Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Politics. The feel in your country.

1482483485487488635

Comments

  • WarChiefZekeWarChiefZeke Member Posts: 2,625
    Nationalization is a great way to make private investment flee your country en masse. Nobody wants to invest in property or buisnesses that may one day be arbitrarily confiscated. About the only time you can get away with it is when you have a precious natural resource in demand by the rest of the world and even then, how often does it go to benefit the people?

    SorcererV1ct0rBalrog99semiticgoddessbooinyoureyes
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    Balrog99 said:

    Balrog99 said:

    Another day, another cabinet member openly defying all regulations, rules, and laws. Does anyone care?? Doesn't seem like it. This time, it's Ben Carson (again). Friday I'm sure we'll get back around to Scott Pruitt or Ryan Zinke. From NY Times:

    Department of Housing and Urban Development officials spent $31,000 on a new dining room set for Secretary Ben Carson’s office in late 2017 — just as the White House circulated its plans to slash HUD’s programs for the homeless, elderly and poor, according to federal procurement records.

    The purchase of the custom hardwood table, chairs and hutch came a month after a top agency staff member filed a whistle-blower complaint charging Mr. Carson’s wife, Candy Carson, with pressuring department officials to find money for the expensive redecoration of his offices, even if it meant circumventing the law.

    Mr. Carson is also facing questions on another front. Under pressure earlier this month, he requested that HUD’s inspector general investigate his son’s involvement in a department-sponsored listening tour of Baltimore last summer. Department lawyers had warned Mr. Carson that including Ben Carson Jr., an entrepreneur who does business with the federal government, could create a conflict of interest.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/us/ben-carson-hud-furniture.html?smid=tw-share

    $31,000? That's kind of chump change. While I agree that le' Empereuer is going commando, that doesn't sound like an egregious expenditure in the grand scheme of things really. That's less than an Air Force 1 flight to Atlanta!
    The merit of spending has to consider what the money was spent on. $31,000 for a dining set is extravagance, and doesn't come close to fulfilling the promise of fiscal responsibility we consistently hear from this administration.
    I don't disagree necessarily but that's probably 0.0000001% of our total budget. Not a big deal as far as I'm concerned. For that to be a news item is nitpicking. I'd need a breakdown of everything other administrations spent on upgrades for their offices and such before I believed that was overly extravegent.
    Partisan news organizations always report on the extravagance of opposing politicians. You can look at Obama and Trump's golf outings. Also, President Obama's vacations were extravagant as well.

    The percentage of the budget doesn't matter here. That excuse applies to almost every expenditure, but in the aggregate the waste is massive. This is the classic problem of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. The interested parties have a strong incentive to keep their trough open, and will fight hard for it since they have more to "lose". Meanwhile, the costs are dispersed so widely that no individual taxpayer feels the urgency to fight back.

    ThacoBellsemiticgoddessProont
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    edited February 2018
    Balrog99 said:

    Balrog99 said:

    Another day, another cabinet member openly defying all regulations, rules, and laws. Does anyone care?? Doesn't seem like it. This time, it's Ben Carson (again). Friday I'm sure we'll get back around to Scott Pruitt or Ryan Zinke. From NY Times:

    Department of Housing and Urban Development officials spent $31,000 on a new dining room set for Secretary Ben Carson’s office in late 2017 — just as the White House circulated its plans to slash HUD’s programs for the homeless, elderly and poor, according to federal procurement records.

    The purchase of the custom hardwood table, chairs and hutch came a month after a top agency staff member filed a whistle-blower complaint charging Mr. Carson’s wife, Candy Carson, with pressuring department officials to find money for the expensive redecoration of his offices, even if it meant circumventing the law.

    Mr. Carson is also facing questions on another front. Under pressure earlier this month, he requested that HUD’s inspector general investigate his son’s involvement in a department-sponsored listening tour of Baltimore last summer. Department lawyers had warned Mr. Carson that including Ben Carson Jr., an entrepreneur who does business with the federal government, could create a conflict of interest.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/us/ben-carson-hud-furniture.html?smid=tw-share

    $31,000? That's kind of chump change. While I agree that le' Empereuer is going commando, that doesn't sound like an egregious expenditure in the grand scheme of things really. That's less than an Air Force 1 flight to Atlanta!
    The merit of spending has to consider what the money was spent on. $31,000 for a dining set is extravagance, and doesn't come close to fulfilling the promise of fiscal responsibility we consistently hear from this administration.
    I don't disagree necessarily but that's probably 0.0000001% of our total budget. Not a big deal as far as I'm concerned. For that to be a news item is nitpicking. I'd need a breakdown of everything other administrations spent on upgrades for their offices and such before I believed that was overly extravegent.
    The reason you haven't heard these type of stories about cabinet officials before is that, up to this point, they haven't been stupid or brazen enough to think they could get away with it. The main gist of this story is that Carson's wife was attempting to pressure people to straight up IGNORE the legal budget for decorating his office, which I believe is $5000. Typically, Cabinet and Administration officials are vetted up and down. No stone is left unturned, because no Administration before this wanted to deal with this kind of story popping up. This crew just simply doesn't give a shit. They didn't vet anyone, hardly anyone can get security clearances, etc etc etc. It's nothing but rampant nepotism and corruption at every level. They are there to loot the house before they burn it to the ground.

    No one has even mentioned the fact that a good friend of Melania was paid 26 MILLION DOLLARS from the inaguration fund, to a company this woman created out of thin air less than month before the inaguration took place. The wedding planner for one of his kid's weddings was put in charge of housing in NY. And through it all, the BIGGEST scandal is that you, me, and everyone here is paying money DIRECTLY into Donald Trump's pocket every time he goes to NY or Florida for the weekend. Because the Secret Service and other government entities have to pay Trump to stay at his resort and hotels there while they are protecting him. The man is a walking conflict of interest the likes of which has never been seen or really even contemplated. Foreign governments can curry favor simply by spending money at his properties which he still retains ownership over across the world. There has never been anything remotely like what is going on. No modern President has ever had outside business interests before, much less the on the scale of the real estate Trump owns, in which he can be bribed simply by those wanting favors providing tenants or guests for his properties. It's breathtaking that no one gives a shit about this. If we were a self-respecting nation in the least, we would have demanded this guy divest from all his holding before taking office. Instead, it's basically a mob bust-out of the government on every single level.

    Here is more info about the Carson situation at HUD:

    A senior administrative official in the Department of Housing and Urban Development alleges she was demoted after refusing to illegally circumvent the $5,000 cap to redecorate Ben Carson’s office, according to a report from the Guardian.

    The career official, Helen Foster, said in a complaint that she was repeatedly told by her bosses that “$5,000 will not even buy a decent chair” when she told them that was the limit for the redecoration. The Guardian reported that it obtained a copy of that complaint filed in November to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which investigates allegations of improper treatment from civil servants.

    According to the complaint, HUD’s acting director asked Foster the day before Trump’s inauguration to “find money” for Carson’s wife, Candy, for the redecoration of Carson’s office suite. The director allegedly told Foster that people “always found ways around [the $5,000 cap] in the past.” Foster, then HUD’s chief administrative official, said she then complained to HUD’s budget director about the request.

    In the complaint, Foster said she also angered senior officials in the agency in May when she flagged a $10.8 million hole in the HUD budget that arose from “accounting irregularities,” according to the Guardian. In the complaint, she said she reported the deficit to the department’s chief operating officer and was told the “agency leadership is unwilling to report” it.

    The third incident she alleges led to retaliation involved two Freedom of Information Act requests for information about Lynne Patton, a former event planner for the Trump family who was given a high-profile job she was unqualified for at HUD. In February 2017, the department’s lawyers reached out to because they had “been asked to discreetly handle these two FOIA requests outside of the normal FOIA processes,” according to the Guardian.

    ThacoBellsemiticgoddessProontGrond0
  • SorcererV1ct0rSorcererV1ct0r Member Posts: 2,166

    Nationalization is a great way to make private investment flee your country en masse. Nobody wants to invest in property or buisnesses that may one day be arbitrarily confiscated. About the only time you can get away with it is when you have a precious natural resource in demand by the rest of the world and even then, how often does it go to benefit the people?

    Well said. Nationalization is a terrible idea. Other problem is that if you nationalize one company, the other country can nationalize your companies. That is terrible for economy.

    --------------------------------------------

    Only one "off topic" question. Why a lot of Americans think that there are no climate, cultural and ethnic difference between many different regions in latin america? Like for example :



    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100613130250AAU61UQ

  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965

    Nationalization is a great way to make private investment flee your country en masse. Nobody wants to invest in property or buisnesses that may one day be arbitrarily confiscated. About the only time you can get away with it is when you have a precious natural resource in demand by the rest of the world and even then, how often does it go to benefit the people?

    Well said. Nationalization is a terrible idea. Other problem is that if you nationalize one company, the other country can nationalize your companies. That is terrible for economy.

    --------------------------------------------

    Only one "off topic" question. Why a lot of Americans think that there are no climate, cultural and ethnic difference between many different regions in latin america? Like for example :



    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100613130250AAU61UQ
    Wait, you're not all just 'Latinos'? The Democrats would be shocked! (If they REALLY gave a shit.)

  • SorcererV1ct0rSorcererV1ct0r Member Posts: 2,166
    Balrog99 said:

    Nationalization is a great way to make private investment flee your country en masse. Nobody wants to invest in property or buisnesses that may one day be arbitrarily confiscated. About the only time you can get away with it is when you have a precious natural resource in demand by the rest of the world and even then, how often does it go to benefit the people?

    Well said. Nationalization is a terrible idea. Other problem is that if you nationalize one company, the other country can nationalize your companies. That is terrible for economy.

    --------------------------------------------

    Only one "off topic" question. Why a lot of Americans think that there are no climate, cultural and ethnic difference between many different regions in latin america? Like for example :



    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100613130250AAU61UQ
    Wait, you're not all just 'Latinos'? The Democrats would be shocked! (If they REALLY gave a shit.)
    Mauricio Macri, president of Argentina



    Evo Morales, president of Bolivia



    Jovenel Moïse, president of Haiti


    Alberto Fujimori, former president of Peru


    I see a white, a native american, a african and a asian in that pictures. Of course, the majority of people in south america is multiracial, but there are a very big variety in latin america.

    Balrog99semiticgoddessbooinyoureyes
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965
    Sounds like race doesn't mean much in our southern neighbors. Maybe we can learn something from them!

    StormvesselbooinyoureyesProont
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 654
    edited February 2018
    Nationalization works. The key is force. You nationalize, and when companies and/or individuals try to throw money elsewhere you charge them with treason. Because that's what it is - treason. The capitalist parasites are rootless and do their business globally - the people, the workers, are tied down...all their wagons hitched to their country. The workers don't have options to just pick up and head for greener pastures...the workers are stuck. We have to make the system work for these. Those who work against such a system are traitors and it's a crime against humanity.


    Do you think the right-wing are that gung-ho about joining hands with you and pelting Nazis? Hell no they aren't.

    That's quite the assumption

    This is war and now is not the time to puss out.

    No due process of law for those put themselves above law. They will be rounded up; the piper's payment to be exacted upon them... swiftly, summarily, systematically, and void of passion.

    Nvm, no need to argue with crazy.



    People have been banned from this forum for a lot of reasons. Somehow advocating for violence is not one of them.
    That's true - I do risk banishment. But to be honest I wasn't advocating violence. At least no more than the founders of this country when they incited the colonists against England. But besides all that, of course I do not advocate hurting defenseless people. But right now these people aren't defenseless - it's class warfare.

    Communism - people love throwing that word around. It's not a term I run from - and once in a blue moon I may use it out of convenience to describe certain positions - but here's the thing: what I advocate isn't communism...ask an actual communist if you doubt what I say. They don't like me very much and consider me a Statist. Actual commies seek the abolition of class, state, borders, natonal identity, etc. I myself don't want them abolished but to become secondary to the overall best interest of the people - rather than being used to emotionalize the people into standing against one another and supporting wars and actions that conflict with their own self-interest.

    With that all said, let me state that I understand that my views are a tad extreme just as the problems in our world are extreme, therefore any comments in that vein can only hijack the thread. I don't actually want to hijack the thread which is characteristic of trolls. I think I've said enough and everyone knows where I stand. I'll leave it at that - at least for a while. NWNEE can't get here fast enough.

    Balrog99smeagolheartProont
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965


    Do you think the right-wing are that gung-ho about joining hands with you and pelting Nazis? Hell no they aren't.

    That's quite the assumption

    This is war and now is not the time to puss out.

    No due process of law for those put themselves above law. They will be rounded up; the piper's payment to be exacted upon them... swiftly, summarily, systematically, and void of passion.

    Nvm, no need to argue with crazy.



    People have been banned from this forum for a lot of reasons. Somehow advocating for violence is not one of them.
    That's true - I do risk banishment. But to be honest I wasn't advocating violence. At least no more than the founders of this country when they incited the colonists against England. But besides all that, of course I do not advocate hurting defenseless people. But right now these people aren't defenseless - it's class warfare.

    Communism - people love throwing that word around. It's not a term I run from - and once in a blue moon I may use it out of convenience to describe certain positions - but here's the thing: what I advocate isn't communism...ask an actual communist if you doubt what I say. They don't like me very much and consider me a Statist. Actual commies seek the abolition of class, state, borders, natonal identity, etc. I myself don't want them abolished but to become secondary to the overall best interest of the people - rather than being used to emotionalize the people into standing against one another and supporting wars and actions that conflict with their own self-interest.

    With that all said, let me state that I understand that my views are a tad extreme therefore I don't actually want to hijack the thread which is characteristic of trolls. I think I've said enough and everyone knows where I stand. I'll leave it at that - at least for a while. NWNEE can't get here fast enough.
    All views are welcome here. Just don't expect opposition! ;)

    StormvesselsemiticgoddessProont
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965
    edited February 2018
    Balrog99 said:


    Do you think the right-wing are that gung-ho about joining hands with you and pelting Nazis? Hell no they aren't.

    That's quite the assumption

    This is war and now is not the time to puss out.

    No due process of law for those put themselves above law. They will be rounded up; the piper's payment to be exacted upon them... swiftly, summarily, systematically, and void of passion.

    Nvm, no need to argue with crazy.



    People have been banned from this forum for a lot of reasons. Somehow advocating for violence is not one of them.
    That's true - I do risk banishment. But to be honest I wasn't advocating violence. At least no more than the founders of this country when they incited the colonists against England. But besides all that, of course I do not advocate hurting defenseless people. But right now these people aren't defenseless - it's class warfare.

    Communism - people love throwing that word around. It's not a term I run from - and once in a blue moon I may use it out of convenience to describe certain positions - but here's the thing: what I advocate isn't communism...ask an actual communist if you doubt what I say. They don't like me very much and consider me a Statist. Actual commies seek the abolition of class, state, borders, natonal identity, etc. I myself don't want them abolished but to become secondary to the overall best interest of the people - rather than being used to emotionalize the people into standing against one another and supporting wars and actions that conflict with their own self-interest.

    With that all said, let me state that I understand that my views are a tad extreme therefore I don't actually want to hijack the thread which is characteristic of trolls. I think I've said enough and everyone knows where I stand. I'll leave it at that - at least for a while. NWNEE can't get here fast enough.
    All views are welcome here. Just don't expect 'NOT TO HAVE'" opposition! ;)
    Edit: clarified my view since it actually meant the opposite when I first posted!

    Stormvesselsemiticgoddess
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,415
    Balrog99 said:

    Sounds like race doesn't mean much in our southern neighbors. Maybe we can learn something from them!

    Actually, studies have shown that Latin America has significant racial and ethnic divides in economic opportunity.

    "In Panama, for example, 90 percent of Indigenous peoples live below the poverty line and 69.5 percent live in extreme poverty, compared to just 30 percent of the non-Indigenous population. In Peru, 34 percent of Afro-descendants live below the poverty line, compared to only 23 percent of mestizos. In Brazil, per capita monthly incomes for Brazilians of European descent are more than double those of Afro-descendants. Similar poverty and income gaps can be found in countries throughout the region."

    http://www.americasquarterly.org/content/behind-numbers-race-and-ethnicity-latin-america

    semiticgoddessProont
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,415
    ThacoBell said:

    I am appropriating @Mathsorcerer 's comment here. If you were born in a country, you are native to that country.

    Tell that to the Trump supporters who questioned the citizenship of a Native American Arizona state legislator.

    https://www.snopes.com/trump-supporters-navajo-legislator-legal/

    Proont
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162

    Nationalization works. The key is force. You nationalize, and when companies and/or individuals try to throw money elsewhere you charge them with treason. Because that's what it is - treason. The capitalist parasites are rootless and do their business globally - the people, the workers, are tied down...all their wagons hitched to their country. The workers don't have options to just pick up and head for greener pastures...the workers are stuck. We have to make the system work for these. Those who work against such a system are traitors and it's a crime against humanity.


    Do you think the right-wing are that gung-ho about joining hands with you and pelting Nazis? Hell no they aren't.

    That's quite the assumption

    This is war and now is not the time to puss out.

    No due process of law for those put themselves above law. They will be rounded up; the piper's payment to be exacted upon them... swiftly, summarily, systematically, and void of passion.

    Nvm, no need to argue with crazy.



    People have been banned from this forum for a lot of reasons. Somehow advocating for violence is not one of them.
    That's true - I do risk banishment. But to be honest I wasn't advocating violence. At least no more than the founders of this country when they incited the colonists against England. But besides all that, of course I do not advocate hurting defenseless people. But right now these people aren't defenseless - it's class warfare.
    Yeah, I guess its alright to initiate violence, as long as someone has a fair shot to defend themselves...

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695

    Balrog99 said:

    As a scientist I agree with @FinneousPJ on this. There is likely more at play here than just race. Family dynamics is one factor. Culture is another.

    Even if it was just race in some instances, basing favorable treatment in hiring or acceptance into universities on more general hardship would help those who have suffered on account of their ethnicity/skin color. The problem is that this is apparently very hard to swallow in a culture that is increasingly placing racial identity above all else.
    Economists at Georgia Tech did a study of racial bias in hiring. They responded to help wanted ads in Boston and Chicago with fake resumes. The resumes would be randomly assigned a "white name" or a "black name". Resumes with white-sounding names received 50% more callbacks for interviews than those with black-sounding names. The researchers found that having a white-sounding name was the equivalent of 8 years of experience in terms of the callback rate.

    http://cos.gatech.edu/facultyres/Diversity_Studies/Bertrand_LakishaJamal.pdf
    And if that wasn't enough, this will knock your socks off. And these two issues alone explain how the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow will never go away:

    https://www.vox.com/2015/10/31/9646504/discipline-race-charts

    AstroBryGuy
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162

    When has nationalization ever been tried in the US, outside of FDR's holiday to prevent the run on banks and the war effort in WW2?? Roosevelt could have very easily nationalized the banks and didn't. No parts of industry are the province of the government. The only nationalized programs deal with the social safety net, which ALL modern societies have. The most radical ideas put forth by left in this country are universal health-care (which ALL of Europe has) and universal free college. Hardly tyranny, or anything approaching it in either case.

    Agree for the most part, but there are rare examples. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are approaching nationalization of the housing finance industry. The federal government taking a controlling interest in General Motors is another.

    Truman and the steel industry was a failed attempt. Transportation is highly nationalized, but not unusually so.

    Bernie Sanders wants to go further than most European nations and nationalize the entire healthcare industry (1/6th of the economy), but he will never be president.

    So it is rare, but not unheard of in the US.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited February 2018

    When has nationalization ever been tried in the US, outside of FDR's holiday to prevent the run on banks and the war effort in WW2?? Roosevelt could have very easily nationalized the banks and didn't. No parts of industry are the province of the government. The only nationalized programs deal with the social safety net, which ALL modern societies have. The most radical ideas put forth by left in this country are universal health-care (which ALL of Europe has) and universal free college. Hardly tyranny, or anything approaching it in either case.

    Agree for the most part, but there are rare examples. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are approaching nationalization of the housing finance industry. The federal government taking a controlling interest in General Motors is another.

    Truman and the steel industry was a failed attempt. Transportation is highly nationalized, but not unusually so.

    Bernie Sanders wants to go further than most European nations and nationalize the entire healthcare industry (1/6th of the economy), but he will never be president.

    So it is rare, but not unheard of in the US.
    Bernie Sanders wants Medicare for All or Single Payer.

    Doctors are not employed by the government, they just get paid from the government instead of private insurance companies. Prices go down because there's less middlemen attempting to profiteer in the between patients and doctors. It's not much different from European systems.

    semiticgoddessProontAstroBryGuyThacoBell
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,009

    ThacoBell said:

    I am appropriating @Mathsorcerer 's comment here. If you were born in a country, you are native to that country.

    Tell that to the Trump supporters who questioned the citizenship of a Native American Arizona state legislator.
    It isn't my problem when people do not follow my sage advice. Of course, I am not in the habit of going around making a fool of myself, protesting something when I don't even know what it is I am protesting against.

    With that all said, let me state that I understand that my views are a tad extreme just as the problems in our world are extreme

    That is precisely why you should be ignored--you hold extreme views which bring nothing of substance to the discussion. I suspect, though, that you do not actually believe those things are are instead saying them to just see how people react.

  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,829
    Let's not throw around accusations about people having secret motives behind their statements. If you think somebody is trolling or trying to rile people up for kicks, report it via the "Flag" feature; making the accusation in-thread is against the Site Rules.

    Having extreme views is not against the rules; the only extreme view that's forbidden is advocating violence. But again, that is a subject for the moderating team.

    MathsorcererJuliusBorisovStormvessel
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,009
    @semiticgod I apologize. I had to be in mod mode elsewhere earlier today and apparently I was still in that frame of mind.

    semiticgoddessJuliusBorisovBalrog99
  • Mantis37Mantis37 Member Posts: 1,136

    Balrog99 said:

    As a scientist I agree with @FinneousPJ on this. There is likely more at play here than just race. Family dynamics is one factor. Culture is another.

    Even if it was just race in some instances, basing favorable treatment in hiring or acceptance into universities on more general hardship would help those who have suffered on account of their ethnicity/skin color. The problem is that this is apparently very hard to swallow in a culture that is increasingly placing racial identity above all else.
    Economists at Georgia Tech did a study of racial bias in hiring. They responded to help wanted ads in Boston and Chicago with fake resumes. The resumes would be randomly assigned a "white name" or a "black name". Resumes with white-sounding names received 50% more callbacks for interviews than those with black-sounding names. The researchers found that having a white-sounding name was the equivalent of 8 years of experience in terms of the callback rate.

    http://cos.gatech.edu/facultyres/Diversity_Studies/Bertrand_LakishaJamal.pdf
    I remember a similar story in the UK from civil service research. Racial minorities needed to send almost twice as many resumes to get a response from employers.

    https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover

    ProontAstroBryGuysmeagolheart
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,793
    Mantis37 said:

    Balrog99 said:

    As a scientist I agree with @FinneousPJ on this. There is likely more at play here than just race. Family dynamics is one factor. Culture is another.

    Even if it was just race in some instances, basing favorable treatment in hiring or acceptance into universities on more general hardship would help those who have suffered on account of their ethnicity/skin color. The problem is that this is apparently very hard to swallow in a culture that is increasingly placing racial identity above all else.
    Economists at Georgia Tech did a study of racial bias in hiring. They responded to help wanted ads in Boston and Chicago with fake resumes. The resumes would be randomly assigned a "white name" or a "black name". Resumes with white-sounding names received 50% more callbacks for interviews than those with black-sounding names. The researchers found that having a white-sounding name was the equivalent of 8 years of experience in terms of the callback rate.

    http://cos.gatech.edu/facultyres/Diversity_Studies/Bertrand_LakishaJamal.pdf
    I remember a similar story in the UK from civil service research. Racial minorities needed to send almost twice as many resumes to get a response from employers.

    https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover
    I've said it before in this thread but I have friends who 'white wash' their names on resumes to get a call backs. Having an Anglophone (or really in this market, Francophone) sounding name helps tremendously when searching for a service related job. Civil Service jobs, which an applicant has to jump through more hoops to obtain isn't as bad however.

    FinneousPJ
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965
    Hmmm... In light of this, if I ever lose my job I think I'll change my name to Donald T. Rump!

  • WarChiefZekeWarChiefZeke Member Posts: 2,625
    South Africa has voted to confiscate white owned farm land without conpensation. They are not the first african country to do this.

    Is Germany gonna set up a refugee policy for these people?

    https://www.rt.com/business/420021-africa-white-owned-land/amp/

    Dev6Proont
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    edited February 2018

    South Africa has voted to confiscate white owned farm land without conpensation. They are not the first african country to do this.

    Is Germany gonna set up a refugee policy for these people?

    https://www.rt.com/business/420021-africa-white-owned-land/amp/

    This is the consequence of running your country on a system of apartheid 50 years. Maybe the white population of South Africa should have thought of the repercussions once or twice during the vast majority of the 20th century.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    Well that's not good but the white people's ancestors stole it to begin with right.

  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,965

    Well that's not good but the white people's ancestors stole it to begin with right.

    I guess I need to move back to Ireland and give my land to the Wyandotte tribe then. Wait, I'm actually half German so half of me needs to be sent there. I'm pretty sure my family was poor too so I won't get any land when I get back either. Park bench it is!

    Dev6ThacoBellsemiticgoddessdunbar
  • bleusteelbleusteel Member Posts: 521
    Yeah it’d be like a Native American government coming to power in the US and giving Manhattan back to Native Americans.

    semiticgoddess
This discussion has been closed.