The statistics indicate that people weren't being employed based on merit alone.
Is that what they show? Or do they show that black people on average are worse employees than others? Black people *are* disproportionately economically disadvantaged. That will lead to them being less educated on average, and worse employees. But people of all races face the same problems if they are economically disadvantaged. The solution is to provide assistance based on economic status, not race.
Does it matter than in 1860 almost all the rich people were white and almost all the slaves were black, and that the economic difference hasn't been closed?
No. What matters is today. Can you do the job or not. That is what matters.
Our country is a land of opportunity, but that opportunity is so much easier if you start off rich.
I would strongly agree. This is why we should apply corrective efforts based on economic status, not race. I don't care if a poor urban area is mostly black, mostly hispanic, or mostly white. They should get the same amount of federal assistance.
Wikipedia's notability policy is simply "A thing is notable if and only if you can provide citations that make us think you're not just making shit up."
By that standard, the Wikipedia page on non-notability is non-notable.
There are only two kinds of government that exist anywhere in the world. Socialism that benefits the poor, and socialism that benefits the rich. If I have to choose between the two, I'll take the former.
You can't separate favors done by Dems for their pet contributors (investment bankers)
That's just intellectually dishonest. Bush and Paulson started it. Both D and R are corrupt as hell, if you can't see that you're mindlessly partisan.
the need to stop handing out cash like candy - in perpetuity - to people who don't actually do anything for it?
By which you mean middlemen like banks and insurance companies right?
Entitlements. Received by some simply because they are breathing, and always paid for by others.
Which is worse, people who have contributed nothing to society receiving small amounts of money to keep them alive, or people who have nearly destroyed the economy of our country receiving millions of dollars for their efforts?
they scream bloody murder if you try to tell them they can't change the OS on a device or modify source code, but tell them that they're losing their actual freedoms / rights to an increasingly controlling government and they cheer it on.
You can tell us anything you want, but it doesn't make it true. Most people will be dramatically more free when they don't have to worry about health care. How free are you when you can't start your own business for fear of being unable to acquire health insurance for yourself, your family, and employees?
Anyone who voices dissent with Obama administration policies on radio/TV and even on the internet should be prepared. There will be a campaign launched to demonize you, painting you as "dangerous" and "promoting violence" and attempting to smear you by conflating voicing your dissent with a few nutjobs (which exist on both sides) who may commit some violent act
Wow, that sound *exactly* like what happened under Bush if you voiced opposition to the War on Terror.
Even Calc 1 could be compressed into an algebra course. The techniques used are the same. If you understand how to solve equations by substitution, you understand how to take derivatives.
However, arithmetic with pencil and paper is like pulling teeth for me. I hate it with a passion. Learning how to do square roots in 7'th grade by pencil and paper was torture.
Arithmetic by hand is tedium for anyone who does it. There's nothing really to understand, just mindless symbol manipulation.
Oh the graphics are fine. They're easily better than the N64 and some of the greatest games ever were on that platform. I've yet to see an ugly DS game that wasn't shovelware.
Information on race is required for many federal programs and is critical in making policy decisions, particularly for civil rights.
The best way to ensure everyone has the same civil rights is to treat everyone equally, in which case race is irrelevant.
Sates use these data to meet legislative redistricting principles.
Gerrymandering, disgusting. Districts should be apportioned randomly, without regard to demographics. You can't make any sort of statistical conclusion from a sample that's not random. You can't extrapolate the will of the people from election results if your sample isn't random either.
Race data also are used to promote equal employment opportunities
In otherwords, affirmative action. A racist policy. The best way to promote equal employment opportunities is to employ based on merit alone.
and to assess racial disparities in health and environmental risks."
Possibly worthwhile, but it doesn't need to be part of the census. Give an epidemiologist a nice fat grant and he can get valid results from a much smaller statistical sample of the population.
Yeah, it's in order to provide services with respect to race. I wouldn't use the word "preferential", but I suppose "differential" might apply. So?
Unless the different services are exactly equal, someone's getting preferential treatment.
Government needn't be any more color blind than society. There are lots of legitimate governmental racial policies, along with some illegitimate ones.
I disagree. People are well within their rights to treat different groups differently. The government has no place doing so. Care to name one "legitimate governmental racial policy"?
I live in a mostly hispanic area of the largest city in my state. What I don't understand is why you need race data to provide federal funding to urban areas in need. Aren't the income, property value, etc data available from the IRS and other sources sufficient?
To give a hypothetical example, it would be like if you were a neilsen family but refused to fill out info about the tv shows that you liked and then complained when they got canceled.
If the Nielsen's asked me what race I was, I wouldn't fill that out either. In the case of the Nielsens, I can at least see some value in knowing race, as it would make marketing easier. But the government should be colorblind, every citizen should get the same services regardless of race. Therefore, the government has no reason to know my race.
Honestly, I can't see any other reason for collection of this data. The government should be 100% color blind. Why collect race data unless you plan to give one race(doesn't matter which) preferential treatment? If you don't plan on providing differential services based on race, why would you care what my race is?
Slashdot Mirror
The statistics indicate that people weren't being employed based on merit alone.
Is that what they show? Or do they show that black people on average are worse employees than others? Black people *are* disproportionately economically disadvantaged. That will lead to them being less educated on average, and worse employees. But people of all races face the same problems if they are economically disadvantaged. The solution is to provide assistance based on economic status, not race.
Does it matter than in 1860 almost all the rich people were white and almost all the slaves were black, and that the economic difference hasn't been closed?
No. What matters is today. Can you do the job or not. That is what matters.
Our country is a land of opportunity, but that opportunity is so much easier if you start off rich.
I would strongly agree. This is why we should apply corrective efforts based on economic status, not race. I don't care if a poor urban area is mostly black, mostly hispanic, or mostly white. They should get the same amount of federal assistance.
Wow, misterdiscreet is a dick. He should find something better to do than delete other peoples articles.
Wikipedia's notability policy is simply "A thing is notable if and only if you can provide citations that make us think you're not just making shit up."
By that standard, the Wikipedia page on non-notability is non-notable.
Do you really see no additional choices
There are only two kinds of government that exist anywhere in the world. Socialism that benefits the poor, and socialism that benefits the rich. If I have to choose between the two, I'll take the former.
You can't separate favors done by Dems for their pet contributors (investment bankers)
That's just intellectually dishonest. Bush and Paulson started it. Both D and R are corrupt as hell, if you can't see that you're mindlessly partisan.
the need to stop handing out cash like candy - in perpetuity - to people who don't actually do anything for it?
By which you mean middlemen like banks and insurance companies right?
Entitlements. Received by some simply because they are breathing, and always paid for by others.
Which is worse, people who have contributed nothing to society receiving small amounts of money to keep them alive, or people who have nearly destroyed the economy of our country receiving millions of dollars for their efforts?
they scream bloody murder if you try to tell them they can't change the OS on a device or modify source code, but tell them that they're losing their actual freedoms / rights to an increasingly controlling government and they cheer it on.
You can tell us anything you want, but it doesn't make it true. Most people will be dramatically more free when they don't have to worry about health care. How free are you when you can't start your own business for fear of being unable to acquire health insurance for yourself, your family, and employees?
Anyone who voices dissent with Obama administration policies on radio/TV and even on the internet should be prepared. There will be a campaign launched to demonize you, painting you as "dangerous" and "promoting violence" and attempting to smear you by conflating voicing your dissent with a few nutjobs (which exist on both sides) who may commit some violent act
Wow, that sound *exactly* like what happened under Bush if you voiced opposition to the War on Terror.
"You're either with us or against us"
-GWB
I don't think it's quite fair to refer to the US as totalitarianism yet.
Even Calc 1 could be compressed into an algebra course. The techniques used are the same. If you understand how to solve equations by substitution, you understand how to take derivatives.
However, arithmetic with pencil and paper is like pulling teeth for me. I hate it with a passion. Learning how to do square roots in 7'th grade by pencil and paper was torture.
Arithmetic by hand is tedium for anyone who does it. There's nothing really to understand, just mindless symbol manipulation.
Oh the graphics are fine. They're easily better than the N64 and some of the greatest games ever were on that platform. I've yet to see an ugly DS game that wasn't shovelware.
Information on race is required for many federal programs and is critical in making policy decisions, particularly for civil rights.
The best way to ensure everyone has the same civil rights is to treat everyone equally, in which case race is irrelevant.
Sates use these data to meet legislative redistricting principles.
Gerrymandering, disgusting. Districts should be apportioned randomly, without regard to demographics. You can't make any sort of statistical conclusion from a sample that's not random. You can't extrapolate the will of the people from election results if your sample isn't random either.
Race data also are used to promote equal employment opportunities
In otherwords, affirmative action. A racist policy. The best way to promote equal employment opportunities is to employ based on merit alone.
and to assess racial disparities in health and environmental risks."
Possibly worthwhile, but it doesn't need to be part of the census. Give an epidemiologist a nice fat grant and he can get valid results from a much smaller statistical sample of the population.
Yeah, it's in order to provide services with respect to race. I wouldn't use the word "preferential", but I suppose "differential" might apply. So?
Unless the different services are exactly equal, someone's getting preferential treatment.
Government needn't be any more color blind than society. There are lots of legitimate governmental racial policies, along with some illegitimate ones.
I disagree. People are well within their rights to treat different groups differently. The government has no place doing so. Care to name one "legitimate governmental racial policy"?
I live in a mostly hispanic area of the largest city in my state. What I don't understand is why you need race data to provide federal funding to urban areas in need. Aren't the income, property value, etc data available from the IRS and other sources sufficient?
That's exactly how it shouldn't be used. No group should have greater representation than they would have by a random sampling.
That's what you think.
That's why it's important that my doctor know my race. Why is it important that my government know my race?
To give a hypothetical example, it would be like if you were a neilsen family but refused to fill out info about the tv shows that you liked and then complained when they got canceled.
If the Nielsen's asked me what race I was, I wouldn't fill that out either. In the case of the Nielsens, I can at least see some value in knowing race, as it would make marketing easier. But the government should be colorblind, every citizen should get the same services regardless of race. Therefore, the government has no reason to know my race.
FWIW the census is a huge boon to our descendants for genealogical purposes.
What practical purpose does genealogy have? Why would I give up my privacy to help those in the far future satisfy idle curiosity?
I already received the ACS. I put down the number of people at my residents and returned it. I haven't been arrested yet.
Honestly, I can't see any other reason for collection of this data. The government should be 100% color blind. Why collect race data unless you plan to give one race(doesn't matter which) preferential treatment? If you don't plan on providing differential services based on race, why would you care what my race is?
Someone explain this to me. Please.
Perhaps in 1790 that's all the census needed to know (that and how may slaves you owned), but it's a far different situation now.
Then amend the constitution to empower the government to collect more than an enumeration.
Human is a race. Write that in.
And the fact that Glenn Beck has said the same thing makes me feel dirty. Ugh.
Little risk of rejection, but what is the risk of cancer?