Majority Of White Americans Say They Face Discrimination

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: openminded2011

originally posted by: Maroboduus

originally posted by: Butterfinger
I remember race relations were a hell of a lot better 8 years ago before something happened...

Yes. Before a bunch of racist idiots got upset about having a black president and suddenly felt that their dominance was threatened. Good job for noticing.

That's really NONSENSE. Barack Obama would NEVER have gotten elected without the white vote, which he got in droves. I voted TWICE for Barack Obama, before you accuse me of being a racist idiot. And when he did get elected, instead of EVER trying to bring the people together of all races, he turned out to be one of the most racially divisive presidents we ever had. THAT is what happened, over 8 years he never missed out on a chance to demean those very same white people who elected him, and empower racist blacks to hate whites openly. Its called BETRAYAL, not racism. Now I have a question for you, Obama had a white mother but only EVER identified as being black, WHY?

Answer: y'all call him black so...

Question for you: can you actually cite instances he was 'racially divisive' to help your point?

Yes, I can.

He inserted himself into a sensitive race issue by saying that Trayvon Martin could be his son.

Called working class people racist because they didn't embrace immigrants taking their jobs or didn't approve of trade deals that sent jobs overseas. He did this in 2008 while campaigning.

Called his own grandmother a "typical white person, who feared black men". Totally racist statement, on campaign in 2008. Racist, because its a generalization about a group of people. Try such a generalization about black people and see how fast you are attacked by the liberal media if you are running for office.

Ignored violence at black lives matter protests, calling it "freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. This was said after 5 Dallas policemen were murdered at a BLM protest in 2016.

In short, he took sides on issues of race, when a president is supposed to be impartial and represent ALL the people. That was divisive and polarized the country. I was very disappointed in him, I thought he was going to bring us together as a country, A lot of people did, and a lot of white voters did. Then the opposite happened. Now you have a democratic party that is hostile to white people and is running totally on identity politics. Hillary herself said that she didn't campaign in white working class areas because she didn't think she needed the white vote to win. That is called EXCLUSION. That's how a lot of people felt, not racist, BETRAYED. So we have president Trump.
[

a reply to: Greven

It is the CEO who has to figure out how to lure in the most trash men (or whomever the target demographic of the business in question is) in order to get them to spend their money at that business.

The CEO is an instrumental part of directing the company: which directions to develop (for example, it was the CEO of Sears who most likely decided they could ignore the internet and its potential for sales and marketing -- OOPS!) for one.

A good one (Steve Jobs) turns the company into a monolithic force to be reckoned with, but a bad can start a downward spiral from which there may be no escape.

And all the jobs underneath hinge on that.

Gee I wonder why white people feel this way

People feel all kinds of ways ... particularly when only part of the truth is reported.

Ismael Chamu and Peter Estrada, both 21, were charged Monday afternoon with felony vandalism, and possession of spray paint with the intent to commit vandalism and graffiti, a misdemeanor. The warrants from the Berkeley Police Department also included a hate crime allegation, because the graffiti included the phrase “# White People,” but the Alameda County district attorney’s office declined to charge the case as such.

Berkeleyside

The criminals were charged with hate crimes, but the DA did not pursue those charges and did not disclose the reason why. However, the matter was not simply ignored as suggested.

There are many in the community in Alameda who were asking very valid questions about why the vandals were not also accused of HATE Crimes as much of the vandalism also involves messages directed at race.

This is a valid question from what I can see. As far as I am able to determine, the DA has not responded as to why the hate crime charges were not pursued. The various Penal Codes in California suggest that the act cannot be random and must be directed at individuals. Perhaps the DA felt that case was insufficient?

Hate crimes against any race are wrong, period.

Can you give us, lets say, the top five obstacles? I think it is important to put some clarification on what is unique to only minorities in holding them back.

So you don't think there are any obstacles if you are a minority?

I mean, I guess aside from getting loans, jobs, a competitive salary, equal treatment where any choice is made between a minority and a non-minority, treatment by police, and so on.. there isn't MUCH of a different.

How about taking some time to read some studies. For example.. average household salary of blacks to whites.. or Hispanics to whites. Or even getting into college so you can get a job to give you a better salary. If white, do you fear that if you are walking alone at night you will get stopped by police solely because you are white? And there a lot of little things you probably never notice. Things like where you might be seated in a restaurant or how quickly you are served, being unable to get a taxi because you are ignored if you are a single black guy trying to hail one down (after all.. he might rob the taxi driver!), etc.

It's amazing to me that people think there is nothing that a minority has to face that as a white person, you may have to face. That's just absurd.

I don't consider it "white privilege" however. I think everyone should be treated this way, and it shouldn't be a privilege. So white privilege is a misnomer. So aiming anger at white people to fix these problems is senseless. Saying there should be a "white tax," or forming groups to protest against white people.. is pointless. Do you want to bring white people to the same level, or do you want to propel your race upwards? I'd think the latter. I guess white privilege was perhaps coined to make white people even aware that there was a problem.. which basing on this thread alone, kind of proves the theory that many think there isn't one.

a reply to: fleabit

Now compare Asians to whites.

You didn't mention one thing that whites don't face. There are plenty of whites who have problems with everything you mentioned.

originally posted by: Greven
CEOs don't create jobs.

Business needs create jobs.

You don't hire more people for a single cash register if that register is sufficient; if you need an additional register, then you would hire someone to cover that.

I'm sorry, I didn't know I was dealing with upper leadership in a company...How does a company go from 200 workers to 2000? Who creates that successful strategic plan and vision?

You wrote four paragraphs that didn't make any sense with the whole employees/CEO buying toys other than to suggest more money in the employee's hands will add to the economy better than a lot of money in the CEO hand.

BTW in a typical 10 million gross business the CEO doesn't get 1 million...just saying...

a reply to: ketsuko
You're acknowledging my assertion without realizing it.

Businesses pursue money, and business needs create jobs during that pursuit.

What you're saying is that the CEO gets the credit for getting the income, and so should get credit for creating jobs, but that is not anywhere near universally true.

Steve Wozniak was the technical co-founder of Apple. A brilliant man whose friendship Steve Jobs abused and exploited: the Apple 1 was created prior to Jobs reconnecting with Wozniak and forming Apple over 40 years ago. Steve Jobs left Apple in 1985, and when he did, the Macintosh did very well.

Apple merged with Jobs' company in 1997, and he returned to the helm. I won't deny that he was a good salesman and very persuasive, but his decision-making was not always the best. The choice to improve on digital music players and create the iPod, then later improving on the cell phone to create the iPhone... those were good decisions, for certain. One decision killed him, though - he had a rare pancreatic cancer - rare in that it is the only form that is treatable... and he didn't treat it except by alternative means, so he eventually died due to not treating it at the beginning.

I guess I have it worse because I am deaf and white.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Greven
CEOs don't create jobs.

Business needs create jobs.

You don't hire more people for a single cash register if that register is sufficient; if you need an additional register, then you would hire someone to cover that.

I'm sorry, I didn't know I was dealing with upper leadership in a company...How does a company go from 200 workers to 2000? Who creates that successful strategic plan and vision?

You wrote four paragraphs that didn't make any sense with the whole employees/CEO buying toys other than to suggest more money in the employee's hands will add to the economy better than a lot of money in the CEO hand.

BTW in a typical 10 million gross business the CEO doesn't get 1 million...just saying...

A company's workforce grows out of necessity. If it could pocket extra profits or return more money to its shareholders, it would and does. Better to go from $2 million to $20 million in revenue than from 200 workers to 2000.

That's how things work. Employees are only added when there is a business need for them. An optimal CEO is one who increases revenue and profits - one way to do that is by reducing labor costs, if it can be done. CEOs are not grandmaster chess players; they are not forming some complicated game plan to achieve success. In fact, they rather shy away from risky moves. Their strengths are generally in the social sphere. Private companies are different; they aren't mediated by shareholders and are subject to the whims of the owners.

Sears didn't take risks, and failed to take advantage of their historic catalog roots applied to the internet. That's pretty ridiculous, but that's how it went. Big companies don't tend to try big things. The iPod wasn't a whole new device; digital media players existed prior to it, and Apple realized these could be improved. It wasn't a massive gambit, but seizing an apparent opportunity - one that was not realized by the critics at the release who derided a computer company for making a music player. Same goes with the iPhone - there were smartphones before the iPhone, and there were touchscreens before the iPhone. Apple realized they could put the two together and improve things, and now they're worth billions - iterative, not revolutionary.

It was not a suggestion, but an explanation as to how things work. CEOs represent a tiny population, and other than rather high-end goods, represent a tiny demand on the market for goods.

It was a simple example.

originally posted by: Greven
A company's workforce grows out of necessity. If it could pocket extra profits or return more money to its shareholders, it would and does. Better to go from $2 million to $20 million in revenue than from 200 workers to 2000.

Who creates the necessity to grow or the necessity to layoff? Both start with good or bad leadership. The company I work for pays well, give free healthcare with a 30 dollar co-pay, has many other great things for the employees. Our main company is Boeing, so do I care what the CEO makes...lol

originally posted by: openminded2011

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: openminded2011

originally posted by: Maroboduus

originally posted by: Butterfinger
I remember race relations were a hell of a lot better 8 years ago before something happened...

Yes. Before a bunch of racist idiots got upset about having a black president and suddenly felt that their dominance was threatened. Good job for noticing.

That's really NONSENSE. Barack Obama would NEVER have gotten elected without the white vote, which he got in droves. I voted TWICE for Barack Obama, before you accuse me of being a racist idiot. And when he did get elected, instead of EVER trying to bring the people together of all races, he turned out to be one of the most racially divisive presidents we ever had. THAT is what happened, over 8 years he never missed out on a chance to demean those very same white people who elected him, and empower racist blacks to hate whites openly. Its called BETRAYAL, not racism. Now I have a question for you, Obama had a white mother but only EVER identified as being black, WHY?

Answer: y'all call him black so...

Question for you: can you actually cite instances he was 'racially divisive' to help your point?

Yes, I can.

He inserted himself into a sensitive race issue by saying that Trayvon Martin could be his son.

Called working class people racist because they didn't embrace immigrants taking their jobs or didn't approve of trade deals that sent jobs overseas. He did this in 2008 while campaigning.

Called his own grandmother a "typical white person, who feared black men". Totally racist statement, on campaign in 2008. Racist, because its a generalization about a group of people. Try such a generalization about black people and see how fast you are attacked by the liberal media if you are running for office.

Ignored violence at black lives matter protests, calling it "freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. This was said after 5 Dallas policemen were murdered at a BLM protest in 2016.

In short, he took sides on issues of race, when a president is supposed to be impartial and represent ALL the people. That was divisive and polarized the country. I was very disappointed in him, I thought he was going to bring us together as a country, A lot of people did, and a lot of white voters did. Then the opposite happened. Now you have a democratic party that is hostile to white people and is running totally on identity politics. Hillary herself said that she didn't campaign in white working class areas because she didn't think she needed the white vote to win. That is called EXCLUSION. That's how a lot of people felt, not racist, BETRAYED. So we have president Trump.
[

Trayvon Martin was a kid minding his own damn business, when someone stalked him first in a car then on foot through the apartment complex he was staying. Martin was afraid, and hadn't been able to flee, so tried to stand his ground. Alas, he was a kid and didn't have a gun - his stalker did. Maybe look at it from that perspective, instead of the one where President Obama is black, and so was the kid, therefore it's racial. People made it racial, because they didn't want to consider that perspective. If it was some white kid and President Obama (being half-white) said exactly the same thing, would it have been racial?

I'm sorry, is someone stating the truth a racist statement? I know plenty of people and even relatives who feel the same way. Hell, it's even true of black people:

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
― Jesse Jackson

Yes, that's THAT Jessie Jackson.

The police shooting in Dallas was not done by a BLM person. Would you say the same about country music fans, when some random guy shot over 500 people?

Maybe it's because you wear rose-colored glasses that you see things as you do.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Greven
A company's workforce grows out of necessity. If it could pocket extra profits or return more money to its shareholders, it would and does. Better to go from $2 million to $20 million in revenue than from 200 workers to 2000.

Who creates the necessity to grow or the necessity to layoff? Both start with good or bad leadership. The company I work for pays well, give free healthcare with a 30 dollar co-pay, has many other great things for the employees. Our main company is Boeing, so do I care what the CEO makes...lol

Likewise, but a whole lot of it is based on luck or lies, rather than strategic planning.

Boeing competes with other contractors for military business, and those don't always pan out.
Is it the fault of the CEO if another company underbids a contract and the military goes with that company?

With a big contract, a company will have to hire more people - that's been happening with Northrop Grumman, once they won the LRSB contract. Perhaps the expectation of winning the contract led to hiring - would it be the fault of the CEO for layoffs if the contract goes to another company instead?

There are a lot of variables, and the bigger the company, the less control the CEO has over how a company performs.

I live near a Bosch manufacturing place (no longer called Bosch), I know some people who work there. I don't know the full percentage, but was told over half the employees are black. Why? Because some black people are in charge and hired their friends and relatives. The percentage of blacks in the area is no where near that number, almost 24% of pop is black.

This would be discrimination and yes this kind of hiring practice happens all the time. I've seen the bosses son go to jail and then to be hired on to a military contract because daddy worked there.

Clearly there needs to be some kind of affirmative action in these situations. I wonder why if this is why some of them have to work 7 days a week and sometimes 10 hour days (more 8 hour ones this year).

originally posted by: fleabit

Can you give us, lets say, the top five obstacles? I think it is important to put some clarification on what is unique to only minorities in holding them back.

So you don't think there are any obstacles if you are a minority?

I mean, I guess aside from getting loans, jobs, a competitive salary, equal treatment where any choice is made between a minority and a non-minority, treatment by police, and so on.. there isn't MUCH of a different.

How about taking some time to read some studies. For example.. average household salary of blacks to whites.. or Hispanics to whites. Or even getting into college so you can get a job to give you a better salary. If white, do you fear that if you are walking alone at night you will get stopped by police solely because you are white? And there a lot of little things you probably never notice. Things like where you might be seated in a restaurant or how quickly you are served, being unable to get a taxi because you are ignored if you are a single black guy trying to hail one down (after all.. he might rob the taxi driver!), etc.

It's amazing to me that people think there is nothing that a minority has to face that as a white person, you may have to face. That's just absurd.

I don't consider it "white privilege" however. I think everyone should be treated this way, and it shouldn't be a privilege. So white privilege is a misnomer. So aiming anger at white people to fix these problems is senseless. Saying there should be a "white tax," or forming groups to protest against white people.. is pointless. Do you want to bring white people to the same level, or do you want to propel your race upwards? I'd think the latter. I guess white privilege was perhaps coined to make white people even aware that there was a problem.. which basing on this thread alone, kind of proves the theory that many think there isn't one.

I was ignored 2x today at Jiffy Lube. First I pulled up, waited, nobody came to help. I then went inside and waited, nobody came to help. I saw someone pull up outside and then i saw someone run to help him. I left.

Something similar happened at Walmart a while back. It was a black cashier ignoring white people, but when a black guy came up she was there in a sec.

It happens more than people think.

I was ignored 2x today at Jiffy Lube. First I pulled up, waited, nobody came to help. I then went inside and waited, nobody came to help. I saw someone pull up outside and then i saw someone run to help him. I left.

Something similar happened at Walmart a while back. It was a black cashier ignoring white people, but when a black guy came up she was there in a sec.

It happens more than people think.

It happens more to minorities. Amazing people think it doesn't. And it must have been tragic to have a person ignoring you in Walmart. And you watched them ignore several white people and then help a black person? How dedicated of you to stand around waiting for that, to prove that white discrimination actually exists. Simply hilarious.

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: nightstalker78

originally posted by: RomeByFire
Simultaneously being discriminated against whilst having whites privilege

What is this white privilege you speak of? I've never seen it. But apparently I have it and don't know it.

White privilege isn't about having special privileges for being white, it's about not encountering obstacles minorities often have to face. Non-minorities often take for granted things that are a greater hassle, degrading, or even impossible for a minority. Not saying it's as great as it once was, but the problem still exists. Just because you are ignorant of the times this happens to minorities doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

My wife is Korean, and we talk about this sometimes. She also took some classes in college regarding this topic, so it's an interesting chat topic for us. I don't always agree with her side of things, but she did open my eyes to many things that as a white person, I would take for granted, that for her and even more so for Hispanic and black people, can be an ordeal or even degrading.

Interesting. Can you name those things? I'm genuinely curious. I'm not going to sit here and pretend minorities don't experience racism. They do.Sometimes to an almost sickening extent.But let's not pretend white people don't. We do. For example,right now,I work with a black gentleman who constantly has something derogatory to say about whites. Every.Single.Day. Could you imagine if I was saying things about blacks? Not only would I not have a job but you better believe he'd be demanding my company pay him.