Black Mercedes.

[faa77]

df76 said:

Please point out where i "implied there was no opportunity"?

I asked someone how was there no opportunity and you responded with:

df76 said:

Doesn't really matter what you think. Mercedes themselves believe that a 3% representation is unacceptable, and only 12% women as well. Things will change...

Your reply suggests you claim there is no opportunity. But, do you think there is opportunity?

[df76]

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Well, if you can't be bothered (or want to ignore the obvious) I'm probably wasting my time.. have a read about unconscious bias as well.

Please point out where i "implied there was no opportunity"?

I asked someone how was there no opportunity and you responded with:

df76 said:

Doesn't really matter what you think. Mercedes themselves believe that a 3% representation is unacceptable, and only 12% women as well. Things will change...

Your reply suggests you claim there is no opportunity. But, do you think there is opportunity?

Here you go, get reading. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/17/mino...

And just in case the Guardian link is unacceptable. Trying to be inclusive. https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/news-events/news/new...

Edited by df76 on Thursday 2nd July 23:37

[faa77]

df76 said:

Well, if you can't be bothered (or want to ignore the obvious) I'm probably wasting my time.. have a read about unconscious bias as well.

I'm not doing research on a point I'm not making! You suggested there's no opportunity, you show me!

And there's a rather large fallacy in your argument: the fact that only N% of employees are XYZ doesn't mean there's a lack of opportunity.

Or do you think it does?

[df76]

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Well, if you can't be bothered (or want to ignore the obvious) I'm probably wasting my time.. have a read about unconscious bias as well.

I'm not doing research on a point I'm not making! You suggested there's no opportunity, you show me!

And there's a rather large fallacy in your argument: the fact that only N% of employees are XYZ doesn't mean there's a lack of opportunity.

Or do you think it does?

I have never said that there's no opportunity. Mercedes have not said that there's no opportunity. The research does not say that there's no opportunity. However, employment discrimination remains a problem and motorsport will look to address that (just like any other responsible business).

[faa77]

df76 said:

Here you go, get reading. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/17/mino...

Your evidence there's no opportunity:

Guardian said:

On average, 24% of applicants of white British origin received a positive response from employers, compared with 15% of minority ethnic applicants applying with identical CVs and cover letters. All of the minority applications clearly stated that they were either British-born or had arrived in the country by the age of six and had obtained all their education and training in Britain.

How can an employer see someone's skin colour on a CV/cover letter?

And you think 24% vs 15% is an astronomic difference? If you roll a dice 6 times, do you honestly expect a different number EVERY time?

Edited by faa77 on Thursday 2nd July 23:53

[df76]

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Here you go, get reading. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/17/mino...

Your evidence there's no opportunity:

Guardian said:

On average, 24% of applicants of white British origin received a positive response from employers, compared with 15% of minority ethnic applicants applying with identical CVs and cover letters. All of the minority applications clearly stated that they were either British-born or had arrived in the country by the age of six and had obtained all their education and training in Britain.

How can an employer see someone's skin colour on a CV/cover letter?

Oh god.. suggest that you drop Nuffield College (Oxford University) a line and ask the authors.

And post up any peer reviewed research of your choice that demonstrates no employment discrimination in the UK.

[faa77]

df76 said:

Oh god.. suggest that you drop Nuffield College (Oxford University) a line and ask the authors.

You're the one using this as evidence, why aren't you questioning that before lapping it up?

You're claiming people are discriminated on their skin colour- when their skin colour isn't even visible! (face palm)

[otolith]

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Oh god.. suggest that you drop Nuffield College (Oxford University) a line and ask the authors.

You're the one using this as evidence, why aren't you questioning that before lapping it up?

You're claiming people are discriminated on their skin colour- when their skin colour isn't even visible! (face palm)

It took me about two minutes to find the answer to this.

http://csi.nuff.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/0...

[df76]

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Oh god.. suggest that you drop Nuffield College (Oxford University) a line and ask the authors.

You're the one using this as evidence, why aren't you questioning that before lapping it up?

You're claiming people are discriminated on their skin colour- when their skin colour isn't even visible! (face palm)

I’m taking it that you read the bit where they confirmed that the ethnic status of the applicants was included on the CVs?

[vdn]

sparta6 said:

vdn said:

sparta6 said:

vdn said:

sparta6 said:

TheDeuce said:

sparta6 said:

Or, perhaps, he has a selective memory when advancing his career

But why does it matter to him? He wouldn't be able to do anything or live anywhere if he avoided all connections with all companies and places that have some level or racial discrimination in their history. Britain certainly does..

He's judging those that he sees as creating problems with equality today. There isn't a problem with Daimler Benz's behavior or associations today so there is noting to fix or judge.

I agree.
And yet Lewis is yet to convey how he thinks things could improve in Britain.
Every successful person I know has arrived through merit and hard work, regardless of ethnicity.

I don't know of another country as open and diverse.

Lewis himself is a prime example of that.

You truly are naive, ignorant and a few other things.

Your posts paint a picture; that you’ve never lived in the real world. Maybe one day you’ll get a taste.

Just repeatedly posting that Lewis is neither here nor there re’ Nazi’s - because their car is best - is about the thickest, dumbest, stupidest thing I’ve ever read on Pistonheads. And there’s a mountain to choose from

Ah I see. You managed to miss the bedrock of which BLM is built upon, the injustice of which was abolished almost 200 years ago.
Lewis is yet to comment on the injustice of something his Paymasters were involved with just 80 years ago.

Maybe he just doesn't know ?!

We are all equally entitled to our own views

Just when one thinks it’s reached peak naivety - and the thick meter is already struggling; you take it to another level. Bravo

Thick are those who throw insults when they lack the capacity to accept when others have an opposing point of view.

We used to get patrons at our London pub who would act in this manner, especially at chucking out time. You would have been in your element

I accept you have an opposing point of view. So what’s your point? Accepting the fact that you have an opposing point of view is what led me to label it thick and ignorant. Surely you can distinguish between these two prongs... or are you... dare I say it...

[vdn]

df76 said:

faa77 said:

df76 said:

Oh god.. suggest that you drop Nuffield College (Oxford University) a line and ask the authors.

You're the one using this as evidence, why aren't you questioning that before lapping it up?

You're claiming people are discriminated on their skin colour- when their skin colour isn't even visible! (face palm)

I’m taking it that you read the bit where they confirmed that the ethnic status of the applicants was included on the CVs?

I wouldn’t bother. Faa77 appears to be another in a long line of ignorant minds on PH. They don’t get the depths or nuances of this subject. More to the point; they don’t want to. Strange thing is; it’s these types that end up the most snowflakery of all; rants and raves galore!

[faa77]

df76 said:

I’m taking it that you read the bit where they confirmed that the ethnic status of the applicants was included on the CVs?

I'm taking it you don't know much about statistics:

Oxford said:

On average, nearly one in four applicants from the majority group (24%) received a positive response (i.e. callback) from employers. The job search effort was less successful for ethnic minorities who, despite having identical resumes and cover letters, needed to send 60% more applications

60% is 15 divided by 24

So let's now say 2% of the majority group had received a response and only 1% of the ethnic minorities.

Now the ethnic minorities would have to send 100% more applications. Wow, 100%! What a huuuuuuuuge number........

In other words, they're manipulating the numbers to make them seem bigger than they are.

15% and 24% isn't what i'd call a huge difference. Did you expect the numbers to be identical?

Edited by faa77 on Friday 3rd July 00:37

[faa77]

vdn said:

I wouldn’t bother. Faa77 appears to be another in a long line of ignorant minds on PH. They don’t get the depths or nuances of this subject. More to the point; they don’t want to. Strange thing is; it’s these types that end up the most snowflakery of all; rants and raves galore!

I get everything, whether I care about it or not is another matter.

[faa77]

otolith said:

It took me about two minutes to find the answer to this.

http://csi.nuff.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/0...

Congratulations. I was given a Guardian article and that's what I read.

Next time when I ask for evidence instead of sending web links, describe the point.

[otolith]

faa77 said:

Congratulations. I was given a Guardian article and that's what I read.

Next time when I ask for evidence instead of sending web links, describe the point.

Wasn’t my link. I wouldn’t have bothered, because it was pretty obvious that your point would be nonsense (methodological flaws which are so glaring you can see them without reading the paper tend not to make it through peer review, and it’s a fair bet that the authors are brighter than you seem)

[faa77]

PanicBuyingBogRoll said:

Thats another team the gammons won't be able to support.

Gammon is a racial and ageist slur

But you're against racism?

[faa77]

otolith said:

Wasn’t my link.

Where did I say it was your link? I said:

faa77 said:

Next time when I ask for evidence instead of sending web links, describe the point.

Where are you mentioned? It was a general point.

otolith said:

I wouldn’t have bothered, because it was pretty obvious that your point would be nonsense (methodological flaws which are so glaring you can see them without reading the paper tend not to make it through peer review, and it’s a fair bet that the authors are brighter than you seem)

Well if you conclude spending years publishing the obvious (people view people differently) equates to being bright......... okay!

Glad you got the personal attack in there though, typical leftie tactic when losing the argument. Awesome.

Btw if their research is correct- employers (people) have agendas, surely academics (people) have agendas too?

Edited by faa77 on Friday 3rd July 01:47

[Teddy Lop]

thiscocks said:

sparta6 said:

Nampahc Niloc said:

thiscocks said:

..but are responsible for 50% of the murders... Facts are racist

And why is that?
Are black people naturally more violent?
Or is it a result of living in a worse economic situation (some would say poverty but it is a much over used word in the West when you compare it to true poverty)? Lack of economic opportunities leads to higher crime rate. This can be seen with all races.

It's also directly connected with their personal values and lifestyle choices.

Many of the black women I know have had enough of the black guys who are Baby Fathers. They have multiple babies with multiple women, 6 or more is not uncommon.

That can financially cripple many men, who then resort to crime in order to fund their lifestyle.

Yes and linked to that is lack of an upbringing the children have. Quoted from B.Obama: “We all know the statistics. That children who grow
up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times
more likely to drop out of school and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.”

yet americas welfare system heavily favours the fatherless family, by effectively forcing a woman to choose between hardship with a man of low fiscal means, OR the dependable state support. Hmm abolishment of family units, what does that remind us of. Kids then grow up with street gangs as their male role models. Wonder how that'll work out.

[df76]

faa77 said:

Btw if their research is correct- employers (people) have agendas, surely academics (people) have agendas too?

Edited by faa77 on Friday 3rd July 01:47

That’s an “interesting” view, I’ll give you that. Just send me some evidence that confirms that employment discrimination is now a non-issue in the UK. Anything?

[Teddy Lop]

df76 said:

faa77 said:

Btw if their research is correct- employers (people) have agendas, surely academics (people) have agendas too?

Edited by faa77 on Friday 3rd July 01:47

That’s an “interesting” view, I’ll give you that. Just send me some evidence that confirms that employment discrimination is now a non-issue in the UK. Anything?

Isn't asking for proof of the non existence of something a logical flaw?