impartialobserver

So then lets have you provide QUANTITATIVE metrics concerning JOB PERFORMANCE. The assumption is that these DEI hires (which you have no direct evidence of) performed worse than their previous counterparts. That is my point... take it or leave it. Can you provide such information or not? Seems pretty simple.

Depending on one's source, they will say that there are four fire battalions in LA and supposedly all are ran by lesbians. That is easily debunked. There are 22 in Los Angeles county. So then lets have you provide QUANTITATIVE metrics concerning JOB PERFORMANCE. The assumption is that these DEI hires (which you have no direct evidence of) performed worse than their previous counterparts. That is my point... take it or leave it. Can you provide such information or not? Seems pretty simple.

So then lets have you provide QUANTITATIVE metrics concerning JOB PERFORMANCE. The assumption is that these DEI hires (which you have no direct evidence of) performed worse than their previous counterparts. That is my point... take it or leave it. Can you provide such information or not? Seems pretty simple.

So then lets have you provide QUANTITATIVE metrics concerning JOB PERFORMANCE. The assumption is that these DEI hires (which you have no direct evidence of) performed worse than their previous counterparts.

Well.. and with this, I conclude that you have no idea what I am talking about. I am talking about quantifiable job performance. Feel free to carry on. Someone has to care that you breathe.

where did you get the 1.7 million number? We are not even close to talking about the same thing... how about you drop it? Or do you need to beat the dead horse.

Lets stop here... we are not talking about the same thing. I do not like playing dumb games either and can realize that we are not even close to being on the same page.

I need more than theory. Can you provide actual dollars spent and more importantly... quantitative job performance metrics that show unequivocally that the DEI hires did not perform up to par. Now do not play stupid and say that the fire battalion chiefs have control over the available water supply.

Your zealousness takes you off the rails. First, LA is an urban environment so in this case you are talking apples to oranges. You have a point when it comes to the area in the central and northern parts of the state that are not urban. As for water diversion.. that is irrelevant. Their infrastructure was not ready. The reservoirs in their watersheds were doing fine as compared to years past. Had they been ready.. they could have had the necessary 12 to 13 million gallons ready. Knowing their names is not evidence of job performance. I know that you this Now show me some metrics of those that came before them and metrics of the actual hires. If I want to tell you about a pro athlete.. I use metrics such as points scored, TD Scored, goals scored.. can you do this?

This is like saying that you have evidence of someone stealing XYZ because they like XYZ. Evidence would be quantitative... do you know what that means? There would be established metrics that rate them. Metrics based on actual data such as response time. You would compare the predecessors to the current staff based on quantitative metrics.

So you have no evidence... understood. All you have is theory and hypothetical. Come back when you have something quantitative.

Ok, good that you admit that you can't prove it directly. You are guessing and nothing more. As of 2012.. the available supply was only 1.8 million gallons. Neither would have been sufficient for this event.

Game... the game that I am playing is having you prove your claims. You have no quantifiable evidence that the DEI hiring policies directly and measurably impacted their attempts to contain the fire. Quit going off into the weeds because you have no evidence.

Can you prove that the only reason that she was hired was her gender and race? Spare me the opinions.. lets see some actual evidence. 3 million gallons actually exceeds what they had ready in the past... interesting.

That is not quantifiable evidence.