3 ms·

And yet this constantly happens. "Major companies added more than 320,000 jobs to their U.S. workforces in 2021, and 94% of those went to people of color, acco

And yet this constantly happens. "Major companies added more than 320,000 jobs to their U.S. workforces in 2021, and 94% of those went to people of color, according to Bloomberg."

defrost 11mo ago
It's considerably more often and vastly worse if you quote according to The Daily Stormer. How are the actual stats of employed in the trenches and in the C-Suites?
- machomaster 11mo ago
  Funny how Bloomberg becomes The Daily Storm as soon as you don't like the facts and stats. :-D Please, make Google and AI your friend.
  - defrost 11mo ago
    These are the tools you recommend for reinforcing hallicinations and the stories you like? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45876744 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45876744
tristan957 11mo ago
This statistic means nothing without further context.
- machomaster 11mo ago
  The explosion of DEI discrimination is the context you need.
  - shadowgovt 11mo ago
    Your response, "And yet this constantly happens," in context to the previous post seems to imply 'this' should be 'hiring of unqualified people.' The assertion that 94% of people hired were non-white does not immediately imply they were unqualified without further context.
pseudalopex 11mo ago
> "Major companies added more than 320,000 jobs to their U.S. workforces in 2021, and 94% of those went to people of color, according to Bloomberg." Searching for the quoted sentence found a NewsNation article. The NewsNation article linked the Bloomberg article.[1] The quoted sentence could create an impression 6% of newly hired workers were white. This would be incorrect. 2021 was the time of the Great Resignation. People who stopped working were older and white disproportionately. Both articles mentioned this. But not so clearly. The Bloomberg article said 2021 hiring included hiring back people the companies laid off in 2020. The jobs eliminated in 2020 were lower paying jobs disproportionately. And the workers affected were non white disproportionately. Amazon added over 200,000 jobs. This was over 60% of the total. Most were warehouse workers and drivers. Do you believe Amazon had diversity quotas for warehouse workers and drivers? Both articles said remote work changed where companies hired people. Do you believe they did this for diversity or money? Bloomberg's charts illustrated some of the problems of reducing the data to 1 or 2 numbers even if you ignore resignation. Nike decreased white people at all levels. This was because they decreased jobs at their Oregon headquarters. CVS's professional, managerial, and executive jobs hiring appeared to favor white people. Amazon's professional hiring appeared to favor Asian people. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-black-lives-matter-equal-opportunity-corporate-diversity/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-black-lives-matter-e...
anigbrowl 11mo ago
That could equally mean people of color were disproportionately laid off during COVID. I find it meaningless without any breakdown of what those hires were or any other factors that would help determine the base rate. If this and hand-waving about 'DEI is the context you need' is your whole argument, you're bad at statistics and analysis.

And yet this constantly happens. "Major companies added more than 320,000 jobs to their U.S. workforces in 2021, and 94% of those went to people of color, according to Bloomberg."

defrost 11mo ago

It's considerably more often and vastly worse if you quote according to The Daily Stormer. How are the actual stats of employed in the trenches and in the C-Suites?

machomaster 11mo ago
Funny how Bloomberg becomes The Daily Storm as soon as you don't like the facts and stats. :-D Please, make Google and AI your friend.
- defrost 11mo ago
  These are the tools you recommend for reinforcing hallicinations and the stories you like? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45876744 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45876744

tristan957 11mo ago

This statistic means nothing without further context.

machomaster 11mo ago
The explosion of DEI discrimination is the context you need.
- shadowgovt 11mo ago
  Your response, "And yet this constantly happens," in context to the previous post seems to imply 'this' should be 'hiring of unqualified people.' The assertion that 94% of people hired were non-white does not immediately imply they were unqualified without further context.

pseudalopex 11mo ago

> "Major companies added more than 320,000 jobs to their U.S. workforces in 2021, and 94% of those went to people of color, according to Bloomberg." Searching for the quoted sentence found a NewsNation article. The NewsNation article linked the Bloomberg article.[1] The quoted sentence could create an impression 6% of newly hired workers were white. This would be incorrect. 2021 was the time of the Great Resignation. People who stopped working were older and white disproportionately. Both articles mentioned this. But not so clearly. The Bloomberg article said 2021 hiring included hiring back people the companies laid off in 2020. The jobs eliminated in 2020 were lower paying jobs disproportionately. And the workers affected were non white disproportionately. Amazon added over 200,000 jobs. This was over 60% of the total. Most were warehouse workers and drivers. Do you believe Amazon had diversity quotas for warehouse workers and drivers? Both articles said remote work changed where companies hired people. Do you believe they did this for diversity or money? Bloomberg's charts illustrated some of the problems of reducing the data to 1 or 2 numbers even if you ignore resignation. Nike decreased white people at all levels. This was because they decreased jobs at their Oregon headquarters. CVS's professional, managerial, and executive jobs hiring appeared to favor white people. Amazon's professional hiring appeared to favor Asian people. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-black-lives-matter-equal-opportunity-corporate-diversity/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-black-lives-matter-e...

anigbrowl 11mo ago

That could equally mean people of color were disproportionately laid off during COVID. I find it meaningless without any breakdown of what those hires were or any other factors that would help determine the base rate. If this and hand-waving about 'DEI is the context you need' is your whole argument, you're bad at statistics and analysis.