One of the popular ASPL arguments for unrestricted illegal immigration is some form of "But without illegal immigrants, who will pick your vegetables?", or build your houses.
I like to think of this argument as being based on the premise that the US cannot operate without a permanent underclass, paid incredibly low wages, and essentially forced into slavery/serfdom by the threat of being turned in to ICE. This is the argument being made by the ASPL not by greedy profit loving conservatives, but by the empathetic progressives. What's interesting to me is that every time the ASPL makes a move to "help" those on the low end of the wage scale is the unintended consequences. Raise the minimum wage for low skilled burger flipper jobs, and the companies make the move to kiosks for people to order their food, which eliminates jobs. Given this, how much effort is John Deere putting into making a machine that can harvest tomatoes or other vegetable crops? Y'all don't think that the farm corporations that hire illegal aliens wouldn't jump at the chance to replace them with a machine?
Likewise, as builders are moving toward pre assembled framing components, you'll see an increase in machines and decrease in framers on construction sites, especially residential.
Ultimately it sure seems like the ASPL want this slave/serf class because they believe that they can buy their votes with promises that they'll likely never fulfill. They want them counted in the census because it stacks the legislature. I'm not sure that importing an underclass, keeping them in low wage, low skill, menial jobs to score political points is a good strategy. Expecting them to wipe the asses of progressive legislators seems like an even worse idea.
https://x.com/thomassowell/status/1934337644512612414?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Obviously he's a raging progressive, and she's literally railing against Trump for messing with the status quo of maintaining an entire class of low wage, low skilled, illegal aliens around to prop up "sectors of our economy".
https://x.com/wallstreetapes/status/1934375475469840684?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Big Ag is likely supports politicians on both sides because it's expedient. So this isn't a totally partisan issue, but it is clear that Big Ag relies on underpaid immigrants to make it's money. Trump needs to enforce the laws on both ends. He needs to deport the illegal aliens and fine the companies that hire them. It might keep grocery prices higher, but it's the right thing to do.
FWIW, I have been saying for years that part of the problem with the reliance on low wage immigrants in the trades is that we as a society have demeaned and minimized the value of skilled tradesmen and overvalued 4 year degrees in terms of status. We as a society need to rethink this narrative and encourage people to expand their horizons beyond racking up massive debt for a worthless degree to follow your dreams. Obviously the educational establishment and the student loan lenders would prefer otherwise, but failure to do so is going to negatively impact our country in the future.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/city-nebraska-recovering-states-largest-100042406.html
Maybe the ASPL narrative is wrong? Who knew?
https://x.com/wrong_speak/status/1934386525380513868?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.
The pro-abortion argument is "the unborn aren't human", the pro-slavery argument was that "blacks aren't human", the pro-illegal immigration argument is "who's going to pick our vegetables/mow my lawn/roof my house", the pro-slavery argument was "who else will pick our cotton". Coincidence?
25 comments:
Craig falsely and ridiculously claimed... WITH NO support, per usual:
This is the argument being made by the ASPL not by greedy profit loving conservatives
Except that it's literally NOT.
You can not point to ONE LIBERAL PERSON IN ALL THE PLANET who is arguing
We should have immigrants here to pick our crops, tend our children, build our houses, cook our food, etc, etc, etc
AND they should be paid at below the minimum wage.
That is literally the argument of NOT ONE PROGRESSIVE or Democrat.
Given that you didn't even try to find someone who is advocating that because you couldn't because they don't exist in the real world, are you willing to be honest and admit that,
No, of course, Democrats and Liberals are not advocating this at all.
It was a stupidly false claim and attack/slander and I apologize.
And speaking of damned stupid lies...
Ultimately it sure seems like the ASPL want this slave/serf class because they believe that they can buy their votes with promises that they'll likely never fulfill.
This is, of course, BS. Will you admit that you can't find ANY progressive who is advocating ANYTHING like this?
And when you admit that reality, will you apologize for this vicious and completely ass-backwards hellacious lie?
Come on. Don't be obtuse.
Just for one (of many) examples, a couple of decades ago, the Immokalee farm workers (immigrants) group organized a protest to help ensure that the farm workers/tomato pickers got a fair wage. They and their allies (like my church and other progressive types) accomplished this by organizing boycotts of KFC and Taco Bell, the large corporations who were profiteering off the back of these immigrant farm workers.
The boycott worked and eventually, the corporations acceded to the demands of the immigrant farm workers. Because of the leadership of these hard-working immigrants and their largely progressive allies.
Today and for years, progressives (and some conservatives, fortunately) have been supporters of locally produced produce and CSA (Community Support Agriculture groups), again, with the goal of improving connections between our vital farmers and their employees and the consumers of those products... In hopes of guaranteeing a more fair wage for these workers. And not just for the immigrant farm workers (and in our area, immigrant horse industry workers) but also for the small local farmers, whether they're immigrants or not.
Because a healthy food system MUST begin by having fair wages/payments for farmers. As progressives have been noting for decades now, listening to the wisdom of our patron farmer saint, Wendell Berry and his allies.
And, of course, WHO are the ones who advocate for living wage increases across the board? By and large, progressives.
Don't be obtuse. And don't spread false claims and slander. The Bible literally condemns that, if you are inclined to take such words literally.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that you haven't seen the "Who is going to pick your crops" signs, billboards, and responses in interviews? Seriously?
https://www.mynbc5.com/article/becca-balint-immigration-wipe-our-asses-remark/64998987
"We know that our economy is completely bound up in immigration and migrant labor," Balint told the audience. "And of course, we have to come to a place in Congress where it is no longer a political issue, but we see it as an existential issue for the country."
What the Democrat said next drew pushback and criticism from the Vermont GOP.
"If we don't have avenues for people to come here legally, to work or to build a home here, I'm going to be really crude right now, we're not going to have anybody around to wipe our asses," Balint said in the May 28 town hall meeting. "We don't have enough people in our country now to fill the jobs that we have right now."
I'm sure you'll argue (sarcasm alert) that she's not really a "progressive" or some such nonsense, but the reality is she said we need immigrants to "wipe out asses". So yeah, no progressive is making those sorts of arguments.
https://www.google.com/imgres?q=Illegal%20immigrants%20pick%20your%20crops&imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Flookaside.fbsbx.com%2Flookaside%2Fcrawler%2Fmedia%2F%3Fmedia_id%3D1289521032530481&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fstory.php%3Fstory_fbid%3Dpfbid02JZCNmEVb4vtjhivvBoiowELLo3rsaQKVkupTkCEwimbeeeVr7mmhiAuq582zJQ8Tl%26id%3D100044177901904&docid=9ZpnFe9zO7NHTM&tbnid=_c6KW4SfDtL82M&vet=12ahUKEwjsj52o2eyNAxVGEFkFHZPoB7gQM3oECE0QAA..i&w=1074&h=1440&hcb=2&ved=2ahUKEwjsj52o2eyNAxVGEFkFHZPoB7gQM3oECE0QAA
https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/pelosi-florida-farmers-need-immigrants-to-pick-the-crops
I didn't "find anyone" because I couldn't believe that any sentient adult with access to a computer hadn't heard some version of this argument. Clearly I was wrong and you've managed to silo yourself off from anything on your side that might go against your fantasy progressive world.
Yeah, it's just a coincidence that the ASPL is obsessed with getting illegal aliens counted in the census and moving forward with opportunities to get ID that can be used to vote.
Once again, Dan makes a claim he can't prove.
Well, if you have one example fro decades ago then the matter is settled.
Hey, I'm all for legal immigrants or people on work visas getting paid an appropriate wage. I'm not for the ASPL using underpaid immigrants to score political points and win elections. I see what the ASPL is saying in hearings, on TV and I can read the signs. You live in your fantasy world if that helps.
Absolutely the "living wage" for low skill, entry level, jobs has been a great success. Replacing employees with kiosks and automation, and causing small businesses to close due or cut staff because they can't afford their labor costs, yeah awesome.
Wouldn't a "healthy food system" start with eliminating artificial and chemical additives?
FWIW, I fully support fining businesses who employ illegal aliens to the maximum allowed under the law. While I have no problem with deporting those here illegally, the best way to solve this is to deal with the employers.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that you haven't seen the "Who is going to pick your crops" signs, billboards, and responses in interviews? Seriously?
I didn't say (and read closely so you understand): I DID NOT SAY that progressives were warning about the harm to our agricultural systems if we deport most of our workers.
Now, having said that: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS I JUST WROTE?
Putting it another way, OF COURSE, progressives and rational people are concerned about the harm to immigrants AND our food system if we deport most of our farm workers and many of our home builders.
Understand?
We ARE concerned about that.
(Now follow...)
AND, AT THE SAME TIME, we want all people to be paid a living wage.
Understand how one does not conflict with the other? How, indeed, both are rational and, for anyone interested, INCREDIBLY biblically consistent with each other?
What is going on with your reading and reasoning comprehension, Craig?
Are you unable to do two things at once? Have two concerns at once? Because we are.
God, have mercy.
Craig:
I'm sure you'll argue (sarcasm alert) that she's not really a "progressive" or some such nonsense, but the reality is she said we need immigrants to "wipe out asses".
I doubt it, but maybe it is the case that you're just not familiar with immigrants working in the US. But here's a little bulletin for you: THEY KNOW that they are vital components in our child and elder care systems. THEY KNOW that many of them have the precious responsibility in their jobs of tending to toileting needs.
That doesn't help you, son.
Again, with the reading comprehension concerns. Are you doing okay?
Lastly:
I didn't "find anyone" because I couldn't believe that any sentient adult with access to a computer hadn't heard some version of this argument. Clearly I was wrong and you've managed to silo yourself off from anything on your side that might go against your fantasy progressive world.
You can't find anyone - and you STILL haven't found anyone - who says we progressives want to have migrant workers SO THAT WE CAN PAY THEM SLAVE WAGES. That is antithetical to the progressive movement. Don't be an idiot, son. Read for understanding. And when one reads for understanding, one has to read the WHOLE paragraph and not just pick out one line.
Maybe that says a lot about your biblical interpretations.
Come on. Be better.
Now that I've corrected your stupidly false claims and misunderstanding, I ask again the clear, reasonable question I led with:
You can not point to ONE LIBERAL PERSON IN ALL THE PLANET who is arguing
We should have immigrants here to pick our crops, tend our children, build our houses, cook our food, etc, etc, etc
AND they should be paid at below the minimum wage.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW? If not, look at that last line.
Jesus, have mercy on us.
Excellent job of not responding to what I actually said. Some on the ASPL are absolutely trading on the fact that losing low wage, low skilled, immigrant labor will raise prices.
You say you're concerned, yet the messaging is that we need to keep the status quo. How much effort did Biden put into mandating e-verify for all workers?
I understand you, did you not understand the words of the DFL rep about needing immigrants to wipe her ass? I
Once again you have this idealized, Pollyanna, view of what the ASPL is which is at odds with what the rest of us see when we drive through protests, see protesters/rioters on video, and listen to DFL politicians and talking heads. You insist that absolutely no one is sending this message, yet reality might disagree.
Of course I understand your "living wage" fantasy, and the consequences that flow from it, as well as the complete lack of understanding of how business works. As long as some random ASPL "experts" get to decide what a "living wage" is and set unrealistic expectations of what standards of living should be possible with various jobs, that's all y'all are interested in.
Entry level employees that lose jobs because of automation, whatever.
Locally owned small businesses that can't afford a 20-30% increase in labor costs and who's clientele can't afford the increased prices to accommodate labor costs, who cares. The owners are too greedy.
You keep living in fantasy land, I'll keep watching the ASPL and listening to what they say.
The condescending, superiority in your "Maybe you don't know..." bullshit is only to be expected.
Yeah, the who notion that the only reason to flood our country with illegal aliens in because y'all need a permanent underclass to keep prices low is nothing. It's just the most common ASPL argument for unrestricted immigration.
If prices will rise if we deport illegals, then the only reason for that rise is increased wages. The primary argument is that we need to keep the illegal aliens to keep prices from rising. Yet somehow the low prices are not related to the current wage structure. It's all just a big coincidence.
I know, double standard and all, but your inability to identity this as being somewhat exaggerated for effect is a bit concerning.
What I do think is kind of amusing, is that the only jobs that the ASPL talks about illegal immigrants having are the low wage, low skill, menial, unpleasant jobs that "Americans won't do.". Again, I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
If one looks at the recent poll numbers, it's clear that your message is very effective.
Just goes to show how totally ignorant you are of actual progressives and their values. WE are the ones who want to see people placed in the highest-value, most apt job in fitting with the person's interests and skills as possible.
In the progressive world, there is this theory called Social Role Valorization. In short, it just means that people should be free to live their best lives the best they can (which does not include minimum or sub-minimum wage jobs, of course... unless that's what the individual wants).
But digging deeper, it's talking about systems of oppression and how those who have been oppressed are benefited most by NOT just getting the lowest bar job as possible, but getting the highest level job as much as possible within their skill and interest set.
This is because, for traditionally oppressed people (in the US, this has often included people of color, those with disabilities, immigrants, LGBTQ folks, women, etc) they are starting at a deficit. So, it's going to behoove them the most to get the best job as possible... and not JUST help them as individuals, but the group(s) they may be part of - immigrants, disabled, etc.
AND when those traditionally oppressed groups get a better leg up, THEN that ultimately helps society in the sense of rising water of people raises all boats. Which is why, biblically speaking and looking at the teachings of Jesus, He tells us that he came to bring good news specifically to the poor, the hungry, the oppressed, the sick, the foreigner... the traditionally marginalized or most at risk of being marginalized. Because when THEY are doing well, we're all doing better.
So, this social role valorization theory (and others that progressive types promote, like Just Peacemaking Theory, Non-Violent Direct Action and Liberation Theology, for instance) are specifically about lifting the "least of these" up and allying alongside them and following their lead to improving their lives which improve the lives of us all.
You just don't appear to understand the progressive value system or, as some might call it, the teachings of Jesus.
Craig:
What I do think is kind of amusing, is that the only jobs that the ASPL talks about illegal immigrants having are the low wage, low skill, menial,
And while one can't speak as if immigrants are a monolith (of course), many of them come from carpentry and gardening/farming backgrounds and that's the kind of work they WANT to do. Progressives support people in doing the work they want to do, getting paid a decent wage for doing the work and having the freedom to move as far along their career path as they want.
I've known multiple immigrant farmers/gardeners and the work they do is holy. They should just be paid a decent wage for it. Which again, is what PROGRESSIVES have traditionally supported and conservatives have traditionally opposed.
So, you're sort of painting yourself into a moral corner there, in your ignorance of actual progressive positions and your slanderous, stupidly false charges you make in your ignorance.
Dan's example doesn't mitigate the fact that such "protests" lead to changes in how businesses operate to compensate for the artificial rise in the cost of doing business. It might not happen immediately, but it's just the nature of the entrepreneurial beast to lower expenses because of their impact on profits, which is the point of going into business. Wages can be organically adjusted, but it still results in owners finding ways to improve the bottom line, and that's bad enough for those who are on the losing end of it. Those like Dan exacerbate the losing end by their demands for that which the job itself doesn't justify.
And much, if not most, agricultural advances in tech were the result of pressures to raise pay for menial tasks. In a great way, it has helped to improve the ability of agricultural businesses to provide more food for the masses by moving to machines which are more efficient than handpicking and such.
Karen Bass just made a comment about how we'd suffer after deporting illegals, and it was quite the same as wiping our asses and picking our crops. It's far more common than Dan has the integrity to admit. Or maybe he's just stupid.
Like many of these sorts of things these attempts to increase labor costs with no understanding of how business works will drive innovation in other areas that will ultimately lead to fewer jobs in these industries.
That it has already led to negative consequences for both low skilled, low wage, employees and small business owners, is beside the point.
Well, I guess if you're going to make shit up, you might as well go big.
What a bunch of crap.
1. Minimum wage jobs were never intended to be careers. They were and are opportunities to learn, grow, and develop skills that will be beneficial in the future.
2. Interesting notion. Given how poorly the progressive dominated education system is doing to prepare students for life after high school.
3. Is this why we're seeing medical schools lowering their admission requirements for applicants of favored demographic groups, higher drop out rates for those groups, and increasing numbers of marginally qualified doctors?
4. Interesting, this must be why we just saw news that Lockheed was denying bonuses to white employees (who qualified for and deserved the bonuses) and giving those bonuses to unqualified employees of favored demographics.
What is interesting is that we've known for decades when it takes to be (reasonably) successful in the US, and it's not that hard. It's crazy stuff like graduating from HS (presuming the HS hasn't failed to educate you), staying away from drugs and alcohol, not fathering children out of wedlock, you know stupid shit like that.
Unfortunately, we can see how successful the theories proposed by progressives have worked out. All we have to do is look at any urban area that is controlled by progressives to see the outcomes y'alls theories give us.
While that may be the case in some instances, the message being sent is that these jobs are what (certain) immigrants are expected to be satisfied with.
This "doing the work they want to do" notion is strange. Personally, I don't support someone with poor qualifications getting to be a Dr or engineer, because they "want to". Similarly, I don't care if a 90 pound woman who can't lift more than 30 pounds wants to be a firefighter or join the army. Doing what you "want to" is fine, as long as you have the qualification/skill/ability to do so, and that what you "want to" do is something that is in demand.
We see all too many students getting degrees is fields where there is no demand, and then they bitch about having to work at Starbucks. Just because someone "wants to" do something doesn't mean that someone else is obliged to pay them to do something there is no demand for.
Yes, people should be paid according to their skill, work ethic, qualifications, ability, and numerous other factors related to their ability to do the job they have. To simply impose pay structures with no relationship to the actual work in an actual industry harms everyone.
No moral corner here. I live in a place that is so far more progressive than you, I simply use my eyes and ears to know what progressives say, do, and believe.
As noted, Dan lives in a fantasy world where progressives operate according to his Pollyannaish wishes, as opposed to the real world where progressives do shitty things.
If he's spend 6 months up here, he'd be convinced that the progressives are really being controlled by Qanon or some such nonsense, to make real progressives look bad.
Hell, we just had progressive city council members publicly disseminating lies to get progressive activists worked up to go attack LE which was engaged in taking down part of an international crime organization which trafficked in Meth and humans. The council members, nor the rioters, have acknowledged their "mistake" to the best of my knowledge.
Craig:
This "doing the work they want to do" notion is strange. Personally, I don't support someone with poor qualifications getting to be a Dr or engineer, because they "want to".
This, in response to what I had said (I guess...??):
WE are the ones who want to see people placed in the highest-value, most apt job
in fitting with the person's interests and skills
as possible.
There's this insane conspiracy theory amongst many who are (somehow!!) opposed to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion that DEI advocates want people to get jobs they are not qualified for or just can't do. Of course, that is insanely false and just not supported by, you know, reality and shit.
As I noted, we want people to have the freedom and the wherewithal to pursue jobs in their interest AND within their skillset. But WHY do we want that sort of inclusion and diversity?
Because the data shows it's best not only for the employee (who might be a person of color or immigrant or a person with a disability) but because it tends to improve the business/agency who has hired them. It makes the world and workforce a better place for all (well, I guess except for bigots and hateful people, perhaps? but really, them too - especially them!)
Workforce DEI is kind of one of my main areas of interest and expertise, given that I've been employed in the field for a decade and have had to do a bunch of training and education to be certified to do the work.
Continuing...
So, where you said...
This "doing the work they want to do" notion is strange.
No. No, it's not at all. When you study the field and do the research, you find that when people are doing work they WANT to do, where they have natural interests in the topic, where they are invested in the work, they tend to be better employees, have fewer days off, are more dedicated and even eager to do the work and that energy is contagious and impacts the workplace and their co-workers. It is a rather obvious, common sense viewpoint, too. I'm not sure why you think it's strange.
Is it the case that you were trying to make the point... "It's strange to encourage people to work in fields where they are not capable of doing the work..."? Well, that WOULD be strange. But it's not anything I or those involved in DEI are encouraging, is it?
As someone who works with adults with disabilities in getting them jobs, we look at their interests, their skills/things they bring to the job, and the things that need to be in place for them to succeed. (And I work with those with disabilities, but our research-based, data-driven practices and processes work well with any potential employee.)
IF they are interested, for instance, in veterinarian work, but they have no degrees or the degree of training to be qualified to be a vet, we look at what is motivating them to want to do vet work. Is it because they love animals? Well, one could work at a dog grooming place and work with animals. Is it because they're concerned about mistreated animals - that there's a sense of justice in support of innocent beings? Well, maybe they'd also be interested in justice work for humans, as well. Maybe they'd be concerned about the elderly not getting the support they need at nursing homes, for instance, and we could look at a job where they're Paid Visitors with the elderly.
The point being, we're never looking to place someone in a job they simply can't physically or intellectually handle. That's insane. NO ONE DOES THAT. (and here's your chance to do your part to drive a stake through the deadly heart of that vampire myth). But we DO seek to find employment in their areas of interest as one of the conditions for them succeeding.
And, as an aside, people are motivated to work for all sorts of reasons. Some folk truly don't care WHAT they're doing as long as it pays well. That person might be interested in hiking for instance, but would gladly work as a sorter at UPS that is NOT an area of interest, but it does help them stay healthy (lots of exercise in that job) and gets them a paycheck.
In all of this, the points are:
There is research into how to best provide employment opportunities;
No one is encouraging people to find jobs they can't do;
Finding work in an area of interest tends to make for a better position for both the employer and the employee.
According to the data.
According to my lived experience in the field.
And what is true for those with disabilities is true for immigrants, is true for women, is true for most people.
Once again you are wrong. I was responding to this quote of yours.
"Progressives support people in doing the work they want to do, getting paid a decent wage for doing the work and having the freedom to move as far along their career path as they want."
Nowhere in this exact quote of your exact words is there any reference to qualifications, needs, or anything other that what "they want". That you are so unaware of how the job market works is alarming.
"There's this insane conspiracy theory amongst many who are (somehow!!) opposed to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion that DEI advocates want people to get jobs they are not qualified for or just can't do. Of course, that is insanely false and just not supported by, you know, reality and shit."
Well, as I noted, the recent Lockheed scandal, and the well documented lowering of medical school (hell higher ed standards in general) standards for certain demographic groups would suggest otherwise. But sure, live in your fantasy world. Y'all have bought into the Kendi (who's been significantly discredited) nonsense that the only possible explanation for disparities between groups is racism, and that the only way to "fix" this is with more racism. Strangely enough, the demographic group most harmed by this racism, is Asians.
"As I noted, we want people to have the freedom and the wherewithal to pursue jobs in their interest AND within their skillset. But WHY do we want that sort of inclusion and diversity?"
The employment market is a bit more complex than that, but I wouldn't expect someone who's experience in the private sector is so limited to understand more than you simplistic talking points. That the quote I was responding to didn't say that probably doesn't mean a thing to you.
"Because the data shows it's best not only for the employee (who might be a person of color or immigrant or a person with a disability) but because it tends to improve the business/agency who has hired them. It makes the world and workforce a better place for all (well, I guess except for bigots and hateful people, perhaps? but really, them too - especially them!)"
Yeah, the mythical data. The problem is that the data shows that lowering medical school entrance requirements for certain demographic groups results in a unusually high number of students who fail medical school along with massive student loan debt, but a cohort of doctors who barely squeaked through med school and will likely provide substandard care if they are allowed to practice at all.
By all means, be proud of policies that explicitly exclude more highly qualified students from some demographic groups, in favor of lower qualified students from other groups. Racism is racism.
"Workforce DEI is kind of one of my main areas of interest and expertise, given that I've been employed in the field for a decade and have had to do a bunch of training and education to be certified to do the work."
Well, aren't you proud of something.
Craig ridiculously stated, with no proof and clearly falsely...
Dan lives in a fantasy world where progressives operate according to his Pollyannaish wishes, as opposed to the real world where progressives do shitty things.
Dan lives in the tough real world that is littered with a history of oppression, neglect and abuse of the poor and marginalized. AND, Dan lives in a world full of progressives - and some conservatives, thank God - who are dealing with that real, tough world of injustices and oppression because we believe in God's realm being lived, God's will being done. We are foolish and pollyannish enough to believe that Jesus who taught us by word and example to ally with the poor and marginalized and to take concrete steps to make that happen.
Are there some "bad" liberals? I'm quite certain of it. Just like there are bad conservatives. Are they the norm? Not that I can see (on the progressive side of things, anyway). If you like to imagine it's anything like normative for liberals generally be abusive or whatever vague allegations you're ridiculously making about whole swaths of people, well, you are free to imagine anything you want.
But with no proof, it really doesn't amount to a hill of beans, does it?
we just had progressive city council members publicly disseminating lies to get progressive activists worked up to go attack LE
Yeah, I get it. It's easy to make empty fear-mongering claims with NO proof and act as if people should take you seriously. It's sort of become the modern conservative Thing to do. You've learned pretty well from your corrupt perverted prince who LOVES to repeat empty, clearly stupidly false claims to stir up ACTUAL fear in his followers.
It'd be easier to take your unsupported claim more seriously IF you also clearly condemned the ENDLESS, nearly daily attacks of the Felon on liberals, Democrats, the free press, judges, immigrants, women, conservative women who displease him, LGBTQ folks, GOP legislators who dare to disagree with him, preachers and churches who disagree with him, just normal workers who fail to adequately bow to his demands, election officials who dare to not validate his stupidly false claims... ON and on and on it goes, the fearmongering, stirring up of dangerous hatred and bigotry and zealots... IF you just started to denounce that endless parade of strongman fascism, I could think you actually give a damn about alleged false claims.
Craig...
Well, aren't you proud of something.
[rolls eyes]
Someone can reasonably note that they are well-versed and even an expert in a particular field without being arrogant or proud. It's not about me, at all. It's about the data and the research.
I get that conservatives have become (strangely) the Anti-Expert party, but you don't need to be and you don't need to dismiss the one who brings the news.
Craig:
The problem is that the data shows that lowering medical school entrance requirements for certain demographic groups results in a unusually high number of students who fail medical school along with massive student loan debt
If there actually is data that says that, then that is certainly a problem. But that doesn't mean working for diversity, equity and inclusion is a bad thing. Again, I suspect you have a muddled notion of what DEI means.
Are there going to be some instances where DEI is poorly enacted? Of course. And we should learn from that and get better. But you know what is BOUND to go bad? Anti-diversity, inequity and exclusion. EVERY TIME that is going to be a bad thing (if you understand aright what I mean by that).
So, the ideal is to shoot for DEI (and it will never not baffle me why I have to explain why that's a good thing... and explain it to CHRISTIANS?!!) and learn from any mistakes that are made and do it better.
That is the progressive model and it should be the conservative model because it's the smart and just way to do things.
But here, once again, you're citing "BAD THINGS..." with no support. I can't evaluate a vague and unsupported allegation. So, short of actual data, I have to suspect that you're likely misunderstanding something. Again, it's POSSIBLE that something like that is happening, but I don't trust vague allegations from conservatives. Sadly, conservatives have become no longer reliable to pass on accurate data.
And rather than just make a vague allegation about conservatives not being reliable and being more likely to pass on fake news, here's an article about some of the research.
https://www.newsweek.com/misinformation-fake-news-political-polarization-democrat-republican-1998742
With the caveat that this has been studied since at least the 1960s and it's remained a consistent finding in research.
Ol' White Craig said:
By all means, be proud of policies that explicitly exclude more highly qualified students from some demographic groups, in favor of lower qualified students from other groups. Racism is racism.
DAYUM, but the white boys really get riled up about racism when they perceive they are the ones being racisted against!
Who decides what makes one best qualified? Based upon which criteria? Criteria that continues to serve the privileged, more wealthy and white communities? Well, I'm quite SURE you might like that, Craig (but you tell me).
But expanding our view of what makes one qualified so that we can be more inclusive and equitable is rationally a good thing and of course not racist.
The point, you see, is literally NOT to exclude anyone. It's to include everyone. That you find an equitable inclusion to be racist or problematic is just odd.
Like in our recent idiot of a "military leader" to be placed in charge of the military - Hegseth. That is certainly NOT a hire based on hiring "the best" unless you consider "the best" to be the ones most loyal to the Felon and willing to blindly follow his orders. We encourage DEI because, without DEI efforts, lesser qualified jerks get positions because of their privilege and loyalty to a despot. We're just saying, give everyone a chance (and don't base that "chance" on being white and a party loyalist).
Well, Dan is so proud that he's appointed himself as an expert.
There's a difference between being "anti-expert" and being cautious not to simply believe everything someone says that they or someone else has anointed them an "expert". Further, if "believing the experts" is a hard and fast rule, then (logically) you'd believe the experts that don't support your hunches and narratives.
"If there actually is data that says that, then that is certainly a problem. But that doesn't mean working for diversity, equity and inclusion is a bad thing. Again, I suspect you have a muddled notion of what DEI means."
I've posted extensively on the data, it's readily available and hard to ignore. That you chose to ignore or refuse to look at the data, isn't my problem.
"Are there going to be some instances where DEI is poorly enacted? Of course. And we should learn from that and get better. But you know what is BOUND to go bad? Anti-diversity, inequity and exclusion. EVERY TIME that is going to be a bad thing (if you understand aright what I mean by that)."
Yeah, the Lockheed example is just "poorly enacted", they just goofed when the codified racism in their compensation protocols. What's ridiculous is your notion that I am "anti-diversity", quite the contrary. I am all about diversity. I have only one guiding principle when it comes to things like hiring, and school admissions. Pick the best possible candidate regardless of any other factors. I look at the stunning lack of intellectual and viewpoint diversity in areas that are overwhelmingly controlled by the left (the MSM and the academy for two examples), and at the recent research that points that way, and wonder how anyone on the left can claim to be for diversity while demonstrating so little.
Even if reaching the idea means that some people get discriminated against in the process and lesser qualified individuals are prioritized. Got it, So racial discrimination against some demographic groups is a feature, not a bug.
"That is the progressive model and it should be the conservative model because it's the smart and just way to do things."
Got it. The "progressive model" is to elevate lower performers over higher (if they're the correct demographic), and discriminate against certain demographic groups even when some of those groups are minorities. Got it.
"But here, once again, you're citing "BAD THINGS..." with no support."
No, I'm referring to things that I've cited and supported multiple times. Things that can easily be searched.
" I can't evaluate a vague and unsupported allegation. So, short of actual data, I have to suspect that you're likely misunderstanding something. Again, it's POSSIBLE that something like that is happening, but I don't trust vague allegations from conservatives. Sadly, conservatives have become no longer reliable to pass on accurate data."
Well, i guess simply telling blatant lies is one option when faced with things that you don't like.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2024/06/ucla-woke-medical-school-dei/678606/
https://www.thecollegefix.com/shocking-decline-ucla-med-school-prioritized-racial-diversity-leading-to-decline-report-says/
Just cause you're too lazy.
Well, your impatience to jump to conclusions is impressive. That you choose to lie about me is less impressive, although not surprising.
If your continued insistence on ignoring the real world words and actions of your fellow travelers and to cling to some idealized fantasy of a progressive utopia is any indication, I think I'm closer to right than you'd prefer to admit.
What in the hell are you lying about. I've posted the fucking news stories (local NBC affiliate) and the fucking video of the fucking SHERIFF calling the council members out for their role is spreading false information and inciting violence.
It is not my problem if you choose to ignore my postings about a topic, but this bullshit where you make up lies, and play these idiotic games is evidence of your lazy, myopic, head in the sand, view of the movement you support.
Post a Comment