Army Guy Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 17 hours ago, TreeBeard said: I asked how it’s racist to make things equal. You think that’s a disgusting thing to say. Ergo, you don’t seem to be a fan of equality. You guys sure are emotional about this topic. Ad hominems fly when someone suggests not being racist anymore! 😂 How far do you go to make it equal, do we make sure skinny, fat people are fairly represented, what about disabled/ handicapped are they fairly represented, smart and mentally challenged, LGBTQ people and straight people are they fairly represented...We could go on and on.... Here is a idea how about we hire the best qualified for the job...instead of trying to correct mistakes from the past ( which we today have no control over) we level the playing field...Those companies or institutions that do not have a fair hire practices could be taken to court OH wait i think we already have laws about that today... You seem to think that white people seem to deserve to be over looked/ punished because of past injustices...done by people who are no longer in charge of anything... We all should be emotional about the topic, racism is racism.... 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
WestCanMan Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 (edited) 9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. I don't think this is true at all. The idea is to give an advantage to qualified people who satisfy diversity criteria. I am not saying I support DEI but your statement is wrong on the face of it. You know that was 100% true, so what exactly are you doing right now?. Are you honestly trying to say that DEI is nothing more than people saying "Use the fairest hiring practices possible now"? Did you forget that universities in the US have created completely different grade requirements for Asians and African Americans? If you're black, you need an 80. If you're Chinese, you need 96. That's what DEI is, Mike, and you know that. Don't insinuate that I'm a f'ing liar again. The CENTRAL tenet of DEI hiring is that STANDARD QUALIFICATIONS ARE LOWERED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE MINORITIES AND WOMEN, BUT REMAIN THE SAME AS ALWAYS FOR WHITE MEN, AND SOMETIMES ASIANS. As if that's not enough, it's also common to see "white men need not apply" at companies like Google and in the US military while the Dems were in charge. If you think I'm wrong then look into it instead of just accusing me of saying something that's not truthful. I don't make grand accusations whimsically. What's the point of even talking to you if you're going to be this dishonest, Mike? We've had discussions here about those exact hiring practices. Hell, there was even a class action lawsuit filed by air traffic controller applicants who got 100% on their courses but were denied work in order to accommodate DEIs with far lower scores. And then the geniuses in charge ended up with a shortage of ATC's. Go figger. Quote 2. What's the difference ? First of all cop is not as risky a job as people let on... you're letting narrative override facts again. Secondly, once they are hired they are in unless they do something wrong. Getting past the barrier is the hardest part and I thought you wanted fairness... OMG, Mike. That's callous and disgusting. I just did a quick check and there seem to be about 70 cops murdered in the US and 75,000 assaulted yearly. In addition to the cops that are killed every year, there are other cops who were shot and survived, or shot at but missed, or stabbed, or attacked with knives but unhurt, or attacked with other weapons but survived. Sure, some of the assaults might be like that OPP jerk-off who pretended that David Menzies assaulted him, but that cop should have been fired, and that never ended up being an assault charge either, but that's probably because it was caught on camera. Quote 3. Ok, well you just think Canadians deserve to be hired over others... this is the DEI ethic you have framed as being unfair. I never made a blanket statement that they all deserve to be hired over others, so that's a lie, but it's ridiculous to assume that a Syrian or Gazan muslim who just came to Canada 5 years ago should be an equally likely candidate to protect a conservative PM as a 5th generation Atheist (yeah, capital A) or Christian. Quote 4. You're swatting at imaginary people here, stoking a mythical fire you have set. There's no way to test whether your assertion is right, even leaving out the hair colour. Wrong, I'm just not into pretending like you are. I know that there's no way in hell that crakhobarbie or hodad are gonna be fair about hiring if they work in an HR dept. Nor would herbie. Never. It's just ingrained in their DNA now to be racist and bigoted. Quote 5. Who cares ? This isn't a conversation about facts, it's a long plaint about the way you see the world, with blue-haired HR 1diots ruining everything. How abut if you don't pretend that AOC isn't an idjit and I won't pretend that MTGreene and that weaselly faced chubby little white senator aren't nutjobs. Lindsay Graham iirc? Quote 6. Cops do fine. My cop friends retired quite early and make the among the highest salaries of non-managers. Thank the unions and Hollywood. @eyeball did a job that was a risky by many measures, and Bruce Willis never played a tough fisherman... This conversation is about how you see the world, not reality. This conversation is about reality. DEI is reality. It's discriminatory, racist, counterproductive, and it's as real as the planet you're standing on. Here's a scenario for you to mull over: M Hardner works at a company for 30 years. He worked overtime when they needed him, even though he was greatly inconvenienced. He worked the occasional weekend, and did a lot of work at home on evenings and weekends. By all accounts he is an excellent employee. Now he's been moving up in the company for a while, life is good, and his son completed a 1-yr course training him to work at a company like the one you work at. He gets 100%. He has 5 solid years of work experience, and he's bilingual, in Eng and Fr, which is good because you work with the federal gov't and there are a lot of Francophones there. He gets his "secret" security clearance with no problems, and applies where you work. It's in his home town. There's one other applicant, a Gazan refugee. He has no work experience here in Canada, but he took the same course as your son and just barely passed, due to his limited English-speaking ability. He had been arrested for domestic abuse twice here but he wasn't convicted, and authorities in Gaza aren't cooperating with Canadian authorities, so our police don't have a clue what he may have gotten up to over there, but since he wasn't convicted he passed his criminal record check, and he was able to get a "classified" security clearance (due to a new LPOC policy), just a bit lower than your son got. The bad news is that your company isn't hiring people with your skin colour right now, because there are too many people who "look like you" there, so your son can't be hired. The Gazan refugee gets a rental unit nearby that's partly funded by the federal gov't, and starts work at your company the next Monday. Is that sensible Mike? Are you really gonna high-five the HR people where you work? Wait, there's more. So your son gets hired in a different province, a 10-hr drive away. It sucks because he has to move out of your side-suite and pay hefty rent where he's moving to. He's also moving away from his friends and family, but what's he gonna do? Work at a job he doesn't have any special training or education for in his home town? And... now the company that he got hired at offers you a nice raise to come work for them... You'll get to be close to your grandchildren, and you'll be moving away from your mother-in-law. Houses are the same price there. The only thing that's really keeping you where you are is loyalty to your current company. Wait, do you even have that now Mike? If they ask you to work overtime are you still gonna do it or are you gonna keep your dinner plans? So whats the deal? Does your company lose you now? FYI 95% of people in your situation lose every bit of loyalty they had for their company. You'd think that after 30 years they'd at least hire your son if he was the most qualified candidate, no? In this scenario, your company got a downgrade on their new hire, 100%, and they lost you, a valuable, reliable 30-yr employee. How do you feel about DEI now that you're the one being screwed by it? Edited January 16 by WestCanMan 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Army Guy Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 4 hours ago, Moonbox said: It really depends how it’s implemented, but unless it’s properly regulated it can very easily end up siphoning resources from the public systems (doctors, donations etc) and leaving the poor with much worse access. Yes it does depend on a lot of things , but our history shows us the government may not be capable of fixing our health care system as it sits, or maybe it is just that they are not very interested in doing so for many reasons......Will another system compete with one another sure they will, and what a better way to compete by using everyone's greed, on side pays more than the other...the governments system is fiscally restrained....and your right it will create a two tiered health system...But why should we hold back people that can afford better health care... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
TreeBeard Posted January 16 Author Report Posted January 16 50 minutes ago, Army Guy said: do we make sure skinny, fat people are fairly represented You’re being absurd. You’re unserious. 1 Quote
I am Groot Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 7 hours ago, herbie said: Congratulations on thinking you are 'correct' because you feel you're on the political right. You are a wrong winger, Firstly by denying a problem existswhen I didn't deny global warming. I denied your ridiculous solution of making it impossible for industry to operate in the West, and thus driving it offshore to places like China, with their coal plants. All that is doing is robbingCanada of jobs and wealth while enriching China. And it actually results in MORE CO2 than if they'd stayed where they were. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
I am Groot Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 11 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Well, we Canadians do very much accept and admire "The whole 'correcting racism of the past". We have in the last several decades removed statues based on what was perceived those folks had done in the past that does not sync with today attitudes. We have renamed buildings, parks bridges etc based on what those folks may have done, believed or purported. We are renaming parks and rivers and lakes and even towns and highways to indigenous nomenclature to demonstrate we are not racists now but have been in the past. So, it is not an "American thing" at all. It's an entirely American thing because, as I said, all the policy ideas Canada's progressives foist upon us are American ideas. They avidly watch what their American brethren do, like little girls watching how their big sisters dress, then eagerly don the same dresses, despite them being too large, and splash makeup all over their faces and act like they're sophisticates. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
I am Groot Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: There's also the idea of the 'nepo baby'... which most people have a negative reaction to. That is, people getting their role because of their parents. It happens in Hollywood, the Music industry etc. But nobody talks about Police, Hydro Workers, and so on getting their jobs because of family connections. Every cop and hydro worker I know got in that way. The white ones, maybe. Having someone inside clues you in to what you need to know to pass the tests. I saw this myself when I worked for the government. We'd hire temps and if we liked them, guide them into how to apply and pass the exams. But let's face facts. If you're a Chinese woman the system will bend over backward to get you in as a police officer. They'll give you every possible assistance to pass those tests. In Ottawa, we even had the chief overrule his screening officer and hiring Somalis despite them having been ruled totally unsuitable due to past behaviour. A number of them then wound up getting into serious trouble. 11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: I have seen people complaining about Indian folks hiring other Indian folks but that has been in small business. I do suspect Indian people have racist views about white Canadians btw, no evidence though. Friend of mine is encountering it now in the federal government. Senior Indian EX brought in from outside last year with no previous experience in the federal public service, showing open preference for Indians and acting like a haughty, disdainful, arrogant b!tch to everyone else. 11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Nobody asked my question about age. Does 'age' provision in hiring constitute a DEI privilege ? Age never works for you in hiring. Experience does, though. 11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: peaking of DEI - did the NUMBER TWO CONSERVATIVE in Canada get her job because she's a married Lesbian, so that they can hold back that card in case something bad happens ? Almost certainly. And the number three is a Sikh. The Conservatives are no strangers to courting immigrant groups, and have never shown the courage to challenge either diversity or multiculturalism. The first time they EVER dared to even call for lower immigration was just last year. 10 hours ago, TreeBeard said: Throwing around insults as soon as someone mentions equality seems like the opposite. You haven't mentioned equality as something desirable. You want equity. Which is to equality what "People's Democratic Republic" is to Democracies. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
ExFlyer Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 10 hours ago, I am Groot said: It's an entirely American thing because, as I said, all the policy ideas Canada's progressives foist upon us are American ideas. They avidly watch what their American brethren do, like little girls watching how their big sisters dress, then eagerly don the same dresses, despite them being too large, and splash makeup all over their faces and act like they're sophisticates. Well, it was the Liberals that also allowed statues to be removed, bridges, buildings, towns, villages and highways to be renamed. It is not a political party affliction , it is a societal politically correct thing Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
Michael Hardner Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 13 hours ago, WestCanMan said: 1. You know that was 100% true, so what exactly are you doing right now?. 2. Are you honestly trying to say that DEI is nothing more than people saying "Use the fairest hiring practices possible now"? 3. Did you forget that universities in the US have created completely different grade requirements for Asians and African Americans? 4. ... air traffic controller applicants who got 100% on their courses but were denied work in order to accommodate DEIs with far lower scores. And then the geniuses in charge ended up with a shortage of ATC's. Go figger. 5. OMG, Mike. That's callous and disgusting. 6. I just did a quick check and there seem to be about 70 cops murdered in the US and 75,000 assaulted yearly. 7. I never made a blanket statement that they all deserve to be hired over others, so that's a lie 8. Wrong, I'm just not into pretending like you are. 1. Questioning, discussing... getting specifics 2. No 3. Indeed I DID forget about education, mea culpa. And I agree there that people who are less qualified in terms of marks might get in ... however there is also a thing called legacy admissions... would you be ok with outlawing all of it and making a double-blind admission test ? I don't mean to say that DEI is 'fair' but the idea that it puts unqualified people into jobs is not 100% true and often a situation where people aren't implementing it properly. 4. To say that people with the highest marks didn't get in isn't the same as saying unqualified people get in. 5. Let's not comment on each others' morality. If you think I am a bad person, stop posting to me. I accept that you and I may have different definitions of right/wrong but that as citizens we need to work it out. 6. It is good to use statistics, and I am with you there. I also don't want to imply that cops DON'T deserve danger pay. They are certainly targeted enough. However my point is that we don't actually base salary on how dangerous the job is - lots of others are attacked more or less than cops and aren't widely seen to be in dangerous jobs. That's all. 7. It's not a lie, it's implied in your defense of "hire my kid" practices. Either you want fair hiring or you don't. What are the criteria, what are the details ? I'm assuming you're in a different area than me so I'm interested to hear your perspective. 8. Ok, I'm going to stop reading there due to your personal comments on me. Whatever comes after that statement was unread by me FYI 1 Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Army Guy Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 14 hours ago, TreeBeard said: You’re being absurd. You’re unserious. Well from my point of view your being absurd, Why should this generation atone for the sins of our fore fathers ? We have already seen BC take this in to the extremes in regards to lands claims....DEI is more than just excluding whites from jobs, they break it down into What sex you are, are you a part of a mistreated race. Religion is a special carve certain religions, minus Christian, or Jewish those are very bad...The rest well they get special treatment in regards to our laws.... If you want to end discrimination , you must practice what you preach, and not just trade one for the other....That is absurd...and Racist... Had any of this been against any other race of color or religion what do you think the consequences would have been... 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
TreeBeard Posted January 16 Author Report Posted January 16 2 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Well from my point of view your being absurd I’m not the one who mentioned fat people and the mentally disabled. You’re either unaware of the differences between being fat and being a visible minority, or you’re just not able to have an actual discussion. Quote
Army Guy Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 2 hours ago, ExFlyer said: Well, it was the Liberals that also allowed statues to be removed, bridges, buildings, towns, villages and highways to be renamed. It is not a political party affliction , it is a societal politically correct thing Is that because we are ashamed of our past, or is it that some Canadians feel uncomfortable with those statues, or names...and so we try to erase it...hoping we will forget, that our nation has some warts attached to it....Have we really grown that soft....You should not be trying to change history, but rather learning from it...can't do that if it is erased... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 3 minutes ago, TreeBeard said: I’m not the one who mentioned fat people and the mentally disabled. You’re either unaware of the differences between being fat and being a visible minority, or you’re just not able to have an actual discussion. Being fat or mentally disable is a visible minority, a group that gets unwarranted attention from average Canadians, that cause mental distress, and other social problems...... And yet you have drawn the line to include color and gender, those are the only groups DEI seems interested in....So why just those two groups ? and why at the expense of other groups... Why not just Hire the best candidate for the job, why is that such a hard concept to wrap your mind around....why do i need to include color or gender on a job application...why can't people hire by reading your resume, and then a face to face interview...with questions that are formed around the job, and not your sex or race, because the DEI crowd that favors this type of practice are racist or guilty of our past... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
ExFlyer Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 28 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Is that because we are ashamed of our past, or is it that some Canadians feel uncomfortable with those statues, or names...and so we try to erase it...hoping we will forget, that our nation has some warts attached to it....Have we really grown that soft....You should not be trying to change history, but rather learning from it...can't do that if it is erased... I was responding to I am Groot who said "It's an entirely American thing because, as I said, all the policy ideas Canada's progressives foist upon us are American ideas." indicating it is also a liberal government thing, not just conservatives. I also said "It is not a political party affliction , it is a societal politically correct thing" I never said I agree with the actions.... as a matter of act I totally disagree. What "they" did in the past was a result of what was going on and happening at the time. 20/20 hindsight has never benefited anyone...only made us a society of second guessers. 1 Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
ExFlyer Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 27 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Being fat or mentally disable is a visible minority, a group that gets unwarranted attention from average Canadians, that cause mental distress, and other social problems...... And yet you have drawn the line to include color and gender, those are the only groups DEI seems interested in....So why just those two groups ? and why at the expense of other groups... Why not just Hire the best candidate for the job, why is that such a hard concept to wrap your mind around....why do i need to include color or gender on a job application...why can't people hire by reading your resume, and then a face to face interview...with questions that are formed around the job, and not your sex or race, because the DEI crowd that favors this type of practice are racist or guilty of our past... Having been in the position of hiring people...I have not seen any applications for jobs that ask for your colour or gender in my tenure. Maybe in the past but certainly no tin the past 20 or so years. Applications I have dealt with do not even ask age or race. Many resumes do not even have names, as applicants are given a number. 1 Quote You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to tell me what mine should be.
CdnFox Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: Is that because we are ashamed of our past, or is it that some Canadians feel uncomfortable with those statues, or names...and so we try to erase it...hoping we will forget, that our nation has some warts attached to it....Have we really grown that soft....You should not be trying to change history, but rather learning from it...can't do that if it is erased... They don't want to erase history exactly and it's not because they're ashamed of it. What they want is to destroy pride in our history. They want to have a new country, they don't like our current country. They're never going to convince people of that if people are proud of our current country That's why they also try to cancel Canada Day. And they're perfect world everybody else would be ashamed of Canadian history, there would be no pride in Canada, everybody would hate our country. Then it would be easy to convince people that we should throw our current country out the window and create a new socialist Utopia that will be much better. According to them anyway There is an active movement to create a hatred of our current history in Canada and country. This is necessary to replace it and that's their motivation Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
Michael Hardner Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 23 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said: Using skin color or gender as hiring criteria is equality of outcome not equality of opportunity, and can only occur via racist and sexist discrimination. Again... what about age ? What about nepotism and clan loyalty ? Are we allowed to complain about these ? 1 Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
CdnFox Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Again... what about age ? What about nepotism and clan loyalty ? Are we allowed to complain about these ? Are you suggesting that 3-year-old should be put to work? Are you suggesting a father shouldn't allow his son to work at his own business? Why don't you actually take a position on something for a change Mike? You're such a spineless goon. Quote "That which doesn't kill me... Had better start running."
WestCanMan Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 (edited) 3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Questioning, discussing... getting specifics Is it really "discussing" though, when you try to pretend that DEI just means "making sure everything is really fair" when it is just blatantly discriminating against people? DEI = codified discrimination. Truly. If your kid isn't at least 35% better than the other kid, they miss out, and some companies in the US, like Google, even advertise "whites/white males need not apply". Quote 3. Indeed I DID forget about education, mea culpa. 👍 Quote however there is also a thing called legacy admissions... would you be ok with outlawing all of it and making a double-blind admission test ? TBH I don't know how legacy admissions work. Some people donate millions to a university. If that helps keep the doors open, and makes tuition more affordable for everyone, and increases the quality of services that a university can provide to all its students, is it such a bad thing if one kid gets in? I think not. And I'm not in a position to give millions to a university. That's at the bottom of my list of things to donate money to, if I even had $1M to give away, so my own son will clearly never benefit from such a policy. Quote I don't mean to say that DEI is 'fair' but the idea that it puts unqualified people into jobs is not 100% true and often a situation where people aren't implementing it properly. I think it 100% puts people into positions that they are unqualified for. Eg, I think that the fire chief in NYC should have experience putting out at least one fire. Would it be cool if I just said that a white cisgender male just has to be put the dean of a black female university in Georgia? How would that make sense? Quote 4. To say that people with the highest marks didn't get in isn't the same as saying unqualified people get in. That's a pretty flippant response to "worked harder, did far better on the testing". IMO the people who can get 100% are better at the job, and can perform all the tasks quicker and more accurately. I mean, the people who devise the course and testing are fairly useless if their testing, after 60 or so years, doesn't identify the best candidates... Do you really have so little faith in education and training? Quote 5. Let's not comment on each others' morality. If you think I am a bad person, stop posting to me. I accept that you and I may have different definitions of right/wrong but that as citizens we need to work it out. It's safe to say that being a cop is dangerous, and it's objectively quite rude to suggest that it is not. Quote 7. It's not a lie, it's implied in your defense of "hire my kid" practices. Either you want fair hiring or you don't. What are the criteria, what are the details ? I'm assuming you're in a different area than me so I'm interested to hear your perspective. There's no real "hire my kid" and it definitely doesn't end with "no matter what", but for sure: all things being equal you 100% hire the kid first. There's far more to it than just the quality of the applicants to consider. Loyalty is something that goes both ways, and it's actually an important part of a strong company. DEI BS is not. I mean, name one other country aside from the US where an illegal immigrant will have an advantage getting hired over a citizen who's also the child of a long-time employee... The concept is purely re-tar-ded. Quote Ok, I'm going to stop reading there due to your personal comments on me. Whatever comes after that statement was unread by me FYI It's not personal, I just want you to understand how you would feel in that situation. When someone has worked for a company for a long time, the chances are that they've gone over and above many many times. If you consider yourself to be someone who showed extreme loyalty to your company, and then they didn't value your job references or give your kid a chance, then your feelings of loyalty would just instantly die. Edited January 16 by WestCanMan Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Moonbox Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 17 hours ago, Army Guy said: Yes it does depend on a lot of things , but our history shows us the government may not be capable of fixing our health care system as it sits, or maybe it is just that they are not very interested in doing so for many reasons......Will another system compete with one another sure they will, and what a better way to compete by using everyone's greed, on side pays more than the other...the governments system is fiscally restrained....and your right it will create a two tiered health system...But why should we hold back people that can afford better health care... I think the issue is that both private and public healthcare care system are prone to inefficiency or abuse. The American system is the best warning we could get for how the private sector fails, and why public healthcare is overall a superior mode. They spend more than almost anyone and (AFAIK) don’t even crack the top 25-30 for overall healthcare service standards. Australia is a good example of how private medical care can be used to support the public system. The key here is that you don’t want the private system to reduce support and funding for the public one. The concern most Canadians have is that it would. 1 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Michael Hardner Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 31 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: 1. Is it really "discussing" though, when you try to pretend that DEI just means "making sure everything is really fair" when it is just blatantly discriminating against people? 2. BH I don't know how legacy admissions work. 3. Some people donate millions to a university. If that helps keep the doors open, and makes tuition more affordable for everyone, and increases the quality of services that a university can provide to all its students, is it such a bad thing if one kid gets in? I think not. 4. I think it 100% puts people into positions that they are unqualified for. Eg, I think that the fire chief in NYC should have experience putting out at least one fire. 5. Would it be cool if I just said that a white cisgender male just has to be put the dean of a black female university in Georgia? How would that make sense? 6. IMO the people who can get 100% are better at the job, and can perform all the tasks quicker and more accurately. 7. I mean, the people who devise the course and testing are fairly useless if their testing, after 60 or so years, doesn't identify the best candidates... 8. Do you really have so little faith in education and training? 9. It's safe to say that being a cop is dangerous, and it's objectively quite rude to suggest that it is not. 10. Loyalty is something that goes both ways, and it's actually an important part of a strong company. DEI BS is not. 11. I mean, name one other country aside from the US where an illegal immigrant will have an advantage getting hired over a citizen who's also the child of a long-time employee... The concept is purely re-tar-ded. 12. It's not personal, I just want you to understand how you would feel in that situation. 13. When someone has worked for a company for a long time, the chances are that they've gone over and above many many times. 14. If you consider yourself to be someone who showed extreme loyalty to your company, and then they didn't value your job references or give your kid a chance, then your feelings of loyalty would just instantly die. 1. It's not perfect, nor is it explicitly evil. The people who set it up have goals, some noble some not. It's our job to discuss and look through it. I don't think I ever said it was "really fair". 2. If you went to Harvard, your kid gets to go. Period. When you go there, you end up immersed in a network of money-making that is less and less related to merit, skill, and knowledge. These are the so-called 'Elites' skewered often on here, but the thing is they're both Democrat and Republican. 3. What you're describing is a tiny corruption... not even worth thinking about. 4. I agree. 5. That kind of reverse discrimination happens too, if that's what you mean. 6. Not true. We don't give the best jobs to people who got the highest marks in school. It's an idealized view that testing = ability. Instead, you want to make sure that the qualifications are MET - that they can do the core work competently, then other facts will be born out in the job et. communications skill, leadership etc. There's no way to objectively assess based on numbers who would be the best cop, leader, Director of Development. 7. It's one measure, not THE measure. Now, again, I am not saying testing is useless. 8. I have worked with enough Dean's List folks who would never progress above the bottom of the ladder, yes. I also worked with artsies, philosophers and street musicians who found their groove and made millions. 9. I wouldn't suggest otherwise, but go back to the discussion above for context. It was about nepotism not safety. 10. "Diversity gives strength" is the slogan and there are reasons for that. I appreciate the idea, because people from away (eg. Americans - with whom I work) bring a different culture and perspective that can be helpful. 11. It's called the market... again, there are lots of factors. 12. I'll take what you say, but you implied that I am making things up. 13. Do YOU work in a company where there is actual loyalty ? Because the concept went out the window 20+ years ago in my industry. We are, conceptually, collaborating prostitutes in IT as far as I am concerned. Your boss will openly talk about you/he/she leaving if something happens next quarter... 14. What you're writing here is 100% foreign to anything I have experienced at work in the last 25 years. The only time I saw family come in was internship (which is a kind of slavery anyway) in a small/medium company where the kid was fully qualified and the position was created for them because the boss was the president. And it was a bargain for everyone. Not to cast aspersions on the way other outfits work, but I just can't relate. Likewise, when I speak to my friends who work in healthcare the whole setup seems cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffs with me... folks filing HR complaints over the weirdest little things... massive and crippling bureaucracy... that's a whole thread topic in itself. 1 Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
WestCanMan Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. It's not perfect, nor is it explicitly evil. The people who set it up have goals, some noble some not. It's our job to discuss and look through it. 2. If you went to Harvard, your kid gets to go. Period. When you go there, you end up immersed in a network of money-making that is less and less related to merit, skill, and knowledge. These are the so-called 'Elites' skewered often on here, but the thing is they're both Democrat and Republican. 6. Not true. We don't give the best jobs to people who got the highest marks in school. It's an idealized view that testing = ability. Instead, you want to make sure that the qualifications are MET - that they can do the core work competently, then other facts will be born out in the job et. communications skill, leadership etc. There's no way to objectively assess based on numbers who would be the best cop, leader, Director of Development. 13. Do YOU work in a company where there is actual loyalty ? Because the concept went out the window 20+ years ago in my industry. We are, conceptually, collaborating prostitutes in IT as far as I am concerned. Your boss will openly talk about you/he/she leaving if something happens next quarter... 14. What you're writing here is 100% foreign to anything I have experienced at work in the last 25 years. The only time I saw family come in was internship (which is a kind of slavery anyway) in a small/medium company where the kid was fully qualified and the position was created for them because the boss was the president. 1. DEI is pretty evil, TBH, and it was designed by people who don't have the country's best interests at heart. 2. I didn't know that 6. School is not like a specific trades training course. The ATC course is specific to people who want to do that one job, not just break into a general field, and it's designed to separate the wheat from the chaff. 13. Always. I've always found loyalty to be a key aspect of working with other people. Maybe that comes from being so involved in sports, or from being in the military, but I definitely view loyalty as a day-to-day fixture. 14. Yet you seemed to think that nepo-babies were common earlier... Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Michael Hardner Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 15 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: 1. DEI is pretty evil, TBH, and it was designed by people who don't have the country's best interests at heart. 2. School is not like a specific trades training course. The ATC course is specific to people who want to do that one job, not just break into a general field, and it's designed to separate the wheat from the chaff. 13. Always. I've always found loyalty to be a key aspect of working with other people. Maybe that comes from being so involved in sports, or from being in the military, but I definitely view loyalty as a day-to-day fixture. 14. Yet you seemed to think that nepo-babies were common earlier... 1. I do believe that there are evil people in the world, however it's pretty difficult for true evil to perpetuate in an open system such as labour frameworks. Do you think that they THINK they have the country's interests at heart ? That is, they're misguided. 2. Fair point. 13. I'm so far removed from such a place that I can't even say "it must be nice". I wouldn't trust work... with anything. I get my paycheck, I keep going in. My boss at my last company left and openly recruited her favourites to the new place, me included. Nobody batted an eye. 14. Yeah, when I thought about it I did come up with a few examples but they weren't exactly the same thing. It was more like a leg-up but... yes... I have seen it. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Goddess Posted January 16 Report Posted January 16 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: "Diversity gives strength" is the slogan Is "diversity" synonymous with "good"? Quote "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
TreeBeard Posted January 16 Author Report Posted January 16 6 minutes ago, Goddess said: Is "diversity" synonymous with "good"? No. Diversity is generally better compared to mono-culture. Especially in large corporations or government, if we’re talking about employers. It can only be of benefit to have diverse views and be able to reflect the diversity of your customers/clients when offering services. You would prefer a white Euro-centric workforce in government and business? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.