Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
" I did not say you were an imbecile. But if the shoe fits, wear it"
Knock it off.
it's such an obvious roundabout way of insulting someone, at least own it.
edited 11th Aug '15 9:53:00 AM by Stratostygo3
The world is inherently chaotic no amount of religion, conspiracy or wishful thinking will change that, accept it, and move on.There are hundreds of those.
I remember they were discussed in one of the Freakonomics books, too.
There is a concept of companies regarding a social responsibility.
If you are a company that is fully aware of economic difficulties, who knows people are struggling and who knows the problems and deficiencies others are suffering through, you have two options.
You can shrug, close your eyes and ears and deny your responsibility in being part of fixing this (companies can hire who they want. Put them through courses. Train them. Educate them. Scholarship them while still making profit), and also spending their profit back into the society that allows them to thrive.
Just saying they are part of the problem is not the whole side of it, they can also be part of the solution.
My personal fear is that this part of the solution will be blocked because simple theorethical terms wil be prostituted to hell and back.
edited 11th Aug '15 9:56:49 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesThere have been. Give me a minute to Google-fu them for you...
edited 11th Aug '15 9:54:59 AM by TotemicHero
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
x6
In that case it's even more disingenuous to assume that's the reason for not being hired, because frankly one can't really know nor has anything to prove it.
edited 11th Aug '15 9:54:50 AM by Stratostygo3
The world is inherently chaotic no amount of religion, conspiracy or wishful thinking will change that, accept it, and move on.no. fite ME aprilla
ill punch the head milke out of u
edited 11th Aug '15 10:00:31 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesEqual Employment Opportunity Commission - Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices
Look this over when you have the chance. Some policy makers, activists and civil rights attorneys have argued that pre-employment inquiries should be amended to cover more specific dress styles (i.e. not reject an applicant because of their afro or dreadlocks) and to exclude inquiries about maternity. I believe the latter is covered in many states if I recall correctly.
![]()
Let me get the polar bear so we can make it fair.
![]()
![]()
There's something here I want to address openly because I want others to see and understand it.
I'm much less interested in you and more so with the arguments you've put forth. However, your points have been summarily addressed and countered by other people. They are also not particularly original or nuanced arguments, and they have been debunked before in numerous other environments of public discourse.
Consider the implicit and explicit layers of meaning in language when you're presented with a rhetorical device or a metaphor. There was a point being illustrated to you with the metaphor about fitting shoes that you misinterpreted. It is ultimately neither here nor there, but what is worth focusing on right now is that it's generally good practice to not read too deeply into the assumptions total strangers are (or my case, are not) making about you as a human being.
I do not know you. I do not know how intelligent you are, nor do I care. That is not an insult. It is a mere statement of fact. My concern was with the inaccuracies behind the assumption that society has become overly sensitive or that workplace discrimination is too nebulous to be addressed at the policy making or educational level.
We have a political base in our nation that has taken great strides in implanting the idea that our hiring process is totally transparent and based on premeditated fairness. This ignores subconscious biases we have about people who are different from us, and it ignores the obstacles marginalized people are faced with up to and including microaggressions that can and often do jeopardize their economic growth.
edited 11th Aug '15 10:36:56 AM by Aprilla
I tend to simplify it. It's about the money at the root.
Despite that there are (very) well-to-do African Americans and Hispanic Americans, the overall impressions is that they have lower socio-economic rankings.
For low-ranking jobs, this isn't much of a concern. But the higher-level jobs usually require social circles of a certain level. See "social capital" or Guanxi
Another thing is that most employers prefer to hire people who do not have money troubles. That's why they also do credit checks.
Oh yeah, and social capital is probably why I wouldn't agree with Murphy Brown about raising a child on your own (even if I like her a lot). Over here, marriages are not just between two people, families but two clans also interconnected with other clans. It's tough to compete with individuals with so much social capital.
Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.Yeah over here there's been issues with black people not being hired for city jobs because they don't sound posh. It's not even that the person hiring is racist, a person who doesn't sound posh can't do the job as well because the job requires spending a lot of time dealing with posh snobs who will be less receptive if you can't speak in a posh accent.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
![]()
![]()
Also need to say, again, that making loopholes around those laws are laughably easy for companies. And the U.S is one of the countries that regularizes how you run adverts for positions and such, I think.
Indeed, we do have the power to ban you. Rejecting faulty arguments does not make us an echo chamber. Bye now.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Who are the Oath Keepers, and why has the armed group returned to Ferguson?
Also on the scene overnight: Members of a citizen militia group known as the Oath Keepers.
The men — all of them white and heavily armed — said they were in the area to protect someone who worked for the Web site Infowars.com, which is affiliated with talk-radio conspiracy theorist and self-described “thought criminal against Big Brother” Alex Jones.
Reporters and Black Lives Matter activists immediately took note.
“Media launches new demonization campaign as Oath Keepers arrive in Ferguson,” read an infowars.com headline Tuesday; the story noted that Oath Keepers members were with two reporters for the site.
If the presence of this group was confusing, here’s a brief explainer on their background and history in Ferguson.
Who are the Oath Keepers?
On their Web site, the Oath Keepers are described as a group focused on fulfilling “the oath all military and police take to ‘defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'” The site notes that the organization is comprised of members who have, or have previously had, some sort of connection to law enforcement or the military.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, however, describes the Oath Keepers as a “fiercely antigovernment, militaristic group.”
“The core idea of the group is that its members vow to forever support the oaths they took on joining law enforcement or the military to defend the Constitution,” reads the SPLC site. “But just as central is the group’s list of 10 ‘Orders We Will Not Obey,’ a compendium of much-feared but entirely imaginary threats from the government — orders, for instance, to force Americans into concentration camps, confiscate their guns, or cooperate with foreign troops in the United States.”
One Oath Keeper named Sam Andrews told the New York Times last year that the group’s membership includes “a really broad group of citizens, and I’m sure their motivations are all different. In many of them, there’s probably a sense of patriotism. But I think in most of them, there’s probably something that they probably don’t even recognize: that we have a moral obligation to protect the weakest among us.”
As The Post’s Terrence Mc Coy wrote in November:
The Oath Keepers are many things to many people. For one fervent believer, it’s about the Constitution. For another, it’s about a .50-caliber Bushmaster and his right to carry it. Others talk of fear: fear America has become a security state. Fear President Obama has become a dictator. Fear the Oath Keepers are needed now more than ever — especially in Ferguson, Mo.
The group, Mc Coy added, “came into being after founder Stewart Rhodes wrote a 2008 manifesto calling for men and women to protect a complacent America besieged by what he described as dictatorial leaders. ‘If a police state comes to America, it will ultimately be in your hands,’ Rhodes, a Yale Law School graduate, wrote. ‘That is a harsh reality, but you had better come to terms with it now, and resolve to not let it happen on your watch.'”
What are the Oath Keepers doing in Ferguson?
Abby Phillip, who is on the the ground for The Post in Ferguson, described the scene like this:
Members of the group arrived on West Florissant Avenue in Ferguson in the early morning as protests wound down just before 2 a.m.
The small group of men — dressed in military-style camouflage and bullet-proof vests, and armed with long guns — initially startled protesters, some of whom asked the Oath Keepers to leave. But they insisted that they were “on their side,” and had arrived to protect protesters from police, who stood standing watching in riot gear across the street. They said Missouri law permitted them to openly carry legally owned weapons.
When the Oath Keepers crossed to the same side of the street where police stood, protesters followed. But police didn’t react to their presence.
Has this group been in Ferguson before?
Yes, in November — though their presence was rather confusing for residents and activists then, too.
Here’s the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, describing the scene a few days after it was announced that Darren Wilson — the officer who shot Brown — wouldn’t face criminal charges:
Following a night of arson fires and bashed storefronts that hit close to home, Greg Hildebrand stood naked Tuesday, drying off from a needed shower, when he noticed somebody on the rooftop.
“I opened the window and said, ‘Hey, can I help you?’” said Hildebrand, 35, a website developer.
The man said he was security and would be up there at night with others to protect the pocket of second-story apartments and lower-level storefronts near the Ferguson Police Department. A day earlier, rioters had broken out windows below Hildebrand’s apartment in the 100 block of South Florissant Road and torched a nearby beauty supply store.
“I am in the middle of a difficult spot,” Hildebrand said. “I feel a lot better having those guys up on the roof.”
“When they’re here, there’s definitely a weight lifted off of our shoulders,” Davis Vo, whose family owns a local restaurant, told the New York Times, when discussing the Oath Keepers in November. “I’d be lying if I said otherwise.”
What do authorities in Missouri say?
“Their presence was both unnecessary and inflammatory,” St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said.
What do the Oath Keepers say?
An e-mail to Oath Keepers was not immediately returned Tuesday.
But here
, from the Alex Jones Channel on You Tube, are videos of Oath Keepers engaging with some of the Ferguson protesters.
Hmm...
If they're genuinely on the side of the protestors, this could have been conveyed much better. Like others, I can't help but notice how for many people, the disruption of Sanders' speech was met with great condemnation (note that the two women were unarmed) while the presence of armed militia men, while regarded as bewildering, is tacitly more acceptable.
I'll admit that I have slight issues with some activists calling them white supremacists, but these men's perspective on BLM is not the healthiest, to say the least.
A good point I just heard online: "What would you think if I stood outside your house to guard it without you asking? And argued with you when you asked me to leave?"
Something to think about.
edited 11th Aug '15 11:43:39 AM by Aprilla
To put in perspective in both of my jobs in Baltimore, I got from kitchen service to cashier at Wendy's in just three mere weeks of work and in the Villa restaurant I went from waiter to cashier in less than four (I didn't even get the cooking and kitchen works).
Why? Formal English and quick math skills, one of my co-workers mentioned you'd need months working just to get assigned to those spots. Incidentally I was more often than not the only male in the staff at Wendy's and the whitest (arguably white depending of who you ask) guy in the workplace.
All my manager did was asking me a few questions and see how fast I'd answer, after a few work shifts she left me in charge of serving the customers and taking the money.
I was working with people who were usually older than me and she left implied they weren't either good with numbers or had an English clear enough to interact with most customers.
I take that as a sign of how far behind the education of the average black person in the US is, if a newcomer foreigner can attain a position that someone who worked before him should be first, but he gets it because the employer assumes that he/she knows she/he can do it, then it is the systematic lack of chances and education those people get as the fault for their lack of qualification.
Sometimes being the most qualified isn't a symptom of a meritocratic system, but of a rigged one that excludes people and groups from becoming the best choice.
![]()
I really hope they side with the protesters.
edited 11th Aug '15 12:04:20 PM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent leges

Thing is a corporation will do whatever will make them more money, they themselves are not intentionally walking all over minorities, as I said that's counter productive to making money.
It's the lead up to even getting to this point that screws people over (Economic situations)
The thing is most of this is not within the control of the employer the problem largely lies with the shit economic situation this broken country has minorities stuck in, the companies themselves (and employers in general) are largely not at fault for whatever is happening prior to the person (who is not necessarily the most qualified) stepping up for a job.
edited 11th Aug '15 9:51:41 AM by Stratostygo3
The world is inherently chaotic no amount of religion, conspiracy or wishful thinking will change that, accept it, and move on.