Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

acesfull86 said:
Then you’re a fool, I don’t know what else to tell you. You claim to be a data analyst, yet you’re saying you’d willingly ignore more predictive variables in favor of less predictive variables all to satisfy your prejudices.
Click to expand...
Thats because you don't believe race is a predicative variable. I can't help you with that blindspot. You don't think IQ is a real thing. I can't help you with that blindspot.

And I don't 'claim' to be anything. I am what I say I am and if you looked me up you would see that for yourself.
 
thethe said:
Thats because you don't believe race is a predicative variable. I can't help you with that blindspot. You don't think IQ is a real thing. I can't help you with that blindspot.

And I don't 'claim' to be anything. I am what I say I am and if you looked me up you would see that for yourself.
Click to expand...
You’re insisting race is THE predictive variable, without evidence, as per your usual.

The average man makes more money than the average woman. If someone asked me “who makes more money between these two people” and only told me one was a man and the other was a woman, and gave me no other information, I would guess the man on that basis.

If I was then told the woman is a doctor and the man drives a cab, my answer would change because I was given much better predictive information. Genital shape is no longer bringing valuable insight to the question. I wouldn’t disregard better, more useful information on the basis of some prejudice.
 
acesfull86 said:
You’re insisting race is THE predictive variable, without evidence, as per your usual.

The average man makes more money than the average woman. If someone asked me “who makes more money between these two people” and only told me one was a man and the other was a woman, and gave me no other information, I would guess the man on that basis.

If I was then told the woman is a doctor and the man drives a cab, my answer would change because I was given much better predictive information. Genital shape is no longer bringing valuable insight to the question. I wouldn’t disregard better, more useful information on the basis of some prejudice.
Click to expand...
I would never rent to an individual woman because they make awful decisions with their money. Just like black men.
 
thethe said:
I'd absolutely take a white guy with lesser income / similar credit / lack of references because regardless of whether or not you want ot admit it the probability I get screwed with the black guy is much higher. Its far more likely that white guy is going to make better decisions with his money.

But hey - You keep thinking this is imagined and we don't have incredible amounts of evidence of bad decision making.
Click to expand...
You should go with the immigrant. Less likely to be a criminal. More likely to be a baller. Lesson learned. Sorry for your loss.
 
acesfull86 said:
You’re insisting race is THE predictive variable, without evidence, as per your usual.

The average man makes more money than the average woman. If someone asked me “who makes more money between these two people” and only told me one was a man and the other was a woman, and gave me no other information, I would guess the man on that basis.

If I was then told the woman is a doctor and the man drives a cab, my answer would change because I was given much better predictive information. Genital shape is no longer bringing valuable insight to the question. I wouldn’t disregard better, more useful information on the basis of some prejudice.
Click to expand...
A white guy and a black guy show up to run track. The coach can make assumptions. Or he can use his stopwatch.
 
nsacpi said:
You should go with the immigrant. Less likely to be a criminal. More likely to be a baller. Lesson learned. Sorry for your loss.
Click to expand...
I’d rent to an Indian family every single time over a black family. Have much better priorities. Hispanics are incredibly hard workers too.
 
sturg33 said:
Car insurance companies charge young male drivers more than young female drivers due to known risk they are taking to insure them. I consider that rightful prejudice against men. Do you not?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don’t like it.

It’s worth noting that by the time men and women get to age 25-30 ish, the difference in their car insurance premiums become negligible, because now the insurance companies have better data on which to accurately price individuals, rather than using blanket assumptions.

In thethe’s world, the driving record of individuals, which is obviously more predictive of their risk than the shape of their genitalia, would be disregarded.
 
acesfull86 said:
Yeah, I don’t like it.

It’s worth noting that by the time men and women get to age 25-30 ish, the difference in their car insurance premiums become negligible, because now the insurance companies have better data on which to accurately price individuals, rather than using blanket assumptions.

In thethe’s world, the driving record of individuals, which is obviously more predictive of their risk than the shape of their genitalia, would be disregarded.
Click to expand...
That’s because the insurance companies aren’t trying to get it right every single time. This is what you’re missing.
 
sturg33 said:
You said we have more work to do as a society? What is that work? Bc from where I sit, society has bent over backwards to accommodate the black population, only to receive disastrous results. Hell, until just yesterday they had special disctrict lines drawn just for them to have outsized political power. We can't have voting IDs in our elections because apparently - per the Democratic Party - the black population is too stupid to obtain them. The criminal justice system goes out of its way to be lenient on black offenders, citing nonsense about tougher upbringings - allowing them to be violent again creating more victims. And entire racist law was put into place incentivizing companies to give more jobs to black Americans. They overwhelmingly consume our welfare benefits with minimal improvement in their own lives. City by city offers special programs, benefits, and freebies to black people than they do white people. In the meanwhile - fatherless children have exploded since the 70's and welfare usage has well. They are having worse outcomes than before the civil rights movement.

So I ask again - what additional work must we do as society? Even more blatant systemic racism?
Click to expand...

I’m not asking you, Sturg, to solve racism or even to do anything. I’m stating that if we are still debating whether it’s safer to rent to a black doctor or a white cab driver, we haven’t exactly reached the mountain top. Even if the barriers aren’t due to the laws in our country, they exist, or this entire discussion wouldn’t make any sense. I don’t think the answer is to simply give black people more than white people, but I also don’t think the answer is to just accept an entire population is inherently discriminated against forever.
sturg33 said:
Nonsense. The future black child can get a home right next to thethe. Or even better, get their free section 8 housing that the productive citizens generously give them. The kid denied out of Harvard is likely being denied a better career - one he loses out to a less qualified person instead. And worse -it's not the fault of one"racist" recruiter... it's by design. It's systemic. It's intentional to punish one person based on their race in favor of a different.
Click to expand...
Not if the future child’s family can’t get into the home next to thethe because that landlord also has the same prejudices. Maybe that black child can’t get into a good school district or get out of a violent neighborhood. Hell, maybe the future black child dies as a result. Surely that’s worse than the future white child having to slum it up at a slightly less prestigious school. This is of course hyperbolic, but it sure seems like you’re just excusing one form of prejudice because it’s an informal system, not a formal one.
 
mqt said:
I’m not asking you, Sturg, to solve racism or even to do anything. I’m stating that if we are still debating whether it’s safer to rent to a black doctor or a white cab driver, we haven’t exactly reached the mountain top. Even if the barriers aren’t due to the laws in our country, they exist, or this entire discussion wouldn’t make any sense. I don’t think the answer is to simply give black people more than white people, but I also don’t think the answer is to just accept an entire population is inherently discriminated against forever.

Not if the future child’s family can’t get into the home next to thethe because that landlord also has the same prejudices. Maybe that black child can’t get into a good school district or get out of a violent neighborhood. Hell, maybe the future black child dies as a result. Surely that’s worse than the future white child having to slum it up at a slightly less prestigious school. This is of course hyperbolic, but it sure seems like you’re just excusing one form of prejudice because it’s an informal system, not a formal one.
Click to expand...
That future black child is likely to die at the hands of another black person.
 
thethe said:
I’d rent to an Indian family every single time over a black family. Have much better priorities. Hispanics are incredibly hard workers too.
Click to expand...
I mean, unless one of them stiffs you and then it’s time for the freeloading immigrants with their low sows to all go back to their countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top