Bush Tells Blacks, 'I'm Here to Ask for Your Vote'

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Lookout it isnt a case of rights. In law black and white are equal.....but in reality the opportunities are fewerr for black than white and the wages are lower. Unless you are suggesting that the reason black people are so disproportionately living bneath the poverty line and that whites are disproportionately likely to succeed in business and academia is due to black people just being less capable or ambitious.

actually i don't feel they are less capable or ambitious, but those who support affirmative action obviously do.

again - what opportunities do blacks not have access to?

the difference in thought here is pretty obvious - you think that equality means we all have similar job success, income, educational achievements, etc. i say that those are results dependent on the individuals level of dedication - something that cannot be quantitatively measured. in my view equality means having the same ACCESS to opportunities schools, jobs, etc... what you do with it and how you perform and the decisions you make in regards to these opportunities all fall on the individual, not society.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by lookout123

actually i don't feel they are less capable or ambitious, but those who support affirmative action obviously do.

No, those who support affirmative action feel that there are still many people in positions of power who feel that way, who have to be given a nudge to overcome their prejudices.

[jaguar]

To ignore it is to accept it as an inevitable part of life rather than a problem which can be solved. To ignore it is to maintain the status quo. It is in the interests of those in power to maintain the status quo as it benefits their demographic.

Bias is part of humanity, you're never going to eliminate it. If the majority of executives were black women I'll put $50 that says they would elect a disproportionate number of blacks and women to similar posts, why? Not because they are racism or sexist but becuase they are more likely to be close friends and associates of blacks and women. Bruce's westinghouse example goes in this direction, but that does sound like straight out racism that jobs for the boys.

disproportionately likely to succeed in business and academia is due to black people just being less capable or ambitious.

How about we look at the socioeconomics of that a little further. Poverty breeds poverty, outside the more racist areas of the US I'm willing to be a white guy from an impoverished background who goes though a shitty school system in an inner city slum is just as likely to be a failure as a black guy who does the same. Visa versa for middle class. The fact that more blacks are below the poverty is a social artifact of another era, there isn't too much you can do about it that doesn't apply to all races.

Dana 200 years ago blacks were slaves, I don't think they are today, wage equality isn't there yet but it isn't quite that bad.

[jaguar]

again - what opportunities do blacks not have access to?

Or to word it slightly differently, what do blacks not have access to that all whites have access to. If my parents were alumini of an Ivy League uni I'd have an easier path in.

[lookout123]

you know that is a good point. i just assumed we were all working from the same basis, but we obviously aren't.

dana and many like here don't see that even though i (and many others) scored high enough to meet their standards it would be a cold day in hell before i ever got into an ivy league school. that isn't racist, classist, or any other ist. life is about meeting people and networking. my dad got his job in the factory 30-odd years ago when they weren't hiring because he played poker with one of the HR guys. each of my successive jobs i have worked with or for someone that i sold something to in my last career. people remember those that they have had a positive experience with and move them to the top of the list. as long as the person hired is qualified, there is nothing wrong with that.

[jaguar]

For the record I'll add my own examples - though family name and resulting contacts I've had access to information that has made me a lot of money and opened many doors though no action or inaction of my own. I understand this and do my best to help out others who may not have the same luck (it is luck) but I certainly don't apologise for it.

[wolf]

[double]Jag ... for the purpose of any discussion of race or racism, as a white male you start with a lack of credibility from the standpoint of those whose job/avocation/life mission it is to find, point out, and punish racism.[/standard]

See, that's what I have a problem with. And no amount of arguing is going to change the viewpoint of those whose firm belief (despite evidence pro or con) it is that thus and such does or does not exist. It's pretty much the same stalement you come to in existence of god(s) discussions.

Racism is the evangelism of color.

[Undertoad]

I thought this was important so I went to the US Census Bureau table on mean income over time against race to get mean incomes for whites and blacks from 1948-2001 (in fixed 2001 dollars). Then I created a graph of it.



Conclusion: there is still a very large gap in income. However, percentage-wise, blacks ARE catching up. White income was about 100% higher than black income in 1948 and now is about 30% higher.

I also learned, in browsing around the tables at the census bureau, that in 2001 white women and black women's mean income was about the SAME. !!!

[Troubleshooter]

Rather illuminating.

Thanks for the extra effort. Graphs can be a bitch.

[Happy Monkey]

(Fixed 2001 dollars means adjusted for inflation, right?)

Wierd. An almost fixed difference of $7500 the whole way down. I wonder what accounts for something that constant.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

(Fixed 2001 dollars means adjusted for inflation, right?)

Wierd. An almost fixed difference of $7500 the whole way down. I wonder what accounts for something that constant.

Correlation can be hard to find sometimes. The trick is to avoid attribution, or spurious correlation, under those conditions.

And I agree, weird.

[Beestie]

Those lines just seem too similar to me. Every wave and crest. I can't bring myselft to believe that blacks were doing that well relative to whites pre 1950. The $7,500 gap today seems believable but in 1950? That's almost laughable. Not questioning UT's work but the data itself.

[Happy Monkey]

You don't think they were making half salary on average, pre 1950? There were (and still are) a lot of poor whites to balance out the rich elites, and the number is mean salary, not average, so the robber barrons don't throw the number off too much.

[lookout123]

thanks for that effort UT. good job.

[Undertoad]

It is adjusted for inflation, so the real numbers in 1950 were more like $2000 vs $1000.