Why are all of the low-level jobs in the US held by visible minorities?

[user43770]

I don't get what your gettin at F$D

He was agreeing with you.

 

[Effington]

Pretty much what everyone said; the good jobs go to the people with the fancy resumes, which means you have a college degree (in general the more expensive, the better name) which in general, can not be paid for unless you have an upbringing that can support you at least partially. (The rich get richer) That's not to say it's not done solo, but those people who do it themselves are definitely the minority.

I worked for an employer that hired mostly minorities, some just off welfare, for their corporate positions. They received a tax break for it. However, it's easily the worst run company I've ever seen and it is going bankrupt, and I'd say the biggest reason for that is because they have incompetent employees and no one smart enough to run it once the original founders left.

 

[Luveno]

Based on the original question, I'm going to have to say that Luveno is the most naive person I've ever met.

You've met me?

I am merely stating a pattern I have observed. I am not saying it exists. I am not explaining it away with any theory. I am stating it, and questioning if or why it exists. You should try it sometime.

 

[MacAvoy]

I've never met you but your definately the most naive person I've ever come across. Even more so demonstrated by your response to my post.

 

[Luveno]

I've never met you but your definately the most naive person I've ever come across. Even more so demonstrated by your response to my post.

I'm not here to start a "flame war". If you don't like my post, that's fine. But insulting someone you've never met is poor form.

Instead of attacking the messenger, attack the message. Try it. It works better.

 

[MacAvoy]

I'm not here to start a "flame war". If you don't like my post, that's fine. But insulting someone you've never met is poor form.

Instead of attacking the messenger, attack the message. Try it. It works better.

I agree with the above quote 100% but you OP isn't exactly rocket science. As for your OP, I would have thought that for 99.9% of the population, that it was a given.

 

[ready123]

Women and minorities are overrepresented.

I always thought it's funny when dudes throw out the affirmative action argument but don't mention legacy admissions, nepotism, and all the other forms of white affirmative action. I'm not putting a judgement on either, neither of them bother me, but if you're gonna blame the social forces that help minorities, you need to also taken into account the social forces the help the majority

also, how come ragging on affirmative action comes so easily but we don't even think about legacy admissions?

 

[ketostix]

I always thought it's funny when dudes throw out the affirmative action argument but don't mention legacy admissions, nepotism, and all the other forms of white affirmative action. I'm not putting a judgement on either, neither of them bother me, but if you're gonna blame the social forces that help minorities, you need to also taken into account the social forces the help the majority

also, how come ragging on affirmative action comes so easily but we don't even think about legacy admissions?

--> institutionalized racism

Because what you're saying is mostly a myth. The benefits of coming from money don't apply to just someone who's white. Minorities want minority rule pure and simple. How is that fair? It's not.

 

[ready123]

Because what you're saying is mostly a myth. The benefits of coming from money don't apply to just someone who's white. Minorities want minority role pure and simple. How is that fair? It's not.

I'm going off on a tangent but the best proposal I ever heard for an alternative to affirmative action, at least for college admissions, was to to use economic and region criteria, instead of just race. that way all the poor kids who get bussed to high school 3 hours a day and gotta work to pay rent (and have that much less time to study), can be put on par with the kids that are well off

 

[SmoothTalker]

I'm not too sure what you mean by socially disenfranchised and relatively invisible to be honest. Care to clarify?

As for specifically giving college spots to kids that didn't have time to study in high school because they had to pay rent, sounds good in theory.

But it's idealistic and totally ignores the fact that college/university is not primary school, you are not going in with a clean slate.

If they didn't learn a lot in high school, they will find college very very hard. Even if they are smart, you need some sort of base to work from. So we could get them in, but then you'd have to give them breaks to keep them in, at least for a couple of years before they catch up. Grade inflation is already enough of an issue without having to do that.

I agree disadvantaged students should get assistance, but it needs to come EARLY. These kids should have had time to study in high school so they could have good marks, do well on SAT's, and rightfully get into college.

Otherwise, it's a superficial solution that only creates bitterness from the people not being given the advantage, and in most cases, except for the gifted students that will be able to catch up, it will be a waste of money anyway.

 

[bbestar]

I'll throw some theories out there.
Because of some hidden entities and unknown forces, the cost of living has gone up, and the value of the dollar has gone down significantly.

Back in the past where the value of the dollar held its value because of Gold, and debt was almost non existent anybody could find any type of job and make a decent living, for example working full service at a gasoline station or at a soda shop.

Also families were much stronger and neighbors looked out for each other. My teacher told me how back in the day, they would keep the doors unlocked to their house and car, and even let neighbors use the car. So if something were to happen, they had people to support them until they got back on their feet.

Now the amount of currency circulating in the economy plays a role as well, because of some hidden entities and unknown forces, they were able to manipulate that amount of money in the economy, if they were to cut the amount of money, people would suffer and loss of property would ensue. Then they increase it so others who they prefer to have the money do have it.

This has been going on for decades since the end of the civil war.

 

[wallycleaver]

almost every country has minorities doing the crappy jobs. hell, places like kuwait and uae are something like 90% foreign workers so that the playboy's can fly around the world and party on oil money.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fZwN8Xmsa0c&feature=related
how about a mall with cars like this? somebody is happy with the price of oil - and i bet it isn't you!

 

[ready123]

But it's idealistic and totally ignores the fact that college/university is not primary school, you are not going in with a clean slate.

GPA has always been a factor in college admission, even with affirmative action.

I agree disadvantaged students should get assistance, but it needs to come EARLY. These kids should have had time to study in high school so they could have good marks, do well on SAT's, and rightfully get into college.

yeah, well that's the thing. They SHOULD have had time to study, but they don't. Life is fvcked up like that. So where should we draw the line?