Page 9 of 27 [ 424 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 27  Next

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

02 Jan 2022, 10:28 am

Screw statistics when it comes to judging people as people.

You believe one thing—I KNOW what you believe is not true.



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,324

02 Jan 2022, 10:40 am

QFT wrote:
Now, there *is* a very good way of avoiding the whole issue without blaming either the teacher or the students. Namely, just don't worry about race altogether. Just say that "this many humans passed, this many humans failed" and forget their race. Thtas the option right wing people are happy to take but left wing people aren't.

Simply being colour-blind might work if everybody did it and if whites weren't at an overall advantage. It's a mistake to generalise and say that every left-winger is a strong advocate of "positive discrimination." It's actually a matter of debate among the left. I'm quite suspicious of it myself, but I also think that many right-wingers would simply ditch it and put nothing in its place.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

02 Jan 2022, 10:48 am

I’m a strong advocate of an even playing field.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

02 Jan 2022, 12:47 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
Screw statistics when it comes to judging people as people.

You believe one thing—I KNOW what you believe is not true.


I am not judging people as people. I am saying the opposite. Do it on merrit-only basis. Let me spell it out:

a) If there are two people, one white and one black. And black performs better than white. I say hire the black person.

b) If there are two people, one white and one black. And white performs better than black. I say hire the white person.

Now,

1) Most people on the right would agree with both statement "a" and "b".

2) Most people on the left will only agree with "a" but disagree with "b"

3) A few people on the right will agree with "b" but not with "a"

Number "2" is a reaction to "3". But it is an over-reaction because they are tryign to change the whole system in response to what a few people might do.

I side with 1.

Since its people on the right that side with 1, I side with people on the right.

If you say don't judge people by color you should side with 1 too.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

02 Jan 2022, 12:49 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I’m a strong advocate of an even playing field.


Me too.

I just don't think the left would side with even playing field. Its the right that supports it as is.

Left position is: make the field un-even in order to favor the team that has a statistical tendency to lose.

Right position is: make the field even. Regardless of who wins or who loses.

There is a minority of people on the right who would want a field to favor a team that tends to win, but thats a minority. The majority of people on the right wouldn't agree with them.

The reason left doesn't like "even playing field" is that they know that whites would win more often than blacks. So the left says "please make it un-even enough so that blacks win just as often" and the right say "screw this: leave it even-playing; if whites will win more, so be it".



SabbraCadabra
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,694
Location: Michigan

02 Jan 2022, 8:41 pm

QFT wrote:
Actually "the fact" is that they don't perform just as well. The part where the speculation comes in is "reason why". Are they just as intelligent as whites but are less hard working? Are they just as hard working as whites but are less intelligent? Are they just as hard working and intelligent as whites but don't have financial means to get educated? Are they experiencing systemic racism? Which one(s) of these reasons (or others) it is due, is just a speculation, I agree (although its a bit of a stretch to say that some of the blacks we all see in the downtown are very hard working). But the fact that they perform worse is a fact.

At the risk of sounding racist, a lot of African American kids are being raised by single moms, and live in areas of poverty (which, in my neck of the woods, also have heavy drugs and crime, prostitution, guns, human trafficking, you name it). A black kid I worked with briefly, who had just graduated high school, was explaining it to me...said he did a lot of mentor work with these kinds of kids to try to get them into healthier activities and higher education. Really cool guy, but he didn't stay very long.

Anyway, we're getting a bit off topic.


_________________
I'm looking for Someone to change my life. I'm looking for a Miracle in my life.


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,419
Location: Long Island, New York

02 Jan 2022, 8:58 pm

QFT wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Blacks perform just as well as whites when placed in similar environments. That is a fact.

There is no difference between the races as far as intelligence is concerned.


Actually "the fact" is that they don't perform just as well. The part where the speculation comes in is "reason why". Are they just as intelligent as whites but are less hard working? Are they just as hard working as whites but are less intelligent? Are they just as hard working and intelligent as whites but don't have financial means to get educated? Are they experiencing systemic racism? Which one(s) of these reasons (or others) it is due, is just a speculation, I agree (although its a bit of a stretch to say that some of the blacks we all see in the downtown are very hard working). But the fact that they perform worse is a fact.

Again though the above refers to statistics. There are blacks that are both smart and hard workign AND perform just as well as whites. I remember some examples from my own life. But if I think of any of those examples, I don't think any of those people ever benefitted from things like affirmative action or any other help liberals want to give blacks. They would have done well regardless. When we are talking about blacks needing special treatment, we are not talking about that kind of blacks. We are talking about the other kind of blacks (such as what we see in the downtown). And that other kind of blacks that we see in a downtown still stays in the downtown despite all this extra help.

Now, again, not all blacks are on the streets of downtown (the "smart blacks" I was thinking of are at the universities, and I respected them just like I did all my other colleagues) and not everyone in the streets of downtown are black (I saw some white ones and they were just as disgusting). But the fact that there is that statistical correlation that a lot of them are black, thats what makes liberals want to help them out. I am sure if they were all white then liberals would happily ignore them, as they should. Well, if they are as colorblind as they claim to be, then maybe they should ignore them even if they have a lot of blacks. As Martin Luther King said "judge not by the color of the skin but by the content of the character". Well, the "content of the character" of the people in the downtown (of both races) is not that good. While the blacks with good "content of the character" (the smart ones that I mentioned) are doing well without any help.

By the way, as someone Jewish, you should know that back in the 19-th century Europe Jews were discriminated just as badly as blacks were in America. Yet look at how well they are currently doing. So that shows that it "is" possible to overcome the fallout of a discrimination few generations ago. Now ask yourself why blacks couldn't do the same.



Blacks got off to a worse start in that they did not voluntarily come here.

Blacks can not pass as white, Jews can pass as gentiles.

Dark/black is considered bad.

There is culture/society. In the last 60 years, the messaging has been constantly to remind them of the racism they do face. Wokeism tells them not only are whites against them but the system from the get-go was designed to oppress them. I want to be careful here. I am not black, do not face their daily lives and thus can not say what is the "proper" amount of mental distress for the prejudice and worse they face more of. I can say that negative thought loops make bad situations worse.

I believe related partially to cultural issues is not only the financial issues but the obstacles involving the chaos and fear inherent in poor high crime areas.

Jews when they got here had a culture of study, study, study, and comedy to relieve the stress of the hardships of being discriminated against.

There are so many interacting factors that saying why with any degree of certainty is a fools' errand.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

It is Autism Acceptance Month

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

03 Jan 2022, 1:06 am

I didn't follow American politics as much until after the last election when all of this stuff blew up with the the riots. But I didn't know what Trump was like before he lost the last election much. Why do so many hate him? I mean he wanted to waist money on building a wall it seems, but why else did they hate him or what else has he done? People blame him for rushing vaccines too fast, but then when Biden was elected, everyone loved the vaccines all of sudden, so that can't be it it seems. What did Trump do that I apparently missed?



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,324

03 Jan 2022, 2:31 am

^
This might give you a whiff of the reason why so many people hate him:
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/why-do-p ... ald-trump/



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,098
Location: temperate zone

03 Jan 2022, 2:59 am

ironpony wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ironpony wrote:
thinkinginpictures wrote:
Why do the majority of American voters want someone who has attempted a coup against Congress, for president?

I don't understand this.

Biden may have his flaws, but Trump has even more. So why is Biden in more trouble than Trump?


I really feel that people are being hypocritical against Trump inciting a coup by telling people to go to congress and fight, because the democratic government told people to fight the government if George Floyd was acquitted and told people to threaten the government and court if he was. So it's the same thing in a way, yet people are okay if the democratic government does it, but not Trump.

I swear if Trump decided to have joined the democratic party, then people would have loved him just because he was of that party.


Too much nonsense in the above post to list.

Just explain this please:


Why are you, a Canadian , so passionate about another country's head of state? You dont see me, nor any other American on this site shooting our mouths off about how fair/unfair you Canadians treat Trudeau. In fact I never even see YOU talk about Trudeau, nor about Canadian politics. How did you, a Canadian, get to be so passionate about "making [the United States of] America Great Again?

And would like to have him for yourselves? Trump? To make Canada great...again?


Oh well it's just that Canadians have a tendency to copy America's politics a lot, so whichever political party is in charge in America does greatly effect Canada therefore. I fear that a lot of the unrest going on in America will be copied by Canadians therefore, and therefore needs to change in the US, in order for it not to spread to Canada. I don't think Trump should be President, but not Biden either, but someone different entirely.


Where you seem to be coming from is fear. Fear that the disorder and violence you see in the news here in the US is going to spread to your country. I dont think that you hafta worry because North American history just doesnt "work that way".

In the EIGHTEEN Sixties we had a civil war, but it didnt spread to Canada. In the Nineteen Sixties the US had riots in the Black ghettos across the nation...Watts, Detroit, DC, etc. Just about every inner city in the nation was burned down. But Canada stayed peaceful. Canada didnt have the high crime rate that the US used to have in the mid to late 20th century.

Now we have violence again. A revival of street riots similar to the Ghetto riots of the Sixties, and we had a mob try to seize the Capitol building. But I dont see either phenom spreading to Canada. Your political scene is just too different. despite the fact that Canada probably does follow some American trends.



ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

03 Jan 2022, 3:02 am

naturalplastic wrote:
ironpony wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ironpony wrote:
thinkinginpictures wrote:
Why do the majority of American voters want someone who has attempted a coup against Congress, for president?

I don't understand this.

Biden may have his flaws, but Trump has even more. So why is Biden in more trouble than Trump?


I really feel that people are being hypocritical against Trump inciting a coup by telling people to go to congress and fight, because the democratic government told people to fight the government if George Floyd was acquitted and told people to threaten the government and court if he was. So it's the same thing in a way, yet people are okay if the democratic government does it, but not Trump.

I swear if Trump decided to have joined the democratic party, then people would have loved him just because he was of that party.


Too much nonsense in the above post to list.

Just explain this please:


Why are you, a Canadian , so passionate about another country's head of state? You dont see me, nor any other American on this site shooting our mouths off about how fair/unfair you Canadians treat Trudeau. In fact I never even see YOU talk about Trudeau, nor about Canadian politics. How did you, a Canadian, get to be so passionate about "making [the United States of] America Great Again?

And would like to have him for yourselves? Trump? To make Canada great...again?


Oh well it's just that Canadians have a tendency to copy America's politics a lot, so whichever political party is in charge in America does greatly effect Canada therefore. I fear that a lot of the unrest going on in America will be copied by Canadians therefore, and therefore needs to change in the US, in order for it not to spread to Canada. I don't think Trump should be President, but not Biden either, but someone different entirely.


Where you seem to be coming from is fear. Fear that the disorder and violence you see in the news here in the US is going to spread to your country. I dont think that you hafta worry because North American history just doesnt "work that way".

In the EIGHTEEN Sixties we had a civil war, but it didnt spread to Canada. In the Nineteen Sixties the US had riots in the Black ghettos across the nation...Watts, Detroit, DC, etc. Just about every inner city in the nation was burned down. But Canada stayed peaceful. Canada didnt have the high crime rate that the US used to have in the mid to late 20th century.

Now we have violence again. A revival of street riots similar to the Ghetto riots of the Sixties, and we had a mob try to seize the Capitol building. But I dont see either phenom spreading to Canada. Your political scene is just too different. despite the fact that Canada probably does follow some American trends.


But Canada copies American politics in other ways though. When Cannabis became legal in the US for example, Canada copied it. When Americans chose to politicize covid, Canadians chose to do so to for example. When BLM decided to be comea a thing in the US, some groups in Canada started some protests too. These may not seem like as big of a deal, but if Canada is willing to copy those things from the US, imagine what other things they would be willing to copy.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,098
Location: temperate zone

03 Jan 2022, 12:08 pm

Thats what I am saying. Somethings Canada copies, and some things it doesnt. You dont have Black ghettos so you're not going to copy our inner city riots. Even the things it "copies" arent really copied anyway. Like pot legalization. Americans and Canadians were like two horses running abreast moving in that directions already, and some American local juristictions crossed the finish line before Canada did. It wasnt really Canada imitating us.



carlos55
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,793

03 Jan 2022, 2:29 pm

Back in 2016, Clinton freaked out many of her potential supporters by suggesting she wanted to confront Russia militarily. Russia is easily able to destroy the US if cornered on its home territory like Ukraine for example, just like the US was cornered in the Cuban Missile Crisis and was able to destroy Russia if pushed, AKA Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).

Even though the cold war ended 30 years ago many intelligent people can picture what WW3 or a mushroom cloud over Washington or their home city really means.

Trump by contrast suggested the in my opinion, more reasonable idea of reaching a peace with Russia through strength and went further in the idea of allying with Russia as a way of confronting the main US rival China, in the same way the US did with China against the USSR in the 70`s under Nixon.

The rest was history of course and the US never really made peace with Russia. Trump was also blocked in most of his policies & proved useless anyway. The US grew weaker & less influential, meanwhile both China & Russia grew stronger and formed an alliance that the US cannot handle militarily.

its reminiscent of John Snow in game of thrones, wanting to make peace with the hated wildlings to confront the greater enemy of White Walkers and was persecuted and eventually killed for it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37766786
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16850662/ ... -military/
https://adst.org/2016/08/bad-blood-sino ... ion-china/


_________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."

- George Bernie Shaw


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

07 Jan 2022, 12:28 am

naturalplastic wrote:
Thats what I am saying. Somethings Canada copies, and some things it doesnt. You dont have Black ghettos so you're not going to copy our inner city riots. Even the things it "copies" arent really copied anyway. Like pot legalization. Americans and Canadians were like two horses running abreast moving in that directions already, and some American local juristictions crossed the finish line before Canada did. It wasnt really Canada imitating us.


Maybe it's just my fear but I feel that Canada is now going to copy America's no bail laws now that they have in some states. The Canadian government and culture seems to have this attitude that says "American politics and idealogies! Hell, yeah!", rather than having our own political identity as a culture more so.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,687
Location: Northern California

07 Jan 2022, 1:31 am

ironpony wrote:
I didn't follow American politics as much until after the last election when all of this stuff blew up with the the riots. But I didn't know what Trump was like before he lost the last election much. Why do so many hate him? I mean he wanted to waist money on building a wall it seems, but why else did they hate him or what else has he done? People blame him for rushing vaccines too fast, but then when Biden was elected, everyone loved the vaccines all of sudden, so that can't be it it seems. What did Trump do that I apparently missed?


Ultimately, it probably all comes back to one word: narcissism. Do we really want someone who is completely self-absorbed, only interested in advantage for himself and his family, as a public servant? Even when he does the right thing it is because it advantages him in one way or another. He does not actually care a single ounce about anyone else.

Which worked well when he was a media personality, making his money more off his branding than his accomplishments.

It can be hellish in a president, as we've seen most clearly since his election loss.

The man does not accept reality or disagreement. If a vote doesn't go his way, it must have been rigged. If an aid isn't praising his every word, no matter how off the rails, that person must be "disloyal" and shown the door.

He has never been the business genius he claimed to be. He has always been more of a branding specialist and hot shot salesman than a businessman with good instincts or knowledge. If voters were looking for business skills that could whip an inefficient government into shape, he was never the right guy. Never. I've paid close attention to him since the late 1980s and loved the first few seasons of the Apprentice. I also know insider details about some of his bankruptcies and workouts, and exactly how badly he has screwed over lenders and contractors alike. Ultimately, us "little people" ended up paying for his business mistakes, not him. I was heavily involved with the real estate industry in the late eighties and early nineties and know a ton of inside information, including which tax loophole helped him avoid taxes for DECADES. Dishonest, selfish, and lacking in morals all come to mind when considering his personal character. But watching him sell himself really is an amazing sight; he is so darn good at it. He isn't slick; that would make people distrust him. But if you actually pay attention, it's nonsense, contradictory, and full of lies.

I don't hate him. I hate what he might do to in another presidential term, I hate that he has taken over the Republican party, I hate how he is lying to and influencing so many citizens, and I hate that he might succeed in his apparent goal to become an American version of Putin or Ader.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,687
Location: Northern California

07 Jan 2022, 1:55 am

QFT wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I’m a strong advocate of an even playing field.


Me too.

I just don't think the left would side with even playing field. Its the right that supports it as is.

Left position is: make the field un-even in order to favor the team that has a statistical tendency to lose.


I disagree. Lets pretend the two teams have different records because one has the right equipment for the game, and the other is forced to use unsuitable equipment that causes them to trip and fall. The left's position is to help the second team acquire the suitable equipment so they are no longer disadvantaged solely because they couldn't afford the better equipment. The right, instead, denies that the quality of the equipment has had anything at all to do with the losses, that the trips and falls are due to their inferior talent, and sees no reason to try to make the equipment situation more equitable. Even if the right is willing to admit the problem is the equipment, the right argues that it isn't their responsibility to fix the inequity.


Quote:
Right position is: make the field even. Regardless of who wins or who loses.


Except the field isn't the only difference advantaging one team over the other, and the right is refusing to accept that any of the other factors matter.

Quote:
a) If there are two people, one white and one black. And black performs better than white. I say hire the black person.

b) If there are two people, one white and one black. And white performs better than black. I say hire the white person.


Have you ever hired people? I have. I think your example overly focuses on performance. In most professions it isn't just today's performance that matters, but tomorrows, and five years down the road.

So take your example b) and add the following information:

The black men couldn't afford the same level education as the white man, and started his career in an inferior company, thus learning less on the job. But in the interview you can tell how driven he is, how intelligent, and how quick to learn, while the white man seemed competent but fixed and unlikely to grow in his skills.

Now who do you hire?

Ultimately, hiring decisions are based more on "soft" data than on "hard" data, and unconscious biases can play a very heavy part on the read employers get on that "soft" data. Go back to your original striped down example and ask, how would an interview KNOW that one man "performs" better than the other? When is it fact, and when is it perception?

Because of all that, affirmative action is asking people consider that the less expensive and less impressive school may be less an indicator of talent or ability, than financial disadvantage coming into the game. What is asked that employers be more willing to talk to candidates from less impressive schools in recognition of the talent that may be hidden there. There is no requirement or even suggestion to hire the weaker overall candidate because of skin color. What is asked is that the person evaluating candidates factor in the quality of equipment each candidate has been playing the game with up to this point, in order to recognize that there may be a superior candidate whose performance only appears weaker due to lack of quality equipment.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).