3 ms·

I don’t see if one neighborhood is full of parking attendants and rich one is less proving discrimination. This is an optimization problem, you have limited ca

I don’t see if one neighborhood is full of parking attendants and rich one is less proving discrimination. This is an optimization problem, you have limited capability of enforcement, and you need to use it with most efficient way.

IkmoIkmo 6y ago
> I don’t see if one neighborhood is full of parking attendants and rich one is less proving discrimination. Suppose only a poor neighbourhood has laws enforced, while in another there is no enforcement. Would that be discriminatory? I think in effect, absolutely. In terms of intentions, it remains to be seen what the reasons were, it could've been a mistake or a matter of optimising resources. But there are clearly limits to this argument, and it is also clearly discriminatory in practice. For example, racial profiling is very much a form of discrimination. Suppose two ethnicities live in a city, one (A) has a 0.5% serious crime rate, the other (B) has a 2% serious crime rate, on average, and say equal chance of minor offences. Profiling citizens of group B more often, e.g. stop & frisk, would be a more optimal use of police resources than random selection, to stop serious crimes. Yet, 98% of group B is innocent of serious crimes and is being subjected to more enforcement, which lead to a higher than proportionate conviction rate of minor offences, simply for belonging to a different ethnic group. It also leads to more run-ins with the police, which disturbs your day, risks escalation, makes you feel like a second-class citizen etc. That's discrimination, because the 98% innocent individuals from group B are being treated more harshly without cause, purely on the basis of their belonging to a group. Discrimination is when an individual is maltreated on the basis of belonging to a group, rather than as an individual. Yet also 'more optimal/efficient use of resources'. They're not mutually exclusive. And that's true not just within policing, by the way. If you know that 80% of ethnic group A have empirically been good hires, and 70% of ethnic group B, in the past, and suppose you had many people to choose from to invite for an interview, and then interview. Suppose you have limited resources and selection & interviewing is time-consuming. Does that allow you to 'optimize use of scarce resources and efficiently reject all applicants from group B'? No. It'd be perhaps efficient, but also very much discriminatory. Of course if you have two neighbourhoods and one has rampant parking abuse, the other not, then indeed it does make sense to allocate enforcement capacity accordingly. But only to a point. And that point must be evaluated. And whether you've reached that point, will be indicated by the data. That data isn't available, yet it's a priori stated that the parking enforcement cannot be discriminatory. OP noted a few possibilities that could indicate it is discriminatory, but we'd need to see the data to draw any conclusions. I think he's right in saying that.
- bluesign 6y ago
  Yeah but you are mixing people in equation with your examples with ethnicity. Imagine two same ethnicity neighborhoods, with same economic wealth, one has crime rate 2% other 0.5%, would you think it would be discrimination to allocate more police force to 2% one? For the interview part, imagine I am saying I am only hiring CS graduates, and A ethnicity has 10% CS graduates, B has 1%, am I discriminating?

IkmoIkmo 6y ago

> I don’t see if one neighborhood is full of parking attendants and rich one is less proving discrimination. Suppose only a poor neighbourhood has laws enforced, while in another there is no enforcement. Would that be discriminatory? I think in effect, absolutely. In terms of intentions, it remains to be seen what the reasons were, it could've been a mistake or a matter of optimising resources. But there are clearly limits to this argument, and it is also clearly discriminatory in practice. For example, racial profiling is very much a form of discrimination. Suppose two ethnicities live in a city, one (A) has a 0.5% serious crime rate, the other (B) has a 2% serious crime rate, on average, and say equal chance of minor offences. Profiling citizens of group B more often, e.g. stop & frisk, would be a more optimal use of police resources than random selection, to stop serious crimes. Yet, 98% of group B is innocent of serious crimes and is being subjected to more enforcement, which lead to a higher than proportionate conviction rate of minor offences, simply for belonging to a different ethnic group. It also leads to more run-ins with the police, which disturbs your day, risks escalation, makes you feel like a second-class citizen etc. That's discrimination, because the 98% innocent individuals from group B are being treated more harshly without cause, purely on the basis of their belonging to a group. Discrimination is when an individual is maltreated on the basis of belonging to a group, rather than as an individual. Yet also 'more optimal/efficient use of resources'. They're not mutually exclusive. And that's true not just within policing, by the way. If you know that 80% of ethnic group A have empirically been good hires, and 70% of ethnic group B, in the past, and suppose you had many people to choose from to invite for an interview, and then interview. Suppose you have limited resources and selection & interviewing is time-consuming. Does that allow you to 'optimize use of scarce resources and efficiently reject all applicants from group B'? No. It'd be perhaps efficient, but also very much discriminatory. Of course if you have two neighbourhoods and one has rampant parking abuse, the other not, then indeed it does make sense to allocate enforcement capacity accordingly. But only to a point. And that point must be evaluated. And whether you've reached that point, will be indicated by the data. That data isn't available, yet it's a priori stated that the parking enforcement cannot be discriminatory. OP noted a few possibilities that could indicate it is discriminatory, but we'd need to see the data to draw any conclusions. I think he's right in saying that.

bluesign 6y ago
Yeah but you are mixing people in equation with your examples with ethnicity. Imagine two same ethnicity neighborhoods, with same economic wealth, one has crime rate 2% other 0.5%, would you think it would be discrimination to allocate more police force to 2% one? For the interview part, imagine I am saying I am only hiring CS graduates, and A ethnicity has 10% CS graduates, B has 1%, am I discriminating?