Apple's U.S. Workforce Continues to Diversify Per Latest Federal Data

[darcyf]

Or we could equally say that without white men there would be hundreds of rampant diseases that were (historically) cured by white scientists, or that without white people there would be even more diseases, or that without white people the economy of the world would be much lower and poverty much higher (because, historically, the economy of the world grew through industrialization, something that white people made).

See, anyone can speculate. So why isn't your post disgusting? The person you quoted used historical facts. You used speculation that cannot be proven AT ALL, but is also illogical if one considers historical fact.

I was clear to point out that speculation is useless and used my speculation as an example -- much like you did here. If you're going to criticize at least know what you're criticizing.

 

[KdParker]

This is certainly one of the most racist things I've seen on MR. I have seen posts modded for stepping just a little bit out of line, but I would have hoped that a racist post would get the same treatment. But I guess his post was racist against the wrong group, so its all okay.

Oh yeah, post reported.

Huh? Should the poster used 'favorite class/race/gender' instead of white to make his point?

Would that not have made it racist in your eyes?

Or we could equally say that without white men there would be hundreds of rampant diseases that were (historically) cured by white scientists, or that without white people there would be even more diseases, or that without white people the economy of the world would be much lower and poverty much higher (because, historically, the economy of the world grew through industrialization, something that white people made).

See, anyone can speculate. So why isn't your post disgusting? The person you quoted used historical facts. You used speculation that cannot be proven AT ALL, but is also illogical if one considers historical fact.

Historical facts aren't being quoted by you or the previous posters. It is all speculation on what version of history you choose to believe.

That being said. Having a mono-cultural environment is not the current world we live in, and we would be foolish to not that the most innovative ideals regardless of where they came from.

 

[darcyf]

Enjoy your diet racism everyone! Though I hear aspartame gives you throat cancer. Might wanna watch out for that.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Enjoy your diet racism everyone! Though I hear aspartame gives you throat cancer. Might wanna watch out for that.

Alcohol. It's what's for lunch. Apparently.

 

[ctg7w6]

Historical facts aren't being quoted by you or the previous posters. It is all speculation on what version of history you choose to believe.

I was referring to:

When one looks back at the 20th century, once could hardly say that there was a lack of innovation. Ditto for the 19th, 18th and 17th centuries. Overwhelmingly, that innovation was led by single white men, or small groups of white men, inspired by God.

While I am not sure how accurate "single" is in the above quote, the rest is absolutely true. You can give whatever reasons you want for it, but this is not something that is debatable. The only thing debatable is "why." It doesn't come down to "which version of history" you believe. It isn't about opinion.

You can certainly debate whether there would have been more innovation had there been more diversity during those centuries. You could also debate whether there would be more innovation in the present age with less diversity. But the historical facts of the 17th-20th centuries remain the same whichever side of the debate you are on.

 

[dk001]

...
Oh no, I don't feel entitled. I don't believe anyone owes me anything. Everything I have, I have worked for. What you talk about as "accomplishment disbelief" is more common when looking at black man and not a white one. White privilege exists and the deference to a white man, even if the other person is more qualified exists.

.....

Your opinion and I recognize your right to have it. Let's just say our opinions differ significantly.
In my "neck" of the world, I find skin color has very little to do with anything today unless it is a legislated requirement. That was different 20 years or more ago.
On a global stage, I find outside the USA cultural hiring discrimination is still very rampant.

 

[69650]

Two potential employees.

One white one black

White one slightly more suited for the job
"Oh wait we need to be diverse, sorry white".

This is still racism. You're noticing someone's colour/race, when we are meant to ignore all that and take someone for who they are.

Depends on your definition of "slightly more suited". To remain truly objective it should come down to which one is better qualified and/or more experienced, otherwise personal preferences and prejudices will inevitably affect the decision.

 

[Mums]

This is certainly one of the most racist things I've seen on MR. I have seen posts modded for stepping just a little bit out of line, but I would have hoped that a racist post would get the same treatment. But I guess his post was racist against the wrong group, so its all okay.

Oh yeah, post reported.

techwhiz got banned!! And deservedly so for his racist anti-White-male posts.

 

[ctg7w6]

techwhiz got banned!! And deservedly so for his racist anti-White-male posts.

And that is the thing... I think a lot of posts here may have a racist intent (either consciously on the part of the author or subliminally), but more often they come off as potentially within the spirit of the debate. He, however, did not try one bit to couch his racism in indirect language, and it was clear he was not interested whatsoever in an actual intellectual discussion. Justice was served.

 

[dk001]

Depends on your definition of "slightly more suited". To remain truly objective it should come down to which one is better qualified and/or more experienced, otherwise personal preferences and prejudices will inevitably affect the decision.

Unless you are legally mandated by law to hire to maintain a "diverse" workforce.
The ability to always hire based on skills and leadership would be an awesome choice.