So 100% of the contracts to this group would make it the year, let's say, 1950.
But listen, we've come a long way. Now it's down to 92%. An 8% change in more than half a century (or much more depending on your timeline). Lots of hope. Not much change.
But listen, this was always and has always been based on merit.
I'd like to thank Bloomberg.com, a right-leaning website, for putting the story on their front page.
It could only ruffle more than a few feathers based on the readership demographics.
To the reader of this post? Reflect on the article, remove me from it, and come to a conclusion other than, "Here he goes again!" (a refrain so common you'd think this place was a church choir at times).
So 100% of the contracts to this group would make it the year, let's say, 1950.
But listen, we've come a long way. Now it's down to 92%. An 8% change in more than half a century (or much more depending on your timeline). Lots of hope. Not much change.
But listen, this was always and has always been based on merit.
I'd like to thank Bloomberg.com, a right-leaning website, for putting the story on their front page.
It could only ruffle more than a few feathers based on the readership demographics.
To the reader of this post? Reflect on the article, remove me from it, and come to a conclusion other than, "Here he goes again!" (a refrain so common you'd think this place was a church choir at times).
Maybe I missed it in the article, but how many/what percentage of the firms in question are owned by minorities? White men make up 14% of the population, but I'm pretty sure the majority of owners of major companies (those that have been around long enough to have a good rep and get large bids) are predominatly white men. (not debating why or how they got the job, just the fact they have it)
Without those numbers, the 92% doesnt mean much to me. If 3/4 owners are white men, them getting a large % is a given. Can you fill me in on the missing parts please?
0
Maybe I missed it in the article, but how many/what percentage of the firms in question are owned by minorities? White men make up 14% of the population, but I'm pretty sure the majority of owners of major companies (those that have been around long enough to have a good rep and get large bids) are predominatly white men. (not debating why or how they got the job, just the fact they have it)
Without those numbers, the 92% doesnt mean much to me. If 3/4 owners are white men, them getting a large % is a given. Can you fill me in on the missing parts please?
Maybe I missed it in the article, but how many/what percentage of the firms in question are owned by minorities? White men make up 14% of the population, but I'm pretty sure the majority of owners of major companies (those that have been around long enough to have a good rep and get large bids) are predominatly white men. (not debating why or how they got the job, just the fact they have it)
Without those numbers, the 92% doesnt mean much to me. If 3/4 owners are white men, them getting a large % is a given. Can you fill me in on the missing parts please?
Why wouldn't you extend the 3/4's owner hypothetical figure to the same glass ceiling/impasses encountered in getting loans to start a business, or having other sources of cash flow for a black or female owned business that white males seem to get so easily just as we see in the contract awards instead of assuming the company ownership is completely merit based (which is implied by the 92% not meaning that much to you) and therefore the contracts could only go to the overwhelming majority of white males who have favoritism to own a business and flourish in the first place?
No matter how far you dissect it down the line, you end up with one answer: favoritism (to a group that whole-heartledly believes it is victimized. Just turn on Rush Limbaugh and listen for 5 minutes.).
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Maybe I missed it in the article, but how many/what percentage of the firms in question are owned by minorities? White men make up 14% of the population, but I'm pretty sure the majority of owners of major companies (those that have been around long enough to have a good rep and get large bids) are predominatly white men. (not debating why or how they got the job, just the fact they have it)
Without those numbers, the 92% doesnt mean much to me. If 3/4 owners are white men, them getting a large % is a given. Can you fill me in on the missing parts please?
Why wouldn't you extend the 3/4's owner hypothetical figure to the same glass ceiling/impasses encountered in getting loans to start a business, or having other sources of cash flow for a black or female owned business that white males seem to get so easily just as we see in the contract awards instead of assuming the company ownership is completely merit based (which is implied by the 92% not meaning that much to you) and therefore the contracts could only go to the overwhelming majority of white males who have favoritism to own a business and flourish in the first place?
No matter how far you dissect it down the line, you end up with one answer: favoritism (to a group that whole-heartledly believes it is victimized. Just turn on Rush Limbaugh and listen for 5 minutes.).
I thought this was gonna be about blacks and prison.
So did Train before me and another guy skewered him for almost EXACTLY what you just said a few weeks ago when he said the same thing using an 80% figure.
You ready to get skewered too?
You all think alike. I pity you.
0
Quote Originally Posted by speak2truth:
I thought this was gonna be about blacks and prison.
So did Train before me and another guy skewered him for almost EXACTLY what you just said a few weeks ago when he said the same thing using an 80% figure.
Why wouldn't you extend the 3/4's owner hypothetical figure to the same glass ceiling/impasses encountered in getting loans to start a business, or having other sources of cash flow for a black or female owned business that white males seem to get so easily just as we see in the contract awards instead of assuming the company ownership is completely merit based (which is implied by the 92% not meaning that much to you) and therefore the contracts could only go to the overwhelming majority of white males who have favoritism to own a business and flourish in the first place?
No matter how far you dissect it down the line, you end up with one answer: favoritism (to a group that whole-heartledly believes it is victimized. Just turn on Rush Limbaugh and listen for 5 minutes.).
WHat are you talking about? I asked a question. I didnt ask for a history lesson. How come I have to reflect on the article and remove you, but you cant remove yourself?
If in 1950. 100% of the contracts went to whites, its probably because 99.9% of the businesses were owned by whites. So, 63 years later, the number of minority owned companies has obviously grown, but they are still the "minority" % of business owners.
What % should should the small number of minority owned businesses get? Do they deserve the jobs just cause they are black?
I'm not asking the history behind whites plotting against minorities. I'm asking you to remove yourself and ask is there possibly any other reason "white owned companies" got the majority of the bids. Is it simply because they are white. Thats the only possible reason in every case?
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Why wouldn't you extend the 3/4's owner hypothetical figure to the same glass ceiling/impasses encountered in getting loans to start a business, or having other sources of cash flow for a black or female owned business that white males seem to get so easily just as we see in the contract awards instead of assuming the company ownership is completely merit based (which is implied by the 92% not meaning that much to you) and therefore the contracts could only go to the overwhelming majority of white males who have favoritism to own a business and flourish in the first place?
No matter how far you dissect it down the line, you end up with one answer: favoritism (to a group that whole-heartledly believes it is victimized. Just turn on Rush Limbaugh and listen for 5 minutes.).
WHat are you talking about? I asked a question. I didnt ask for a history lesson. How come I have to reflect on the article and remove you, but you cant remove yourself?
If in 1950. 100% of the contracts went to whites, its probably because 99.9% of the businesses were owned by whites. So, 63 years later, the number of minority owned companies has obviously grown, but they are still the "minority" % of business owners.
What % should should the small number of minority owned businesses get? Do they deserve the jobs just cause they are black?
I'm not asking the history behind whites plotting against minorities. I'm asking you to remove yourself and ask is there possibly any other reason "white owned companies" got the majority of the bids. Is it simply because they are white. Thats the only possible reason in every case?
So did Train before me and another guy skewered him for almost EXACTLY what you just said a few weeks ago when he said the same thing using an 80% figure.
You ready to get skewered too?
You all think alike. I pity you.
Recheck your facts. I never said anything about prison. I quoted murder rates and then you happened to side step it with opinion while I provided links and real data.
Typical
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
So did Train before me and another guy skewered him for almost EXACTLY what you just said a few weeks ago when he said the same thing using an 80% figure.
You ready to get skewered too?
You all think alike. I pity you.
Recheck your facts. I never said anything about prison. I quoted murder rates and then you happened to side step it with opinion while I provided links and real data.
Without knowing what % of firms in the area are owned by white men, not sure you can draw any conclusions at all. I don't think this was stated in the article. Why wouldn't that be included?
0
Without knowing what % of firms in the area are owned by white men, not sure you can draw any conclusions at all. I don't think this was stated in the article. Why wouldn't that be included?
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
I am just reporting what a .com said. That's all.
0
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
I am just reporting what a .com said. That's all.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SALTY:
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
Before any claim I am racist......^^^^^^^^Here is one of a hundred pics^^^^^^ I have from the day I attended spur of the moment a black protest rally against the white man a few years back. It was in Lousiana and I literally was one of mabye 500 white people out of 100,000 in attendance that day at the courthouse. I can be seen here with Al Sharpton right over my shoulder.
We were at the front of the march and one of my buddies helped with security on the front line. Cool thing was I got to say I attended and was a part of racial protest that white people never dare think about attending
I was up all night drinking and had a giant bag of weed. Good times
0
Quote Originally Posted by Randisist:
Calm down Randis
The pizza thing is an old joke.
https://i.imgur.com/06CfJ.jpg
Before any claim I am racist......^^^^^^^^Here is one of a hundred pics^^^^^^ I have from the day I attended spur of the moment a black protest rally against the white man a few years back. It was in Lousiana and I literally was one of mabye 500 white people out of 100,000 in attendance that day at the courthouse. I can be seen here with Al Sharpton right over my shoulder.
We were at the front of the march and one of my buddies helped with security on the front line. Cool thing was I got to say I attended and was a part of racial protest that white people never dare think about attending
I was up all night drinking and had a giant bag of weed. Good times
This dude with face paint was out there. He thought I was Peyton Manning He would not believe me I wasn't, he kept telling me to quit being modest. So I signed his sign like I was Peyton Manning And the funny thing was I spotted him first and wanted a pic with the Zulu Bush guy.....Turns out it made his day
https://i.imgur.com/QFxVDLf.jpg
And this town was a ghost town......95% of this little town left town thinking riots would break out
https://i.imgur.com/bnNIxJS.jpg
Like I said I ain't racist.
0
This dude with face paint was out there. He thought I was Peyton Manning He would not believe me I wasn't, he kept telling me to quit being modest. So I signed his sign like I was Peyton Manning And the funny thing was I spotted him first and wanted a pic with the Zulu Bush guy.....Turns out it made his day
https://i.imgur.com/QFxVDLf.jpg
And this town was a ghost town......95% of this little town left town thinking riots would break out
Without knowing what % of firms in the area are owned by white men, not sure you can draw any conclusions at all. I don't think this was stated in the article. Why wouldn't that be included?
Exactly, it's all propaganda to fuel the hate. They report what they want no matter about facts that matter. Why worry about how many bids were presented and who presented them? Who were the bids from all small businesses or multi national companies?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Johnzimbo34:
Without knowing what % of firms in the area are owned by white men, not sure you can draw any conclusions at all. I don't think this was stated in the article. Why wouldn't that be included?
Exactly, it's all propaganda to fuel the hate. They report what they want no matter about facts that matter. Why worry about how many bids were presented and who presented them? Who were the bids from all small businesses or multi national companies?
Recheck your facts. I never said anything about prison. I quoted murder rates and then you happened to side step it with opinion while I provided links and real data.
Typical
It's the same principle!...prison/crime/rape/whatever. You bigots are out to demonize the black male as the bane of America and you link whatever topic or percentage is necessary to your claim to bolster your stance.
And the links you provided disproved your own 80% racist hot potato that you just tossed out to defame blacks...
You corrected yourself! I merely pointed out, with ilsp that you were a fool for claiming the 80% figure.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Recheck your facts. I never said anything about prison. I quoted murder rates and then you happened to side step it with opinion while I provided links and real data.
Typical
It's the same principle!...prison/crime/rape/whatever. You bigots are out to demonize the black male as the bane of America and you link whatever topic or percentage is necessary to your claim to bolster your stance.
And the links you provided disproved your own 80% racist hot potato that you just tossed out to defame blacks...
You corrected yourself! I merely pointed out, with ilsp that you were a fool for claiming the 80% figure.
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
I am just reporting what a .com said. That's all.
One thing you'll never be able to buy is class...and you need a warehouse full of it.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SALTY:
I was just on facts.com and they reported details a new 20 year study just released on race, families, and what we all value. Data had been collected since 1993 they claim.
On the scale of importance in our lives to families. Large pizzas have more overall value than a black man any given day. They said reason be that the biggest difference between a black man and a pizza was that a pizza can feed a family of four.
I am just reporting what a .com said. That's all.
One thing you'll never be able to buy is class...and you need a warehouse full of it.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
And the funny thing was I spotted him first and wanted a pic with the Zulu Bush guy.....Turns out it made his day
i have no idea what you are talking about
Hot Forum Topics
