patrick.net

turtledove says

It would be easier if we could say that all bigots can be found under a particular affiliation

The one thing I tire of is the notion of "a pox on both your houses". This is a subtle rhetorical trick that people do when faced with the reality that the party or ideology they have adhered to is flawed.

Fascism is a rightwing ideology. Nazis, no matter what conservatives say, is a conservative ideology. Mein Kampf explicitly condemned liberals, and fascism explicitly is anti-communist, anti-egalitarian, pro-business and jingoistic.

Communists, Catholics and others have historically aligned to fight AGAINST racism, sexism and other injustices. They protest together. They fought side-by-side for civil rights in the 60s. It is better to be born black in Cuba than in most of America. Blacks have a higher literacy rate in Cuba than in the US. These philosophies were also condemned by the fascists and Nazis.

Are these commonalities a coincidence?

There are douches on both sides, no question. But I think the temptation is to say "everyone does it!", which has the same effect "we report, you decide" does. Equivocation is insidious and prevents us from seeing clearly, and acting accordingly.

FortWayne says

Try this out of the world leftist rant from Dan earlier in this thread. He is making his own code language now even. What will the left make up next?

You seem rather good at avoiding answering questions directed at you and you also fail at staying on topic. It seems to me your biggest concern is making sure to throw out a few random supposed insults against the left.

So let's try this again and this time try and answer the question. Specifically I asked you what "Race card" has to do with this subject? We were talking about racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia in general and as seen, many people here were talking about the fact that no, those sorts of negative attitudes aren't expressly voiced just by the right but the left as well.

As also mentioned there has been a rash of racist, sexist, xenophobic posts made on this site which NOBODY asked for. Its really that fucking simple: That sort of trash has no place anywhere.

CL says

Fascism is a rightwing ideology. Nazis, no matter what conservatives say, is a conservative ideology. Mein Kampf explicitly condemned liberals, and fascism explicitly is anti-communist, anti-egalitarian, pro-business and jingoistic.

Couldn't disagree more. Some of the bloodiest regimes and movements were labeled "socialist" or "communists", and the Nazis were formally "left", but in reality neither left nor right. And if you look to Stalin, there were no notable differences between what you would call far-right and far-left. I would actually make the pitch that the original liberal movement came from the upper to upper middle-class, and thus rooted out of a "conservative" bourgeoisie. Kurt Schumacher got it right with his famous quote describing communists as red-painted Nazis.

edvard2 says

So let's try this again and this time try and answer the question. Specifically I asked you what "Race card" has to do with this subject?

Go reread what I posted again, and you'll have your answer. And it was done by someone on the left, your comrade Dan.

FortWayne says

I have never seen a man do well as a waiter at Hooters. Was that too sexist?

I would wager you've never seen a male waiter at Hooters. In any case, all you illustrated was that a workplace dependent on the objectification of WOMEN will, in fact, objectify women. I've never seen a female Chippendale, either, although I'll admit I haven't looked for either anomaly.

But, if the rightwing argument is that women simply choose low paying professions, then with the disparity even in "their house"? Hmmm?

Do you not believe that people in power, whether here in white, male Christiandom, or in the top castes in India, etc. don't intend to maintain their privilege, directly or indirectly? That there is no hiring bias?

Imagine a world where Black Jewish Gay people dominated the country's power structure. Fortwayne gets paid less. He must have not negotiated properly, I reckon.

FortWayne says

Go reread what I posted again, and you'll have your answer. And it was done by someone on the left, your comrade Dan.

Do you understand how a conversation works? I asked you a question last night. You did not answer the question. What Dan said has nothing to do with what I asked. So answer the question.

FortWayne says

Try this out of the world leftist rant from Dan earlier in this thread. He is making his own code language now even. What will the left make up next?

Dan8267 says

By the way, thug is now code for "nigger". It's the socially acceptable way of saying that while trying not to appear racist. I guess the conservatives didn't think we could break their code.

Really, I'm making shit up? Well, not according to Google's autocomplete.

Or Time Magazine

Care to rescind your statement, or would you prefer to double down on stupidity?

By the way, only right-wing nutjobs call me a leftist. Also, only left-wing nutjobs call me right-wing.

CL says

But, if the rightwing argument is that women simply choose low paying professions, then with the disparity even in "their house"? Hmmm?

Why do you care about the "right-wing" argument so much. You just want to fight a group you don't like and use the occasion when they made a seemingly weak argument?

Instead, forget about left and right and look at the data within the same profession(s). There is NO pay gap.

mell says

Instead, forget about left and right and look at the data within the same profession(s). There is NO pay gap.

That's the thing. The Rightwing will say there is no pay gap. Then they say, "if there is a pay gap, it's because women have children". Then they say, "if there is a pay gap, even among women without children, it's because they choose lower paid professions".

They use the "all of the above" argument with Climate change too. It's intellectually dishonest.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/04/07/women-earn-less-than-men-even-in-woman-dominated-jobs/

Dan8267 says

Really, I'm making shit up? Well, not according to Google's autocomplete.

So what? You want to label everybody using the word thug as a racist now? People coining these "trends" and ingraining them into peoples' heads are not better than your closest racist.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/DbO5h8Ctfs8

I like the new title

lostand confused says

That is in an utopian world. in the real world, there are other skills-kissing ass, willing to bob your head in endless meeting, pretending your boss' new idea is the next best thing to quantum physics etc etc. That person ought to receive more money-for willing to crush his soul that much.

I've seen that a lot..Much of the time it has nothing to do with competence. Unwavering blind loyalty to your superior is also a factor.
Also the willingness to take a dressing down by the boss just because he's in a bad mood.

mell says

So what? You want to label everybody using the word thug as a racist now?

A implies B does not imply B implies A.

Why is basic logic so difficult for the masses?

CL says

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/04/07/women-earn-less-than-men-even-in-woman-dominated-jobs/

I don't want to post the countless studies and articles "debunking" this data from the Institute of women's policy research. Everybody has a bias towards looking up studies corroborating their claim. I have worked in tech management and (over)seen salaries, and there simply was no pay gap. Obviously I cannot speak for every sector, but I have insight into a few other sectors (medical, restaurant/service, education) and I have never observed a pay gap there either, nor did the women I know in these fields report one. The last point is simple logic. There is zero reason for a (male or not) manager to incorporate a pay gap (no personal gain, no gain for the company). Occam's razor would dictate then that it is highly unlikely.

Dan8267 says

A implies B does not imply B implies A.

I'm quite comfortable at math, so are you trying to say that

Every racist (A) now switched to using the word thug (B), but not everyone using the word thug (B) is a racist (A)?

I'd still question the truth of the first half of that statement.

Aside from that, character assassination, justified (provable) or not is very hard to take back these days and can ruin somebody's career/life forever. Hence I'd like to see proper and ample evidence in each case, similar to a trial and when there is no sufficient evidence you have to give the benefit of the doubt. Interestingly pointing fingers with heavy allegations is very close to denouncing people and IMO much much closer to Nazi practice than being a (closet or not) racist that abides by the law but voices their opinion (anonymously or not).

mell says

I have worked in tech management and (over)seen salaries, and there simply was no pay gap

A quick google search shows headlines that say "Wage gap in technology exceedingly small", especially in San Franciscco.

mell says

I have never observed a pay gap there either, nor did the women I know in these fields report one.

Were the salaries public knowledge?

mell says

Occam's razor would dictate then that it is highly unlikely.

Not necessarily. If you get a salary range approved, you can award the high end based on your notion, or the low-end based on the same. Women can get the low-end, and will likely accept it if they encounter discrimination at every prospective employer.

I've seen deliberations in my past, and seen firsthand concerns for people (men) who have children, families, etc. They "need" it more, the logic goes. Haven't you?

mell says

Every racist (A) now switched to using the word thug (B), but not everyone using the word thug (B) is a racist (A)?

I'd still question the truth of the first half of that statement.

Racists are using the word thug, but not everyone using the word thug is a racist.

Note that not all racists have to be using the word thug, but plenty are.

CL says

've seen deliberations in my past, and seen firsthand concerns for people (men) who have children, families, etc. They "need" it more, the logic goes. Haven't you?

Such employers will not last very long. A market participant should not respond to the need of others. Just his own profit motive. The is an obvious inefficiency.

CL says

But, if the rightwing argument is that women simply choose low paying professions, then with the disparity even in "their house"? Hmmm?

I've seen women who make a lot of money, so I don't really see an issue there. People get paid what they bargain for.

But left doesn't care, they just want to trumped a fake made up issue just for Hillary's 2016 campaign. And that mantra of "women are oppressed" is just laughable in this day and age.

But I know that won't stop the BS train from the Democratic campaign machine. Should be entertaining to watch Hillary try to do that sell to the nation.

FortWayne says

Should be entertaining to watch Hillary try to do that sell to the nation.

She doesn't have to. But the GOP will have a much harder time because they will need to show they can present a candidate who isn't a utter joke.

CL says

A quick google search shows headlines that say "Wage gap in technology exceedingly small", especially in San Franciscco.

exceedingly small = Zero. Maybe it's a local bay area phenomenon, I cannot speak for every area and sector in the US, but Occam's razor would dictate to be skeptical of claims of pay gaps.

CL says

Were the salaries public knowledge?

Some have administrative/managerial function and had info about other salaries in their hospital etc. But probably not public by default.

CL says

I've seen deliberations in my past, and seen firsthand concerns for people (men) who have children, families, etc. They "need" it more, the logic goes. Haven't you?

I haven't.

CL says

Women can get the low-end, and will likely accept it if they encounter discrimination at every prospective employer.

Like Peter P said businesses who discriminate against better suited workers don't stay in business for very long, it's against their own interest. Now, all the affirmative action and harassment and pregnancy laws do make women a potential liability for their employers, so they may be citing other reasons for not employing her but really don't want to take on that liability. Those laws are not only unfair to the other genders/races, they can end up hurting those they were "intended to help". Next stop then is the law mandating to employ a certain percentage of a gender or race, which are even unfairer, but also doom the competitiveness of the company and the country.

mell says

Now, all the affirmative action and harassment and pregnancy laws do make women a potential liability for their employers, so they may be citing other reasons for not employing her but really don't want to take on that liability.

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be unpaid.

Prospective parents need to fully comprehend the costs before they skip the condom.

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be
unpaid.

In a perfect world for walmart cult?

The problem of sexual harassment is overblown. Very often, the employer is the vulnerable party simply because of their deeper pocket. There are already criminal laws against sexual assault, and I think that should be sufficient.

Fearing for one's job is not an excuse for not saying no. It is just a job.

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be unpaid.

Prospective parents need to fully comprehend the costs before they skip the condom.

What is your definition of "perfect"?

dublin hillz says

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be

unpaid.

In a perfect world for walmart cult?

It is only fair. People should be taking a lot more vacation than the 2-4 weeks per year they are "earning."

FortWayne says

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be unpaid.

Prospective parents need to fully comprehend the costs before they skip the condom.

What is your definition of "perfect"?

Maximum economic efficiency.

Peter P says

dublin hillz says

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be

unpaid.

In a perfect world for walmart cult?

It is only fair. People should be taking a lot more vacation than the 2-4 weeks per year they are "earning."

Seems to me like a lot of small biz owners in united states are afraid to take vacation precisely since they cannot make any money when they close up shop.

mell says

I cannot speak for every area and sector in the US, but Occam's razor would dictate to be skeptical of claims of pay gaps.

See? I don't think it does. If I create a new position, and get approval for 50-65K to start what factors do I use to assign value to that employee? Resume, sure. Experience, sure. But Occam's razor would say that the shortest path is likely the most accurate, right?

So, isn't it a bit more esoteric than that? The candidate "feels" right? "Seems like a great fit"? "Has the right attitude?".

Consciously or not, humans grant deference to certain people, except through mental effort. It's the same reason that white male Christians disproportionately hold the levers of power, in the Congress and all elected offices, as well as Executive positions on corporations.

If there is a disturbance, and there are 2 middle age white men and 2 black youths, who will get investigated first? Is justice blind? If not, what is different about a hiring scenario?

Whether it be by 5k or 15K, the women will, over time, get the short end of the stick. I've seen married males get bumps in salary, and single males get none or less. Unless the salaries are publicly available, there is little way to know until a grievance is filed, ala Ledbetter. Or via surveys, but a skeptic will write those off.

Slavery isn't very efficient.

Peter P says

FortWayne says

Peter P says

In a perfect world all leaves (sick, vacation, maternity, paternity) would be unpaid.

Prospective parents need to fully comprehend the costs before they skip the condom.

What is your definition of "perfect"?

Maximum economic efficiency.

edvard2 says

super right wing' = irrational, xenophobic, and out of touch with modern society.

Was it irrational to be displeased by a law that was passed with out reading it?
Was it irrational to be concerned that wide open boarders would lead to Mexican gangs and cartels gaining a greater foothold on America and would flood depressed workers to further strain our Employment numbers?

We're not out of touch with Modern society, we're just not Allowing the confused and morally bankrupt left define "Modern Society"!

You say trashy posts like it's a bad thing!

This is Damning Evidence.
All Damning Evidence....
CaptainShuddup says

Was it irrational to be displeased by a law that was passed with out reading it?

Was it irrational to be concerned that wide open boarders would lead to Mexican gangs and cartels gaining a greater foothold on America and would flood depressed workers to further strain our Employment numbers?

CaptainShuddup says

Was it irrational to be concerned that wide open boarders would lead to Mexican gangs and cartels gaining a greater foothold on America and would flood depressed workers to further strain our Employment numbers?

Bleeding heart liberals are a confused bunch. They think it's ok to bring millions of poor to lower wages across the border, yet they complain about outsourcing. But say something about closing borders, and they call you racist.

It's as if they only use half the brain and only figured half the equation of wage slavery. It doesn't dawn on them that desperate poor they want to bring will always accept a shittier station in life just to have a job, which will reduce wages and benefits for all Americans.

Just wait till edward or his liberal friends have to compete with a million of Juan's and Jose's from across the border for a job, he'll change his tune on illegal immigration pretty darn fast.

FortWayne says

Bleeding heart liberals are a confused bunch. They think it's ok to bring millions of poor to lower wages across the border, yet they complain about outsourcing. But say something about closing borders, and they call you racist.

And the straw man award of the year award goes to...

If I was going to write a comeback he could understand, it would be about gullible morons and not about right wingers.

"Darrrrr, guhuh... I know what let's do. Let's blame it on the liberals."

The propaganda works so well on a certain gullible and ignorant segment of the population.

FortWayne says

he'll change his tune on illegal immigration pretty darn fast.

Obama has been tougher on border security than any other President. He basically doubled it.

As for allowing illegals to stay ? Even most right wingers understand you aren't going to deport all those people.

How come Fortwayne got through saying what he had to say with out sounding like a sbh and Rush love affair?

FortWayne says

It doesn't dawn on them that desperate poor they want to bring will always accept a shittier station in life just to have a job, which will reduce wages and benefits for all Americans.

But those immigrants are also consumers, and the stuff they consume is being sold by Americans in America. Where does money we send abroad go?

We have a problem in supply v. demand. and it's not on the supply side. Importing consumers is not the same as exporting jobs.

sbh says

He'd be OK with importing them if they were actually "natural conservatives"

Many of them are Catholic. That is conservative in a way, for example with respect to "family values." I think you mean natural right wingers, which is impossible for a minority immigrant group.

sbh says

They are conservative in other ways as well.

Some of that is hype, drummed up by the right. The majority of Catholics support birth control, despite the hierarchy. Latinos are no exception, and support gay marriage as well.

They make the (false) assumption that, Catholicism is conservative, Mexico is a "Catholic" country, therefore Mexican immigrants are naturally conservative. I needn't remind you that a combination of Catholicism and Latin America is also the foundation for liberation theology, which has been deemed "Marxist" by many conservatives.

It's filled with untruths and logical fallacies.

So, ultimately, it is simply a thinly veiled attempt to define Latinos for themselves, to give them a framework to eventually vote Republican. It's a racist one at that, because if demographics don't reveal what conservatives WANT them to reveal, then it's back to the brown heap they go. They are no longer useful to the right.

CL says

They make the (false) assumption that, Catholicism is conservative, Mexico is a "Catholic" country, therefore Mexican immigrants are naturally conservative.

When I say conservative (above) I don't mean right wing.

I meant conservative more like Eisenhower conservative. Pro family values, strong work ethic and so on. I wasn't suggesting they will ever vote republican. Tha't for scared white folks and the whole "fuck you I've got mine" crowd.