Post: #1

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/.../11369019/

So Facebook is the latest Silicon Valley tech company to release its employee demographic info, and big surprise, the vast majority of people working there are White and Asian men. This matches similar demographics at Google and Yahoo, who already released similar reports. Why was this information publicly released to the media? Because professional BRT (Black Race Troll) Jesse Jackson began showing up at shareholder meetings and causing a scene. No, that's not a joke:

Quote:But in recent weeks several companies led by Google released numbers under pressure from civil rights activist Jesse Jackson. He appeared at the shareholder meetings of Google and Facebook to demand the companies release the information.

But hold on, this is not a race thread. Women are also agitating for some of those high paying White and Asian male jobs:

Quote:The pressure is especially high for Facebook. Its users span races and cultures around the globe, and the majority of Facebook users are women, making it crucial for Facebook to have a diverse workforce, said Stanford fellow Vivek Wadhwa, author of the upcoming book Innovating Women.

The rest of the article is filled with similarly insane quotes, I suggest everyone read it. Now I will make some general commentary on it (and as I said, my intention here is not to discuss race, except as a facet of the overall progressive agenda. So let's not get this thread shitcanned by going down the race thread hole).

I found this article shocking due to how brazen and shameless progressives have become with their demands for wealth transfer and equality of outcome. They are literally looking at these companies like piggy banks. There is this bizarre and toxic idea promoted by the left that these tech companies somehow owe people jobs simply because they are black, Hispanic or female. It's literally the most racist/sexist thing imaginable: you approach a successful company and demand they hire more people of X skin color and gender, because for some reason they are owed a job by virtue of existing.

These companies were built up recently with the hard work of their entrepreneurial founders. They achieved great success. They employ thousands of people and pay millions of dollars in taxes. They have become enormously successful with the employees they have now. And yet our society now expects them, after all of this hard work and success, to turn around and fire many of the people responsible for that success and replace them with less-qualified people, simply because those people have darker skin colors and/or vaginas.

We are living in a bizarro world where denying someone a job because of their skin color or sex is a crime, unless that person is White/Asian or male. In that case, not only can you freely be denied a job, but a company you have worked you ass off for can fire you and replace you with someone less qualified than you for no reason.

The funniest thing is that this diversity shakedown racket is actually passed off as being good for business. They say this with a straight face. Look at the quote about Facebook requiring more female employees "because most of its users are female." What the fuck? Where is the basic logic? Facebook already attracted a majority female userbase with a majority male workforce. What the fuck is the problem? Are they failing with women? No, quite the opposite. They are a massive success with women. But we are told that they cannot have long-term success without more women working there. Right.

Silicon Valley has been one of the last strongholds of the purely meritocratic approach to hiring in the U.S., simply because tech startups don't have room for dead weight. But now the progressives have entered the gates. We can soon expect start-ups to be forced to meet diversity standards in order to receive funding, or some other similarly insane law. In the very near future these larger companies like Facebook and Google are going to be forced to create makework positions for women and minorities just to keep these progressive vultures at bay.

It's literally a fucking shakedown racket. As if our economy was not bad enough, now the left is going to weaken and eventually destroy Silicon Valley. Where's the incentive for the tech entrepreneur to build up the next great company from scratch, when he knows all he has to look forward to is being forced to hire a bunch of do-nothings? This is going to absolutely destroy innovation. Our tech sector will begin to move offshore to escape the progressive insanity. We'll also see more startups forced to sell out to big companies rather than attempt to grow themselves, simply because the startups won't be able to willing to deal with the diversity mandates. These diversity shakedowns are basically a tax levied on successful companies that employ White and Asian men. It's not acceptable for them to have that much success, you see. They need to share that success and money with people who had nothing to do with creating it.

The progressive ideology is essentially a virus. It spreads slowly throughout the host organism (society), infecting various parts in turn. Eventually it spreads through the entire body.

Then the host dies.

Post: #2

It's really no different than how communists went around "nationalizing" everything in the name of the proletariat.

Too bad, since the tech sector is the last part of America that still produces wealth. If the progressives kill that sector there won't be much left here.

Post: #3

Tech entrepreneurship is one the most location-independent industries that has ever existed. As you said, expect to see more innovation come out of other technology hubs if this sort of thinking expands.

Ramz Paul made a post on the progressive push for diversity and its effect in schools

Post: #4

I am black and work in IT as a consultant for an elite firm. I was irritated with the peanut gallery of non-technical liberals looking to find ways to undermine our industry. IT is a field that requires certain levels of skills in order to successfully finish projects. We cannot control who has the skills or not to do various things. When a project comes up, clients want the best resources available. We charge alot of money per hour for our services and in general that commands high pay. A picture perfect looking staff will not get the job done.

There is plenty blame to go around as to why:

1. Individual people - Every time I climbed higher in my area of expertise, the less Hispanics, blacks, and women I saw around me. I cannot tell you just how many of them I tried to help get the fuck out of helpdesk, desktop support, QA testing, etc. with my own personal time trying to train them, only for them to tell me, "Nah man, this is too hard." "Ah man this is okay, they still pay me and I am glad I have a job." "Nah, bro I like working at a big company more. It's comfortable here." Despite their talents, they could never be willing to aspire to jump up in the field. I can count on one hand how many guys I did manage to pull up. They were willing because like myself they got sick of getting outsourced, laid off, and treated like shit in the past.

2. Non-Tech Industries - They never train or invest in their own people and rarely provide a path for growth. They use contractor agencies and "churn and burn" people all the time. They don't invest in their information properly and hire CIO's in name only. CIO is often a joke under the breath of other C suite members. They fire all their domestic staff, outsource to India for a while, lose profits and productivity, then hire domestic staff all over again. IT is a vicious and cutthroat industry. Gotta have thick skin to survive.

3. Tech Industries - Losers like Bill Gates and Google's founders got fat and addicted on outsourcing and HB1 Visas for YEARS. Getting guys from India and Malaysia for 30K, instead of paying someone 60-100K in America for the same work worked out great for the stock holders. The one rare thing Obama has done right was to deny them new HB1s. Then all of a sudden Bill Gates and Zuckerberg hit the chitlin circuit crying for lawmakers to put computer science courses back in schools again. Gates was on CNN talking about how STEM and US schools and the lack of programmers in the US. Made me want to vomit. If he would actually use his famous charity money to buy technical training centers around the US, he would get his money back easily over time. We all know his Foundation is merely a tax shelter.

4. The Government - How does any government that actually cares about the competitiveness of their people, let a handful of countries infiltrate US universities, cause mass offshoring of jobs from 1000's of companies, never catch a clue? When I heard that Obama asked Steve Jobs what could America do to get iPhones to be built in the US, I almost passed out from the shock of his incredible stupidity. These government losers are not qualified to understand technology because they spend most of their time trying to find ways to further divide people in this country with gotcha-games. They also screwed up big time when they removed trades from High Schools. Computer Science classes were in that same wing in my high school. They closed all those programs two years after I left, saying it cost too much money. All the guys making 20+ per hour after school that avoided gangs and prison seem to be worth it IMO.

I won't even get deep into the cyberdefense junk. Edward Snowden was a shitty 3rd party contractor too. Look at the loyalty he had towards his employer. Look at how many times Obama has changed his "Top Hacker" appointments..... Muppets. All of them.

They do not know what they are doing or talking about, so they should stay out of IT. The cream at the top always finds a way to make adjustments to our game to stay on the top. When we got no help from "progressives" and republicans, we adapted and got creative.

Post: #5

Jesus, relax people.

Nobody is forcing Silicon Valley to hire people that aren't qualified. Because a feminist or civil rights activist gets angry and makes a bunch of noise doesn't mean anything will change about their hiring process. There would have to be actual evidence of discrimination before the government got involved. Having a workforce that's non-representative of the population is not considered evidence, otherwise the NBA would've been out of business long ago. Airline pilots are almost entirely white males, but nobody has done anything to stop that. They'd have to have actual evidence that corporations are turning away qualified applicants for reasons related to their race or sex. IRTs are over-represented in Silicon Valley, so it's obvious no racism is going on.

If Silicon valley relocates, this isn't going to be the reason.

Post: #6

(06-25-2014 08:35 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  3. Tech Industries - Losers like Bill Gates and Google's founders got fat and addicted on outsourcing and HB1 Visas for YEARS. Getting guys from India and Malaysia for 30K, instead of paying someone 60-100K in America for the same work worked out great for the stock holders.

This has been one of the biggest rackets going on since the rise of the IT era. The constant claims that there were not enough people graduating in IT fields was pure bullshit concocted by the tech industry to mash down salaries and import cheap labor. Back when I was going to college I noticed how there were a lot of underemployed IT grads already. There was already a significant disparity in what they were claiming and what was reality. People who were graduating in the field were all chasing the same entry level jobs and the salaries were tanking. There was a certifications and advanced degree arms race to see who could plaster their resume with the most certs to get some shitty 40k a year job.

Post: #7

(06-25-2014 08:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Jesus, relax people.

Nobody is forcing Silicon Valley to hire people that aren't qualified. Because a feminist or civil rights activist gets angry and makes a bunch of noise doesn't mean anything will change about their hiring process. There would have to be actual evidence of discrimination before the government got involved. Having a workforce that's non-representative of the population is not considered evidence, otherwise the NBA would've been out of business long ago. Airline pilots are almost entirely white males, but nobody has done anything to stop that. They'd have to have actual evidence that corporations are turning away qualified applicants for reasons related to their race or sex. IRTs are over-represented in Silicon Valley, so it's obvious no racism is going on.

If Silicon valley relocates, this isn't going to be the reason.

But that's the point. There is no evidence of discrimination, and they still want these companies to hire minorities and women. Even if they can't perform at the level needed in competitive roles, these progressive advocates want more minorities on the payroll regardless. To follow your NBA analogy, it would be like forcing NBA teams to keep a well-paid practice squad that was 80% white just to scrimmage with the real roster, even if the white guys couldn't ball for shit and the black starters got nothing out of it. That would be a pure handout to unqualified employees based on nothing but race. Which is exactly what is being demanded here.

It's basically just a progressive tax on companies they deem to be insufficiently diverse. Hire more minorities in makework positions or else get on the progressive shitlist (which is, if you haven't noticed, an increasingly dangerous place to be over the past several years).

Post: #8

In one way you can look at it like a good thing. These massive brands will topple after all the key talent is erased from the pool. It'll pave the way for smaller startups to take over where those businesses have become inefficient turds manned by women.

Every school here I've seen startup goes really well until women managers start taking over, then it tanks within a year or two of mismanagement.

Post: #9

H1Bs are used to depress labor costs for software programmers.

Outsource jobs, insource H1Bs........ Then wonder why the unemployment rate is so high and wages
are falling.

America in the year 2014.

Post: #10

Quote:Nearly 70% of Facebook employees are men and 57% are white. Asians make up 34% of employees.

But Hispanics represent just 4% and African Americans are just 2% of Facebook's workforce.

When it comes to technical employees, the numbers are even more grim. Eighty-five percent are male, 53% white and 41% Asian. Hispanics make up just 3% and African Americans just 1% of the workforce.

So Facebook is "too white," despite whites constituting 57% of its employees compared to 72% of the US population and the company having been founded and funded by whites. I like how it's "even more grim" that whites make up (gasp!) 53% of technical employees. Meanwhile Asians are overrepresented 8-9 times over, lolz. Exactly how few whites must a company have until our existence can be tolerated? Maybe in the case of Facebook, TPTB can be convinced that Zuckerberg at least can stay on, since starting the company may outweigh the sins of his skin color. To some extent anyway!


BTW, I work for a consulting company and in my current project (here in the US), 400 out of 500 some resources are Indians and virtually 100% male. Somehow I don't believe "Vivek Wadhwa" would have any problem with that. Fuking race troll.

Post: #11

(06-25-2014 09:09 PM)rekruler Wrote:  Meanwhile Asians are overrepresented 8-9 times over, lolz.

Just to give you an idea of how bogus and hypocritical liberal arguments are about this.. asians as a group are not even considered when it comes to affirmative action or equal opportunity measures. In fact asians are penalized in both categories because liberals consider asians to be "overpresented" and "overachievers" in professional fields. That's why ivy league schools started actively discriminating against asian applicants. This doesn't even consider the fact that the entire race category is bullshit and there are a lot of asians that grew up as poor immigrants living in shit neighborhoods in America. Then when these people work themselves up from the shit heap they get mashed down due to quotas based not on merit but on skin color. Affirmative action and EE is essentially a racist policy that rewards underachievement and mediocrity.

So basically some "minorities" receive preferential treatment due to various race lobbies. This is where Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton come in. They have a whole cottage industry based on victimhood.

Post: #12

(06-25-2014 08:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Jesus, relax people.

Nobody is forcing Silicon Valley to hire people that aren't qualified. Because a feminist or civil rights activist gets angry and makes a bunch of noise doesn't mean anything will change about their hiring process. There would have to be actual evidence of discrimination before the government got involved. Having a workforce that's non-representative of the population is not considered evidence, otherwise the NBA would've been out of business long ago. Airline pilots are almost entirely white males, but nobody has done anything to stop that. They'd have to have actual evidence that corporations are turning away qualified applicants for reasons related to their race or sex. IRTs are over-represented in Silicon Valley, so it's obvious no racism is going on.

If Silicon valley relocates, this isn't going to be the reason.

They won't leave per se, but what you will have is a bunch of (probably females), given management positions they either do not deserve nor have the proper temperament for. I personally seen female IT managers/CIOs drive off an entire department more than once. IT and Affirmative Action do not mix. Many guys with kick-ass resumes don't have to put up with that shit and take off quickly. These people won't quit pushing this stuff. You saw what happened to the Firefox guy. If he did not have so many liberal idiots and women infiltrate his company, he would still be in charge of it.

Google, Zuckerberg, and all those other firms out there in liberal land will earn their red pills the hard way for their ultra-liberal agenda whoring. It was cool to be one of them when they did not have any interests in how your tech company made it's money. Now they will see the error in mixing business with their own immature and childish agendas. It's karma at it's finest. Businesses exist to make a profit. Period. If they want to protect those profits they better get a grip now and snip these associations they have. These hamsters bite the hands that feed them all the time.

Google could save itself in a way by becoming a larger Internet Service Provider (ISP) like time warner or comcrap, with their cable/fiber service. Then they wont have to worry alot about innovation as much and will always have a very high and steady stream of income to insulate themselves with. If normal people cannot break up ISP/Utilities monopolies, a feminist cabal even inside the company wont either.

Post: #13

Any cognitively-intensive endeavor is going to be more heavily saturated with Jews, East Asians, and South Asians due to higher mean IQ with the first two, and higher population numbers with the latter two.

And it's going to have a lower saturation of latinos and blacks due to lower mean IQ.

Furthermore, it will have more men due to greater male variance in cognitive abilities vis a vis women.

Clearly, it does not mean every latino or black, or woman, is dumber than every Jewish/East Asian/South Asian/white male--however, statistically it should be obvious why cognitively-intensive endeavors are not equally balanced across population groups.

Should be.

Post: #14

Jezebel weighed in (heh) on this issue a few weeks back in an article about Google's demographics:

http://jezebel.com/google-is-70-percent-...1583249526

The article is as dumb as you'd imagine given the source and the topic. Of note is that Google is now trying to appease these clueless morons by conducting research on why so few women go into comp sci. As we all know, they'll have no choice but to find that it's the result of social conditioning and/or discrimination. Can you imagine the uproar if Google came out with a report on the differences between the male and female brain?

Liberals are pro-science alright... when that science supports what they already believed.

Post: #15

(06-25-2014 07:48 PM)scorpion Wrote:  I found this article shocking due to how brazen and shameless progressives have become with their demands for wealth transfer and equality of outcome. They are literally looking at these companies like piggy banks. There is this bizarre and toxic idea promoted by the left that these tech companies somehow owe people jobs simply because they are black, Hispanic or female. It's literally the most racist/sexist thing imaginable: you approach a successful company and demand they hire more people of X skin color and gender, because for some reason they are owed a job by virtue of existing.

When you take what progressives you say at face value, this is entirely consistent. There is absolutely nothing radical about this latest salvo, given the assumptions that progressives already trumpet on a regular basis. To express confusion or surprise that progressives are logically pursuing their ideology is to profess an ignorance of them. It happens to all of us, but the worst thing you can do is to constantly remain in a state of disbelief and shock.

Google et al are evil because they perpetuate inequality, inequality of the sexes and the races.

Legally mandated favoritism is an unavoidable outcome of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the climate that surrounded it. With that in place, racial and sexual favoritism is inevitable; you cannot sensibly defend modern civil rights legislation and castigate affirmative action in the same breath. Many do, and it's a testament to their utter confusion.

It will start off with the tech companies hiring more of the 'underrepresented' groups, preferably in positions that are less essential or harder to fuck up. These hires will come to be a tax on the productive parts of the organization, but it will be a hidden tax, because no one will dare spell out how this policy of favoritism is costing them - because that would just open them further to lawsuits and protests. Think of women as police - you gradually need more and more officers to control the situation and maintain order... but no one knows why. Everyone will studiously ignore the elephant in the room as to why productivity is declining and costs are going up. I lied - everyone is already well aware that pinning the decline on an official embrace of mediocrity is crimethink. They will not even enunciate these thoughts in their head. They'll just express confusion, and get back to their NFL games and Kardashian reality TV.

The big companies that comply with the New Nepotism will trumpet their commitment to diversity, to pressure their rivals to pay the tax too - especially their smaller nimbler rivals who are more vulnerable to the depredations of the state.

When there isn't market competition to keep favoritism from getting out of hands, you see outcomes like this - http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012.../?page=all . Of course, it will never get to that level in the major tech companies. But as others have said, tech is still a competitive market at times, so nepotism will not be without its cost. Still, the more entrenched players with a big piggy bank and a golden goose to their name - Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Amazon maybe... they will easily manage to survive with a little extra slack tax.

I see it in my workplace, the effects of nepotism. Often it starts with hiring someone competent - but prone to favoritism, nepotism, ethnocentricity, call it what you like. And then this competent person goes on to hire and protect people who are incompetent, out of a sense of kinship. It's not always on ethnic lines either - it could just be the boss feels for someone who's been around a while, despite them being terrible at their job.

It could be interesting to see how the 'market' responds to such pressures. Eg, maybe Google enters some product segment where it won't make much money, but it can hire lots of women or minorities to be in 'compliance' with the diversity mob.

Post: #16

What Jesse Jackson needs to do is encourage black entrepreneurship. What women need to do is encourage female entrepreneurship. The guy that started Whats App is a billionaire. The guy was a Ukrainian immigrant that used to be on welfare and food stamps. Ultimate rags to riches story. The majority of the people in this forum are smart enough to come up with something like that. It's a pretty simple concept, just needed someone to bring it to fruition.

I would like to see more black leaders encouraging blacks to start businesses of their own. We totally lack in this area. Back in segregation there were lots of black businesses. Tulsa, Oklahoma was home to a thriving and prosperous black middle class that served its own needs. This would put us in a strong social position and not be so dependent on whites for employment. It's also an embarrassment how many stores in black communities are owned by outsiders siphoning money away. Korean women selling weave hair to black women. And these Koreans hate their clientele. Why these small corner stores and beauty shops aren't owned by black folks is beyond me.

Post: #17

(06-25-2014 11:02 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  It's also an embarrassment how many stores in black communities are owned by outsiders siphoning money away. Korean women selling weave hair to black women. And these Koreans hate their clientele. Why these small corner stores and beauty shops aren't owned by black folks is beyond me.

I figure it's partly because these jobs are hard and low paying - and most of the blacks or really anyone else who was born here who can manage a store like that has many other opportunities that offer a far better quality of life.

Post: #18

(06-25-2014 11:02 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  What Jesse Jackson needs to do is encourage black entrepreneurship. What women need to do is encourage female entrepreneurship. The guy that started Whats App is a billionaire. The guy was a Ukrainian immigrant that used to be on welfare and food stamps. Ultimate rags to riches story. The majority of the people in this forum are smart enough to come up with something like that. It's a pretty simple concept, just needed someone to bring it to fruition.

I would like to see more black leaders encouraging blacks to start businesses of their own. We totally lack in this area. Back in segregation there were lots of black businesses. Tulsa, Oklahoma was home to a thriving and prosperous black middle class that served its own needs. This would put us in a strong social position and not be so dependent on whites for employment. It's also an embarrassment how many stores in black communities are owned by outsiders siphoning money away. Korean women selling weave hair to black women. And these Koreans hate their clientele. Why these small corner stores and beauty shops aren't owned by black folks is beyond me.

It should be noted that actual leaders in the Black community, like Dr.Claud Anderson have been preaching the doctrine of creating Black businesses now ad nauseum for several decades now. The only reason that Black America is in the state it is in now is because it has essentially been locked out of competition economically. People expect Blacks to compete with other groups, but with that resources? These days Blacks own about 3 percent of the wealth available in the country and largely have not been able to benefit from the spoils of slavery or civil rights movement like the progeny of damn near every other group that has come to America has in some form or fashion. This even includes Blacks from the Caribbean and Africa, who have a nasty habit of talking down on Blacks in this country, but get free reign to benefit from the policies that past Black activists worked and died to get. This dynamic manifests on this very forum as well as in real life all the time. When Blacks did create thriving communities like Black Wall Street, they were often destroyed due to jealousy or trumped up BS charges, from outsiders to those communities.

For example, its pretty much impossible for a a Black person to get a bank loan to start a business as well, even when controlling for excellent credit and whatever other credentials lenders user to determine worthiness. Its because of things like this that Blacks want reparations, because there's no economic base in the community to undertake such an action like creating businesses or media conglomerates to combat negative images on a wide scale. Even King wanted reparations. See his rationale below:





Groups like the Japanese, Native Americans, and Jews have received massive entitlements in the ways of land, casinos, money, etc, so if you ever hear that argument, the root lies in the mis-allocation of wealth in this country. A political solution is worth nothing at this point because it usually gets hijacked by other groups. This is exactly what happened with affirmative action since the language in the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 was so ambiguous, words like minority(which was supposed to mean Black) got conflated with womens rights and gay rights for example time went by. Fast forward a decades later, and now gays are trying to gain acceptance by latching on to the struggle that Blacks faced and appealing to the masses that way. Now AA doesn't benefit Blacks nearly as much as it does other groups these days. These type of ploys ensure that only solution is like you alluded to a greater sense of Black communialism.

Post: #19

^^^ It's a joke that there is affirmative action for women. Whenever a woman marries it is basically a transfer of wealth. The majority of female billionaires either inherited the money from daddy or their husband. This is one reason I respect Oprah. While I'm not a fan of her content, gotta give the woman props for doing it on her own.

Post: #20

Opposing librul pinko viewpoint here: yes, Guys and Asians are smarter programmers for sure.
But from the overall societal viewpoint, the CURRENT REALITY is that there's a lot of black people in poverty here, and it doesn't cost that much to make some effort to bring them into the tent. And giving someone a job they don't quite deserve could be part of getting them and their descendants into the mainstream and out of full-on parasitism

Look at the opposite end of the spectrum: Bush II would have never, ever gotten to be president based on his merits , he got in because he was connected, not due to talent.
THAT kind of unfairness and its cost to us can never, ever be eliminated. It's the nature of power to try to perpetuate itself, and to succeed at it, sometimes to our benefit or- -in the case of Bush II-- to our detriment. (Isn't Bush I looking smarter and smarter for NOT invading Iraq? loll) So what will counterbalance that?

To have some system of trying to let the little guy, the "loser" get a piece of the pie has a lot of good effects at preventing really ugly long term race hatred.

I got FAR higher on the GREs than black people who beat me for slots in elite grad schools.
But I don't really resent that, I see the big picture.

Having to work a little harder cause I'm a white guy is not problem for me. I'm obviously so smart when people work with me that they know who to ask about stuff when they need help.

I'm really glad the attempts to include black people in the mainstream here mean even in ghettos, I don't feel like they hate me because I'm white. Would you really want to live in an Israeil-Palestine situation, or in the Hindu-Moslem conflicts in Asia-India, where they can never get rid of the fucking hotheads who are forever saying "No compromise! Justice or death!" so there can never be any hope of fucking peace?

Just from my personal experience, I knew a very intelligent Indian doctor who told me he was troubled because his wife's father prayed for the death of all Moslems every night. That is a really grisly thing to have happening in your society. I think there's a lot to be said for something that tries to prevent things from happening like that, and I think America has succeeded more than older cultures at doing it. As evidence, as far as I know there has been virtually ZERO terrorist attacks on the US from American -Born Moslems. The Koran advocates all sorts of horrid shit be done to "infidels", but no one hardly ever does anything. (I know there have been some locals who went overseas to do harm).

And why don't they? Because if they grew up here, they knew for the most part people hardly ever gave them shit about their religion. Contrast that with Iraq, where centuries-old Sunni-Shia bullshit NEVER gets resolved.. just today they're killing each other because they NEVER GIVE AN INCH.

I'll take Martin Luther King and write him a check for whatever he wants any day over Osama bin Laden.

I don't think there's a solution for the underclass, but trying to give a little to keep some good feelings for each other amongst ALL the population may be a small price.

Post: #21

(06-26-2014 12:25 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  Opposing librul pinko viewpoint here: yes, Guys and Asians are smarter programmers for sure.
But from the overall societal viewpoint, the CURRENT REALITY is that there's a lot of black people in poverty here, and it doesn't cost that much to make some effort to bring them into the tent. And giving someone a job they don't quite deserve could be part of getting them and their descendants into the mainstream and out of full-on parasitism

Once you start moving away from a meritocracy to one of quotas you are heading down a slippery slope. It's kind of like feminism and its "equality" rhetoric when the reality is it becomes a disengenuous fight for a bigger slice of the pie using liberal dogma as a weapon. That's why guys like Jesse Jackson have found such an enterprising niche.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The problem with entertaining race politics is that America becomes very balkanized. You're setting people up for failure by assuming they need special consideration with broad quotas instead of focusing on the root cause of the issues such as poverty and a culture which deems academics as selling out.

Post: #22

@iknowexactly

That argument would hold some water if we were talking about a low-skill, relatively inconsequential field... but this is TECH. There are boatloads of money at stake, and only the brightest of the bright are really capable of adding any value. In that context you can't reasonably expect companies to pass over the most talented candidates in the name of diversity.

Post: #23

(06-26-2014 12:46 AM)Turnaround Wrote:  @iknowexactly

That argument would hold some water if we were talking about a low-skill, relatively inconsequential field... but this is TECH. There are boatloads of money at stake, and only the brightest of the bright are really capable of adding any value. In that context you can't reasonably expect companies to pass over the most talented candidates in the name of diversity.

So you think these companies won't hire at least a few hundred/thousand non-whites to keep appearances up? I think I'd be willing to put some money on that one if you give me a three year time horizon.

I'm not saying it would actually work this way, but as a thought experiment, would you want 5% more pay if you had to work in an imagined place with the physical characteristics of America, but the undertow of race/religion hate of Israel/Palestine etc?

Post: #24

(06-26-2014 12:41 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(06-26-2014 12:25 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  Opposing librul pinko viewpoint here: yes, Guys and Asians are smarter and their descendants into the mainstream and out of full-on parasitism

Once you start moving away from a meritocracy to one of quotas you are heading down a slippery slope.

When you've had a mediocrity like Bush II for president, you can't seriously argue you're in a true meritocracy.

It's more accurately described as a meritocracy/plutocracy hybrid.

That's really the core of my argument/question, do you want to counterbalance the unavoidable plutocracy elements? There seems to be some negative outcomes from that.

Post: #25

(06-26-2014 01:04 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(06-26-2014 12:41 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(06-26-2014 12:25 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  Opposing librul pinko viewpoint here: yes, Guys and Asians are smarter and their descendants into the mainstream and out of full-on parasitism

Once you start moving away from a meritocracy to one of quotas you are heading down a slippery slope.

When you've had a mediocrity like Bush II for president, you can't seriously argue you're in a true meritocracy.

That's true but the elite <1% are in their own category and always will be. There's just no getting past that and it's impossible to legislate out nepotism of these people under any system. That's why Alexander Hamilton talked at length about the long shadow cast over politics by old money and business interests.

The only thing you can do as a society is mitigate the slippery slope of race quotas and other arbitrary liberal criteria from further destroying the vast majority of the population.


What you are proposing is throwing out the baby with the bathwater and exacerbating the problem with handouts.