Why do Minorities get most Govt and State Jobs?

reply to post by Honor93


i did post my observations a few pages back. i have been to 3 dmvs in my area (chicagoland) i "observed" that minorities were not the majority at any of the places i have been to.

reply to post by noctos

so, far, you are pretty much on target ... for a few good laughs, a few more pages could be to your advantage enjoy

oooooh, oh yeah ... the OP actually presented a few good ideas to help alleviate this imaginary situation ... please, share some more ... www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by lonegurkha


when people do not agree with the op and post there own observations, and when people post statistics you say they are ignorant and that they are derailing the thread. its like i'm talking to a brick wall. why dont you just make a thread and tell people who dont agree with you or have had different "observations" not to post on your thread.

reply to post by Honor93


The statistics provided from 2006 are only five years old and quite relevant to the discussion at hand. However, you are more than welcome to disregard them as is your wont. That is not my problem.

You have offered your Opinion based on seriously out-dated information, lack of understanding, and an unwillingness to admit your own misleading commentary.
Which, by the way, only serves to prove you have no intention of discussing the point of this thread.

Riiiiight... I haven't made any attempt whatsoever to discuss this issue in an honest, civil and logical way. My bad.

why are you keeping us all waiting for that "intelligent discourse" you mentioned?

Oh, and ad hominem attack. How nice. Thank you for keeping me in line.

The question: "why do minorities get most government and state jobs" is a valid and complete thought ... without any reference to 'ethnicity'.

Actually, he did reference ethnicity quite prominently in his opening post. In fact, it's the fourth paragraph down from his first line. Allow me to quote it for you:

Originally posted by GeminiSky
Simply put, it seems to me that minorities here are awarded state and govt jobs far more often that the average Caucasian.

See that reference to Caucasian -- it is inferred that he is specifically talking about race -- as in "the average Caucasian" vs. other minority races. Seriously, that's not a stretch by any means.

Then, the OP reveals his personal experience as valid reason to pose the question.
are you clearer now?

He's posed a perfectly valid question. I certainly haven't denied that. Nor have I chosen to misunderstand his question as you are obviously attempting to imply.

At no time did he declare that his experience was a National Standard (hence, stats).

But he did pose a question regarding federal government and state jobs. It is only natural that federal statistics play a role in the discussion as it is pertinent to the issue.

At no time did he infer or state that ethnicity had any role in this discussion, yet you keep harping on it.

Again, he did infer just that in his opening post by mention Caucasian in reference to minorities. Twice, in fact. Again, allow me to quote:

Originally posted by GeminiSky
Simply put, it seems to me that minorities here are awarded state and govt jobs far more often that the average Caucasian.

Originally posted by GeminiSky
Is there really an equal opportunity chance of getting hired for a state or govt job if you are say a Caucasian, and not part of a minority?

Furthermore he inquired as to my ethnicity in another post. So, yes, he has played the race card quite prominently within his thread.

And, rather concede to your confusion and gain some knowledge and/or clarification, you prefer to beat a dead horse ... interesting.

If I was confused or uncertain about a point I certainly have no qualms asking for clarification. I've been quite steadfast with my stance in this thread -- there has been no violence against deceased animals occurring on my behalf. But you are more than welcome to continue chastising my obvious confusion and lack of intelligence, as that seems to float your boat.

For the last time (hopefully), the OP never claimed his experience is/was or reflects any national standard ... just his locale and he is curious about those elsewhere ... why is this a problem for you?

and your perception that severely out-dated statistics have any relevance is becoming factually humorous.

so, if you haven't experienced any similar situation, how do you qualify your opinion (based on out-dated nonsense)? personally, at this point, it do believe it resembles rubbish.

Federal employment statistics regarding the make up of the federal workforce is quite relevant to the issue. The statistics provided are from within the last five years -- hardly ancient as you have claimed. As I've stated previously you can choose to ignore them -- or not -- as you see fit.

However, it would only be fair to point out that several other members have accepted these statistics as a valid representation of the federal workforce. So, it's not just me you're insulting.

WRONG again ... many 'average male Caucasians' are classified minority. do you need a list?
It is clear you have no clue what constitutes a 'minority' classification of a person.

Grasping at straws, aren't you? It is overly obvious within the opening post that it is Caucasians as a race in general that was being compared to other ethnic (implied by the OP regarding race as an issue) minorities. It was not a break down of Caucasian males vs. all females, the disabled and all other ethnic groups.

And, no, the "average male Caucasian" are not officially classified as a minority group. But if that thought makes you happy, you are more than welcome seek solace where you can.

Therein lies your confusion ... the ONLY 'average Caucasian' who is not a minority is male.
contrary to your opinion, ALL of the following caucasians are classified as a minority ... (whether you agree or not)
C/women
C/elders regardless of gender or age
C/veterans regardless of gender or age
C/disabled regardless of gender or age
C/criminals also regardless of age or gender
i believe there are others but at the moment, i believe i've made my point.
All of the above are likely to be ready, willing and able employees.
All of the above who apply WILL be considered before and above any 'average caucasian'(male).
which happens to be the crux of the OPs opening communique.

So you're defining what constitutes a minority for GeminiSky? Outside the parameters initially set within his opening post where he first posed his question?

Okay...

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone else (subgroup wise) that you would like to add to that list as to who would be considered a minority? Because this would be the time to chime in. Oh, what the hell, feel free to add to that list to your heart's content whenever you want. The more, the merrier I say!

Because, really, you are watering down the OP's original premise big time. Let's revisit that:

Originally posted by GeminiSky
Is there really an equal opportunity chance of getting hired for a state or govt job if you are say a Caucasian, and not part of a minority?

I've emphasized the term Caucasian, because that is the central point of his question. If we were to take the expanded definition of minority as you have been kind enough to provide, by default we would have to cancel out the following minority subgroups:

• Caucasian women
  
• Caucasian elders regardless of gender or age
  
• Caucasian veterans regardless of gender or age
  
• Caucasian disabled regardless of gender or age
  
• Caucasian criminals also regardless of age or gender (although I seriously call this one into question)
  
• Caucasian etc.
  

After this is done, we are still left with ethnic minority groups (even taking into consideration the myriad of subgroups, women, elderly, disabled, etc.).

So, to make an extremely long point short. The reason race comes prominently into play within this discussion is because the thread's author deems it so.

Every time I think about whining about blacks or mexicans getting special treatment I try to remember all the times I didn't get pulled over by the cops for being white.

Originally posted by GhostLancer
The OP pointed-out his perception that "minorities" seem to have an uncomfortably large percentage of government/state jobs, based on his limited encounters with such organizations as the DMV, Post Office and Social Security Office, etc.

What about many OTHER avenues of employment, excluding the military (since we've already covered that). Let's look at the service industry. Would you say that "minorities" are the *majoriy* there? How many McDonald's, Wendy's, Hardees, BK's, Arby's and Taco Bells (plus others) are manned by "minorities?"

How many cabs have you gotten into that are driven by white males? How many 7-11s are manned by "whites?" How many luggage checkers at the airport are whites?

In the end, the direction of YOUR PERSONAL JOURNEY IN THIS LIFE is determined by YOU. A person going around and blaming other races and ethnicities and cultures for his/her private demise is foolish. YOU are in charge of your own destiny. YOU are empowered to better YOURself. YOU control these most important factors in YOUR life...

To try to BLAME others for your own shortfallings is simply lazy. Take control. Set higher standards. Embrace a higher power of your choosing.

Souls have no particular color. We all bleed red.

We are not humans having a spiritual experience. We are SPIRITS having a HUMAN experience.

IMHO

ah geez, not you too?
the service industry is NOT a govt/state job. bad examples all around.

Parks & Recreation, Firemen, Police Officers, Judges, Sanitation (where state sponsored), bus drivers, crossing guards, state hospital employees (hospitality but not private sector), state sponsored medicine and technicians, first responders, EMS, pharmacologists, Drivers (of all kinds who seem to wreck frequently), city mechanics, FBI, TSA, CIA, more? ... come on now ... let's talk reality, not imaginations.

private sector jobs = govt/state jobs ... that's your argument?
oh well, so much for intelligent discourse.
good night ... may we be the change we wish to see.

reply to post by conspiracy nut

yes, you did mention that but also when you were still of the opinion just whites were non-minority ... you still maintain that opinion? and if so, which whites?

of these visits, how many were women? how many were veterans? any physically disabled? how about aged/senior status? ... i am just guessing here, but i seriously doubt any dmv in chicagoland is lacking or void of minorities.

so, how recent were these visits of yours?
care to share details?
how many service stations, employees, minority breakdown, attitude issues, less than stellar performance, worthy of your tax dollars?
____________________________________
personally, i really can't speak about the 'attitude' issues anymore ... i don't seem to encounter them since i adopted a different approach ... but i still witness many who have.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by GeminiSky

 

How many of these jobs have you applied for?
Just curious.

...

So I am going to have to assume the answer to my question would have been somewhere around...

...none?

Thanks. Helps put some perspective on what is purported in this thread as perspective.

Reply to post by maria_stardust
before i begin another 'attack' ... let me say thanks for continuing the discussion if for no other reason than it has helped distract me from my physical pain. and that, is a blessing. thank you all

ok, on to this mess you insist applies ...
as usual, you're looking beyond the facts, entirely ...

as in "the average Caucasian" vs. other minority races

... in the US, All races other than caucasian are classified minority ... he did not set them apart ... the government did ... but you claim otherwise.
would you prefer he had been less PC and said ... non-minority caucasian males vs all other applicants, legal or not? because that is the cold, hard, truth.

i prefer more recent facts, not 6+yr old ones ... no argument there ... they are useless and certainly not my problem.

well, at least we agree on something ...

I haven't made any attempt whatsoever to discuss this issue in an honest, civil and logical way.

So, my direct question is an ad hominem attack? do you even know what that means?
i'm guessing not.
here, let me give you an example ... as it is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise ... i could say ... since you admit to being prone to flights of fancy, your perception is merely a reflection of your chosen state of delusion.
**** that, would be an ad hominem attack ... really, if you're gonna play with the big kids, could you at least pack a dictionary or maybe next time, bring your own tutor? ***
boy o'boy, i must really be a floatin' now

But he did pose a question regarding federal government and state jobs. It is only natural that federal statistics play a role in the discussion as it is pertinent to the issue.

oh baloney, federal statistics have no place in this discussion, period.
keep chanting that mantra ... the fed will guide us ... they'd never lie to us ... the fed will feed us ... you know they need us ... the fed will endure ... of this we're sure ~~ problem here is, we've heard it all before and it sounds just as bad now as it did then.

and this happens to be another valid question of which you still continue to avoid answering.

Is there really an equal opportunity chance of getting hired for a state or govt job if you are say a Caucasian, and not part of a minority?

the only answer is .... da .. da da da da ... No.

Federal employment statistics regarding the make up of the federal workforce is quite relevant to the issue.

we are not discussing "the federal workforce" but a slice of it ... sad that you refuse to cooperate.

you're a bit off your rocker with this one ...

However, it would only be fair to point out that several other members have accepted these statistics as a valid representation of the federal workforce. So, it's not just me you're insulting

other members who accept those stats as you do are equally as mistaken as you ... no insult there, basic fact.
other members who disagree with you and your stats are what in your opinion, exactly?

i agreed the stats are an old representation of "the entire federal workforce" ... not the slice we're discussing on this thread.

you cannot dissect the group "minority" to suit your argument ... sorry, but the law isn't that flexible.
it is all or nothing ... and minorities are seldom classified based on ethnicity alone.
also, this point is not up for discussion, it is an absolute unless the law changes.
even if everyone's perception was aligned with yours, it doesn't change the law.

making things up as we go along, eh?

And, no, the "average male Caucasian" are not officially classified as a minority group.

never implied it was (at least not classified as such). the phrase "average Caucasian" - only references a male (in this context).

If you prefer to use 'average male Caucasian' ... i could get used to it but wouldn't necessarily agree cause it's too general, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
----> too general because there are plenty of 'average male Caucasians' who are deemed minorities ... (for a multitude of reasons).

So you're defining what constitutes a minority for GeminiSky?

ummm, no ... the definition of minority doesn't fluctuate just because you or i may want it to. the government defined it, we just follow their lead. it is a group and all members must be given equal consideration.
as stated earlier ... the concept that minority = ethnicity is a MYTH or a coincidence or a falsehood or whatever synonym works, but it is not fact by any stretch of the imagination.

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone else (subgroup wise) that you would like to add to that list as to who would be considered a minority? Because this would be the time to chime in. Oh, what the hell, feel free to add to that list to your heart's content whenever you want. The more, the merrier I say!

cute, almost funny even but truthfully, i think i did miss a couple or a few, but i'm not going searching for'em now.

when it comes down to the nuts and bolts of it all ... even the group title "average Caucasians" is misleading because -0- females are included and many males are excluded. (some group, eh? - hey, i didn't design it :wow

ok, let's try a different approach ... you said i'm watering down the OPs premise, big time.
well alright, where and how?
let's dissect it, shall we?

Originally posted by GeminiSky
Is there really an equal opportunity chance of getting hired for a state or govt job if you are say a Caucasian, and not part of a minority?

1. in search of an equal opportunity / desire
2. in search of state/govt employment / goal
agreed so far?
3. Caucasian and not part of a minority / certain males only / condition
4. so, based on the above condition, is he likely to fulfill his desire or achieve his goal?
please answer.

given that the above 'condition' limits his hiring opportunities at every govt/state location, does he have an 'equal opportunity' to acquire govt/state employment? please answer this one too.

I've emphasized the term Caucasian, because that is the central point of his question.

no, not really, you just perceive it that way. Caucasian is the only ethnicity separate from the group, but not all of them are non-minority.

If we were to take the *expanded* / original and only definition of minority as you have been kind enough to provide, by default we would have to cancel out the following minority subgroups:

exactly ... but how then, do you go from Caucasian subgroups to ...

we are still left with ethnic minority groups

this does not compute.
there is NO OTHER race or ethnicity that is non-minority. Really, there is no other, they are all included in the minority group already.

So, to make an extremely long point short. The reason race comes prominently into play within this discussion is because the thread's author deems it so.

hmmmm, if the OP doesn't identify the non-minority race, how then do you separate the non-minority folk from everyone else? PC or not. please, enlighten me.

Originally posted by Honor93
Reply to post by something wicked

 

Hi there,
Your response was to another poster, but please take a look at what you have said in context of the OP please, you have me confused. If you believe the OP was not referring to ethnic minorities, then which 'minorities' do you believe he was referring to and if they were not of an ethnic nature how would he be able to say 80% fell into such a bracket? As apart from gender I'm not sure how such an assessment could be made, so not sure what you are trying to say.

hello there and thank you for your almost civil response

The easiest answer is the simple one ... most are confused as to whom is classified a minority today, not 50yrs ago.
As stated earlier, most ppl are confusing what is merely a coincidence.
All minorities are Not based on ethnicity ... it is only a coincidence that many minorities are of a different ethnicity than caucasion.

Example: 1 room 20 ppl ... 10 female, 10 male (color irrelevant) .. based on visual observations, i am positive of the following --> minimum 10 = minority (women) ... 2 men are disabled = minority ... 2 men are clearly seniors/elderly = minority ... the other 4 are completely questionable at first glance unless they are 'other' than caucasion. does this help you understand my point? based on the above, by simple observation (and knowing the rules) we have a room with at least an 80% minority populus.


The OP never suggested ethnicity in the opening statement, it was just randomly perceived in error. The term 'minority' has become as offensive as racial slurs were before they became illegal to utter.

The remainder of this mish-mash isn't deserving a response.
However, to answer your question, yes, exactly ... who are you or anyone else to put words (especially that one - ethnic) where it doesn't exist? minorities = all in the example above and others ... seems you should learn about which you speak, as should many others.

only answering out of understanding and willingness to share.
if we are equal, why should we be classified as minorities in anything?
edit to add ~~ by the way, i am also classified, minority ... regardless of my skin color or
ethnicity
oooops, forgot the question ... so, as a minority, what am i?? a WASP

, disabled, senior, female, vet, ethnically challenged

or other?

edit on 17-2-2011 by Honor93 because: add text[/editbyo]

edit on 17-2-2011 by Honor93 because: add question

So basically, if you aren't a white male with no obvious signs of physical disability you are classed as a minority? Would you care to be any more specific while you are at it, I don't know, age range, length of hair (or lack of it)? Gender preference?

You seem to imply I have asked a question about what it is about you that makes you class yourself as in some kind of minority group. I can't recall asking, certainly don't recall caring. Why do you think I would be interested and why do you think my response was almost civil and then call my post a mish mash? extra DIV