Are Asian Americans “White Adjacent”?

#153
#153
85SugarVol said:
Not talking about big business. That’s just DEI, and all for show.

Universities using race to select admission. The kind of Affirmative Action that generated most of the controversy.
Click to expand...

I do find it problematic for public universities to make decisions based off skin color, but the result of getting more minorities into higher education is not really problematic to me, if that makes sense.

As a matter of practicality, I used to be vehemently opposed to AA because my thoughts were "I want the most qualified student to be my surgeon/lawyer/CPA" but then I saw a pretty compelling case made that the differences in HS qualifications for minority entrants are not actually seen in the job world. With that in mind, opposing AA seems like an incredibly low priority fight.
 
#154
#154
85SugarVol said:
Then let’s back up.

Where do you see the break and take issue?
Click to expand...

I don't really want to walk through anymore of this. I think it's safe to say it's very difficult to identify anybody who is saying that Asians are not "'real' minorities or POC's". In all my searching and my asking, we found one school district categorizing results as non-POC.
 
#155
#155
n_huffhines said:
I do find it problematic for public universities to make decisions based off skin color, but the result of getting more minorities into higher education is not really problematic to me, if that makes sense.

As a matter of practicality, I used to be vehemently opposed to AA because my thoughts were "I want the most qualified student to be my surgeon/lawyer/CPA" but then I saw a pretty compelling case made that the differences in HS qualifications for minority entrants are not actually seen in the job world. With that in mind, opposing AA seems like an incredibly low priority fight.
Click to expand...

I’d be curious to see that data
 
#157
#157
n_huffhines said:
I do find it problematic for public universities to make decisions based off skin color, but the result of getting more minorities into higher education is not really problematic to me, if that makes sense.

As a matter of practicality, I used to be vehemently opposed to AA because my thoughts were "I want the most qualified student to be my surgeon/lawyer/CPA" but then I saw a pretty compelling case made that the differences in HS qualifications for minority entrants are not actually seen in the job world. With that in mind, opposing AA seems like an incredibly low priority fight.
Click to expand...
I understand. I don’t agree, but I do understand your position.
 
#159
#159
n_huffhines said:
Legal immigrants and their children are very good at conforming to the system (which is what seems to be meant by white adjacency) and being productive. I've seen data that shows they outperform native-born Americans, at large. This is not unique at all to Asian Americans.
Click to expand...

So these minority immigrants come to a system (which is generally described by SJW types as "by and for" white people, and thus inherently biased against non-white people), but the more these immigrants conform to said system, the more successful they are? And that's supposed to be evidence that the system is somehow racist or biased against minorities??? I don't understand that logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, NCFisher, volinbham and 2 others
#161
#161
VolStrom said:
Give me an electric bike and a motor boat and I'll take any of you guys on in a triathlon.
Click to expand...
Motorboat....

motorboating-gif-4.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and VolStrom
#162
#162
n_huffhines said:
I don't really want to walk through anymore of this. I think it's safe to say it's very difficult to identify anybody who is saying that Asians are not "'real' minorities or POC's". In all my searching and my asking, we found one school district categorizing results as non-POC.
Click to expand...
Ok.

Do you personally believe Asian Americans, as a group, are viewed the same as black, latin, and native populations (in terms of being minority)?
 
#163
#163
SamRebel35 said:
So these minority immigrants come to a system (which is generally described by SJW types as "by and for" white people, and thus inherently biased against non-white people), but the more these immigrants conform to said system, the more successful they are? And that's supposed to be evidence that the system is somehow racist or biased against minorities??? I don't understand that logic.
Click to expand...

Yep, because there is no logic to it. That very response of his accepts defeat because it proves the issue is not race but culture.
 
#164
#164
85SugarVol said:
Ok.

Do you personally believe Asian Americans, as a group, are viewed the same as black, latin, and native populations (in terms of being minority)?
Click to expand...

I don't even think latins and blacks are looked at the same, so I can't say yes to your question.
 
#167
#167
EasternVol said:
There's wanting the most competent staff possible for one thing.
Click to expand...

Hiring over-qualified people is not a great strategy. I'll take someone who is competent enough and pleased to have the job over somebody who is much more competent but also more likely to leave soon or be a dissatisfied bad apple.

Also, we're just judging who people are on paper and in an interview. Anybody who makes a lot of hires knows there is a big element of luck, so introducing diversity measures to the process might not even be noticed in the results.
 
#168
#168
n_huffhines said:
Hiring over-qualified people is not a great strategy. I'll take someone who is competent enough and pleased to have the job over somebody who is much more competent but also more likely to leave soon or be a dissatisfied bad apple.

Also, we're just judging who people are on paper and in an interview. Anybody who makes a lot of hires knows there is a big element of luck, so introducing diversity measures to the process might not even be noticed in the results.
Click to expand...
If you think that hiring someone involves a big element of luck, you don't know crap about hiring people.
 
#170
#170
VolStrom said:
If you think that hiring someone involves a big element of luck, you don't know crap about hiring people.
Click to expand...

Haha, sure, man.

Everywhere I've worked (and done hiring), they hired mostly people who were competent enough, and by that measure, it's not luck....but they hired pains in the ass. They hired people who hurt the culture. They hired people who didn't work hard. They hired people who were HR problems. They hired people who were gone in a year. Etc. I'm sure everybody you've hired was a Waylen Smithers, tho.
 
#171
#171
n_huffhines said:
Hiring over-qualified people is not a great strategy. I'll take someone who is competent enough and pleased to have the job over somebody who is much more competent but also more likely to leave soon or be a dissatisfied bad apple.

Also, we're just judging who people are on paper and in an interview. Anybody who makes a lot of hires knows there is a big element of luck, so introducing diversity measures to the process might not even be noticed in the results.
Click to expand...
I think one of the areas where seeking out Diversity can actually help us in Product Development- you really do want all views and perspectives in the room to engineer the best products.

Most of the time it’s just window dressing though.
 
#173
#173
85SugarVol said:
I think one of the areas where seeking out Diversity can actually help us in Product Development- you really do want all views and perspectives in the room to engineer the best products.

Most of the time it’s just window dressing though.
Click to expand...

What was that streaming service that was only designed for phone consumption? They poured like $1b of funding into that thing and it was dead in weeks. A bunch of white-haired businessmen making crazy decisions based on the understanding that "young people love their phones"
 
#174
#174
n_huffhines said:
Hiring over-qualified people is not a great strategy. I'll take someone who is competent enough and pleased to have the job over somebody who is much more competent but also more likely to leave soon or be a dissatisfied bad apple.

Also, we're just judging who people are on paper and in an interview. Anybody who makes a lot of hires knows there is a big element of luck, so introducing diversity measures to the process might not even be noticed in the results.
Click to expand...

There is such a thing as overly qualified, but that is easy to spot in most cases. What we are talking about can be summed up in this great example: Programmer A has been on the cutting edge of developing custom automated software systems for over 20 years working solo with great success. He is White. Programmer B has 4 years of experience in a team that modifies existing code from time to time, but generally works more closely with the startup process of the equipment. He is black. Why would I hire programmer B? I know from experience that I can likely get more out of programmer A in 6 months than I could get out of programmer B in 2 years.
 
#175
#175
n_huffhines said:
Haha, sure, man.

Everywhere I've worked (and done hiring), they hired mostly people who were competent enough, and by that measure, it's not luck....but they hired pains in the ass. They hired people who hurt the culture. They hired people who didn't work hard. They hired people who were HR problems. They hired people who were gone in a year. Etc. I'm sure everybody you've hired was a Waylen Smithers, tho.
Click to expand...
Every person that I've seen hired that was a bust was a diversity hire that checked the boxes. Everyone that was a success was interviewed and vetted by the people that know the job and know how to ferret out BS people that put crap on their resume. I've interviewed a lot of people that put things on their resume that when they get questioned about it stumble to give a coherent answer. It's not a crap shoot, it's asking the right questions.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top