If white privilege is real, riddle me this

to balance out white privilege.

u dumb.

I think you probably don't really understand the meaning of "white privilege"....

Cause Mexicans are cheaper than whites.

Federal budget in 2016, 3.5 trillion... gdp 18.5. Your answer is somewhere in that 15 trillion, if it's there at all.

You lost out on that governmental contract to a company owned by a black woman, huh?

Probably to give a historically underutilized business a shot.

It isn't just contracts. It's employment as well. Minority applicants for federal jobs get "preference points" simply for being a minority, whether it be race or gender.

I don't give a shite what happened 40 or 50 years ago. Are we really that stupid that we can't, in the 21st century, hire people based on ability? I mean, frick, they do the interviews on the phone for Christ's sake. This is why the federal workforce isn't worth a shite now, not to mention the fact that you can't fire anyone, because they will find some card to play as to why you are firing them. Doesn't matter that you can prove they are a lazy frick.

quote:

---

Are we really that stupid that we can't, in the 21st century, hire people based on ability?

---

ACtually yes. Look up with white vs. black resume studies.

quote:

---

During the two-year study, which was published in the Administrative Science Quarterly Journal, Kang and her colleagues sent out 1,600 fabricated resumes, based off of real candidates, to employers in 16 different metropolitan areas in the US. Some resumes were left as is, whereas others were “whitened”. While 25.5% of resumes received callbacks if African American candidates’ names were “whitened”, only 10% received a callback if they left their name and experience unaltered. For Asian applicants, 21% heard back if they changed their resume, and only 11.5% of candidates did if their resumes were not “whitened”.

---

LINK

quote:

---

We perform a field experiment to measure racial discrimination in the labor market. We respond with fictitious resumes to help-wanted ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To manipulate perception of race, each resume is assigned either a very African American sounding name or a very White sounding name. The results show significant discrimination against African-American names: White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews. We also find that race affects the benefits of a better resume. For White names, a higher quality resume elicits 30 percent more callbacks whereas for African Americans, it elicits a far smaller increase. Applicants living in better neighborhoods receive more callbacks but, interestingly, this effect does not differ by race. The amount of discrimination is uniform across occupations and industries. Federal contractors and employers who list “Equal Opportunity Employer” in their ad discriminate as much as other employers. We find little evidence that our results are driven by employers inferring something other than race, such as social class, from the names. These results suggest that racial discrimination is still a prominent feature of the labor market.

---

ARE EMILY AND GREG MORE EMPLOYABLE
THAN LAKISHA AND JAMAL?
A FIELD EXPERIMENT ON LABOR MARKET DISCRIMINATION

And based on the fact that they sent them to employers, I'm going to assume they didn't submit even a 10th of those resumes to federal agencies, because the amount of work you go through filling out a federal application is more exhausting than the actual work you are applying to do. So how applicable is that study to federal jobseekers anyway? I'd say not very.

The hiring process in the private sector is night and day when compared to the public sector. I had a boss in private industry that very openly (within our group anyways) discriminated against applicants based on age and gender. The managers you work for in the government often times aren't even the ones hiring you.