I call you a racist because you only say that in relation to blacks being hired. You dishonestly chose to face the reason why DEI was necessary. You also chose to ignore that DEI doesn't mean unqualified people are being hired. Your entire argument is racist.
You would be hard-pressed to find a doctor in this country that isn't a foreigner.
Quote me saying anything like that. I know you won't, because I haven't.
Once again I say, "quote me". I have NEVER, and I repeat, NEVER said that white people either are or are not hired because of their skin color. In fact, I have gone out of my way to say that no one should be preferred for a job because of their skin color. You call that racist.
I was very clear on the subject. I said the racial makeup of a construction crew or the skin color of a doctor was irrelevant as long as they were competent. You said that is racist. As we can see from this story, incompetence doesn't know skin color, and IF that doctor got his job over better qualified minority doctors, there's a case to be made against the hospital. It's up to you now to prove that happened.
Your belief that people of color are hired because of color, not qualifications is racist. DEI and Affirmative Action were implemented so that QUALIFIED people of color would be considered for jobs they were excluded from because of race.
Yes, you were very clear that you only mentioned this in reference to policies that were created to provide qualified people of color opportunities to get jobs they wee excluded from. I have nothing to prove to you because your opposition to the policies is based on racist assumptions. You can't conceive any situation where someone white is hired because of their race, even though I'm sure you've seen it done, but you think that blacks get hired only because of race.
I also condemn unofficial policies that companies use to deny qualified minorities access to jobs. I am glad you mentioned "qualified". That saves a lot of questions, except this one: Why is it racist for me to hold everyone to the same quality standards but not for you to do so?
You know full well that anyone receiving official assistance such as lowered expectations is going to have their competence questioned and they carry a burden of proof that others do not. If I know, for example, that somebody got an engineering degree more because their daddy donated a scoreboard for the football field than because they mastered the necessary math and science to do the job, it stands to reason that I would question their competence and not want them designing a bridge I have to cross every day commuting to work. If I know a white guy cheated his way into getting a medical license but does not know the difference between a spleen and a liver, it stands to reason that I do not want him operating on me. Likewise, if I know someone got a job more because of their skin color than because of their qualifications, it stands to reason that I would question their competence, and yes, that applies to all skin colors. This is why I oppose lowering standards for some to "improve outcomes". It doesn't make things even, it lowers quality. You still haven't told me, BTW, why it's racist to hold everyone to the same standards. I've posed that to you multiple times and you've ignored it every time.
Okay, there's where you stomp off into la-la land, because you don't have a clue what I think. You obviously don't, because you continue to accuse me of thinking things that I explicitly tell you I do not. That is your downfall and is why you have yet to convince me I'm a racist.
What we have already done, which is to make official racial exclusion illegal. Look, you can't force people to change their attitudes and ranting at them CERTAINLY doesn't do anything more than make them dig their heels in harder. What we do is make it illegal to discriminate in hiring and normalize the appearance in minorities in every situation, which is what we are doing. Why do you think Tiger Woods dominated golf and Eminem dominated rap music? Not because standards were lowered for them, but because minority participation was normalized. It would no more be right for the rap music industry to reject Eminem on racial grounds than it would be for the PGA to reject Tiger on the same grounds.
Is racism justified to fight racism? That is the question. I should also ask you why professional sports are approaching monoracial status. Should there not be DEI for short white players that can't run and jump or should sports remain a meritocracy? I notice that you never complain about extremely high-paying athletic positions going almost exclusively to black players. You say it's racist for someone to only comment on certain aspects of society, I invite you to look in the mirror. I applaud professional sports for becoming a meritocracy, BTW. There's no need for a Jackie Robinson anymore.
Probably not. What we will likely see is more robotic surgery, where the surgeon doesn't have to rely on steady hands to do very fine, small incisions and sutures. He'll be able to let go of the tools and know they will stay precisely where he left them. Also more likely will be remote surgery, where a surgeon can do multiple surgeries all around the country from his base hospital and we won't have to worry as much about shortages of highly skilled doctors. Local staff will take care of sedating the patient, prepping them and getting the robot set up. The surgeon could do a surgery in Topeka, take a break, then do another one in Omaha. A specialist could become very skilled in one type of surgery, improving outcomes.
I should never have to state this again. I do not believe that people of color are hired for skin color, not qualifications, because I see qualified minorities everywhere. I do, however, believe that when skin color becomes more of a determinant than qualifications, quality suffers, and that applies across the board. I've said this multiple times, and it appears that you're not getting it because you keep coming back with the same nonsense. Stop it.
And what have I said about DEI? I won't repeat it because I know you've seen it, but you also won't be allowed to project what somebody else says about it onto me.
Yes, it takes a large mass a lot of time and energy to change course. In this case you have millions of people whose ancestors held toxic attitudes, and it takes generations to change those attitudes. We are seeing great progress in this country. What did you see on TV in the 60's? White families. Black cops? No. Black judges? No. The only black families were ghetto caricatures. No more. Did you see interracial couples in public? Not very often, and when you did, they were the targets of whispers and pointing. No more.
It takes time to correct that, and we have taken steps already to rectify that discrepancy. It is, for example, illegal to discriminate on the basis of skin color in hiring. We can't force attitudes to change, however, and there are still those who, for their own reasons, want to discriminate, but they're being pushed to the sidelines. It would seem that you would prefer they be mainstream, as you refuse to allow white America to marginalize them.
That's the ultimate goal, sure. What are you demanding, 200 years of black favoritism, one great wrong to address another great wrong, or do we tip the scales for a generation or two until opportunity is equalized and it's no longer sensational to see a black <fill in the blank>?
You don't end it, but you change attitudes with it. Case in point, seatbelts used to be totally voluntary and people didn't use them. Then they became mandatory, and now it's rare to see someone driving without one. Smoking used to be everywhere to the point you couldn't escape it, even in hospitals. Then it became illegal to smoke except in designated areas, and attitudes changed. You don't ever see anyone on TV smoking as a normal part of their day anymore. Attitudes change over time and the law can effect those attitudes. You will never totally get rid of black or white racism, especially if you keep acting like a black person in America literally is a slave.
Ah, you are making progress. At least now you are saying that I "seem to want" instead of automatically thinking you know what I want. No, you can't address past wrongs on the basis of skin color without noting skin color. What you do is make discriminating on the basis of skin color in hiring illegal and normalize the appearance of minorities in society.
That'll be awesome. What I do foresee, however, will be something similar to airline pilots. Today's planes can literally take off, fly a course, and land all by themselves, but we will always have humans in the cockpit. AI can do a lot, but it will take a long time before human patients will be willing to let a machine operate on them all by itself.
IM2's entire shtick is to turn every issue down racist avenue Hadit......we could be talking about the weather ,and he'd be off his leash yet again....
~S~
im2 is a phony and a liar....IM2's entire shtick is to turn every issue down racist avenue Hadit......we could be talking about the weather ,and he'd be off his leash yet again....
