I am not trying do dunk anyone. I am merely trying to suggest a solution that will be less divisive, because the current one is creating tension rather than eas

I am not trying do dunk anyone. I am merely trying to suggest a solution that will be less divisive, because the current one is creating tension rather than easing it. Also unfortunately, our brains are not naturally good with statistics, so many things may seem counter-intuitive until you look into details. Here's some napkin math model (numbers are arbitrary). Assume that we can assign an abstract "techiness score" to every person that will correlate with their chances of being hired. Assume we have 10 people of population A and 10 people of population B. For population A it's: * 1 person with score 0 * 7 people with score 5 * 1 person with score 9 * 1 person with score 10 For population B it's: * 1 person with score 0 * 1 person with score 1 * 7 people with score 5 * 1 person with score 10 The difference it not that large, but if you simply hire everyone with score 8 and up, you get 2 people from population A and 1 person from population B. If you talk to these 3 people, you will see that there is no difference between them in terms of score and can easily conclude that the 2x difference is due to treating people based on their population. If you introduce a hiring quota, you are forced to hire 1 person with score 5 from population B, and that's where the problem starts because they will be perceived weak and will trigger divisive behavior I mentioned. As I said several times, I'm not concluding that ALL or MOST Blacks are bad or anything. I'm saying that there are statistical differences that are hard to measure and that can explain workforce underrepresentation. Other metrics you may want to look at is: * Black-on-white crime vs. white-on-black crime. * Families with both parents. * Change in student loan principal after 5 years. This shows whether a certain population is choosing degrees that pay off.