't have a silver spoon in my mouth. Community college, and I worked to put myself through it as well, with some help from parents. I started off in the same boat, economically. So I'm entitled to special consideration too, right?
Regarding immigrants, Immigrants of oriental origin as a whole don't seem to have too much difficulty succeeding in our society. Neither they or I, for that matter, had access to the "social networks" that you refer to.

Your theories don't seem to hold up all that well. If so, everyone from a modest background would be stuck at the lower ends of the scale, as would everyone who migrated to this country.

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

*wanders in* ....Didn't we sort all of this out last week? My time machine works!!

[aretood2]

a system of policies designed to imply that minorities somehow are incapable of making it in the workforce based on their own merits, that minorities somehow cannot make it without the strong arm of the nanny state government forcing employers to abandon reasonable hiring practices and hire a certain number of people based solely on their skin color, is inherently racist by definition and is precisely what "affirmative action," while it may not have started out that way, has become

Thing is, no one is saying that. At least no one here. And we've all pretty much mentioned the employers still hire people who are qualified. No employer is going to hire someone on any meaningful position who is unqualified simply to check off the Affirmative Action box. That's just a fabrication of your imagination. But at least you are willing to see that there was, at some point, just concern/cause for affirmative action in the first place. The question is then regarding it's lifetime before it does more harm than good.

Ok, your assertion is that because of their lower "starting point" on the economic ladder, they are handicapped. What about white folks like myself, whose parents were of modest means? I certainly didn't have a silver spoon in my mouth. Community college, and I worked to put myself through it as well, with some help from parents. I started off in the same boat, economically. So I'm entitled to special consideration too, right?

The silver spoon thing has more to do with just how many more poor people there were in the US back in the day. The middle class grew between your childhood and mine. Don't forget to take into account that your age does factor here. What would have been your children would have been in much better position than either I was or Womble was. What would have been your grandchildren would then be middle class if not upper middle class. That is, after all, how the American dream works...and it still works. Not for everyone, but it is still there and it works.

I too grew up with less than others in my school, and I also had to work to put myself through college after I transferred from community college to a four year school. The difference is, that when you lived, I would be unemployed and you would be employed. Affirmative action was made to force that to change, and in many respects it did change.

Regarding immigrants, Immigrants of oriental origin as a whole don't seem to have too much difficulty succeeding in our society. Neither they or I, for that matter, had access to the "social networks" that you refer to.

That success is not universal, and positive stereotypes do have a huge impact. The bias with Asians is that they are smart. The bias with black people, thugs. Hispanics, illegals or drugs. Indians, vegetarian gas station owners. Arabics, they blow up. Asians lucked out, they are the exception that proves the rule. That bias does have a strong impact on things like employment and education.

Your theories don't seem to hold up all that well. If so, everyone from a modest background would be stuck at the lower ends of the scale, as would everyone who migrated to this country.

That's because you are comparing America in the 1950's to America in the 1990's or today. Very different Americas. Everyone was poorer back when you were learning to ride a bike...especially immigrants and minorities.

[Gatefan1976]

Ok, your assertion is that because of their lower "starting point" on the economic ladder, they are handicapped. What about white folks like myself, whose parents were of modest means? I certainly didn't have a silver spoon in my mouth. Community college, and I worked to put myself through it as well, with some help from parents. I started off in the same boat, economically. So I'm entitled to special consideration too, right?

Economics are only a part of the situation Annoyed. Remember when we were speaking about lead earlier? That lead paint, lead pipes -despite the known health risks to children- was used in poor neighbourhoods and those neighbourhoods are predominantly populated by non whites. So, it's not just economics at play here, but social engineering to keep a class of citizen "in their proper place". This then produces generations of physically sick people, without the means to pay for healthcare, which is then passed along to the taxpayer because the only relief they have is via emergency hospital care. Then, people point at them and say "it's their fault"
It's victim blaming on a grand scale.
That's what you need to understand here. AA is an aggressive approach to balancing the scales, yes, but you need to do -something-

Regarding immigrants, Immigrants of oriental origin as a whole don't seem to have too much difficulty succeeding in our society. Neither they or I, for that matter, had access to the "social networks" that you refer to.

See Tood's response to that.

Your theories don't seem to hold up all that well. If so, everyone from a modest background would be stuck at the lower ends of the scale, as would everyone who migrated to this country.

Everyone from modest backgrounds, barring the outliers -are- stuck at the lower ends of the scale.

[Coco Pops]

And why can't women fight in the military?

[Womble]

Ok, your assertion is that because of their lower "starting point" on the economic ladder, they are handicapped. What about white folks like myself, whose parents were of modest means? I certainly didn't have a silver spoon in my mouth. Community college, and I worked to put myself through it as well, with some help from parents. I started off in the same boat, economically. So I'm entitled to special consideration too, right?

That is an interesting claim. Do your family's "modest means" go back generations? Were members of your family legally denied the ability to change their situation the way Black people were? More interestingly, do you have to contend with a social stigma according to which you aren't fit for jobs requiring high education?

Regarding immigrants, Immigrants of oriental origin as a whole don't seem to have too much difficulty succeeding in our society. Neither they or I, for that matter, had access to the "social networks" that you refer to.

As a matter of fact, the perception of success of Asian Americans is a recent thing.

For one, which Asians? US demographics do not classify Central Asian ethnicities like Kazakhs and Uzbeks as Asian but rather as white, which skews the hell out of statistics. Also, the older Asian populations, the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans who came to the USA as laborers in the 19th century, did not surge to the top of the society. So who is successful? Recent immigrants from relatively well-to-do countries. The Cambodian and Bangladeshi immigrants, for example, aren't anywhere near as successful as the Koreans.

You see, the Asian immigrants who are successful are the ones who have educated parents. If you want a non-Asian example of the same adaptation dynamic, I will remind you about the success of the Jews and the Russians as immigrants in most societies they come to. If you have educated parents and your family moves to another country, your parents will make every effort to push you to gain education because they understand first-hand the importance of it. They will sacrifice their short-term everything - prosperity, health, anything it takes- for you to achieve that goal. If your family haven't had anyone college-educated for generations, it's bound to handicap your drive for education as well.

Another thing: many Asian American immigrants became so after having come to the USA to study. In other words, they either come from fairly wealthy families in their own countries, or their education is subsudized by a government or business body, and they began their journey as immigrants with a tremendous headstart. Many others move to the USA when they've been hired for a high-paying professional job (something you've been known to bemoan with some regularity). Which again means they get to skip the "lost generation" stage which first-generation immigrants go through, and catapult themselves straight into the middle class.

[Annoyed]

Everyone from modest backgrounds, barring the outliers -are- stuck at the lower ends of the scale.

Not much discrimination going on then, is there?

Sorry, GF and Womble, I'm just not buying it. There are far too many examples of successful minorities to sell the discrimination line anymore. Hell, we have a black POTUS.
A long time ago, AA was perhaps justified for 10-20 years after equality was legally mandated. But the whole racial argument has degraded into utter nonsense. You are actually more in favor of discrimination than I am, you are just choosing a different form of discrimination.

And then we have abuses like this:
Elite K-8 school teaches white students they’re born racist

An elite Manhattan school is teaching white students as young as 6 that they’re born racist and should feel guilty benefiting from “white privilege,” while heaping praise and cupcakes on their black peers.

Administrators at the Bank Street School for Children on the Upper West Side claim it’s a novel approach to fighting discrimination, and that several other private New York schools are doing it, but even liberal parents aren’t buying it.

They complain the K-8 school of 430 kids is separating whites in classes where they’re made to feel awful about their “whiteness,” and all the “kids of color” in other rooms where they’re taught to feel proud about their race and are rewarded with treats and other privileges.

Examples such as the above show just how far from treating people equally the AA/Diversity crowd has gotten.

Long past time to scrap all such programs.

Oh, and by the way? As you suspect, my folks were immigrants from Europe. My father grandfather was from Germany, in the period between the 2 world wars where Germany was a primary aggressor nation. You can bet your bottom dollar that German immigrants weren't treated kindly back then.

Everybody has hurdles they have to overcome. Black, white, orange or purple polka dots. Everyone. Stop trying to blame everything on race.

That's because you are comparing America in the 1950's to America in the 1990's or today. Very different Americas. Everyone was poorer back when you were learning to ride a bike...especially immigrants and minorities.

That's exactly the opposite.
While there were indeed racial bias issues back then, that have since been resolved, the middle class did much, much better back then than it does today. The average person, if he was willing to work, could easily earn enough money to comfortably support a family on ONE income. This left the non-working spouse, usually the wife in that era, free to raise the children and tend to the home. In the time since then, numerous changes to the US have decimated the middle class,(for ALL races) where often it takes 2 incomes to provide even a semblance of a comfortable life and often with a very uncertain outlook on the future. This left child rearing to be farmed out to whomever they could find, often poorly paid day care workers these days. If you don't think that has had a negative effect on the quality of child-rearing, well, take a look at the behavior of kids today vs back in the 50's and 60's. That is a huge quality of life issue.

Maybe instead of blaming white people for racism several generations ago, we might want to look at undoing some of the changes that have been so destructive to the middle class of ALL races?

[garhkal]

I am surprised, there's not been chatter here about the incident in Bangladesh.

[Coco Pops]

I am surprised, there's not been chatter here about the incident in Bangladesh.

What incident?

[Falcon Horus]

Or the carbomb in Baghdad.

[Annoyed]

I did read about these attacks. ISIS has outright claimed responsibility for Baghdad, but I think the one in Bangladesh was a group of local malcontents.

[Falcon Horus]

I did read about these attacks. ISIS has outright claimed responsibility for Baghdad, but I think the one in Bangladesh was a group of local malcontents.

Nope, Bangladesh was also Daesh. They published the identity of the four and claimed it all at once.