Slashdot Mirror
Diversity At Google Hasn't Changed Much Over the Last Year (cnet.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Not much changed at Google over the last year when it came to the diversity of the tech giant's workforce. Google released its annual diversity report on Thursday detailing the composition of its workforce. The percentage of female employees rose by .1 percent to 30.9 percent. The percentage of Asian employees grew by 1.6 percent to 36.3 percent. The number of black and Latino employees grew by .1 percent to 2.5 percent and 3.6 percent, respectively.
"Google's workforce data demonstrates that if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach," said Danielle Brown, chief diversity and inclusion officer at Google, in the report. "That's why from now on ownership for diversity and inclusion will be shared between Google's leadership team, People Operations and Googlers. Our strategy doesn't provide all the answers, but we believe it will help us find them."
"Google's workforce data demonstrates that if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach," said Danielle Brown, chief diversity and inclusion officer at Google, in the report. "That's why from now on ownership for diversity and inclusion will be shared between Google's leadership team, People Operations and Googlers. Our strategy doesn't provide all the answers, but we believe it will help us find them."
What's the purpose of this article supposed to be?
You mean religion in general is cancer.
"Google's workforce data demonstrates that if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach," said Danielle Brown, chief diversity and inclusion officer at Google
If you had listened to James Damore instead of doing the same illegal things over and over again, you might get a better result.
Is the goal to have a 50% female workforce even though there's almost no chance of that happening in terms of interest in the general population for the foreseeable future so they'll have to resort to lowering standards or upping hires for more diversity officers and other nontech positions basically defeating the supposed reason they're concerned? What happens if they overshoot the goal and men dip under 50%. Are they just going to not care and ignore it like for how women now earn significantly more college degrees and dominate middle bureaucratic management and nobody gives a crap?
Who wants to bet their next paycheck that Google's recruiters have never darkened the door at a career fair at a HBC? Where do they think they're likely to find a huge group of black Computer Science majors who aren't African or Caribbean immigrants outside of that?
Google's not stupid. They know where they could aggressively recruit young black people trying to get engineering degrees, but HBCs are too prole for a company that typically only recruits "from the best." And Google doesn't want proles because they might bring truly shocking perspectives like telling Mr. I Identify as a Dragon that he's a total whack job who needs to stop mixing crystal meth and D&D instead of nodding along. (Working and middle class black people tend to be refreshingly willing to call you on your bullshit compared to the upper class yuppies that dominate places like SV)
62% of the population, but only 53% of Google employees... how would this come about except through strong discrimination in hiring practices?
Hillary you're drunk, go home.
So, which law is it you're saying Trump violated when Greenburg approached Stone to tell him he had information the campaign might want to hear? Is it the same legal territory you might discuss when the DNC/Clinton machine spent money to hire foreign agents to spend time in Russia obtaining phony info from government agents there? Please catch your breath from your shrieking for a moment, and be specific on the statutes involved. No? Don't have that handy to copy/paste like the anonymous troll you are? Didn't think so.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I want Google to be as 'diverse' as possible. That's because I'd personally like to see them fail as a business, because in my opinion they aren't good for the Internet, and for the software industry in general. And if there's one guaranteed way to make a company irrelevant, and eventually a total failure, it's to hire based on 'diversity' instead of skill and merit.
Diversity means not white, therefore 100% purple is 100% diverse. You can't pull the violet card!
But it's fun to see Google struggle with diversity, because this is the result of their culture and they are a racist company.
None of the top executives at Alphabet are black or hispanic, Larry and Sergei are both white males. For such an important issue, they should be willing to give up their positions to historically disadvantaged people.
Or is this the usual "diversity for thee, but not for me" situation?
I'm pretty sure there was a memo/manifesto on this that received a great deal of attention...
The funniest thing is that despite not being adept at office and internet politics, Damore was actually pretty empathetic. He pointed out that the job description and environment were optimized towards what white men want.
SJWs responded by assuming that the only rational way to interpret it was that women weren't fit for the job, ignoring the possibility that the job wasn't fit for women.
So, it looks like Damore was right and insightful, even if he's already been converted to full Nazi. I don't really blame him in that scenario, given that his views were rejected by SJWs, and embraced by racist and sexist assholes. People are often going to associate with people that don't treat them as shitty as other people do.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
and islam is asshole cancer.
Because it cannot be done!
There is NO way you cannot tell me those money grubbing hacks @ Google would not hire 100% purple poka-dotted zebras if purple poka-dotted zebras made them more profitable.
The fact is that there are significant cultural differences between demographic segments. And there is NOTHING wrong with that.
But, ultimately it translates into only 2.5% of the black population cuts the mustard at Google. It's not Google's issue, it's black culture as a wholes' issue.
When the percentage of black people or Latina's or females who value schooling and work ethics like oriental people do then you will automatically see a reversal of these numbers.
Governments, corporations, and educational facilities should not be in the business of cultural modification because we all know, assuming we are honest, that family and extended family/friends are the ultimate cultural arbitrator.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Considering the lengths to which they've recently gone to increase skin-level diversity, which includes literally suspending all application processes for lower level positions where the applicant is white or asian, I do have to say that I am somewhat surprised by how little they've been able to move the needle.
Kind of makes you wonder what could have nullified their efforts this heavily. I know they've had some well meaning changes that have made their minority hires feel genuinely uncomfortable, like how the traditional mentoring of new hires has been changed so that your mentor will always be of the same race, but I didn't imagine they'd be able to take as many steps backwards as forwards like this. Either that or then they've knocked some sense into their hiring practices, which should have come with such a big backlash it would be well known to people outside the organization, so I can't image anything could explain this except well meaning policies that have backfired strongly enough to make their diversity hires leave in the same numbers as they're able to shepherd them in.
I guess that's good for them as nobody deserves to work in a place that makes you feel uncomfortable enough to make you want to quit your job. However I am somewhat worried about their remaining staff because if I know these diversity types, a setback will only cause them to double their efforts rather than take a moment to think about what they're actually doing.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
Maybe because the big co's are all trying to do the same such that the pool of diversity candidates has shrank.
Table-ized A.I.
That's a pretty big change in just one year since it's 4% greater. The article is misleading.
I did a series of interviews at Google in Kirkland, WA (between Seattle and Microsoft) because I had a free place to stay a couple of blocks away for a friend that's out of the country for two years working for Microsoft in Dublin that was looking for a house sitter. I also had two other friends that are also black that did the same. All three of us gave up before the end of the process. Despite being able to get rid of $1,500 a month and live somewhere nice and have a higher paying job, Google's interview process just made it not worth it. My two friends also gave up since both of them ran out of vacation time to take off from their current jobs to keep going back to Google.
The way I feel about the process is that if you screen resumes well, do a good phone screening, then in person interviews with three or four people, then another interview with someone more senior and you still can't make-up your mind then the problem is with your process, not the candidate. It shouldn't take six months of waffling to make a decision.
Yeah, that's the mental gymnastics of having actually read the memo, instead of regurgitating a third-hand report of how someone on Jezebel was offended.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Yup. And you'd be labeled a Nazi for simply observing reality.
As it stands right now, if Google wants to increase diversity in skin pigment for it's own sake, then what they're going to get is diversity in actual skills, instead. Less superb, and more average. And they don't want average, for obvious reasons. So the social diversity score simply follows the talent. Unforgivable, right?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
You do understand that all (most) these Manafort things they are looking at are from before he was associated with Trump in any way? And more to the point, he was working for the Podesta Group at the time...
Should Trump have done better homework before he hired him? Probably, but that's about all you can put on Trump in any way for that.
Big surprise, and the steady descent of Google from kind of evil to really evil has not stopped either. No news here, but something to see here for those who have somehow not noticed.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
You mean religion in general is cancer.
Right, because Christianity and Judaism have been so toxic that cultures that live consistent with Judaeo-Christian norms have failed miserably.
Oh, wait, that didn't happen. Look at Israel and compare it to it's neighbors. The nation that exists, and was created, as a sanctuary for Jews in the world has the ability to produce all the water and food it needs for itself and then some. They produce some of the best technology and are able to fend off attackers which consistently have more numbers and resources but also a religion that leads them to a path of suicide. This suicide is quite literal, they will strap bombs to their bodies and detonate them to "win" a war. While Europe was looking at the stars and plotting the motion of the planets there were cultures in the Americas and Africa that were sacrificing themselves and their children to their gods.
That's not saying that Europeans were entirely peaceful and intellectual, they had plenty of wars based on national borders and their interpretation of how to best worship a god. I will also admit that cultures in Asia prospered without a Judaeo-Christian culture. They still had their own religion and also had incredible advancements in science and technology.
Religion is not cancer. You could argue that people can be peaceful, intellectual, and also without religion. I'd like to see an example of such a culture. Best we see of that is a culture that replaces worship of a god or gods with worship of a leader or of government. Such cultures tend to devolve into shit holes like North Korea. Islam is cancer and we see this play out every day in the news. Many of these Muslim nations exist only because of trade with nations that do not practice Islam. Had they been left to their own devices they'd slowly revert to goat herders as the infrastructure they imported decayed into dust.
Perhaps someday Islam will evolve into a religion that is not bent on suicide. I see hints of this in Saudi Arabia, where they have begun to allow women to get an education and drive a car. A culture that keeps half their population ignorant and sheltered will continually be outdone by cultures that do not. It might also help if they don't strap bombs to their children and blow them up.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Have you tried reading the post you reply to? The point is that Google has mostly high-stress, high-pay jobs where you are expected to work all of the time. That's a formula for single white dudes, given our current social values
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Diversity is the least important factor when assembling a good tech team.
Google's feelings of diversity are just like that of California universities:
Multiple skin colors, all 51 genders,* and all 187 sexual orientations.**
* Diversity of opinion is not permitted.
** Cisexual cismales with white skin must choose one of the other 50 genders and/or one of the 186 other sexualities. Your skin color will be decided by your diversity officer fairly using diversity standard skin tone swatches.
Black American Culture you mean. Blacks in other countries don't generally have their own culture. Their skin color is different but otherwise they are just like everyone else. For some reason American blacks like to self identify to the point of even having their own language dialect (AAVE/ebonics). If I were a black American I would want to be seen as an individual and not a stereotype based on my group identity. As a jew I feel the same way. I don't want a fucking Jewish History Month. Why can't we all just see each other as unique individuals that we can get to know if we want to know more instead of stereotyping everyone from certain ethnic groups like the SJWs do. If I were an intelligent black person and I am sorry but they do really exist I would be extremely insulted and pissed off by the SJWs trying to give me a condescending helping hand.
If Google wants to be racist and choose people based on race, but they are having trouble finding people with 10 years of experience using Common Lisp or whatever their silly requirements probably are they should just hire Jews and East Asians. Then they can rest easy about being accused of being racists (which they are since they have a fucking diversity officer who is probably a black chick and that is the only reason she was hired) by SJWs.
It sucks that we jews are persecuted and disliked but still don't get credit for being a persecuted minority by SJWs. We are considered super-white these days. Nobody is trying to hire more jews and everyone is happy about that. Google should just refuse to hire anyone who is not East Asian or Jewish unless they are from Caltech or MIT. Not Harvard because they are obvious racists. Aren't ugly people also a persecuted minority? Just start hiring more ugly people. Or paedophiles. If you really want to be diverse you could hire deaf, blind, legless, black girls with kiddie porn on their computer from Tristan de Cunha.
Or just fucking stop being racist and hire the most qualified candidates while doing your best to be race-blind. SJWs are racists themselves but are just too stupid to realize that fact. That is what bothers me about them. The least they could do is admit to being as racist as the KKK, but against anyone of European or East Asian descent (including jews) instead of mostly blacks and jews. Why they consider racism ok against one group but not another I don't know. We jews always get the short straw though. Even SJWs hate us.
Is the goal to have a 50% female workforce even though there's almost no chance of that happening
The goal is probably to have well above average female participation, as a kind of virtue signal.
What no-one seems to think about is that all of these large companies offering very high salary and bonuses for the small pool of potential technical female employees, what does that do for participation in smaller companies?
They simply have no way to complete for female employees, which means that females are inevitably poorly represented in smaller companies. That is really unfortunate because a smaller company is I think a generally nicer work environment for anyone, female or male... you simple have no room for the kind of nonsense that can get by at larger companies because everyone has to be productive and largely professional at a smaller company or they are gone.
If you have any kids just going to college about now you'd have to be insane too have them study anything but computers or some other engineering, they can do really, really well even just on internships over the summer (I have a friend with a daughter who just finished a CS degree and she had companies fighting for her like mad all through school).
She did sadly end up working for one of the large companies in part because of a huge bonus, that's what led me to mention that as a caution as I feel a little bit sad that will be her entry position in the technical world, when I think a smaller company would have suited her better.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
the goal is cheaper labor. There's a class of people who could be going into tech but who aren't. Often they go into medical, business and finance. If you can get those people to join your labor pool it drives down wages (supply/demand). That's the goal. There's no greater purpose and no SJWs at work. It's just a company trying to get the laborers they want for as little as they can.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I've seen a number of good people leave Google over the past year. The completely toxic culture that Google created by doubling down on their abusive rhetoric can very-well drive people away.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Any this is why effectively banning research and discussion of human biological diversity is bad. It would be okay to ignore the realities of differences in aptitude between groups, IF nasty policies were not going to be enacted to "correct" the disperate outcomes.
Can you find any raw figures in the Google diversity annual report 2018? "Sometimes it is percentages that are given and raw figures that are missing," warns How to Lie With Statistics , "and this can be deceptive too." And yet the lack of raw figures doesn't keep Google from boasting, "We are further increasing transparency. Google's publication of workforce representation data in 2014 helped shape the current industry conversation on diversity in tech. We aim to take the conversation-and our work to the next level as we further refine our approach, so this year we've published new and more detailed workforce representation data."
By what percentage did *applicants* in each of these categories rise or fall? What about the percentages amongst promotions? Of course we're not going to solve systemic racism and sexism in the tech industry overnight. It takes generations to undo that kind of damage. But what we *can* do is make sure that no discriminatory hiring practices are taking place.
Forget this article, ask yourself the question why some would even CARE if your skin color differs from that of your co-worker.
Go far enough left around the circle, and you eventually end up on the right.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
When the summary is corrected for mathematical reality, the numbers are:
Women: +0.3%
Asians: +4%
Blacks: +4%
Latinos: +3%
Percent != Percentage Points
Age discrimination is still rampant in Silicon Valley. I have a Stanford Ph.D. but am a baby boomer (guessable from my LinkedIn profile) and Google won’t give me the time of day. This despite the alleged scarcity of tech workers in an era of near record unemployment.
I think that Google has enough money to solve this problem. If they felt like it, they could open an office in Mississippi, hire a bunch of minorities, and have them do something of no consequence. Next diversity report comes out, and they'll be looking great.
With regards to any issues with the 2016 campaign, yes.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
You want more 4 years of trump? no?
Then you will have to accept the fact that judging people by the color of their skin failed you miserably, and that there were enough white people in bad conditions to elect a fucking president.
Go back to judge people individually or be blind.
Right, because Christianity and Judaism have been so toxic that cultures that live consistent with Judaeo-Christian norms have failed miserably.
What does that even mean?
Look at Israel and compare it to it's neighbors. The nation that exists, and was created, as a sanctuary for Jews in the world
...after they got their asses kicked out of there, and had to be reinstalled by force substantially later? That sounds a lot like failure to me.
has the ability to produce all the water and food it needs for itself and then some. They produce some of the best technology and are able to fend off attackers which consistently have more numbers and resources
...or would, if not for US foreign aid to Israel.
but also a religion that leads them to a path of suicide.
When you deprive people of other delivery systems, they will use their bodies. They may do this even without the influence of religion, if you take their homes away from them and subject them to an ongoing policy which looks very much like genocide.
That's not saying that Europeans were entirely peaceful and intellectual, they had plenty of wars based on national borders and their interpretation of how to best worship a god.
They had plenty of wars based on profit which they ascribed to national borders and their interpretation of how to best worship a god.
Religion is not cancer.
Of course it is. It's inefficient.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Right, because Christianity and Judaism have been so toxic that cultures that live consistent with Judaeo-Christian norms have failed miserably.
The only difference of import between Islam and Christianity is the REPETITIVE nature of being a practicing Muslim.
Religion at low levels is a manageable annoyance. Religion of people who organize their life around it is how you get ISIS and heaven's gate.
Religion is not cancer. You could argue that people can be peaceful, intellectual, and also without religion. I'd like to see an example of such a culture. Best we see of that is a culture that replaces worship of a god or gods with worship of a leader or of government.
Religion is absolutely a cancer. Too many have leveraged religion for their own aims granting themselves legitimacy that would otherwise be denied to them without it. Religion is a dangerous vehicle of control (yet far from the only one) the world is far better off without.
The only difference between Christianity and Islam is the volume level. It isn't the content of the religion. All of the Abrahamic religions reflect cave dwelling sensibilities of their times.
Perhaps someday Islam will evolve into a religion that is not bent on suicide.
The only evolutionary path for religion is the extent to which underlying theology is ignored by its adherents.
Merely because the people whose land was stolen are pissed and are fighting to get it back?
Israel, as it exists today, was created in 1947. That's over 70 years go. The people that had this land "stolen" are quite likely all dead. The few that remain, if any, are not likely in fighting form. The people fighting today are the grandchildren and great grandchildren of that generation. How many generations removed can they still call this their land?
I grew up in the USA, as did my parents and grandparents. If I go back far enough I can find ancestors from Germany and other European nations. Does this mean I can go back and claim land there? I don't think so. What point was that right lost? Give me a number of generations. It's not "their land" any more than some piece of Germany is my land.
Also, while 75% (give or take) of people in Israel are Jewish the rest are not. They weren't killed off or relocated out of the country. Those that can behave themselves and not be pissed about a 70 year old gripe will live in peace and prosperity within the borders of Israel. Those that can't will be imprisoned, not killed or forced out.
And you think that shows Religion in a good light?
I think this shows Jews in a good light. Muslims? Not so much.
If Israel really was the bloodthirsty culture you believe it to be then they'd bomb the Gaza Strip until it glowed in the dark. The Gaza Strip is 99.9% Muslim, why is that? Could it be because the Jews and Christians were largely killed or forcefully relocated? All the rockets that go over that border originate from Gaza and land in Israel. Sure, the Israeli Army will defend it's border with lethal force so bullets and grenades do cross from Israel into Gaza. They do this because they know if the border is breached that those that cross will do so with the intent to kill as many Jews as they can. This isn't about land any more, no one fighting this war has ever set foot in Israel before.
Israel is showing considerable restraint and diplomacy. This has not been reciprocated by its neighbors. I read my history and know of the Six Day War. Israel has a far superior military than any of its neighbors. If they wanted to take the Sinai Peninsula again, and keep it, then they could do so at any time. But they gave it back as an offering to hopefully reach peace. All they got in return was more rockets fired at them.
This is not a political war. Maybe in 1947, or perhaps 1967, it was but no more. All those warriors from then are dead or senile. This is a one sided religious war, Muslims wanting to kill Jews or die trying.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Are you talking about claims he made or just ones that seem implicit? His main actual sin that I saw was that seemed to be leaning to heavy on claims of the difference between genders being biological, when we are much better able to measure the cocktail of nature and nurture.
Again, I feel a lot of the criticism tends to be not on what he said, but on what was implied by what he said. But drawing conclusions requires preconceptions to fill in the blanks, particularly the overall legitimacy of corporate structure and management.
Now, it's quite possible that he's just a sexist jerk. But the memo is still quite readable if one operates under the assumption that traditional management and business structure is garbage that is heavily biased in favor of "rugged invididualism"-type affluent men. The jobs in question make up some of the main exceptions to overtime laws, and one biological difference between men and women is the women generally need more hours of sleep to not have impairments. Women are socially expected to be the one that takes care of a child, and these positions have horrible work-life balance. The traditions of promotion encourage aggressive behavior, which men are inculcated to engage in while women are inculcated to avoid. It's not hard to see how a lot of higher positions are deeply antagonistic towards women by design. And the obvious solution would not be to throw more women into the pool of candidates, but to alter the environment so that it's not hostile. And I believe that those changes would result in a HUGE improvement for diversity and productivity that dwarfs their current initiative.
Like I said, it's possible that Damore didn't intend for this kind of interpretation, but this makes for a far more interesting discussion than the conventional read on it.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
This is mindless SJWism and everyone knows it but the cultists.
But any company that takes this seriously should put their existential future where their stupid mouths are... and just kill their company.
Hire people that aren't qualified merely on the basis of who is more or less statistically represented.
Burn the company to the ground. And when there's nothing left but ashes and finger pointing... the industry can be rebuilt by people with the courage and integrity to stand their ground.
I'm sure there are devotees of the cult that are offended by the statement, I am not an adherent to your religion.
I find the suggestion that I should take it seriously as silly as you would take the suggestion that only Christians following christian doctrine should be hired. Its that absurd.
But obviously fundamentalists are not known for being sensible. So this is going to continue until they burn it down. We already are seeing companies leave not only the bay area but California entirely. And not merely for tax or real estate issues but literally because the culture has gone toxic.
I know I know... The great sage has prophesied that when the planets align your golden age will come to pass... which is why everyone else has to get on the right side of history... because these people on top of everything else think they have an accurate prophesy of the future. Literally. Otherwise how would they know what was the "right side of history"... they're saying that in the end they'll get what they want. And yet the industry is already very international and most of the international partners on top of the domestic companies that are leaving are not ascribing to this stuff.
Its not good for any industry in which it takes over. Its even f'ing up hollywood, journalism, and academia is lousy with it.
But these people are not open to correction. They were told the word of god at some point and anyone that disagrees is a dirty infidel. So this is just going to have to play out to the pain.
I'm enjoying the show.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
It really is fun watching the Shillaries unable to ever actually talk about the substance of any single thing. And then they wonder why they lost nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the governorships, both houses of congress, the White House, the Supreme Court, and millions of two-time Obama voters who can't stand people like you any more. Carry on! More! It will help again in the next round. Thanks!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
The University of Chicago just announced last week that going forward, SAT scores will be "optional" when determining admission standards. Others, no doubt, will follow suit.
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Guess who tends to do better on SAT tests? That's right - whites and asians. Blacks and Hispanics, on average, do far less well on SAT tests. Notice I said "on average". Obviously there are some Black and Hispanic students that do exceptionally well on the SAT tests but overall, as a group, they don't do as well as whites and asians do as a group. It's just a fact.
I suspect that at least one of the reasons that the University of Chicago chose to take this path is to "right" a supposed "wrong". Google has a very low percentage of black and Hispanic employees and Facebook and Microsoft are probably about the same. I don't know this for a fact but I would be willing to bet it is the case.
So the U of C has now "leveled" (i.e. tilted) the playing field in favor of two groups that traditionally don't do well on standardized tests. What could possibly go wrong?
I'm guessing their discriminatory hiring programs accelerated that trend even more.
Two -- the Supplemental Headcount Program for industry hires and another program which affected new grads.
Diversity for diversity sake is a totally misguided approach to... well, anything actually except maybe winning a diversity trophy.
If any group faces higher obstacles than others, that needs to be addressed. If any group is statistically significantly under-represented, that might justify checking for why it is so.
But intentionally hiring one group over another is actually the definition of discrimination, even if you do it in the name of enriching diversity.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
The stats from within every company now follow every profession, not just a total count of staff and a SJW set ratio.
... with a free... support for ... better... more of ... with .... longer.... better .. in a nice community thats clean and safe... solar ...
Every profession within the USA now has to reflect wider US community demographics.
50%, 10% 5% 1% as exists in cities and states all over the USA.
Top engineering people what can keep a company globally competitive have to reflect that same US demographics.
How can any US company work with that SJW demand?
Offer money and a house and a free bus and the ability to earn and save more money and good food and gym and a work location in a nice community and a
The problem is the working hours, conditions and the educational demands on the top engineering people. All that free stuff and amounts of free money does not make for a happy professional person with the hours of work.
Other nice jobs with the same/more pay, less hours, more freedom start to look much better. Not having to be work ready at 3 am any day for years.
Smart people walk out of that job to nicer start up, create their own work, become contractors, work with a smaller brand that has much better hours.
Brands that want new ideas, have growth. New jobs in great parts of the USA where excellence and merit is seen as good.
In a part of the US thats safe, clean, has fast networking, has a nice community and good education. Solar.
The SJW cant make people take work and stay at work in the ratio of workers they want to see the USA changed into.
The USA can solve all this by:
Remove all need for merit and skills. Only hire on demographics. Every new worker then has a professional worker look after them for years.
Make people keep their jobs so the ratio and demographics cant change?
For an offer of free university make workers take a job later?
Use the tax system to keep people in a job to make up the ratio of workers needed?
Work in a profession with a short list of brands for a better tax credit and free education?
Escape that job and the tax credit stops, the once free education becomes a loan.
With that gov guidance smart people will have to stay at the job offered and not look for any other jobs. Ratio of workers and demographics are then set by gov and tax laws.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
most the people who make up America chose to come here
No, the vast majority of the people who make up America were born there, and had no say in the matter.
Tell us how you REALLY feel.
Seriously, you're going to let something as temporal as the POTUS drive you THIS fucking bug-nuts?
Do you ENJOY flagellating yourself this much?
You don't like him, you don't like his supporters.
FINE.
He's gone in 4 years IF YOU ACT LIKE SANE PEOPLE.
He's gone in 8 if you continue acting this way (and then gets replaced by someone just like him).
Don't you see how this sort of crazed, bitchy, vindictive behavior is simply pushing people in the near left and center ever further right, even as you and your compatriots dash ever further left?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
A more interesting question is how they managed to go from 59.6% white techies in 2014 to 50.7% white techies in 2018. That's an 8.9% drop in four years. Presumably they're not preferentially firing white techies, nor are they preferentially quitting. That leaves hiring, which for some reason has fallen off a cliff, versus non-whites. Is there any innocent explanation for this?
On top of that, female techies have gone from 16.6% to 21.4% over the same four years. Since many of these new hires are undoubtedly white, that means that white male techies have fallen even more than the above stats would indicate. We need more data, but I'm guessing 15 or 20% over four years.
This seems almost beyond belief, and yet no one else seems to be discussing it. Am I all wet here? Or maybe Google screwed up their numbers?
If the left abandon the racist as fuck social justice and go back to being "color/gender blind" and tries to find ways to improve the life of those that are in terrible conditions no matter who they are, then they're cured.
But that probably will take more 4 years.
This is mindless SJWism [ ... ] Its even f'ing up hollywood
Huh so SJW are responsible for the continual churn of mediocre reboots, remakes and cookie cutter superhero movies?
Is there ANYTHING SJW won't stoop to???? :clutches pearls:
SJW n. One who posts facts.
...after they got their asses kicked out of there, and had to be reinstalled by force substantially later? That sounds a lot like failure to me.
They got kicked out by religious, but pagan, Roman Empire. That only proves, that a religion with more gods is better than a religion with one. And I definitely second that opinion - paganism caused significantly less religious wars than monotheism and produced much funnier mythology.
As to the rest of your points... religion was created on the fly as a tool used by witch doctors and such to keep their less enlightened tribesmen from eating poisonous mushrooms and wandering off from safe camps, and kinda snowballed from there. All things considered it's a miracle in itself it didn't turn out even worse, and actually managed to create something good.
What is best in life? Hot water, good dentishtry and shoft lavatory paper.
How many generations removed can they still call this their land?
Wait - you’re claiming that the religious zealots from Europe who said they have an eternal homeland after 2000 years are reasonable but the second and third generation of the people displaced are not, even though they are still stateless and occupied by said European religious zealots?
Those that can behave themselves and not be pissed about a 70 year old gripe will live in peace and prosperity within the borders of Israel. Those that can't will be imprisoned, not killed or forced out.
You seem to not know a heck of a lot about this, so it’s unsurprising you are parroting propaganda, but the Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank face starvation rations and no clean water in one case and dispossession in the other, and both face near-daily violence from Israelis. You should open a newspaper or two, or maybe read a book.
If Israel really was the bloodthirsty culture you believe it to be then they'd bomb the Gaza Strip until it glowed in the dark. The Gaza Strip is 99.9% Muslim, why is that? Could it be because the Jews and Christians were largely killed or forcefully relocated? All the rockets that go over that border originate from Gaza and land in Israel. Sure, the Israeli Army will defend it's border with lethal force so bullets and grenades do cross from Israel into Gaza. They do this because they know if the border is breached that those that cross will do so with the intent to kill as many Jews as they can. This isn't about land any more, no one fighting this war has ever set foot in Israel before.
I think you’ll find it’s about occupation and Israeli brutality. Seriously, the level of ignorance you’re showing here is embarrassing. Even the Israelis admit that they have a brutal occupation with the intent of starving the Palestinians into acquiescence. They just can’t mass murder the Palestinians because then they’d be subjected to sanctions, and they rely on massive aid handouts from the EU and US just to survive.
I read my history and know of the Six Day War. Israel has a far superior military than any of its neighbors. If they wanted to take the Sinai Peninsula again, and keep it, then they could do so at any time. But they gave it back as an offering to hopefully reach peace. All they got in return was more rockets fired at them.
Ouch! You really should open a book about the Yom Kippur war, where Egypt steamrolled over Israeli forces almost by accident, and discovered that they could do that again and again if they had better preparation. Isarel and Egypt were discussing peace a year later, and a peace treaty was signed shortly after that. What rockets do you think go from Egypt to Israel, or vice versa? Egypt was Israel’s second Middle East ally.
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
how about to start
A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official.
5 U.S. Code 3110
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Wait - youâ(TM)re claiming that the religious zealots from Europe who said they have an eternal homeland after 2000 years are reasonable but the second and third generation of the people displaced are not, even though they are still stateless and occupied by said European religious zealots?
I'm saying that after 70 years of the borders of Israel being where they are there is no one alive today on either side with any claims for land except that under their feet. For the most part all of the people were born on the land they live on. We can rehash all the history of who possessed this land all the way back to before Judaism existed if we want but that changes nothing on who owns it now. Israel owns this land and they can keep it as long as they can defend it. These 20 year old punks that toss fire bombs at Israeli border guards can claim that the land on the other side of the fence is there's but it's not. They never set foot there and therefore can claim no ownership. These "European religious zealots" have never been to Europe, and have no citizenship in any European country.
Here's an idea, send the Palestinians to Europe. They have just as much right to be in Europe as the Israeli Jews. Oh, that's right, these Arabs are going to Europe. Seems that they are as poorly behaved in Europe as they are at home, being as they have a tendency to rape the women, drive trucks over children, and hack the men to pieces with machetes. Has Europe been "mean" to the Arabs too and somehow deserve this treatment? Was this land also "stolen" from the Arabs and they just want the land back? Is this all just a political dispute? I say not. This is religious zealotry from the Muslims and they are willing to "convert or kill" everyone or die trying. I'm willing to grant their wish, they can die trying and get their 72 virgins.
You seem to not know a heck of a lot about this, so itâ(TM)s unsurprising you are parroting propaganda, but the Palestinians both in Gaza and the West Bank face starvation rations and no clean water in one case and dispossession in the other, and both face near-daily violence from Israelis. You should open a newspaper or two, or maybe read a book.
They could have better conditions if they wanted it more than to kill Jews. I have no sympathy for the living conditions of those that threaten the lives of Jews for being Jews. I have read a book or two, and I see the news. The Israeli authorities give those in Gaza pipes to fix their water supply, fertilizer to grow crops, and sugar to can their food. What they do is weld the pipes into makeshift rocket casings, use the sugar and fertilizer to make rocket propellant, then send the unguided rockets to kill random innocent people. Had they instead used this material to improve their own living conditions they'd have food and clean water. I'm impressed by their ability to improvise these weapons but saddened by their inability to use those resources for improving their living conditions.
I think youâ(TM)ll find itâ(TM)s about occupation and Israeli brutality. Seriously, the level of ignorance youâ(TM)re showing here is embarrassing. Even the Israelis admit that they have a brutal occupation with the intent of starving the Palestinians into acquiescence. They just canâ(TM)t mass murder the Palestinians because then theyâ(TM)d be subjected to sanctions, and they rely on massive aid handouts from the EU and US just to survive.
Israel has nuclear weapons. As I recall VP Biden let this slip as before it was merely speculated. Iran has stated openly that if they get a nuclear weapon they fully intend to drop it on Israel. If Israel was equally brutal then they'd drop nukes on Iran, Gaza, and wherever else they thought it necessary. Iran faces sanctions now, precisely because they have more hate than intelligence. Israel is smart enough to hold back their brutality on their neighbors to avoid these san
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Mostly, GOOG wants a well oiled machine. Diversity is not engineering. So GOOG continues engineering its workplace to achieve error-free outcomes. A good design parameter - for a machine.
Unique, individual, counter-intuitives and creatives are not the COGS in the machine but exceptions. Exceptions interrupt the flow, disrupt the running of the machine. Females in a minority have no voice, other than to accept GOOG's very generous offer to FREEZE their eggs. Which fits nicely with their FREE lunch that keeps people working –– like a machine.
And when the machine doesn't work who do you think they fire ' for cause' in an 'at will' state like CA? Yep...unique, individual, counter-intuitives and creatives. SO females can grab their frozen eggs and run to the nursery after they've been shown their pink slips. BUT the untold story remains here...Google's diversity doesn't change because that's NOT the machine that they built.
NOT until the US.gov makes them.
"All things considered it's a miracle in itself it didn't turn out even worse, and actually managed to create something good."
It's unsustainable, that is the opposite of good.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Oriental? Are you 80 years old?
The US population is 62% white. Google's employee population is 53.1% white and new hires are 45.2% white. That seems like a pretty serious bias to me, but it's a private business and they can do what they want. What I don't understand is what "better outcome" they actually want to achieve. Dose Google want to become a "majority minority" company?
Skipping past the usual dueling SJW and ASJW's, I'm going to propose that what's going on is something a bit different than people usually suggest:
Google pays lip service to the idea that a diverse workforce corresponds to a diverse range of intellectual approaches to the job, but they're also famous for a "tough" application process that I submit is actually a series of affinity tests in disguise. For example, you can be a very good programmer and still not qualify as google material if you can't show you're up on a lot of computer science trivia [1] which isn't actually used that much by working programmers-- hence the trend toward computer science cram classes to get you through the job application process (much like the SAT preparation racket).
[1] Before you object to this point and start telling me about "fundamentals": if you can actually prove that an algorithm is correct, the algorithm will be embodied in standard libraries, and knowing it in much more than outline form will become unnecessary for anyone outside of the tiny fraction of people working on those standard libraries. I really and truly don't need to know how to code up a postgresql index, because there's some really good code that does this already-- I could learn to do this if it were needed, I need to know enough about indexing to choose appropriate ones, but beyond that, no.
So, in the name of diversity, should all of us get fired, just so our employers can get closer to that "perfect" mix of different genders/races/whatever? Think about it, if you work for an employer and there are only five employees, who happen to be male, or female, or fit a certain demographic, if the employer is only looking at the best candidates for the job, no matter what, is there a problem? Should most of us lose our jobs just to force our employers to give the job to someone else who may not be as qualified/experienced, just to fill some "quota" that is seen as politically correct?
For a long time, women were not encouraged to go into science/technology, not just because of jobs, but because their parents had the culture that encouraged these gender roles. It takes generations to change things, not because children are not able or interested in a subject, but because their parents encourage their children, and will generally hope that their children in most cases are like them when it comes to interests. How many generations will it take to get from the 1940s-1950s culture where "a womans place is in the home" and to the point where it should be a very normal thing to see women in just about any field? Remember, we are talking generations, not years. Those in their 50s at this point still come from the culture of the old-school gender norms for many careers, and even when the older crowd enjoys seeing change, it is such a part of the cultural upbringing that many want their children to have similar interests.
When it comes to race, and you know that education in the USA has a huge split between schools in wealthy areas compared to poor or middle class areas, and you also know that there is a much larger percentage of non-whites in poor areas, that means the schools will not be at the same level, meaning there will be a lower percentage of non-white people who will get the education needed for high end careers. Like it or not, and I do NOT like that the USA is like this, it means that relatively speaking, there will be a lower percentage of African-American people who are qualified for many high end jobs. It isn't about race as much as it is the education system being unfairly designed to keep those in poor areas from getting a good education compared to areas with more wealth. At that point, diversity is difficult, because your percentage of qualified applicants of given races will make it more of a challenge. We are not talking about diversity in retail jobs, we are talking about jobs that are NOT all that easy to get, even for those qualified.
Perhaps because I said that his conclusions are still right for all practical purposes, he just focused too much on one factor as to why. The authors of the studies he cited have publicly refuted his conclusions. That's bound to come up in court. He is going to have a hard time justifying his position as rational and science based when the scientists whose work he is relying on contradict him.
To my recollection, he mainly opposed efforts that simply brought in more diverse workers, without changing the job itself.
I would agree that his arguments do have an overlap with what sexists have to say. However, that's precisely why I prefer my interpretation. If you use arguments that sexists have made, they have a hard time arguing against those policies, because they've already bought into those arguments. Genuinely ask yourself which is more subversive to a male-dominated industry, token diversity outreach or completely rethinking the structure of power within an organization?
Even if Damore is a sexist asshole, turning his words into disruptive feminist rhetoric would do more damage than firing him, so he can be embraced and coddled by clear misogynists and racists, would make for better revenge.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Perhaps because I said that his conclusions are still right for all practical purposes, he just focused too much on one factor as to why.
Yeah, anyone who suggests he was wrong gets modded "troll". Someone is very concerned about enforcing the narrative that he was right and is the victim in all this.
To my recollection, he mainly opposed efforts that simply brought in more diverse workers, without changing the job itself.
One of his recommendations is to "[s]top restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races" and "reconsider making Unconscious Bias training mandatory for promo committees", both things which are considered to be effective. I suppose how important those are relative to the rest is debatable but the rest are not that great either.
Consider his suggestions to stop alienating conservatives. I'd like to hear an explanation of what exactly that means in practice, because the only examples I've seen mentioned are things that would clearly be unacceptable in almost any company. Things like expressing the view that some people's marriages are not legitimate or as valid as others, or that some people should stick to traditional gender roles. What conservative values and ideas are actually oppressed at Google that it would be beneficial to hear?
Perhaps he just means the appeal to biology, as I know some people consider "science" to be a conservative thing now since they believe that progressive attitudes on things like gender are not scientifically justifiable. However, it's already well established that such views are simply incorrect and biology does not support them.
Genuinely ask yourself which is more subversive to a male-dominated industry, token diversity outreach or completely rethinking the structure of power within an organization?
The latter, but that's what Google is attempting to do. In fact Damore complains about it a lot, saying that it creates a hostile environment for conservatives.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Mostly, you just have to consider how you sell ideas. You can sell many of the same ideas to conservatives if you bother to speak their language. You can also do what I did here, and instead of outright rejecting their ideas, apply the principle of charity to some core statements they made, and argue them as supporting your ideas and views. People often cling more to identity than ideas, and react instinctively more than cognitively. The bonus is that the most effective method of doing so is understanding a group of people, what they want, and what they believe. In such a case, you can genuinely find what will feel like a victory for them, while still getting your agenda across.
AFAIK, they aren't even rethinking their overtime policies, likely because the way their business currently functions is very dependent on them. The overall hierarchy is fundamentally unchanged. And there's very little chance that stockholders would tolerate the kind of genuinely radical change needed. So, their efforts are restricted to more anemic methods. Even if those methods have some degree of efficacy, they are little more than a band-aid on a serious wound. This is all pretty obvious if you talk to people who are actually on the left, instead of the really watered down version of it you'll find in corporate environments like Google.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Mostly, you just have to consider how you sell ideas.
Okay, but Damore complains that conservatives feel that they can't express themselves and have to keep quiet for fear of reprisal. What specifically does he, or anyone for that matter, think they are not allowed to say but should be?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The memo itself is a good example. He stated a lot of important points about diversity in the workplace, even if he did so in a way that was not all that considerate. Google's response was firing him, while my response is to apply the principle of charity and use his arguments to construct more effective methods of addressing these issues. Of course, I also have the advantage of being on the outside of the machine, so suggesting things like "pay executives less money" or "make managers less powerful" are things I can freely say.
I also take great joy in the potential of trolling both McFeminists and actual misogynists at the same time.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Hmm, I'm not really buying it. He was fired because while some of his points were not that unreasonable, some of it clearly was and demonstrably created a hostile environment.
Still, I expect we will hear more about this when the court case starts. Doubtless both sides will put forward more detailed arguments and much more evidence.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
How can you improve diversity among categories that are entirely defined by having proved invalid ways to categorize people in the past? Seriously, the discrimination model that explains why you have to feel guilty for something at this point isn't even thought crime, it claims that you are wrong... in your thoughts... about your reasons because of things other people who shared this invalid classification did to people whose only relationship is one of these invalid relationships.
Having the same junk doesn't relate you to anyone else with the same junk, any crime, or any thought, and nobody knows your motives better than you. Stop pretending psychology is or ever was science.
The Diana Moon Glampers of the world smile upon you.
Welcome to the New America, where conservatives care more about putting SJWs in their place than little things like terms limits.
Sure! Because if we weren't plagued by people like the SJWs infecting both local and national politics, term limits would have very little appeal. Why treat the symptom when you can treat the problem itself?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
"if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach"
Note the way in which "better outcome" is just oh-so-casually identified with a factor other than something material to the business like "profit". I guess the "chief diversity & inclusion officer" just measures & affects what she can. It falls to someone else to bridge the logical chasm between those and useful business metrics.
King? Oh good grief, you guys used to say this about Bush 2. And Bush 1. And Reagan. Give it a rest. Please.
Endless scandals? You mean the ones created by the Democrats out of whole cloth?
Lack of progress on campaign progress? You might want to take a look at this website that tracks all of the progress Trump has made. It's fairly extensive. https://www.promiseskept.com/
Or you can just keep your head buried in the sand. Your choice.
Just imagine Obama did half the shit Trump has done you'd be frothing at the mouth. Trump was quite vocal in his anti Obamaness and by extension anti the current president. Now he's the current president its all fake news and trying to shut down people who criticise him and everyone should respect the president regardless because hes the president and that makes him right apparently. How long do you think it will be before he tweets out how term limits are a democrat ploy to hinder him and wonders if they can be removed? Probably punctuated with the word sad and full of random capitalisation.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Asian americans, 6% of the population, are at 36% at Google.
Harvard faced the same "Asians have higher scores than any other race" problem, tried to address it with "personality" scores, got sued.
It is interesting to note that Asian-American SAT scores improved by 54 points since 2006, while for other races they dropped (for whites only modestly, by 6 points);
source
I'm saying that after 70 years of the borders of Israel being where they are ...
So you’re unaware that the borders moved in the first 10 years of the state of Israel, plus the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and Golan began in 1967. Why am I even discussing this with someone who doesn’t know the basics?
... there is no one alive today on either side with any claims for land except that under their feet.
The settlements are expanding. You seem unaware of that fact, or maybe you support it. It’s hard to tell, frankly, so I’m wondering what your point is.
For the most part all of the people were born on the land they live on. We can rehash all the history of who possessed this land all the way back to before Judaism existed if we want but that changes nothing on who owns it now. Israel owns this land and they can keep it as long as they can defend it. These 20 year old punks that toss fire bombs at Israeli border guards can claim that the land on the other side of the fence is there's but it's not.
Well, the people you detest are under belligerent occupation by Israel, hence why they toss incendiaries and fire crackers over the fence, sometimes hurting people. But the key point is that you are being inconsistent. You claim might makes right, but then you object to someone challenging that might. The rest of that paragraph is just the usual racist driven so I will ignore it.
They could have better conditions if they wanted it more than to kill Jews. I have no sympathy for the living conditions of those that threaten the lives of Jews for being Jews. I have read a book or two, and I see the news. The Israeli authorities give those in Gaza pipes to fix their water supply, fertilizer to grow crops, and sugar to can their food. What they do is weld the pipes into makeshift rocket casings, use the sugar and fertilizer to make rocket propellant, then send the unguided rockets to kill random innocent people. Had they instead used this material to improve their own living conditions they'd have food and clean water. I'm impressed by their ability to improvise these weapons but saddened by their inability to use those resources for improving their living conditions.
Yes, that’s the Israeli line, however what the Israelis actually did - and they admitted it - was, after they were forced out of Gaza, blockade it almost completely, stop trade and goods going out, put the people on starvation rations, and bomb the electricity and sewerage so that the people would suffer. The Palestinians dug tunnels and smuggled food, essentials and then luxuries to survive, and smuggled out goods. Israelis got really mad and bombed the tunnels. Far from letting the Palestinians live in peace, they wanted them to suffer. They even boasted about it.
Israel has nuclear weapons. As I recall VP Biden let this slip as before it was merely speculated. Iran has stated openly that if they get a nuclear weapon they fully intend to drop it on Israel.
Blah blah blah. None of that is on topic, Palestinians are not Persians, and Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons. It’s just meaningless blather.
The Palestinians were offered land for peace FIVE TIMES since 1900. These offers were accepted by the Jews every time, but the Arabs in the area refused. If they honestly wanted land and peace then they had plenty of time to do so. The last offer was in 2008, far from ancient history. Israel is seeking peace but the Palestinians are not. They will not accept anything less than the total destruction of Israel.
Ignorance isn’t bliss in this case. In 1946 Ben Gurion wrote that he would appear to accept Partition of Palestine, but he always intended to expand it’s borders and drive out the Arabs. By the 1980s Isarel had occupie
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
Democrats are mostly just keeping quiet at the moment
OH REALLY?
So we've been IMAGINING them falling all over themselves for the last 18 months to potshot the administration?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Maybe it'll bite them in the ass.
However, there comes a point when some people just have nothing to lose.
So, if they're screwed no matter what, they're going to get a "fuck you" in on their way out.
And I'm sorry, but I SERIOUSLY disagree that putting Clinton in the Oval Office was "in the best interests of this country".
She's an influence peddler, a kleptocrat and has botched every job she's been given.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I'd have to see how that poll was formulated. Because my first reaction to that is "bullshit!"
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
Violating more laws just to get at them isn't an answer.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I'd have to see how that poll was formulated. Because my first reaction to that is "bullshit!"
Exactly. Anything you don't like or doesn't fit your narrative: BULLSHIT.
Trump HIMSELF was quoted as saying that the US should consider abolishing term limits (like China):
http://www.businessinsider.com...
It's a quote dude. He said it. There's no dispute on that.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
That's called "whataboutism". You dismiss things like suggesting the constitution should be changed to allow Trump to be king with "well, OBAMA DID OTHER STUFF!!!". Seriously, how about just judging each situation on it's merits? I learned when I was 4 that two wrongs don't make a right. If you think Obama committed some terrible crimes, GO GET HIM. What's stopping the Republican house, senate, and presidency from opening an investigation into Obama? Aren't you upset with your R elected officials that they are letting Obama off the hook after he committed all those crimes? Why are you voting for people that let criminals like Obama go free?
Downvote if you want, the fact remains you support a president that said publicly that the US should "give it a try" abolishing term limits, using China as the shining example.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
I'd have to see how that poll was formulated. Because my first reaction to that is "bullshit!"
Exactly. Anything you don't like or doesn't fit your narrative: BULLSHIT.
Trump HIMSELF was quoted as saying that the US should consider abolishing term limits (like China):
http://www.businessinsider.com...
It's a quote dude. He said it. There's no dispute on that.
No. I said my first reaction was "bullshit".
But, as I said, I'd like to see how the poll was formulated.
There's a difference between dismissing it and wanting to know more.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
That's called "whataboutism". You dismiss things like suggesting the constitution should be changed to allow Trump to be king with "well, OBAMA DID OTHER STUFF!!!". Seriously, how about just judging each situation on it's merits? I learned when I was 4 that two wrongs don't make a right. If you think Obama committed some terrible crimes, GO GET HIM. What's stopping the Republican house, senate, and presidency from opening an investigation into Obama? Aren't you upset with your R elected officials that they are letting Obama off the hook after he committed all those crimes? Why are you voting for people that let criminals like Obama go free?
Oh for fuck's sake.
My POINT is that violating laws simply because OTHERS have violated laws IS NOT OKAY!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Go in black face!
Not sure if you are being intentionally obtuse or just unaware of your own language.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
Violating more laws just to get at them isn't an answer.
You are softening the issues with Trump by at the same time pointing out that the previous admin did it also, and did it a lot. That's "whataboutism". If you have issues with the previous admin, lobby your elected officials to investigate, prosecute and sentence. Don't use it to soften or excuse Trumps's dealings.
What I'm SAYING is that I've had enough of it and I'm not prepared to countenance any more.
And using previous administrations misconduct as an excuse for more misconduct is unacceptable.
PERIOD. Anything beyond that is something you are reading into it.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Imagine how unconvincing it will be when theyâ(TM)re sniping kids in 10 years and claiming that theyâ(TM)re being forced to, because they kids got too close to a fence, and their only defence is the fence, tanks, airplanes and nukes?
Given the history of these "freedom fighters" to strap bombs to children and send them running into crowds, fences, and such I can't blame the Israel border guards. They built a wall, they posted signs, these people know that if they get too close to the wall that they will face lethal force. It's unfortunate, extremely so, if a lost child wanders too close to a fence and gets shot for it out of the fog of war.
So long as we are placing blame here lets not forget that the reason the border guards shoot children and the disabled is because they have seen compassion for these people, quite literally, blow up in their face. In World War 2 the Japanese would fly a white flag indicating surrender but when American soldiers went to accept the surrender they'd get cut down by machine guns. After that the white flag is meaningless, by their own actions they've indicated that they have no intention to surrender. Decades later we still hear idiots talking of American brutality for ignoring Japanese surrender. Well, had the Japanese not redrawn the rules then the Americans in the Pacific Theater would have respected their surrender.
The Palestinians drew up their own rules. They sent children strapped with bombs to the border fence in an attempt to make a hole in it. Well, Israel now knows the rules that people in Gaza are playing under. If they are willing to use children as soldiers in their holy war then they can expect to lose these soldiers in war.
You claim might makes right, but then you object to someone challenging that might.
I'm objecting to them claiming ownership to this land as justification for this use of force. I've read the interviews of people in Gaza. It's some sad story of a young man in Gaza that pines to see "his homeland" on the other side of the fence. He's so determined to set foot on this land that he's willing to die fighting for the "right" for this land. Here's my question, what makes him think that "his land" is on the other side of that fence? He admits that he's never been there. It's likely his parents haven't been there. It's quite possible that his grandparents have never been there.
If this were a political fight as many often claim then that was lost long ago. This is a religious fight now. Perhaps not "religious" in the truest definition as it's not about deities being worshiped. This is a religious war in that they are fighting over this land over many generations out of a belief being passed down over generations that they have a "promised land" on the other side of the fence and that they must kill the people that "stole" the land from them.
In some of the stories I've read the "freedom fighters" in Gaza are being totally honest. They admit to taking people in wheelchairs to the border fence as human shields. They admit that this is about killing Jews. If the Jews are as brutal as you claim then what's keeping Israel from shelling and bombing the entire Gaza strip until the sand glows in the dark? You can claim its because of sanctions they'd get from other nations. Well, Israel is continuously being sanctioned by other nations. How would bombing Gaza change anything? The UN already made statements of Israel violating human rights, but they do nothing about it. So the UN isn't going to stop them. What's stopping Israel from just pushing everyone in Gaza into the sea is that they have compassion.
I believe that Israel has this compassion because they've read their scripture. They may not view Jesus as the son of God but they view him as a prophet. Jesus was a carpenter, he built things. He never lead an army or fought in a war. Mohammad was a warlord, he killed people. If you think using Jesus as an example for Je
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Have you been following the news about the selective enrollment schools in New York? Asian groups are up in arms about attempts to diversify the schools by forcing them to set aside seats for certain groups.
Asian Groups See Bias in Plan to Diversify New York's Elite Schools
If you want to make people equal it's much easier to knock some down than it is to build the others up.
Given the history of these "freedom fighters" to strap bombs to children and send them running into crowds, fences, and such I can't blame the Israel border guards. They built a wall, they posted signs, these people know that if they get too close to the wall that they will face lethal force. It's unfortunate, extremely so, if a lost child wanders too close to a fence and gets shot for it out of the fog of war.
The problem with making stuff up, like you just did, is that inevitably someone who knows better will call you out. You can provide proof, admit you're a liar, double-down, hotly angry, or just stop posting. Strapping bombs to kids? Just bullshit.
So long as we are placing blame here lets not forget that the reason the border guards shoot children and the disabled is because they have seen compassion for these people, quite literally, blow up in their face. In World War 2 the Japanese would fly a white flag indicating surrender but when American soldiers went to accept the surrender they'd get cut down by machine guns. After that the white flag is meaningless, by their own actions they've indicated that they have no intention to surrender. Decades later we still hear idiots talking of American brutality for ignoring Japanese surrender. Well, had the Japanese not redrawn the rules then the Americans in the Pacific Theater would have respected their surrender.
The Palestinians drew up their own rules. They sent children strapped with bombs to the border fence in an attempt to make a hole in it. Well, Israel now knows the rules that people in Gaza are playing under. If they are willing to use children as soldiers in their holy war then they can expect to lose these soldiers in war.
Yeah, let's blame the Palestinian Kamikaze pilots, I mean the Japanese suicide bombers, I mean, LOOK OVER THERE!!! How many Israelis fought the Japanese in WWII?
I'm objecting to them claiming ownership to this land as justification for this use of force.
And yet you have no issue whatsoever with Israelis using eternal ownership of the land as justification for the force used, both past and present. Surely some consistency is desired? No? Didn't think so.
I've read the interviews of people in Gaza. It's some sad story of a young man in Gaza that pines to see "his homeland" on the other side of the fence. He's so determined to set foot on this land that he's willing to die fighting for the "right" for this land. Here's my question, what makes him think that "his land" is on the other side of that fence? He admits that he's never been there. It's likely his parents haven't been there. It's quite possible that his grandparents have never been there.
Even the Israelis admit they ethnically cleansed and mass murdered Palestinians. If the Israelis admit it, isn't it time for you to as well? You're as bad as a holocaust denier, just on 1/6th the scale. I love how the standard response of Israel's defenders, when presented with proof of Israelis murdering kids, doctors, nurses and people in wheelchairs, is to blather on about religion and how some guy 1500 years ago was bad, but the guy before him was good. Sigh. It's not about religion, it's about force, taking land, and wanting to be cruel to people because you've taken their land. Israelis are addicted to occupation now. There's no way for them to stop. The whole state would become impoverished and fall apart, even under the best case scenario, if the occupation were to end and an equitable solution found.
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
The problem with making stuff up, like you just did, is that inevitably someone who knows better will call you out. You can provide proof, admit you're a liar, double-down, hotly angry, or just stop posting. Strapping bombs to kids? Just bullshit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...â"Palestinian_conflict
The use of children as suicide bombers by Palestinians is well documented. There's plenty of links to news sources in the Wikipedia article. It took me about 2 minutes to find that article, had you bothered to take 2 minutes yourself to check before you posted then you wouldn't look like an idiot right now.
I love how the standard response of Israel's defenders, when presented with proof of Israelis murdering kids, doctors, nurses and people in wheelchairs, is to blather on...
The Palestinians have been caught lying many times about the Israel forces killing Palestinians.
https://www.christianpost.com/...
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Isr...
These deaths by IDF gunfire and tear gas always happen during a protest along the border fence. If these people know that the Israelis are so brutal then why are they bringing children and people in wheelchairs to the protests? Can you explain that? Assuming that the report of a child killed by tear gas was true, what kind of idiot parent brings an infant to a protest? I don't care if the protest was "peaceful". I don't care if they had no reason to expect IDF to gas them. No one wants to bring a child to a protest, out in the desert, so the child can be miserable and cry and therefore make the parents miserable. They brought the kid there knowing that the IDF would be using lethal force, knowing that the child could die, and therefore carry the blame for the death.
I have no sympathy for a culture that uses children as soldiers. I cannot blame the IDF for shooting children that get too close to the border fence when there is a history of children being used as suicide bombers to breach the fence or kill IDF soldiers. If there are wheelchair bound people and children suffocating in gas attacks by the IDF then that's because someone brought them to the border knowing that it's possible they could die in a gas attack.
If the Palestinians want to wage a war with Israel over the land they occupy then they can't claim to be victims of "brutality" when Israel defends their borders.
Sigh. It's not about religion, it's about force, taking land, and wanting to be cruel to people because you've taken their land.
It's not "their land" if they've never set foot on it. These young Palestinians admit that they've never been there before. Maybe instead of expending this effort in fighting for land that they've never seen before they should make the best of what they got.
The whole state would become impoverished and fall apart, even under the best case scenario, if the occupation were to end and an equitable solution found.
I don't even know what that means.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.