Democrat's Continued Assault On Whites

YOU twisted the words and took them out of context to further YOUR agenda.

 

I was aware of that, but I didn't think we would allow them to attend West Point.

 

Not a problem.

https://moya.bus.miami.edu/~lgiuliano/Hires.pdf

 

OK, so what's your "take away" from that?

 

Table 3. The ONLY race who doesn’t discriminate racially against every other race and in favor of themselves are white people. In fact they’re the ONLY people who hire other races at rates greater than their population would suggest and hire themselves and rates less than their populations suggest.

And yet the clowns on the left assert the white people are racist in hiring, when whites are the ONLY ones who are NOT racist in hiring.

 

From your cite:
"First, our strongest finding is the existence of significant differences between the hiring patterns of non-black managers and black managers. We find that all non-black managers—i.e., whites, Hispanics, and Asians—hire more whites and fewer blacks than do black managers. The estimates suggest that when a black manager is replaced by a non-black manager in a typical store, the share of new hires that is black falls roughly from 21 to 17 percent, and the share that is white rises from 60 to 64 percent. This result holds whether the new manager is white, Hispanic, or Asian. Further, the differences between black and non-black managers are especially large in the South. In a typical southern store, the replacement of a black manager with a non-black manager causes the share of blacks among new hires to fall from 29 to 21 percent."

 

Yes but you’re not paying attention to the numbers lol

The study was done by a group of sociology professors. Their intention was to show how much discrimination minorities faced in hiring by white people. What they found however is that whites do NOT discriminate.

The reason that this part is true:

“We find that all non-black managers—i.e., whites, Hispanics, and Asians—hire more whites and fewer blacks than do black managers. The estimates suggest that when a black manager is replaced by a non-black manager in a typical store, the share of new hires that is black falls roughly from 21 to 17 percent, and the share that is white rises from 60 to 64 percent.”

Is not because whites are discriminating against blacks. It’s because blacks hire other blacks at such a GROSSLY disproportionate rate that when the black manager gets replaced by a white one the number of blacks decrease. Because the white manager is hiring at a rate that is comparable to their overall population rate whereas the black manager was discriminating in favor of black employees. This resulted in a black manager hiring 30+% black employees which is nearly THREE TIMES their population rate while they hired only 40% whites while whites make up 65-70% of the population.

So when the white manager comes in hiring at the population rates and not discriminating, it results in less blacks being hired and more whites.

Whites are in fact the ONLY group who does not discriminate in hiring. They’re the ONLY group who doesn’t hire a greater percentage of racially similar employees than their population rate would suggest.

 

Or it's because whites abuse affirmative action more than any other race.

 

That’s ludicrous. And certainly not white men. Regardless that has nothing to do with the post lol

 

It's a fact, and woman are people too.
A white male is most famous for using it to remain relevant in woman's sports.
It has everything to do with your narrative though.

 

So first of all you’re going to need to source your claim because I’m highly confident that blacks use AA more than white women per capita. There might be more white women engaging in it but that’s simply because there are more white women. However I’m willing to bet they’re still underrepresented in regards to their population rate whereas blacks are grossly overrepresented.

But regardless how does it fit my narrative? My narrative, backed up by statistics I’ll remind you, is that blacks hire blacks at a rate of 30% and whites at a rate of 40% while whites hire blacks at a rate of 20% and they hire whites at a rate of 55%.

This is while whites make up 65-70% of the population and blacks makeup 13%. How does “whites use affirmative action more” explain that narrative?

 

It dispels it because you arnt calculating that in.
https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/

 

Jesus Christ bro. Let’s do this one at a time.

So your link goes to a Time article. Not a study. The first study which your Time article links to is actually this website:

http://www.timwise.org/1998/09/is-s...women-and-the-rollback-of-affirmative-action/

Which is TimWise (whoever the heck that is) “The antiracist essayist’s” blog where he’s partially quoting a study from 1995. A study which in no way, shape or form justifies the claim white women benefitted more than other races.

 

I think I'll take times interpretation over yours.
Let us know when you get yours reviewed, and published.

 

Look! It’s a white guy! Let’s get him! Give us your money and privileges. Hand ‘em over.

 

Oh, good lord.

The black population is a far larger percent than what you are claiming.

And, you need to be careful about the actual percent of blacks in certain regions where this study was taken.

Also, this is one study. No policy is made based on one study. Corroboration by independent work is required well before any policy decisions are made.

 

According to the 2018 United StatesCensus estimates, the United States population is approximately 14.6% Black or African American, which equals 47.8 million people. The Black-only population is 13.4%

 

Which is a problem for your 3X claim.

But, more importantly is the issue of what jobs are being measured - something not addressed.

It's not a credit to hiring "equality" when minority women get hired as hotel maids. And, one might ask who is in charge of making those hires.

How many minorities are being hired by Apple, by Microsoft, by Pfizer, by any other corporation that is paying the good wages - vs. the jobs that often get subsidized by your tax dollars, because the pay is too low to live on?

 

Bruh let’s be honest here. We can both be honest. So for your part just admit that blacks (I assume you) don’t want equality. You want inequality in your favor to make up for the years of disparate treatment.

So for my part I’ll be honest and say if that’s what you want, why should I be willing to give up my position as a “privileged” white man so I can become a non-privileged white man and you a privileged black man?

 

If you want to make accusations like that, then back them up.

There is NO justification for there being privilege associated with being white. Privilege associated with skin color is racism, right?

As for your pathetic assumptions, I am 100% white. And, my career has been in a high tech field where there have been essentially ZERO people of color over the last 15 years.

Thus, your cited study could not possibly even address my field.

America needs to make serious moves AWAY from racism, including systemic racism. We are worse off as a nation when there are color barriers.

 

Well then you will be thrilled to know we have removed all legal government sponsored systemic racism against blacks in this country. Now we just have to remove it in regards to white people.

But wait, you seem to be still upset that blacks aren’t getting their fair share when the ONLY group who is demonstrably legally discriminated against based on their race is white people.

 

This is total nonsense. We have done NOTHING of the sort.

Even you point out that you don't want to give up your white privilege, as you call it.

 

https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2021/11/income-and-wealth-in-the-united-states-an-overview-of-data

This shows income disparity in the USA.

While we do not have an objective of making it all equal, it IS a measure of where we are today.

 

Jesus Christ. Name ONE government policy or program that’s explicitly racist against black people that exists in place today.

Don’t worry. I’ll wait.