• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree'

Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

haymarket said:
Perhaps you should fix your perceptions.
Click to expand...

No thanks. I'm not a liberal and I don't like living in fantasy worlds. I'm a conservative and prefer living in an evidence-informed world.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Henrin said:
If you believe the Civil Rights bill of 1964 is the proof that you aren't racist(which it actually means nothing to the topic) the numbers still show democrats were racist.
Click to expand...

A lot of them were, and now they're republicans.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

AdamT said:
A lot of them were, and now they're republicans.
Click to expand...

That is funny. So the democrats in 1964 that were in office are now republicans in office? Gee...
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

RiverDad said:
Then tell the black community to fix its reputation. There, problem solved.
Click to expand...

There it is folks.... were starting to get places now.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

RiverDad said:
Why would equality of outcome be anyone's goal when they realize that to achieve this goal they're going to have to sacrifice all of their freedom to a government which can impose equal outcomes on everyone?
Click to expand...

First off, I'm not really talking about equality of outcome, I'm talking about equality of opportunity. Right now, equally qualified black applicants get far fewer interviews. That means unequal opportunity. Equalizing that would be equalizing the opportunity, not the outcomes.

But, regardless, you are, again, thinking in binary mode. You really need to watch out for that. You seem like a bright guy, but that keeps hanging you up. Why would you leap to the assumption that the only options are either a totalitarian government ensuring absolutely equal economic outcomes or absolutely no efforts to equalize outcomes? Either of those options would be totally insane... No society has ever survived at either of those extremes. That is what I mean by binary thinking. You need to think in terms of degrees, not absolutes.

As a side note though, economic freedom isn't the only kind of freedom. You could theoretically have forcibly equalized economic outcomes and still have other kinds of freedom. I'm not advocating that, just saying.

RiverDad said:
If both John and Jane have the same equality of opportunity to get as many carrots as they like, which they do, then there is no problem.
Click to expand...

They don't. Black people get less interviews with the same resumes, so that's less opportunity.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Henrin said:
That is funny. So the democrats in 1964 that were in office are now republicans in office? Gee...
Click to expand...

No, don't be stupid. The south, which was predominantly democratic, has over the years become predominantly republican. And it was primarily southern legislators who opposed the civil rights act. Ergo....
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

AdamT said:
The vote was on North/South lines -- not party lines. But it was Johnson's pro-civil-rights stand, and Goldwater's anti-civil-rights stand that pushed the Southern Democrats into the Republican party.
Click to expand...

Certainly it was along party lines, unless you're making the excuse that the Democrats were racist in the South and their votes should count for less.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

teamosil said:
Well, of course it could. Think it through. Lets take a simpler example. Say that John has 10 carrots and Jane has 4. Your goal is for both of them to have the same number of carrots and you have 6 carrots. Who would you give them to if your goal was for them each to have the same number of carrots?
Click to expand...

Are you making the claim that everyone now has the same number of carrots, or that the carrot quota is coming ever closer?

And what is the rationale behind John having to give his carrots to Jane or me?
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

AdamT said:
A lot of them were, and now they're republicans.
Click to expand...

A majority of Democrats in the South were racists, that's true, but many changed their racist ways and became Republicans. That's why they call it the New South.

But the complete eradication of racism in the Democratic Party is a difficult chore, especially when they control much of the major media.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Grant said:
A majority of Democrats in the South were racists, that's true, but many changed their racist ways and became Republicans. That's why they call it the New South.

But the complete eradication of racism in the Democratic Party is a difficult chore, especially when they control much of the major media.
Click to expand...

actually they only changed their parties
unfortunately, not their ways
as examples of this, see jesse helms and strom thurmond
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

teamosil said:
First off, I'm not really talking about equality of outcome, I'm talking about equality of opportunity. Right now, equally qualified black applicants get far fewer interviews. That means unequal opportunity. Equalizing that would be equalizing the opportunity, not the outcomes.
Click to expand...

As I pointed out in my remarks on the study that you referenced, employers don't have perfect information when they are reviewing resumes. There is a widely held perception amongst employers, acknowledged by the researchers, that Latinos are harder working, more pliable and more reliable than blacks. These are all employee attributes which translate into less cost/greater profit for an employer. Bringing on a new employee is a costly endeavor for employers and if the employee doesn't work out, then the employer is back at square one looking for his replacement but now marginally poorer because of the cost of bringing an employee up to speed and that employee not working out.

To the extent that the stereotypes are true the employer benefits by gambling on probabilities and rationally discriminating and hiring the Latino worker because that worker has greater odds of being a reliable, pliable and hard working employee. This means that the employer has less risk of making an error with employee choice.

Is that fair to the individual black person. No, absolutely not. Is it fair to force employers to ignore evidence which can help them make smart hiring decisions and thus save them money? No, absolutely not.

The problem here is that employers have access to valuable information via stereotypes. Invalidate the stereotype and then there is no value in that stereotype.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

I come back to this discussion and once again it's fallen back into who was more racist 45 years ago as opposed to why we should still allow racist government organizations exist today.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Henrin said:
If you believe the Civil Rights bill of 1964 is the proof that you aren't racist(which it actually means nothing to the topic) the numbers still show democrats were racist.



Sorry, but my point holds true.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing that Democrats(in the South) weren't racist, clearly they were. But you can't compare the parties back then, to the parties now. It was JFK's dream that civil right legislation be passed during his presidency. It took a strong LBJ to get JFK dream to fruition after JFK was assassinated.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

1Perry said:
I come back to this discussion and once again it's fallen back into who was more racist 45 years ago as opposed to why we should still allow racist government organizations exist today.
Click to expand...

Attempting to adjust hiring rates to counter structural racism is not racist.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Grant said:
Are you making the claim that everyone now has the same number of carrots, or that the carrot quota is coming ever closer?
Click to expand...

Certainly AA programs lessen the overall bias of the system favoring whites over blacks. Not to a huge extent. It's still a very large bias (2.4 to 1). But, yeah, it helps a bit.

Grant said:
And what is the rationale behind John having to give his carrots to Jane or me?
Click to expand...

At present, black people are still the ones "giving" opportunities to whites. The system is biased in favor of whites. Reducing that bias isn't white people giving something to black people, it is white people taking less from black people.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

teamosil said:
At present, black people are still the ones "giving" opportunities to whites. The system is biased in favor of whites. Reducing that bias isn't white people giving something to black people, it is white people taking less from black people.
Click to expand...

You're funny.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

I bet you will find less people in the Tea Party, (per capita,) wanting blacks hanging from trees, than you will find members of the Congressional Black Caucus, wanting to see ol' whitey hanging from a tree. Isn't that somewhat like the pot calling the kettle black? (No pun intended.)

Imagine a Congressional White Caucus. :rofl

Seriously people?
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

RiverDad said:
As I pointed out in my remarks on the study that you referenced, employers don't have perfect information when they are reviewing resumes. There is a widely held perception amongst employers, acknowledged by the researchers, that Latinos are harder working, more pliable and more reliable than blacks. These are all employee attributes which translate into less cost/greater profit for an employer. Bringing on a new employee is a costly endeavor for employers and if the employee doesn't work out, then the employer is back at square one looking for his replacement but now marginally poorer because of the cost of bringing an employee up to speed and that employee not working out.

To the extent that the stereotypes are true the employer benefits by gambling on probabilities and rationally discriminating and hiring the Latino worker because that worker has greater odds of being a reliable, pliable and hard working employee. This means that the employer has less risk of making an error with employee choice.

Is that fair to the individual black person. No, absolutely not. Is it fair to force employers to ignore evidence which can help them make smart hiring decisions and thus save them money? No, absolutely not.

The problem here is that employers have access to valuable information via stereotypes. Invalidate the stereotype and then there is no value in that stereotype.
Click to expand...

No, the employer is hurt by hiring a less qualified white applicant over a more qualified black applicant too. That's not rational, it's error. And it is a type of error that has a devastating impact on black and hispanic people. Not to mention being immoral and illegal. If an employer knew absolutely zero about the applicants other than their race, your argument would make sense- race tends to correlate with poverty, which tends to correlate with qualifications, so an employer could guess that a black applicant would be less likely to be qualified than a white applicant. But in reality the employer has the qualifications right in front of them. They see that the two applicants are exactly equally qualified, so at that point, race is no longer a useful predictor.

To use my earlier example, it is true that on average, red cars are faster than blue cars. Apparently the same sorts of people who like fast cars also like red cars. So, if you were buying a car and all you knew was the color, and you want a fast car, it would be a reasonable move to buy the red one. You might guess that the red one is more likely to be a corvette and the blue one more likely to be a Toyota. But, once you know the brands of the cars- say the red one is a Toyota and the blue one is a Corvette- then it would be moronic to still assume that the red one is faster. You already know the thing that car color correlates with- brand, so further handicapping based on color would be a mistake. Right? Same deal.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

SE102 said:
Attempting to adjust hiring rates to counter structural racism is not racist.
Click to expand...

Structural racism is illegal. If this is a problem somewhere, you address it through the legal system. You don't create more racism.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

justabubba said:
actually they only changed their parties
unfortunately, not their ways
as examples of this, see jesse helms and strom thurmond
Click to expand...

Are they actually more representative of Republicans than George Wallace, Robert Byrd or Orval Faubus?

Here's further history of the Democrat Party, while Strom Thurmond was still a member.

Southern Manifesto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

teamosil said:
No, the employer is hurt by hiring a less qualified white applicant over a more qualified black applicant too.
Click to expand...

You're making the same error in comprehension that the research paper did in it's experimental design but they at least acknowledged the limitation of their design. Your error is in assuming that the metric of employee quality is comprehensively accounted for on a resume. There is a large body of economics literature which addresses unobservable skills:


Inequality and ability

This paper examines how much the increasing ‘‘residual inequality’’ in the United States can be explained by increasing returns to cognitive skills. Also, this paper uses selection-correction techniques to estimate the latent population distribution of unobservable skill within three occupational sectors, and breaks down the leftover ‘‘residual’’ term into a ‘‘general’’ unobservable component and a sector-specific unobservable component. The results indicate that sector-specific skills have played only a minor role in the inequality trends. Increasing ‘‘residual inequality’’ is mostly characterized by an increasing importance of general skills, either IQ or the general unobservable skill, within all three occupations.​


But in reality the employer has the qualifications right in front of them. They see that the two applicants are exactly equally qualified, so at that point, race is no longer a useful predictor.
Click to expand...

No, the employer has SOME qualifications right in front of him. Those qualifications are not equalized on the issues that the researchers noted form the basis of the stereotypes that the employers reference. Those fake resumes in the experiment did nothing to equalize information on each candidates reliability, pliability and willingness to work hard. Those factors are important to employers and they were not controlled for by inclusion of relevant metrics in the resume. For instance, each employee could have come with a letter of reference which sang their praises on those three metrics. That type of information, when in the possession of a black applicant, specifically deals with that INDIVIDUAL'S attributes and that information invalidates the general stereotype. NOW, if an employer disregards the very specific information about the individual and instead relies on the general information for the group, information which he now knows doesn't apply to THIS individual, then he is guilty of racial discrimination, and that is only if his decision rests on how he valued that specific information.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

SE102 said:
Attempting to adjust hiring rates to counter structural racism is not racist.
Click to expand...

So employers should hire less Latinos? More women? More young people and fewer older? The fact is that some groups will be under represented or over represented in the workplace. Problem within portions of the Black community was recently pointed out by the Mayor of Pittsburgh, but that is a cultural problem in some areas and not a race problem. Quotas would tend to support the idea, long after the Jim Crow laws have disappeared, that Black people are somehow inferior to other groups. This is patently untrue but we are having to pretend that it is.

What happened to Martin Luther King's hope that we should judge people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin? It is Democrats who are most responsible for not implementing that dream. Everyone should have equal rights and opportunities and only when that is accomplished will conditions improve for all..
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom