[MTUCache]

This, to me anyway, is a simple look at numbers... People fall so easily into this idea that because so many things around Detroit are black and white, that the population of the Metro Detroit area is split 50/50 with just blacks and whites. This is so not the case.

Yes, the actual city of Detroit is only about 10-15% white right now, but the entire state of Michigan is over 80% white. So it makes complete sense to me that without even looking at any other factors that somewhere around 80% of all jobs would be getting filled by white people, right? I mean, it's just a function of the people who live where those jobs are. Adjust those factors for education, the types of industries hiring, exactly where those new jobs are, etc, and I don't see any reason whatsoever why 90% of those people being hired right now wouldn't be black or hispanic (just based on the education numbers of those socio-economic groups).... it's not a function of racism in the hiring process, it's literally how many non-black and non-hispanic (i.e. "white") people are out there looking for jobs and where those jobs are (i.e. the burbs).

If an american indian was making the claim that they weren't getting jobs because of a racist hiring process it would quickly be written off as a ridiculous statement, mostly because of how few of them there are... but when it's a black/white thing, people get all up in arms about this without even looking at the numbers. Michigan isn't a racist state, it just happens to be state where 90+% of the qualified, educated work-force happens to be white. Say what you want about the racist and unfair government policies that have gotten us to that number, but I really don't think this should reflect badly on those people who are hiring right now just because they happen to be hiring people who aren't black or hispanic. It's not their fault that the qualified candidates are who they are.

[Hoptik]

Originally Posted by kazoopilot

Are you talking about just Detroit or the entire state of Michigan?

Talking about only Detroit.

Originally Posted by kazoopilot

Also, the main difference is that Singapore and Hong Kong were in communist countries, which explains why the free-trade zone worked wonders for them. The U.S. is a free-market country, which means that there is no way to give a city or state "free trade status."

Singapore and Hon Kong were not in communist country. They still have free market economy. Great Britain returned the Hon Kong back to China and China has a special policy for their city (HK).

Cheers

[mcb1025]

Originally Posted by stanman13

Let me refer you to the '67 riots. Many blacks in Detroit had union auto jobs just like the whites did, yet they chose to destroy the city to make some kind of point to the white man. They sure showed 'em. Why would anyone want to stay in Detroit after that? Add to that the election of a racist mayor and city council and you predetermine the future results. Read your local history.

There was a great piece in Time Magazine a week ago about the fall of Detroit.

Detroit's Future: Will Once Great American City Recover? - TIME

[Ryeno]

Originally Posted by magellan

Ryeno, if you've just come to the Michigan forums to pick fights, can you please show yourself the door. Thanks.

If what i said was wrong please correct me.

[cbmsu01]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

Not sure I caught what your degree was in but it's not all about education credentials in the workplace. It's specific experience in what the employer wants and how cheap they can get you. If you have a Master's or Doctorate, it can sometimes work against you unless the position requires it since the employer will simply think you're too expensive. Manager's these days also don't seem to want to hire somebody smarter than themselves.

STEM workers have been hit hard with global outsourcing/recruiting too. It's cheaper to hire foreign workers who say they have the exact skill set for a job (regardless of if it's true or not) than it is to hire somebody locally. Foreign workers will always work for less and cannot easily job hop. This lowers wages and creates a glut of workers for the number jobs available. There just aren't enough jobs out there now. And the whole quota/diversity thing works against blacks in this situation; employers can claim all of their foreign workers in the minority counts.

Bottomline is that a lot of people are out of work and I don't believe that there's much of a racial component to it.

Dude, the thing about foreign workers is total bunk. I'm in grad school and work with a lot of international students. When it comes time for a career fair, I qualify for about 40-60 positions; they qualify for maybe 10. The only difference is that I'm an American citizen.

Highly-skilled foreign workers are hired because there aren't enough Americans to fill the positions.

[Sparrow_temp]

I wish the thing about foreign workers was bunk but it's not. Visit the Dice forums and see what some real workers are saying about the situation. I've been working in IT for 20 years and have seen it first hand. Foreign workers are hired because they're cheaper than American's; there are way more IT workers than there are jobs now yet the H1B visa program is alive and well. The only spot where this isn't a problem is where a security clearance is required.

What's bunk is the corporate line that they just can't find qualified American workers.

[Ryeno]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

I wish the thing about foreign workers was bunk but it's not. Visit the Dice forums and see what some real workers are saying about the situation. I've been working in IT for 20 years and have seen it first hand. Foreign workers are hired because they're cheaper than American's; there are way more IT workers than there are jobs now yet the H1B visa program is alive and well. The only spot where this isn't a problem is where a security clearance is required.

What's bunk is the corporate line that they just can't find qualified American workers.

Thats very true and whats even more true is when lets say an indian person takes over a white it job. What happens next is exactly what sajae90 said.

Originally Posted by sajae90

someone may give the job to their out of work brother in law or family member first...but here is the problem...most people who are managers, business owners or positions to hire a person are.....(drum-roll)..........white.

So an indian gets hired over a white person because they are can be paid less. Of course the company just makes up some BS about labor skill pay wage blah blah blah. Then that person ends up being promoted to manager and hires a bunch more indians since they are his own race. The higher ups dont care because they can now increase there wage and the people who get screwed are white middle class people.

In short blacks may feel discriminated by white but whites are screwing there own race with foreign workers. So discriminated isnt as cut and dry as race.

[Tom Jefferson]

I think that the answer is, ironically, inside your message..........

[Shizzles]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

Racism generally increases when economic times worsen, as racism has always been linked to economics as people start competing as members of groups.

That said, the past was racist and the present being the creation of the past means that the present is racist too, if in effect (of the past) and not intent (as was the past). What I mean by that is that is the class plays a role and established networks and connections plays a role in who gets the scarce jobs. As a result of the racist ways of the past, blacks are disproportionately unconnected and disproportionately not members of the favored class. So when the influence of networks, nepotism class and the like manifest its influence on who gets hired, it disproportionately will favor whites, as a benefit of history. Now, of course, that does not mean it will benefit poor and unconnected whites, however, notwithstanding, whites will be the main beneficiary.

If you just leave things as is, the present will for a very long time manifest a racist outcome due to the law of nature that the present is a creation of the past. Advantages from the past accrue to the present, as well as, disadvantage, unless the chain is broken through mutation.

And what's your suggestion? We already have quotas and Affirmative Action. What's needed is more investment in education and personal growth in Black communites by both Blacks and Whites.

But will anyone think of that? No. Just scream for more handouts...

[Indentured Servant]

What SHOULD have happened is that there should have been a “Marshall Plan”, once the last legal vestiges of racism were removed, targeted and directed at fixing the problem that 300 years of legal oppression created. The nation would not do that at the time because it was not an popular idea, to say the least, with white Americans. Affirmative Action has not meant for only black people and white women were historically the biggest beneficiaries of the program, but faced little, if any, backlash, despite how much they have benefited.

I really don’t have any suggestions, because the damage to black people have been allowed to go on for so long, that many complications have developed that are not even directly related to racism. It’s like having diabetes and not treating it for a long time. After a while the person’s Kidneys start to fail and they develop circulation and heart problems. Now, once the Kidneys and heart start to fail, treating the diabetes will not improve the condition of the kidneys or heart, because the damage has already been done. So now what threatens their life is their Kidneys and heart and hence one can say that you cannot blame the diabetes anymore because it is now being treated. The same is true of racism. Racism and the segregation and poverty that it caused created many socioeconomic complications in the black community that now live on even after legalized racism is no more.

Its easy to take the “snap shot” view of life and fill in the blanks with ones imagination and prejudice. However, why use a snap shot to figure out what happened when there is video footage of the temporal actions and reaction that resulted up to and including the snap shot? It’s easy to simply look at “what is” or in other words, to make and observation. However, observation is always in the present but explanation is always and only born from capturing the past, which created the phenomenon or reality being observed. When many whites talk about black people and our condition, it is born from observation and dearth of real explanation. They want people to only look at the snap shot of what is contemporary and cry foul when the past is used to correctly explain the present. Why would the truth of the chain reaction of events make people cry foul? Its only because these people have a vested interest in the black condition not being linked to history, but rather, linked only to their “blackness”, as if their socioeconomic inequality is rooted in the genetics of blackness.