As far as the racism goes...here you go.
Quote from pspr:
Maybe they should have put more questions about street drugs, gangs and breaking & entering on the test.
To be fair, I wasn't even looking for it, just reading through the entire thread.
City Forced To Lower Police Testing Standards Because Not Enough Blacks Passed
- Thread starter rc8222
- Start date
As far as the racism goes...here you go.
To be fair, I wasn't even looking for it, just reading through the entire thread.
Nice strawman, but this conversation had nothing to do with Obama or Bush. Obfuscation fail.
My comment was about your accusation of "racism". How is the notion that anti white discrimination policies which favor nonwhites have at some point benefited a nonwhite person "racist"? That WAS your claim, right?
My comment was about your accusation of "racism". How is the notion that anti white discrimination policies which favor nonwhites have at some point benefited a nonwhite person "racist"? That WAS your claim, right?
As you wish:
'If youâre born poor and white, thereâs a 31 percent chance you will be poor as an adult. Not great, for sure. A third of all poor white children end up being poor white adults, while the other two thirds seem to escape.
And for black children? Itâs the reverse. Over two-thirds of black children â 69 percent â are born poor and end up being poor adults.
Black children, the study shows, are 2.5 times more likely than white children to ever be poor."
http://trueslant.com/megancottrell/...d-of-opportunity-but-only-for-white-children/
There are many more. If you'd like them I can try to find them. However, the time I'm willing to spend digging up info on the internet for your benefit is limited.
'If youâre born poor and white, thereâs a 31 percent chance you will be poor as an adult. Not great, for sure. A third of all poor white children end up being poor white adults, while the other two thirds seem to escape.
And for black children? Itâs the reverse. Over two-thirds of black children â 69 percent â are born poor and end up being poor adults.
Black children, the study shows, are 2.5 times more likely than white children to ever be poor."
http://trueslant.com/megancottrell/...d-of-opportunity-but-only-for-white-children/
There are many more. If you'd like them I can try to find them. However, the time I'm willing to spend digging up info on the internet for your benefit is limited.
Strawman....nice one. Why don't you go back and read who and what I was replying to and then read the explanation that I gave to you about my response. What conversation? We aren't having one.
Check the records idiot. I never said anything in regard to the policies of the Dayton Police Dept. You're obviously trying to start some of argument by somehow reading an imaginary claim that I somehow posted? Where is it? I'd like to read where I claimed ANY of what you said...And after you post that link smart guy, post the links I requested to my other replies. Beyond either one of those, you'll be talking to yourself here.
For the record, I think its terrible that the police dept would even consider lowering their tests for minorities of any kind. I agree with ReardenM and I think that the applicants should simply study harder. Most patrolmen probably aren't all that brilliant anyway. Are you a policeman?
I guess you did post a link, I'll check it out after I finish preparing for my trading day tomorrow.
Ok I couldn't wait until I finished looking over my charts to check out your post -- so I read your post.....you really are an idiot. Seriously. You're an idiot. Stop embarrassing yourself here. It is a public forum.
You said:
I said:
And then you decide to post a link to that? With those statistics? Are you special? Confused? Or not smart enough to pass that Dayton test either? My initial reply to Ricter was a conversation about intelligence!! ANYONE could see that.
I'm going to assume that you don't trade profitably...it looks like you look at things and see what YOU WANT TO SEE instead of what's actually there. Its the 2nd time you've done this in less than 4 posts. You're on a roll...keep it up.
Yes, we are having a conversation. Otherwise you wouldn't be responding to my posts. This entire thread is a conversation in which we are both participating.
Why do you feel the need to continually use ad hominem attacks? What's the matter? Do you not have a factual premise, so ad hom is all you're left with?
Check the records? LOL!! I asked you what was "racist". You responded with a quote from someone which suggested that Affirmative Action policies, which are anti white discrimination policies, may have had something to do with Obama academic and professional success. That was your example of "racism" when I asked for one. Check the records
Why do you feel the need to continually use ad hominem attacks? What's the matter? Do you not have a factual premise, so ad hom is all you're left with?
Check the records? LOL!! I asked you what was "racist". You responded with a quote from someone which suggested that Affirmative Action policies, which are anti white discrimination policies, may have had something to do with Obama academic and professional success. That was your example of "racism" when I asked for one. Check the records
Gotcha games??? phenomena you really need to review my post before responding. I simply asked for your opinion on how to deal with a problem that you outlined. Then I responded as to what I thought about the original subject of this thread, affirmative action and the Dayton Police Department. Then finally I asked a very direct question to someone else who expressed similar views to your own. My hope was that he would also provide his version of solutions to these problems. Would his solutions be things that I would agree with? Probably not, but that does not mean that they are not worth reading. Now I am wondering why asking you to express your own opinions disturbs you so much. I can somewhat understand why people calling you names such as "rascist" would bother you...but why is having someone who disagrees with you, question you further and get your arguments in your own words, trouble you so much? Since your data is so exact and your facts so undisputable, you should not even be worried by "gotcha games". You said you have facts and not beliefs, so is asking where those facts lead you really so bad?
Personally if I believed that a group was genetically pre-programed to attack me, I too would be worried. I would want them kept as far away from me as possible. Now I believe that people make decisions to attack others based on their values and beliefs and not their genetics, but that is just me.
When I was at college a visiting professor/speaker made a 2 hour presentation on how white people were genetically racist. He literally had 2 hours of examples of how whites have tried to conqueror, destroy or oppress other races. He had every statistic imaginable, but in the end his conclusions were an absolute joke. It was very clear to me, at least that all races are capable of racism and that it was not genetics, but individual choices.
Personally if I believed that a group was genetically pre-programed to attack me, I too would be worried. I would want them kept as far away from me as possible. Now I believe that people make decisions to attack others based on their values and beliefs and not their genetics, but that is just me.
When I was at college a visiting professor/speaker made a 2 hour presentation on how white people were genetically racist. He literally had 2 hours of examples of how whites have tried to conqueror, destroy or oppress other races. He had every statistic imaginable, but in the end his conclusions were an absolute joke. It was very clear to me, at least that all races are capable of racism and that it was not genetics, but individual choices.
More ad hominem. I guess when the facts aren't on your side, all you have left are personal attacks... LOL!!! Thankfully I'm not in that predicament.
What I linked to was SAT scores which were controlled for economic status, then compared by race. SAT scores are generally taken to be indicative of cognitive ability. It was controlled for the conditions which you specified. How is that not relevant to the premise you put forth? It was you who was referencing education, school books, etc.
What I linked to was SAT scores which were controlled for economic status, then compared by race. SAT scores are generally taken to be indicative of cognitive ability. It was controlled for the conditions which you specified. How is that not relevant to the premise you put forth? It was you who was referencing education, school books, etc.