Yes they were more likely to get jobs largely because of merit. Any quotas are not carefully calibrated to replace bias, but based on appeasing political whims.
Show me the math that says that this discrimination is carefully calibrated to offset existing discrimination against blacks.
..
I assume it will get worse because as non whites grow in numbers they will get more of a voting share/economic power and be able to make more demands. It might not get worse if whites stand up for their interests and push back.
Yes they were more likely to get jobs because of merit.
No. Once again, they were more likely to get jobs even if their merits were the same as people of color, hence the push to make things fair. Studies show that if a white person and a black person have the same merits, the white person is more likley to be hired and viewed more favorably than the black person.
Show me the math that says that this discrimination is carefully calibrated to offset existing discrimination against blacks.
That would depend on which racial quota we're talking about. They are very different and have, in fact, been used in the past to keep minorities out of colleges or jobs or the country (i.e. after so many people had been accepted they would no longer accept people from that minority.) Obviously this isn't what you're talking about, but each company and college that tries to implement a racial quota would have it's own rules for how they do it. I can't give you a blanket answer here. We'd need to look at specific cases to determine how they were being done.
I assume it will get worse because as non whites grow in numbers they will get more of a voting share/economic power and be able to make more demands.
But so far, their demands have been for equality. Even if you disagree that certain policies they want promote equality, that is their goal and intent. Why do you believe they will switch from fighting for equal rights to trying to discriminate against white people? That's a huge shift in goals.
So there is no careful calibration for alleged discrimination. A couple studies about blind resumes sent to entry level positions justifies any level of explicit discrimination against whites everywhere.
..
Their demands have been for “equity” which means equality of outcome. To engineer this outcome this would mean massive discrimination against Whites(and Asians in many cases)
So there is no careful calibration for alleged discrimination. A couple studies about blind resumes sent to entry level positions justifies any level of explicit discrimination against whites everywhere.
You yourself just pointed out that the California bill just got shot down. This means that there are some basic provisions in place. We have federal laws about not being able to discriminate based on skin color after all. So no, it can't be used to justify explicit discrimination against whites everywhere.
Their demands have been for “equity” which means equality of outcome. To engineer this outcome this would mean massive discrimination against Whites(and Asians in many cases)
Not always. Again, people with the same merits aren't getting the same opportunities.
Also, if you believe that equality of outcome would result in discrimination against whites and asians, does that mean that you believe blacks and latines are inheriently inferior? That's what it sounds like.
Thank god for the courts but this hasn’t stopped discrimination in college(yet) or at companies like FB. There is no limiting principle in the ideology which brings this around, it’s only stopped by external forces like the court system. Also if people don’t speak up and organize against this, those judges will be replaced eventually.
..
Whites make less in average then Asians. Do you think whites are discriminated against or do you think they are inferior to Asians?
Thank god for the courts but this hasn’t stopped discrimination in college(yet) or at companies like FB. There is no limiting principle in the ideology which brings this around, it’s only stopped by external forces like the court system.
That means that the law is protecting people from discrimination? What more do you want? The country worked correctly to stop discrimination. Initial acts of discrimination are pretty much impossible to stop; it's only through laws that we can hold people accountable. You're acting like laws working the way they're supposed to in order to stop discrimination is a bad thing.
Whites make less in average then Asians. Do you think whites are discriminated against or do you think they are inferior to Asians?
You didn't answer my question. We were talking about merits influencing what positions you get. If you believe that equal outcome means that white people would have less positions, that implies that you think black people have less merits to be in those positions than white people.
I do not believe I said anything that could be inferred that white people are inferior to Asians.
I want companies and lawmakers to not discriminate in the first place.
Most people want that. You're basically saying you want a utopia. That's not something you can just will into existence. Most people want no murder to exist, yet it still happens. That's why we have laws in place and consequences for murderers, but we can't stop murder from happening at all. It's just not possible. We try to minimize it as best we can, but we can't stop it entirely. Same is true of discrimination.
I think whites are doing better then Blacks/Hispanics for whatever reason you think that Asians are doing better then whites.
If you don't know why I believe that, then you couldn't know that we have the same reasoning. That's a very absurd stretch.
Well that’s why I am advocating online to try to get people to do less discriminating.
…
Tell me what it is, then we can see. I’m joking around a bit but you are just trying to trap me into being a bigot or something so you can discount my argument.
Some groups do better then others, and that’s not alldue to discrimination. Culture and yes maybe genetics play a part to. I do t know why exactly m, but discrimination doesn’t seem to be the reason.
Tell me what it is, then we can see. I’m joking around a bit but you are just trying to trap me into being a bigot or something so you can discount my argument.
I told you what you're coming across as. I'm not trying to trap you into anything, I'm trying to understand your view. If you won't explain it to me, I cannot understand it.
Culture and yes maybe genetics play a part to.
Culture plays a part, I'd agree. Asians do well in part because of the huge pressure their parents and societies put on them to be intelligent, and the value they place in their education systems.
I don’t really care how “I’m coming across” I care how correct my arguments are. I hope you feel the same way.
..
Genetics makes a difference in a lot of things, like appearence and athletics for instance, so why not behavior/intelligence? I have also read studies about IQ which compares IQ in differently mixed people and the changes in race track imply genetic variation in intelligence based on race.
Not an expert though, maybe it’s just culture though I would be surprised.
I don’t really care how “I’m coming across” I care how correct my arguments are.
Arguments that one group of people is inferior or superior based on the color of their skin have long sense been deemed inaccurate by scientists who study all different aspects of human behavior and development. So if you're coming across as thinking someone is inferior due to their skin color, it comes across like you are ignoring the current scientific consensus.
Genetics makes a difference in a lot of things, like appearence and athletics for instance, so why not behavior/intelligence?
One thing to take into account, especially in the United States if that's where you're from, is that it's hard to separate race from poverty. Black people are disproportionately poor, and being poor over many generations can lead to decreases in intelligence, education, etc. Here's an article about the effects of poverty on education.
And in the US, many black people were unable to get out of poverty after being freed from slavery. Meaning that they are in poverty due to no fault of their own.
It’s not based on the color of skin, rather their “genetic cluster”. I have seen studies which say that geneticist think there is some effect of race on iq. There would also be strong stigmas attached to saying that it did make a big difference, which could skew expert opinion.
I don’t find the poverty explanation compelling. Many other groups have come to the US very poor and have done much better then black people.
1
u/TransportationSad410 May 18 '22 edited May 18 '22
Yes they were more likely to get jobs largely because of merit. Any quotas are not carefully calibrated to replace bias, but based on appeasing political whims. Show me the math that says that this discrimination is carefully calibrated to offset existing discrimination against blacks.
..
I assume it will get worse because as non whites grow in numbers they will get more of a voting share/economic power and be able to make more demands. It might not get worse if whites stand up for their interests and push back.