Originally posted by Emperordmb
I think he's talking about Serbia, not countries generally talked about like the US or UK
👆
Additonally, Yale did a study that gave the exact same application and resume to multiple people; the only difference is one was a female named Jennifer and the other a male named John. The people who accepted John asked less questions and offered up to 4000 dollars a year more, of a pay.
Granted, there's also some industries where women are payed more than men and that's also utter bullsh!t. Same job? Same qualifications? Same pay: man or woman.
Originally posted by MythLord
👆Additonally, Yale did a study that gave the exact same application and resume to multiple people; the only difference is one was a female named Jennifer and the other a male named John. The people who accepted John asked less questions and offered up to 4000 dollars a year more, of a pay.
Granted, there's also some industries where women are payed more than men and that's also utter bullsh!t. Same job? Same qualifications? Same pay: man or woman.
I was really just talking about America. the application thing is individual, not systemic
Originally posted by Raisen
it's about mitigating any possible harm to the people you pledged to serve.
Originally posted by Kurk
Women porn stars make 3 times as much as males do. A load of bullshit this wage gap thing is.Note the sarcasm.
Indeed, the places where there are gaps are because of the differences in men and women, but those are behavior differences not "I'm going to pay you less because...vagina". If it was possible to legally do that then 99% of businesses would hire nothing but female employees.
If you want to see something funny watch this two minute video about the wage gap with Kristen Bell, it literally debunks itself lol. These people are bonkers.
Originally posted by RaisenForeign based terrorism has killed about one American per year. That's awful, but I don't think that justifies barring millions of people who seek refuge.
it's about mitigating any possible harm to the people you pledged to serve.
And I don't think any of those terror attacks came from refugees anyway. That's why we already have a very strict vetting process.
If it isn't based on discrimination, then it's still based on stupidity, take your pick.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Foreign based terrorism has killed about one American per year. That's awful, but I don't think that justifies barring millions of people who seek refuge.And I don't think any of those terror attacks came from refugees anyway. That's why we already have a very strict vetting process.
If it isn't based on discrimination, then it's still based on stupidity, take your pick.
How many deaths would be too much? Since look at gun control. There isn't just one death a year from guns, but we have over 300 million people in this country, the percentage of the population that died from firearms(not counting suicides, just homicides)in 2016 is 0.004%.
I'm not trying to make this about gun control, I am talking about just how when it comes to islamic terrorism this country treats it differently than, say, the white supremacists. They act like there is this epidemic of nazis and kkk members in the country. Some in the media also had no problem more or less blaming Vegas on white people. There was also more than one article that was about how a majority of mass shootings are carried out by white men.
It seems like there is a double standard at work. But we both know how people would react if there was an article called "blacks commit the majority of firearm related homicides".
Originally posted by Surtur
How many deaths would be too much?
Though to address the general question, a very fair one, I'd think a bit more than one when we consider the millions we've refused who could have their lives in danger because they can't come here.
Originally posted by Surtur
Since look at gun control. There isn't just one death a year from guns, but we have over 300 million people in this country, the percentage of the population that died from firearms(not counting suicides, just homicides)in 2016 is 0.004%.
Again, I see no drawback to taking steps that could potentially prevent that small percentage. Unlike say, preventing refugees who need refuge from coming here, what's the drawback to banning semi-automatic weapons or implanting background checks?
Raisen's nation-nation evidence suggests it might not be so effective though I'd think Rob's state-state evidence would be more relevant. regardless, I'm not seeing why we wouldn't try the options I mentioned. Handling the fire-arm related portion of crime doesn't preclude us from handling the other aspects.
You can try to improve the culture while simultaneously placing restrictions on a semi-automatic weapons, or at a minimum background checks.
Instead of making this either-or, how about we holistically approach crime to try and make things better on all fronts?
Originally posted by Surtur
I'm not trying to make this about gun control, I am talking about just how when it comes to islamic terrorism this country treats it differently than, say, the white supremacists. They act like there is this epidemic of nazis and kkk members in the country. Some in the media also had no problem more or less blaming Vegas on white people. There was also more than one article that was about how a majority of mass shootings are carried out by white men.It seems like there is a double standard at work. But we both know how people would react if there was an article called "blacks commit the majority of firearm related homicides".
If you don't mind, I'm going to pass on going into the whole kkk or Nazi business, because that's not all that relevant to the point I'm making.