breakyerself

Don't worry. They'll blame immigrants and elect even more radical right wing politicians.

You can aquire a billion dollars. Nobody has ever earned a billion dollars.

A fair shot would be hiring based on qualifications and not race, relion, etc. There seems to be no end to people wanting to perpetuate a status quo that advantages themselves. You might feel differently if you were part of a group that faces discrimination at every turn.

How will you prove and prosecute supposed discrimination?

Usually someone who feels discriminated against will get legal representation, file a lawsuit, and use the discovery process to strengthen their case. They can compare their treatment to that of people who don't share their minority status. They can show internal communications. Call witnesses. compare the companies workforce to other similarly positioned companies.

> because what it really is is slowing down hiring processes and second guessing people's judgments

1. So what?

2. People's judgement should be second guessed if they're racist.

3. One of the easiest ways to reduce discrimination in hiring is to replace names on resumes with numbers before letting hiring managers access them. Which barely slows down anything and eliminates a variable that isn't relevant to the candidates qualifications.

How?

>the clearest evidence we have of anyone doing that at scale in modern times is DEI programs in college

Congratulations you found the one place where a black person might have an advantage. Meanwhile virtually every other aspect of American society disadvantages black people and the supreme court ruled against those colleges.

http://www.racialdisadvantages.com

College admissions and the job market are apples and oranges. It isn't actually safe to assume the same thing must be happening in both. It isn't. There's an unofficial affirmative action favoring white people across much of the job market.

That isn't the premise. The premise is that discriminating is morally wrong.

Also when did we change the subject to college admissions?

I mean there is a tendency for people in the middle class to go all NIMBY and not want additional housing to be built which drives up the cost of housing. It's good that there's a middle class but there are also things that people in the middle class do that aren't good. Like drive f350s on their 40-minute commute to the office.

There's no such requirement to hire proportional amounts of every ethnicity. There are requirements not to discriminate. Which isn't the same thing.

When companies do make an effort to give everyone a fair shot there's a tendency for mediocre white men to lose out to more qualified minorities. The companies get better employees and more diverse perspectives.

Then those white men feel spurned. They imagine they weren't hired because they're white. It's an easier pill to swallow and then the next thing you know DEI is the great Satan of low IQ white men.

Billionares shouldn't exist. We shouldn't just tax them for the revenue. We should tax them to limit the undemocratic power that comes with excessive wealth.

Not when AI is directly resulting in increased greenhouse gas pollution. It's all of the above. Any source of greenhouse gas pollution is bad. Cars, planes, ships, AI data centers running on fossil fuel energy. It's all bad.

The earth is hotter than it's been in 125,000 years. Warming at a rate dozens of times faster than the fastest periods of natural warming. The oceans are 25% more acidic. The worlds ice sheets and glaciers are losing 1 trillion tons of mass per year.

Did Al Gore make a stupid prediction about arctic sea ice loss? Yes. Do you know who criticized him at the time? Climate scientists. Did you know Al Gore isn't a fucking scientist?

I fucking hate Al Gore. You know why? Because he made himself the face of the climate crisis and now every partisan fuck on the right can't see past that. It's overwhelming their rationality.

West Virginia has much lower rates of homelessness and public drug use compared to liberal states despite having higher rates of drug addiction. Because housing is much more affordable.

Homelessness rates increase and decrease in direct proportion to the cost of housing as a proportion of median income. When housing costs increase more and more people become homeless and the ones that end up on the street tends to be those already living at the margins so you see more drug addicts and mentally ill people on the street and assume it's the cause.

Its well understood that being homeless makes it much harder to provide treatment and services. Sweeps of encampments make it even harder as their belongings tend to be thrown out.

So we have places with lots of services, but extremely expensive housing or places with affordable housing, but no poor public services.

Imagine if people could have housing and services how much better it would be. Maybe we wouldn't even have to strip people of their freedoms to make improvements. Wouldn't that be preferable? Isn't it worth trying?

There are other options that are more effective than either of the things you mentioned, but people's feelings get in the way.

Pretty sure they were responding to this: "More study is needed to keep this ball in the air."

Implying the goal is to keep research money flowing in as opposed to learning things about the world. Which is overly cynical bs.

I'm really looking forward to this attitude going out of style. The federal government is abandoning basic research. You won. Fucking move on.

So little political will is needed at this point as the economics now favor renewables. Unfortunately most of the political will seems to be leaning towards protecting the more expensive fossil fuel sources of energy.

It's a lesson the US won't be able to learn until it has administration capable of learning.

They're interested in protecting the profits of industries that line their pockets. It's the most corrupt administration in US history and it isn't even close. Theres some far right ideology mixed in. Particularly from Stephen Miller, but mostly it's grift and graft

I don't remember any violent backlash to the Marshal plan.

I love Idiocracy, but I have come to sympathize with criticism that it's a bit pro-eugenics.

This is awesome. I'd love to see the original escher image scroll through there.

I can't imagine trans women who avoided male puberty are statistically any better athletes than cis women. A total ban seems discriminatory to me.

Tarrifs mostly

Kamala Harris started out with a surge of popularity. Talking about corporate price gouging and selecting Tim Walz as her running mate who had clear populist messaging.

Then the strategists who think like you got in her ear. Told her to stop attacking corporations to protect donations. Had her campaign with Cheney and talk about shooting home invaders. Then of course she refused to take a strong stand on the genocide in Gaza.

Her momentum faded and she lost. In the aftermath some braindead analysts tried to blame words like Latinx and transgender rights.

She didn't campaign on that shit. She campaigned as Republican lite and it fucked her.

The fascists aren't going to rewards you with good environmental policy just because you throw trans people under the bus. They'll just demand another sacrifice. Meanwhile gender affirming surgery on minors is so fleetingly rare that it basically only exists in right wing propaganda and here you are repeating it like it's a valid concern.

Upon closer inspection it seems it's more a result of decreasing accident rates than increasing homicide rates although that is a factor lately.

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-police-officers-die-i...

It's also interesting to note that while violent crime and homicide in the United States have been declining for many years interpersonal violence has overtaken accidents as the leading cause of police on the job deaths.

It seems unlikely the cause of this is more violence among Americans. Since the overall rate is going down. It seems like changes in policing and attitudes and tactics have resulted in more officer deaths from interpersonal violence. Perhaps more de-escalation would save more police officers lives.

Policing isn't in the top ten most dangerous jobs. It's usually listed around the 15-25th most dangerous job in the US. Many Americans including myself are regularly in more danger.

Also around 40% of police deaths are accidents.

TDS is an apt description for anyone supporting this senile, psychopath.