Indianapolis Nascar staduim 250,000 people.
Indianapolis Nascar staduim 250,000 people.
Cowtippers look out....
really what does North Dakota have issues with beside the new influx of oil riggers
My true narrative is that most minority family institutions are broken and that fact is what keeps minorities from succeeding. The lack of and destruction of family structure has a definite impact on people. There are plenty of people that pull themselves up by their own will. And they get my kudos for traveling that road successfully. But by far the most represented in the higher socio-economic levels are those from strong family structures. This support and guidance and resource cannot be replicated, and cannot be discredited. And you can say that even the lowest socio-economic levels have families that are intact... and in this society it takes person ambition to succeed. My statement is that it is vastly harder while dealing with tons of outside pressures. Some are born to do it, and do it well, but if an entire segment of the population has an issue that can be addressed easily then if we are such a high minded society, then maybe we should be ambivalent in our outreach.
Those places all fail in the diversity category and here is why... ( you ignorant schmuck )
All top members of CCP are Chinese... and minority representation is nil. All countries have different minority communities, and in America ours are mostly based on race, or gender, or sexuality. Chinese have very different cultures that are 'Chinese' but are not of the same cultural background. The Saudi princes are arab, but they do not represent all the different tribes in the area. They do not represent the different relevant division in worshiping practices that have split the Middle East in half for the last 400 years.
And people from Niger are called 'Nigerian' and they have a very diverse population based on ethnic origin. Just because they are African does not mean they have no diversity issues.
Japan, hard to immigrate there and gain citizenship -- diversity issues. Iceland - hard to immigrate there -- some small (very small) issues.
And we, Americans, do complain to those governments that they are not inclusive enough of their representative populations. Diversity means just that, if you are fair in practice then all people are represented. The balance does not have to be perfect, but if it is non-existent then this point to a problem structurally in that society. Diversity does not mean 'less white' it means inclusive and representative of the population.
50% of the US are women... however less than 10% of the US leadership is women. -- seems like an issue
48% of the US is considered non-white... however we don't see anything close across socio-economic levels -- this indicates a structural problem
first two senators - one asian american, one white seems a little strange as most of the population is ethnic Hawaiian,
but over time the majority Hawaiian population elects Hawaiian Senators -- a correction
now a Hawaiian Senator dies and the governor ( the previous white Senator ) replaces the senator with a white guy who has worked in government for years and is highly qualified ( actually mostly highly qualified and elected by the people into high office ) its a good appointment but - this will probably be corrected in the next election by the people.
Diverse does not mean less white... it means the structure allows all to participate equally. Bias is hard to recognize unless you start looking at numbers. An IT firm where no minorities have applied does not have a diversity issue for being all white... the area where it is located probably has a diversity issue and minorities don;t get the same opportunities.
I believe the article was written in the US. So since in the US things are US-centric it would be referring to minorities in the US. Also as a context clue the summary list US companies that were interested in the program. ( starting to see a theme yet? ) Wired is also a US magazine.
I am happy to clear that up for you.
So what white minded angle were you fishing for troll?
I agree this is kind of bad.
Why not partner with a college, and get students with a four year degree in a tech field. This just proves that the Big boys can use a little extra cheap labor that they are going to employ for 1.5 years and let go. And they will find they are unemployable with those skills. A four year degree is necessary in the tech field.
that is offensive.
what if minorities are just not smart , indeed sir you are offensive... i am going to refrain from what I want to say
They are not the bottom, they are a group that never gets a chance to even compete and by not competing they get the auto status of failing. Allow competition. which many are scared of.
The issue is most minorities never get the oppertunity to raise to the top. They do not have access to the same sources as everyone else. If given those same supports that others have taken for granted they tend to raise as you say in the same numbers and percentages
Google: "What is a university endowment"
A: Endowments represent money or other financial assets that are donated to universities or colleges. The sole intention of the endowment is to invest it, so that the total asset value will yield an inflation-adjusted principal amount, along with additional income for further investments and supplementary expenditures.
It is a donation that is invested. It is a donation that you cannot guarantee will be given every year. You grow this money so you will have a stable amount of income into the future.
A university is an institution. It is in the business of educating intelligent people, by retaining intelligent people. If you have a large endowment why should a congress that cannot balance a budget tell you how to spend your money?
Please remember not all universities have huge endowments. Many prestigious universities have large endowments ( snark ), from wealthy alumni, or wealthy people in the state that just like that university and left them money. These often one time investments are MEANT TO LAST. so you invest them. You do the smart thing and use 1% and try to gain 8% every year. A university can survive 100's of years so it can apply good financial practices. This is why endowments have boards that review how the money is used and invested and those boards do it for free or a small nominal amount.
A little maths:
( if you cannot grow your money )
1 billion fund spent over 100 years: 1% is only 10 million a year
10 million fund spent over 100 years : 1% is 100k a year
The hope is to grow your money on average by 7% a year. And thats a big HOPE nowadays. Leave them alone, because otherwise those same universities will be broke in 30 years cause they spent the money now for a short term drop in tuition and facilities with no way to replace that money.
I offer this argument:
In collage I often gave people rides to work for 5 bucks for gas. And gas was only $1.xx back then so I made a small profit. The only difference here is that this is a business model to tie supply and demand together. And unfortunately for Uber / Lyft they made it centralized ( like Napster ) so they could make a profit for providing the service ( unlike Napster. )
Like Grokster they could decentralize and offer both driver and passenger a service for a connection fee, they set up the means for connecting but allow the participants to directly connect with each other without ever recording which ( driver or passenger ) they are. This WILL lead to a degredation of service, but allow for the model to continue.
They are not about the propagation of the business model... they are about making money. Which will lead to failure.
I know it's the year of Back to the future.. but we saw this article already... or was that another timeline?
Look you could reduce the pollution from cars to 0 tomorrow and the CO2 emmissions to nothing and you would not put a dent in the CO2 and pollution we produce as humans. Look we can all SEE cars , and diesel trucks and think look at all that stuff it just put in the air. The fact of the matter is one large tanker ship is equal in pollution output as 1 million cars. 1 ship : 1 million cars
the 80's got us looking at the wrong thing and our heads are still stuck looking at the things we can see.
ahhh.... the science is not done on CRISPR-CAS9 -- it works -- kind of, 60% of the time. Oh and if the cell it touches is in the middle of mitosis all bets are off on what mutation it will produce -- oh yeah it also has big problems with gamete cells, you know eggs and sperm. Oh yeah that right it also has this other isssue with....
CRISPR-CAS9 works in a lab in a controlled environment. very controlled. the science is moving faster no doubt, but its not there yet.
the second they get it down pat, i would love for more efficient mitochondria.
Honestly the societies you listed had problems that communism was not the cause of
USSR - was in a arms race with the US, that it was never going to win, it pushed so much of it's countries production into making nukes that while it had thousands of more nuclear warheads than the USA at it's peak, it could do nothing else economically.
Those other counties listed - NK, Cuba, China
China never promised it's people an easy life, China's government promises it's people safety from invaders and internal stability. We have a hard time understanding this as a primary driving mandate in the US because we have a very different value system. We are culturally very different, if the Chinese did not like they're government then if they chose to rise to the occasion there are too many of them ( x billion ) to not topple any government on Earth, just saying
If you are stating that economic ability is - them getting close to the US - then China passed us a few years ago, and as there next half billion people move into the middle class they will be the only economic powerhouse on the planet... we in the US do not have the number of people to compete, our population is too small and this generation of rule makers do not like immigrants ( every generation has had a problem with this to be fair -- lookup Irish discrimination, Catholic discrimination, Italian discrimination - if your different and moved to the US recently the established blamed everything on you )
"In fact, their political policies reinforced* inequity," == as do ours in the US, where the middle class has been shrunk by half in the last 30 years due to changes in tax policy. Granted I like paying less in taxes, but I realize that as the more affluent pay less as well they get to buy more items for speculation purposes that raises the cost of items higher, like houses, cars, clothing, food, and travel, hotels, rentals and everything else. Their money flooding back into the economy has had good things happen to, like reinvestment, venture capitalism funding large gains in tech.
At the end of the day, if we create a society in which 90% of work is done and can be done by machines or the people that program and maintain machines, how do we evolve our way of thinking about our, humans, place in society. If we can only envision usefulness in terms of economics we are doomed to displacing billions into poverty. And if everyone is poor not because they are unable, but because it make no economic sense to employ them we need to rethink money and the role it plays. People are starting to have this conversation more and more as the US the second biggest economy the former king of the middle class looses it middle class to poverty.
Help! I'm trapped in a PDP 11/70!