We should go back to discussing tips.
Whites Allowed!!!
- Thread starter MarcSpaz
- Start date
I can't seem to find enough data in that study to actually verify what it's saying is true.
When gender wage gaps are FULLY ASSESSED, it turns out that women tend to choose jobs that pay lower on average. So in order for us to verify fully that an employer will pay a white man less than a black man, we would need to compare...
1. Work experience
2. Where did they go to college
3. Did they assess wages from a single employer?
4. Did they assess if blacks tend to gravitate towards lower paying jobs?
5. Along with 4, what areas of career do blacks and whites tend to go towards in general?
These studies, as usual, throw blanket statements out there ithout fully assessing th situation and draw conclusions based on incomplete data. It's a rather common issue in many areas of research because the researchers tend to have an agenda and they don't want all the data to be collected, or they just don't care.
In the 1970s and 80s, there were studies that came out showing black woman and men actually getting paid MORE than white men and women in a particular job field, when they had the same experience, education etc.
Thomas Sowell actually touched on that back in the 70s during an interview. For those of you not familiar with Sowell, he's an economist, and former Marxist from his earlier years. He has written college textbooks and many other books and articles, on economics. His views are actually quite close to this article, if you are up for a long, but very informative read.
It discusses how wealth distribution, in all regards (Geographically, as well as among groups), have an impact and that these studies never take them in to consideration. Sowell has a ton of great stuff on youtube too. Warning though, Sowell has been called an Uncle Tom many times, and many liberals dismiss his extremely thorough assessment of economics, his education, and career, but none of them have the intellect to debate him.
https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/five-myths-about-economic-inequality-america
And yet, you can't cite one source to back up all that "research"......
Not "can't"... I don't want to.
I have been having this argument for way too long and I'm sick of doing other people's homework for them. I don't really think I would change your position, even if I did. Especially when you cite sources like the Washington Post and EPI, which are both known to flat out lie and are both owned and/or financed by huge financial supporters of the political Left.
I have never met anyone with a stance similar to yours, that has ever conceded. I just don't want to try to do it anymore. Plus, real research for the most recent data, plus compiling timelines and trends, takes hours... sometimes days and I am insanely busy for the next 2 weeks.
Sure thing.....
And Bush let terrorists go who went right back to their terrorist organizations. MORE than Obama released.
https://www.google.com/amp/thehill....mer-gitmo-detainees-returned-to-terrorism?amp
That is a very poorly written and misleading article. At one point it clearly states Obama is responsible for only 8 terrorists now active. If you made it to Gitmo, and you get out, pretty likely you are going back to what you know. Regardless of who let you out.
When Bush was in office, Gitmo was a functioning high risk prison, with prisoners coming and going regularly. When Obama took over, Gitmo pretty much stopped receiving new inventory to turn over. I'm not in the military and I don't have access to stats, but it doesn't take a leap of faith to get that numbers would be skewed to less prisoners total to process by Obama.
Now to the poorly written part, starts with 121 former detainees re-engaged in terrorism. Next line, 2 new releases back in terrorism, bringing the total to 87. What, thought you just said 121. Next stat, bush 113, Obama 9. Next stat Obama 4.4% back to terrorism 9/182 is 4.9%, so close, confirmed down from 5.6. Then a 2 person increase brings that percentage from 6.8 (where did this new number come from) to 7.1
Then bush drops from 75 to 74 because one dies, and that ups the dead pool to 31.
After that the 87 returning terrorists number is quoted.
If that doesn't constitute a poorly written article to you, so be it.
Now to the poorly written part, starts with 121 former detainees re-engaged in terrorism. Next line, 2 new releases back in terrorism, bringing the total to 87. What, thought you just said 121. Next stat, bush 113, Obama 9. Next stat Obama 4.4% back to terrorism 9/182 is 4.9%, so close, confirmed down from 5.6. Then a 2 person increase brings that percentage from 6.8 (where did this new number come from) to 7.1
Then bush drops from 75 to 74 because one dies, and that ups the dead pool to 31.
After that the 87 returning terrorists number is quoted.
If that doesn't constitute a poorly written article to you, so be it.
and what did obama do to stop isis ?
He was busy having Navy Seals kill bin Laden and ran out of time in office to finish them.......
Wait, didn't ISIS develop because of Bush's destruction of the stability in Iraq?
Your move......
I think we've strayed from the topic. The political section is that way^.
You have your fax a bit skewed, which seems typical. The DOD was hunting Bin Laden for years under the Bush administration And when Barry Soetoro took office, he had no idea the Op was in play. All Obama did was take credit for it.
And ISIS was formed by OBAMA prematurely pulling troops out of the region without a stable government in place and without properly trained local military to defend that (missing) new government.
To make things worse, we left a significant amount of weapons and vehicles there when we left (which is not uncommon), but they were not destroyed or made unusable. ISIS ended up using our equipment to take over Syria while Barry was in charge due to his decisions.
There's a political section? If I knew that, I would have started the thread there.
A "real" President? Bruh. Come on. Trump and his Administration have so far been nothing but a train wreck full of dumpster fires.
It reminds me of that scene in the War of the Worlds remake when the train went whizzing by with all the cars on fire. LOL
You surprised? Thread was going fine until the resident racists arrived.
Or so the media would like you to believe. Or all the fake facebook stories.
Users who are viewing this thread
