Weird Racism At My Job?

[FA_Q2]

Could it be that she wants to help the black community with the little power she has? When you see reports that their unemployment rate is twice as high as whites and they have higher poverty rates and they deal with racial hardships in other areas... it racist or even wrong for somebody to want to focus on helping that cause?

Also she is married to a black guy is that right? Perhaps she has better relationships and commonalities with blacks so she is drawn to them more than others. Like I said before everybody is their own preference, attractions, and comforts in all facets of life. We are never going to have a truly objective and uninfluenced society.

Regardless of motivation, it's still racist. Affirmative Action is racist. Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. I will observe that if someone exercises their own preference in favor of Caucasians, they would be immediately censored.

Let’s say somebody isn’t attracted to Asians and therefore not interested in dating them. Would that make them racist against Asians?

Why would it?

The question as posed I think puts that onus on you.

The point as put out by you: Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. <and I agree with this btw.

The question is that you deciding you do not like to date Asians IS a decision that prefers one race over another solely on the basis of race or its attractiveness both ways.

I would posit that it is, indeed, racist BUT that the question is to black and white for reality. It is not very common that someone is going to blankly decide they are not dating Asians because of their race but rather they are unlikely to date Asians because they are simply not attracted to them most of the time but would date one they were attracted to without a second thought. That I would say is not racist.

One effect is NOT based on race but rather another factor that only tangentially effects race. The same would be true if we were talking about cultural barriers. To tie this back to the thread, in an employment sector this would look something like this: construction company A does not hire Asians and has no Asians on their work force. However, because the nature of construction work virtually zero qualified Asians ever apply to work there. Are they racist? No, even if there is a major disparity of race within the company. There is no decision not to hire Asians, it just never happens. There is no decision to never date an Asian, it just does not happen.

I would like to differentiate between racism and bias. While used interchangeable, I do not perceive "bias" as having the same negative connotation as "racism". This perception arises, for me, in common usage of both words. Based on that, choices made based on cultural preferences or lack of attraction could be described as a bias. Policies, rules, and regulations that give preference for one group over others, defined by some specific characteristic(s), I would characterize as "racist". A company that does not hire Asians because there are few Asians qualified for that work is biased, but not racist because of a cultural standard that implies that Asians might not be interested in that work. I can provide a more specific example: I work at a major airport. Many people who work here are Pacific Islanders, Phillipinos and Somoans, specifically. There is no hiring preference for these demographics. There are significantly fewer blacks working here. Why is that? There is a geographic and demographic bias that shifts the working population this way. The company I work for has a hiring preference specifying Alaskan Natives will be hired before any other, equally qualified persons, that is racist because there are many persons of a wide variety of cultural, ethnic, and racial backgrounds who will be denied employment if an Alaskan Native applies.
Further, other airports I have visited demonstrate the same demographic bias based on workforce availability. Minneapolis airport, on the other hand, has a workforce that appears to be primarily black muslim women. That would appear to represent a bias. If there are specific directions to hire a certain demographic in favor of others, I do not know what they are. But if companies were hiring black muslim women in order to fill a quota based on a percentage of local population represented by that specific group, and there were equal or larger numbers of others qualified, that would be racist.
I also feel that lowering standards or altering requirements in order to skew the workforce in order to meet quotas based on race, or some other group characteristic, is racist.
I hope that helped explain my personal interpretation.

Yes it does. Good explanation of how you see the difference and I would agree with it. It is not far from what I was saying though I did not think to use the word biased.

 

[Slade3200]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days

Why would it?

The question as posed I think puts that onus on you.

The point as put out by you: Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. <and I agree with this btw.

The question is that you deciding you do not like to date Asians IS a decision that prefers one race over another solely on the basis of race or its attractiveness both ways.

I would posit that it is, indeed, racist BUT that the question is to black and white for reality. It is not very common that someone is going to blankly decide they are not dating Asians because of their race but rather they are unlikely to date Asians because they are simply not attracted to them most of the time but would date one they were attracted to without a second thought. That I would say is not racist.

One effect is NOT based on race but rather another factor that only tangentially effects race. The same would be true if we were talking about cultural barriers. To tie this back to the thread, in an employment sector this would look something like this: construction company A does not hire Asians and has no Asians on their work force. However, because the nature of construction work virtually zero qualified Asians ever apply to work there. Are they racist? No, even if there is a major disparity of race within the company. There is no decision not to hire Asians, it just never happens. There is no decision to never date an Asian, it just does not happen.

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections?

Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.

Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system. There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

 

[Slade3200]

Why would it?

The question as posed I think puts that onus on you.

The point as put out by you: Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. <and I agree with this btw.

The question is that you deciding you do not like to date Asians IS a decision that prefers one race over another solely on the basis of race or its attractiveness both ways.

I would posit that it is, indeed, racist BUT that the question is to black and white for reality. It is not very common that someone is going to blankly decide they are not dating Asians because of their race but rather they are unlikely to date Asians because they are simply not attracted to them most of the time but would date one they were attracted to without a second thought. That I would say is not racist.

One effect is NOT based on race but rather another factor that only tangentially effects race. The same would be true if we were talking about cultural barriers. To tie this back to the thread, in an employment sector this would look something like this: construction company A does not hire Asians and has no Asians on their work force. However, because the nature of construction work virtually zero qualified Asians ever apply to work there. Are they racist? No, even if there is a major disparity of race within the company. There is no decision not to hire Asians, it just never happens. There is no decision to never date an Asian, it just does not happen.

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections? Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

As a nation, throwing more money after that already spent is a waste. Without the targeted population's active participation in their own empowerment and efforts to improve their lot, money is of little help. Criminalizing poorly identified concepts, especially overused and abused words, like "racism" and "racist" also only breeds contempt and more division. What would be far more effective would be to stop grooming the disadvantaged to accept their victimhood so complacently. How often is it implied to them that without government intercession and funding, they are helpless to help themselves?

I agree that government isnt the answer to all problems but the government does have a responsibility to fight for equality within the systems that it is responsible for. Compare public schools in Beverly Hills vs public schools in Compton... lower income areas present more challenges so they need more solutions and focus.

Education and opportunity are key, not government checks. Give people knowledge and confidence to think for themselves and then opportunity to succeed by contributing to their communities on a fair playing field. That’s all I can ask for

 

[FA_Q2]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days

The question as posed I think puts that onus on you.

The point as put out by you: Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. <and I agree with this btw.

The question is that you deciding you do not like to date Asians IS a decision that prefers one race over another solely on the basis of race or its attractiveness both ways.

I would posit that it is, indeed, racist BUT that the question is to black and white for reality. It is not very common that someone is going to blankly decide they are not dating Asians because of their race but rather they are unlikely to date Asians because they are simply not attracted to them most of the time but would date one they were attracted to without a second thought. That I would say is not racist.

One effect is NOT based on race but rather another factor that only tangentially effects race. The same would be true if we were talking about cultural barriers. To tie this back to the thread, in an employment sector this would look something like this: construction company A does not hire Asians and has no Asians on their work force. However, because the nature of construction work virtually zero qualified Asians ever apply to work there. Are they racist? No, even if there is a major disparity of race within the company. There is no decision not to hire Asians, it just never happens. There is no decision to never date an Asian, it just does not happen.

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections?

Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.

Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

 

[Slade3200]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections?

Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.

Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

If the republicans were smart they would do a better job messaging these socioeconomic policies as efforts aimed to help the black and minority communities. The government can help build trust between cops and the black community by social engagement. Get cops present in schools and after school programs. Have the kids do ride alongs and community service events with the police. Help the community members know “officer John” by name who’s beat is in their neighborhood, not just see them as anonymous racist cops.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The question as posed I think puts that onus on you.

The point as put out by you: Any program that prefers one race over another solely on basis of race is racist. <and I agree with this btw.

The question is that you deciding you do not like to date Asians IS a decision that prefers one race over another solely on the basis of race or its attractiveness both ways.

I would posit that it is, indeed, racist BUT that the question is to black and white for reality. It is not very common that someone is going to blankly decide they are not dating Asians because of their race but rather they are unlikely to date Asians because they are simply not attracted to them most of the time but would date one they were attracted to without a second thought. That I would say is not racist.

One effect is NOT based on race but rather another factor that only tangentially effects race. The same would be true if we were talking about cultural barriers. To tie this back to the thread, in an employment sector this would look something like this: construction company A does not hire Asians and has no Asians on their work force. However, because the nature of construction work virtually zero qualified Asians ever apply to work there. Are they racist? No, even if there is a major disparity of race within the company. There is no decision not to hire Asians, it just never happens. There is no decision to never date an Asian, it just does not happen.

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections? Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

As a nation, throwing more money after that already spent is a waste. Without the targeted population's active participation in their own empowerment and efforts to improve their lot, money is of little help. Criminalizing poorly identified concepts, especially overused and abused words, like "racism" and "racist" also only breeds contempt and more division. What would be far more effective would be to stop grooming the disadvantaged to accept their victimhood so complacently. How often is it implied to them that without government intercession and funding, they are helpless to help themselves?

I agree that government isnt the answer to all problems but the government does have a responsibility to fight for equality within the systems that it is responsible for. Compare public schools in Beverly Hills vs public schools in Compton... lower income areas present more challenges so they need more solutions and focus.

Education and opportunity are key, not government checks. Give people knowledge and confidence to think for themselves and then opportunity to succeed by contributing to their communities on a fair playing field. That’s all I can ask for

How would you make the "playing fields" in such various communities as are present in this country "fair"? No Child Left Behind was a nice, feel-good concept, but what is socially appropriate for a remote village in Alaska is not going to work well for a school in BedSty in NYC, and vice-versa. We need to see that the so-called educational system focuses on basics, i.e. reading, writing, mathematics, and leaves all the touchy-feely subjects to the local school boards. How different cultures learn information is also a factor to be considered. So, I would suggest a basic curriculum be proposed, leaving all the peripherals to the locals. I would also like to see a different approach to how college education pushed to the detriment of trades. Perhaps an aptitude test at around 6th grade and then a focus on either academic training or training in trades like mechanics (automotive, diesel, etc), construction (plumbing, electric, structural), and others that can be easily structured to provide both skilled tradesmen and excellent product for consumers.

 

[Slade3200]

Regarding the original point about dating Asians. Let’s say that you have the non racist approach like you laid out. “I’ve never dated an Asian or been attracted to them in that way but if I met one that I was attracted to then I’d date one without reservation”... now take that to the business world. I’ll consider hiring anybody of any race as long as I like their qualifications and click well with them during our interview. But even with that mentality it works out that you've only hired white people... I believe many would look at the numbers and attribute a racial bias to your hiring practices... agree? thoughts?

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections? Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

As a nation, throwing more money after that already spent is a waste. Without the targeted population's active participation in their own empowerment and efforts to improve their lot, money is of little help. Criminalizing poorly identified concepts, especially overused and abused words, like "racism" and "racist" also only breeds contempt and more division. What would be far more effective would be to stop grooming the disadvantaged to accept their victimhood so complacently. How often is it implied to them that without government intercession and funding, they are helpless to help themselves?

I agree that government isnt the answer to all problems but the government does have a responsibility to fight for equality within the systems that it is responsible for. Compare public schools in Beverly Hills vs public schools in Compton... lower income areas present more challenges so they need more solutions and focus.

Education and opportunity are key, not government checks. Give people knowledge and confidence to think for themselves and then opportunity to succeed by contributing to their communities on a fair playing field. That’s all I can ask for

How would you make the "playing fields" in such various communities as are present in this country "fair"? No Child Left Behind was a nice, feel-good concept, but what is socially appropriate for a remote village in Alaska is not going to work well for a school in BedSty in NYC, and vice-versa. We need to see that the so-called educational system focuses on basics, i.e. reading, writing, mathematics, and leaves all the touchy-feely subjects to the local school boards. How different cultures learn information is also a factor to be considered. So, I would suggest a basic curriculum be proposed, leaving all the peripherals to the locals. I would also like to see a different approach to how college education pushed to the detriment of trades. Perhaps an aptitude test at around 6th grade and then a focus on either academic training or training in trades like mechanics (automotive, diesel, etc), construction (plumbing, electric, structural), and others that can be easily structured to provide both skilled tradesmen and excellent product for consumers.

All good ideas. I agree.

As for your question about how to make the playing fields fair? It will never be completely fair for the various reasons you mentioned but we can focus resources where needed. Feds can help with funding and support but I agree, change needs to be led by the local communities.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections?

Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.

Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

If the republicans were smart they would do a better job messaging these socioeconomic policies as efforts aimed to help the black and minority communities. The government can help build trust between cops and the black community by social engagement. Get cops present in schools and after school programs. Have the kids do ride alongs and community service events with the police. Help the community members know “officer John” by name who’s beat is in their neighborhood, not just see them as anonymous racist cops.

I agree with FA_Q2 that policing is a local issue. Best would be to encourage local youths to become police in their communities, bringing with them a very specific understanding about the socio-economic dynamics of each community. As it stands, politicians are more focused on setting the people against the police, demonizing police as weapons of the ruling elite...oh, guess who the ruling elite are? Those very government officials promoting the fiction that police are the enemy of the people.
One of the first things that needs done in order to solve a lot of our problems is to fire the ruling elite, get government out of most every pie they have their claws in. Let the communities get back to their own business. That also means breaking community reliance on the government dole.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Yes, that is actually why I used construction in my point. My father does own a construction company and targeted by CA affirmative action laws as a result - he has never hired an Asian that I am aware of in 40 years even though 20 of them he lived in a predominately Asian neighborhood. The reality is that he almost never had an Asian applicant and when he did they did not have the physical stature for the job - you can stock a job with 220 lb sheet rock when you weigh 100 lbs wet. Because of that CA dropped it.

It is the problem with using statistical analysis to determine racist intent. it simply does not work. Statistical analysis may help you find out where to look but it does not determine anything in and of itself. This is an error the news makes CONSTANTLY - the assumption is that racial and sexual parity should somehow exist in the workplace and that is rather ignorant of reality.

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections? Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

As a nation, throwing more money after that already spent is a waste. Without the targeted population's active participation in their own empowerment and efforts to improve their lot, money is of little help. Criminalizing poorly identified concepts, especially overused and abused words, like "racism" and "racist" also only breeds contempt and more division. What would be far more effective would be to stop grooming the disadvantaged to accept their victimhood so complacently. How often is it implied to them that without government intercession and funding, they are helpless to help themselves?

I agree that government isnt the answer to all problems but the government does have a responsibility to fight for equality within the systems that it is responsible for. Compare public schools in Beverly Hills vs public schools in Compton... lower income areas present more challenges so they need more solutions and focus.

Education and opportunity are key, not government checks. Give people knowledge and confidence to think for themselves and then opportunity to succeed by contributing to their communities on a fair playing field. That’s all I can ask for

How would you make the "playing fields" in such various communities as are present in this country "fair"? No Child Left Behind was a nice, feel-good concept, but what is socially appropriate for a remote village in Alaska is not going to work well for a school in BedSty in NYC, and vice-versa. We need to see that the so-called educational system focuses on basics, i.e. reading, writing, mathematics, and leaves all the touchy-feely subjects to the local school boards. How different cultures learn information is also a factor to be considered. So, I would suggest a basic curriculum be proposed, leaving all the peripherals to the locals. I would also like to see a different approach to how college education pushed to the detriment of trades. Perhaps an aptitude test at around 6th grade and then a focus on either academic training or training in trades like mechanics (automotive, diesel, etc), construction (plumbing, electric, structural), and others that can be easily structured to provide both skilled tradesmen and excellent product for consumers.

All good ideas. I agree.

As for your question about how to make the playing fields fair? It will never be completely fair for the various reasons you mentioned but we can focus resources where needed. Feds can help with funding and support but I agree, change needs to be led by the local communities.

The biggest problem I see with Fed funding assistance is that the Fed wants to be able to dictate how the funding is used. There are strings attached to any money the Fed contributes and that means that, in a sense, the local entity accepting such funding assistance has sold out to the Fed. Of course, if local institutions would focus on what is needed specifically for their constituency, they might find that they could function with local funding. But, that "free" money is tempting, isn't it?

 

[Slade3200]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections?

Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.

Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

If the republicans were smart they would do a better job messaging these socioeconomic policies as efforts aimed to help the black and minority communities. The government can help build trust between cops and the black community by social engagement. Get cops present in schools and after school programs. Have the kids do ride alongs and community service events with the police. Help the community members know “officer John” by name who’s beat is in their neighborhood, not just see them as anonymous racist cops.

I agree with FA_Q2 that policing is a local issue. Best would be to encourage local youths to become police in their communities, bringing with them a very specific understanding about the socio-economic dynamics of each community. As it stands, politicians are more focused on setting the people against the police, demonizing police as weapons of the ruling elite...oh, guess who the ruling elite are? Those very government officials promoting the fiction that police are the enemy of the people.
One of the first things that needs done in order to solve a lot of our problems is to fire the ruling elite, get government out of most every pie they have their claws in. Let the communities get back to their own business. That also means breaking community reliance on the government dole.

That’s a tough one. Government can be very corrupt but oversight and accountability is also very important. And cops are government so you can’t completely get rid of it. To me the key is relationship building. Get the police interacting with the community. Know the people by name and allow the people to know the cops by name. Getting kids to participate in policing and exposure to what’s going on is a great start... cops in schools, coaching sports teams, leading after school programs, all goods stuff. it’s all about engagement and relationship building IMO.

 

[Slade3200]

Well said and I agree... so the next step down the rabbit hole would be to explore causes they may have influenced or be influencing the number of and qualifications of the applicants. Has a history of slavery - Jim Crow created poor socio economic conditions for blacks that resulted in higher levels of poverty and lower levels of education? Has that allowed wealthy white people to own a monopoly of ownership in the businesses in our nation, through generations of higher education, wealth and connections? Is there still racial prejudice out there working against minorities... etc. the answer is yes to many of these, do you agree? Now the big question. What is appropriate for us as a nation to do about it?

As a nation, throwing more money after that already spent is a waste. Without the targeted population's active participation in their own empowerment and efforts to improve their lot, money is of little help. Criminalizing poorly identified concepts, especially overused and abused words, like "racism" and "racist" also only breeds contempt and more division. What would be far more effective would be to stop grooming the disadvantaged to accept their victimhood so complacently. How often is it implied to them that without government intercession and funding, they are helpless to help themselves?

I agree that government isnt the answer to all problems but the government does have a responsibility to fight for equality within the systems that it is responsible for. Compare public schools in Beverly Hills vs public schools in Compton... lower income areas present more challenges so they need more solutions and focus.

Education and opportunity are key, not government checks. Give people knowledge and confidence to think for themselves and then opportunity to succeed by contributing to their communities on a fair playing field. That’s all I can ask for

How would you make the "playing fields" in such various communities as are present in this country "fair"? No Child Left Behind was a nice, feel-good concept, but what is socially appropriate for a remote village in Alaska is not going to work well for a school in BedSty in NYC, and vice-versa. We need to see that the so-called educational system focuses on basics, i.e. reading, writing, mathematics, and leaves all the touchy-feely subjects to the local school boards. How different cultures learn information is also a factor to be considered. So, I would suggest a basic curriculum be proposed, leaving all the peripherals to the locals. I would also like to see a different approach to how college education pushed to the detriment of trades. Perhaps an aptitude test at around 6th grade and then a focus on either academic training or training in trades like mechanics (automotive, diesel, etc), construction (plumbing, electric, structural), and others that can be easily structured to provide both skilled tradesmen and excellent product for consumers.

All good ideas. I agree.

As for your question about how to make the playing fields fair? It will never be completely fair for the various reasons you mentioned but we can focus resources where needed. Feds can help with funding and support but I agree, change needs to be led by the local communities.

The biggest problem I see with Fed funding assistance is that the Fed wants to be able to dictate how the funding is used. There are strings attached to any money the Fed contributes and that means that, in a sense, the local entity accepting such funding assistance has sold out to the Fed. Of course, if local institutions would focus on what is needed specifically for their constituency, they might find that they could function with local funding. But, that "free" money is tempting, isn't it?

Agreed, it is a messy business with much corruption and gamesmanship which distracts from productivity. Funding should go to the city manager, mayor, and then delegated according to the needs of the community. IMO. The decision maker should be engaged in the community not a Washington beaurocrat

 

[gallantwarrior]

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days


Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.
I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

If the republicans were smart they would do a better job messaging these socioeconomic policies as efforts aimed to help the black and minority communities. The government can help build trust between cops and the black community by social engagement. Get cops present in schools and after school programs. Have the kids do ride alongs and community service events with the police. Help the community members know “officer John” by name who’s beat is in their neighborhood, not just see them as anonymous racist cops.

I agree with FA_Q2 that policing is a local issue. Best would be to encourage local youths to become police in their communities, bringing with them a very specific understanding about the socio-economic dynamics of each community. As it stands, politicians are more focused on setting the people against the police, demonizing police as weapons of the ruling elite...oh, guess who the ruling elite are? Those very government officials promoting the fiction that police are the enemy of the people.
One of the first things that needs done in order to solve a lot of our problems is to fire the ruling elite, get government out of most every pie they have their claws in. Let the communities get back to their own business. That also means breaking community reliance on the government dole.

That’s a tough one. Government can be very corrupt but oversight and accountability is also very important. And cops are government so you can’t completely get rid of it. To me the key is relationship building. Get the police interacting with the community. Know the people by name and allow the people to know the cops by name. Getting kids to participate in policing and exposure to what’s going on is a great start... cops in schools, coaching sports teams, leading after school programs, all goods stuff. it’s all about engagement and relationship building IMO.

I know, I'm late but have not had time for the forums the last few days


Yes it has to some extent. The overall effect is very hard to measure though as there are a LOT of other factors at play as well.
I think that we have already done the appropriate actions. Namely, systemic or institutionalized racism is not legal. Beyond that, there is nothing that the nation can do about it. I think that more 'help' is not actually helping at all but rather allowing a mentality that someone else needs to fix these problems for the people it effects. The bottom line here is that there is a cultural problem. There is a reason that Asians beat whites in most categories and it is not because racism. It is because the Asian sub culture promotes education, family, honor and success over anything else. There is also a reason that blacks have crime rates that are astronomically higher than ANY other race and it cannot be solely attributed to socioeconomic status though that is a major component of it as well.

At the end of the day, the government or any societal 'fix' cannot address these problems.

I appreciate the reply but disagree on a few points... from what I’ve “heard” it appears that there is some work that can be done in our criminal justice system.

I agree that the justice system needs some work but not based on race. It needs work period. The drug war needs to end for starters.

You disagree but do not have a point on what needs to be addressed.

There is a break of trust between cops and the black community and we can and should do better and mending the breaks. Also we can put energy into education and community programs to help provide our kids in low income areas a better education and more importantly something healthy and productive to do after school.

As for trust, what do you think they should do? I don't see any way for the government to come in and restore trust in policing. That is heavily local.

As for schools, this is not a race issue here either. That work needs to be done anywhere in poorer neighborhoods. The worse part is that the race is used most often to STOP improvements here like opening up school choice.

This is more of a socioeconomic argument and not race specific but I think it has a greater impact on minority communities and would be worth the efforts.

They are socioeconomic arguments. Hence why I said that the government cannot address issues on 'race.' There is zero doubt that solving some of the socioeconomic problems will disproportionally help black Americans but that does not mean that those are fixes for racial problems. It is a different debate if we are talking about addressing socioeconomic problems rather than racial ones.

If the republicans were smart they would do a better job messaging these socioeconomic policies as efforts aimed to help the black and minority communities. The government can help build trust between cops and the black community by social engagement. Get cops present in schools and after school programs. Have the kids do ride alongs and community service events with the police. Help the community members know “officer John” by name who’s beat is in their neighborhood, not just see them as anonymous racist cops.

I agree with FA_Q2 that policing is a local issue. Best would be to encourage local youths to become police in their communities, bringing with them a very specific understanding about the socio-economic dynamics of each community. As it stands, politicians are more focused on setting the people against the police, demonizing police as weapons of the ruling elite...oh, guess who the ruling elite are? Those very government officials promoting the fiction that police are the enemy of the people.
One of the first things that needs done in order to solve a lot of our problems is to fire the ruling elite, get government out of most every pie they have their claws in. Let the communities get back to their own business. That also means breaking community reliance on the government dole.

That’s a tough one. Government can be very corrupt but oversight and accountability is also very important. And cops are government so you can’t completely get rid of it. To me the key is relationship building. Get the police interacting with the community. Know the people by name and allow the people to know the cops by name. Getting kids to participate in policing and exposure to what’s going on is a great start... cops in schools, coaching sports teams, leading after school programs, all goods stuff. it’s all about engagement and relationship building IMO.

Lots of places where that's already happening and you're right, it helps...a lot. Humanize both the police and the people, put names and faces on the bodies. It is unfortunate that pols, and their media mouthpieces, have found it expedient to divide and conquer local communities. Have you noticed how it's "us against them"?
Government has a role, but it should be in the most general establish a framework way. Now, we see government micro-managing almost every aspect of community and personal life. And government strives to gain an even more invasive hold on us. This is not what the Founders envisioned. They gave us that generalized framework and handed it to the people. We have made a mess of it by abdicating local control in exchange for government money.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Oh, I don't worry about my ability to take care of myself and land on my feet. I'm ungodly good at what I do. I just know that I can be paranoid sometimes, and wanted to know whether or not I was imagining things.

Everyone Needs A "Plan B"
Never Hurts To Keep Your Ear To The Ground

If It Really Is Discrimination
You Won't Overcome It

Not even planning to try. I don't stay where I'm not wanted, and if they're dumb enough to leave themselves even more shorthanded over this, they deserve whatever they get.

Blacks are notoriously lazy. And late. They work harder avoiding work than they do actually working.

What's going on is the consequence of institutionalized equality.

I've worked in business interiors for decades, both civilian and non-civilian. Though, I detest the term civilian. Anyway. From experience I can say that as soon as a department or a company goes the institutionalized equality route, the blacks from within start promoting and hiring and more blacks, then nothing gets done, quotas get missed constantly, etc, and then the whites who kept the place afloat get tired of it and either transferred departments or just found similar work elsewere.

Then I have to hire moving companies and installers to empty the floor or building out after the blacks have driven it into the ground and made it unfruitful for the company itself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So . . . follow up to this.

I am now working as the hiring manager for a logistics company. Have already had to tell them they're doing their legal status verification wrong.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So . . . follow up to this.

I am now working as the hiring manager for a logistics company. Have already had to tell them they're doing their legal status verification wrong.

CONGRATULATIONS. I'm sure you'll never regret it.

 

[Third Party]

So . . . follow up to this.

I am now working as the hiring manager for a logistics company. Have already had to tell them they're doing their legal status verification wrong.

Are they hiring illegals?

 

[Cecilie1200]

So . . . follow up to this.

I am now working as the hiring manager for a logistics company. Have already had to tell them they're doing their legal status verification wrong.

CONGRATULATIONS. I'm sure you'll never regret it.

So far, I love it. Enormous amounts of autonomy, and the managed-office space we rent is just wonderful. It's the way one imagines the ideal office to be, but never gets around to spending the money to create. Also, it pays more AND I only ever need to work with one other person, who only talks when he absolutely has to and is really looking forward to the day I can do the hiring events by myself and he never has to come to them at all.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So . . . follow up to this.

I am now working as the hiring manager for a logistics company. Have already had to tell them they're doing their legal status verification wrong.

Are they hiring illegals?

No, but they didn't realize that, while legal immigrants have Social Security cards, they are marked as such and cannot be used as employment verification paperwork by themselves. You have to also get the DHS authorization papers.

They're sending people out in $100,000 vehicles with thousands of dollars worth of client products in them. They have no interest in cutting corners on the people they're trusting with all of that, thank God.

 

[Ernie S.]

I have to laugh at this. Black unemployment stays double that of whites no matter what and that is not racism, but a single black person gets a job in a business with white employees and it's racism because a white person thinks, with no evidence, that they are trying to force her out for someone black.

It's funny how everybody black is always less qualified. Stop

No one has said that. The point the OP made is that it is extremely likely that ONLY black applicants are qualified considering that they make up 6% of the labor force.

Feel unqualified yet?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have to laugh at this. Black unemployment stays double that of whites no matter what and that is not racism, but a single black person gets a job in a business with white employees and it's racism because a white person thinks, with no evidence, that they are trying to force her out for someone black.

It's funny how everybody black is always less qualified. Stop

No one has said that. The point the OP made is that it is extremely likely that ONLY black applicants are qualified considering that they make up 6% of the labor force.

Feel unqualified yet?

Thank you, that was exactly my point: not that blacks aren't or can't be qualified, but that it was suspicious for them to be the "only" qualified applicants, particularly in an area where they make up such a small percentage of the population.