How Immigration facilitates racial discrimination.

[Benvolio]

As I have shown, some American workers are laying off American employees to bring in "temporary" replacements from India.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/u...ney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0Since US law prohibits racial discrimination and in effect forces employers to hire and prefer minorities, it is safe to conclude that many laid off were racial minority members.
So why? Perhaps the Indians work cheaper, but something else is happening as well. East Indians score higher on IQ tests than some other racial groups. http://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-r...ingapore-highest-then-china-and-korea.259586/ screech at me yet, I am talking only about test scores. I know that it is a rigid dogma for liberals that IQ tests aren't valid and that all races are equal. I am not questioning the dogma.
But notice that by trading Americans for East Indians, the companies are discriminating in favor of a racial group which tests higher.
While technically, it is would still be illegal racial discrimination, hiring one protected group to replace another could not be proven by circumstantial evidence to be racial discrimination against American minorities without a smoking gun, memo, letter, inside testimony etc. Indeed, it can be justified as promoting "diversity". To liberals, firing whites to hire minorities is a good thing.

 

[palemale]

I read that article the other day. My take away is that INS is not enforcing existing laws. Those H1 visas should only be issued where an employer is unable to fill jobs because of a shortage of workers with the particular skills the employer needs. If Disney is laying off people and having them train their replacements, then there is no shortage of workers available to perform those jobs. Those Disney workers would still have their jobs if they were in a union. First, if an employer has a union, before INS will issue the visas, the union would have to certify that the jobs could not be filled from the existing, available workforce. The union would obviously have not certified that Disney could not find qualified people to do the work, and the INS would not have issued the visas.

 

[Benvolio]

I read that article the other day. My take away is that INS is not enforcing existing laws. Those H1 visas should only be issued where an employer is unable to fill jobs because of a shortage of workers with the particular skills the employer needs. If Disney is laying off people and having them train their replacements, then there is no shortage of workers available to perform those jobs. Those Disney workers would still have their jobs if they were in a union. First, if an employer has a union, before INS will issue the visas, the union would have to certify that the jobs could not be filled from the existing, available workforce. The union would obviously have not certified that Disney could not find qualified people to do the work, and the INS would not have issued the visas.

That's true, but the Obama Administration clearly has a priority of bringing others in, and many will eventually file for naturalization. There are other instances in which Obama is brushing the immigration laws aside because he can get away with it. With a union, the company would be stuck with employees which, for whatever reason, it does not prefer.

 

[xbuzzerx]

That's true, but the Obama Administration clearly has a priority of bringing others in

Do you believe that by continuing to repeat this unfounded assertion it will one day become true?

 

[chrisrobin]

Do you believe that by continuing to repeat this unfounded assertion it will one day become true?

Yes. FDR* spoke of repeating and repeating and repeating a false assertion enough times so that it would be regarded as true. He called it "the big lie." Specifically, he was referring to our German brothers who were using it very effectively during the thirties. If the American people are gullible enough (which they are) the big lie is just as effective.

*I would prefer not to hear any crap about FDR being a Communist or a socialist.

 

[opinterph]

As I have shown

As you have shown?

Do you have evidence that Walt Disney World uses IQ tests as a part of its selection criteria for “employees who [keep its] data systems humming?”

US law … forces employers to hire and prefer minorities

False.

East Indians score higher on IQ tests than some other racial groups.

You linked to a thread posted in the Pakistan Defence Forum; which in turn, linked to a 2012 book consisting of 530 pages that was published in Great Britain.

Please explain how the book is relevant to immigration or racial discrimination in the United States.

 

[rareboy]

Why is this not rolled into the omnibus Benvolio Immigration rant thread?

 

[Benvolio]

As you have shown?

Do you have evidence that Walt Disney World uses IQ tests as a part of its selection criteria for “employees who [keep its] data systems humming?”




False.




You linked to a thread posted in the Pakistan Defence Forum; which in turn, linked to a 2012 book consisting of 530 pages that was published in Great Britain.

Please explain how the book is relevant to immigration or racial discrimination in the United States.

The links to NYTimes and LATimes show some employers laying off Americans to hire people from India. No, I cannot prove that it was motivated by the results of IQ tests. But here is an article from Forbes which is relevant. http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/24/bo...pinions-contributors_immigrants_minority.html
The important thing is, as the title says, immigration laws are facilitating racial discrimination.
Technically, Federal law does not literally require the hiring of minorities. The Dodds- Frank Act of course does require racial discrimination in favor of minorities, including immigrants, to the maximum extent possible. But notice that I said Federal law IN EFFECT requires the hiring of minorities and it is disingenuous to pretend that it does not.
The link to "defense" was merely intended to show the reputed effect of test scores from country to country. I do not claim such tests are valid. But the results provide possible explanation other than salary and benefits for the [Text: Removed] and hiring of Indians.

 

[Benvolio]

MY title, not the Forbes title, says immigration laws are facilitating racial discrimination.

 

[kallipolis]

The Dodds- Frank Act of course does require racial discrimination in favor of minorities, including immigrants, to the maximum extent possible. But notice that I said Federal law IN EFFECT requires the hiring of minorities and it is disingenuous to pretend that it does not.

Your assertion needs evidencing...kindly provide same citing the appropriate clauses in the Dodds-Frank Act., or other Federal Acts that will enable me to understand that your contention is supported by fact, and is not merely your agenda driven interpretation... thank you...

 

[Benvolio]

Your assertion needs evidencing...kindly provide same citing the appropriate clauses in the Dodds-Frank Act., or other Federal Acts that will enable me to understand that your contention is supported by fact, and is not merely your agenda driven interpretation... thank you...

This has been discussed at length several time before. Google. Section 342 Dodds Frank Act maximum extent possible.

 

[thewiz]

I guess I'm still waiting to hear the Republican plan for immigration. They had one; flipped and now that was a bad one; perhaps Ben can write another after the Kenyan-Socialist-Communist-Dictator president turns the reigns over to Hillary.

 

[kallipolis]

This has been discussed at length several time before. Google. Section 342 Dodds Frank Act maximum extent possible.

sub section, or paragraph (f) would appear to be the relevant wording. Nothing in this sub section appears to suggest hiring of so called minorities not suitable for the employment vacancies that require filling.... I can only suppose that this sub section addresses a need to reverse long term discriminatory hiring practices...screening out Blacks, and Latinos in favour of including non-whites.

It is bizarre for me to believe that such legislation encourages employers to import non United States citizens, who are not white to fill job vacancies...

 

[Benvolio]

sub section, or paragraph (f) would appear to be the relevant wording. Nothing in this sub section appears to suggest hiring of so called minorities not suitable for the employment vacancies that require filling.... I can only suppose that this sub section addresses a need to reverse long term discriminatory hiring practices...screening out Blacks, and Latinos in favour of including non-whites.

It is bizarre for me to believe that such legislation encourages employers to import non United States citizens, who are not white to fill job vacancies...

The motive would be hard to prove. Nevertheless the lay-offs are occurring, and they, I believe, have the effect of racial discrimination.

 

[TX-Beau]

sub section, or paragraph (f) would appear to be the relevant wording. Nothing in this sub section appears to suggest hiring of so called minorities not suitable for the employment vacancies that require filling.... I can only suppose that this sub section addresses a need to reverse long term discriminatory hiring practices...screening out Blacks, and Latinos in favour of including non-whites.

It is bizarre for me to believe that such legislation encourages employers to import non United States citizens, who are not white to fill job vacancies...

Ben has been thoroughly debunked on this topic by several people. He's operating under the assumption that if he sticks his fingers in his ears and hums real loudly reality will conform to his wishes.

 

[opinterph]

The links to NYTimes and LATimes show some employers laying off Americans to hire people from India.

The technology group at Disney was being restructured in a way that demanded “new capabilities development” skills. The company reported that prior to the restructuring less than 30 percent of their technology staff possessed those skills. [Link]

But here is an article from Forbes which is relevant.

Jason Richwine wrote the article.

Richwine argued both in his dissertation for Harvard in 2009 and in a forum at the American Enterprise Institute in 2008 that Hispanics and blacks are intellectually inferior to whites and have trouble assimilating because of a supposed genetic predisposition to lower IQ. [Link]

The important thing is, as the title says, immigration laws are facilitating racial discrimination.

H-1B is a non-immigrant visa. It confers no right to remain in the US in the absence of a sponsoring employer.

The Dodds- Frank Act of course does require racial discrimination in favor of minorities, including immigrants, to the maximum extent possible.

A good-faith effort to ensure fair inclusion is not racial discrimination. [Link]

 

[xbuzzerx]

sub section, or paragraph (f) would appear to be the relevant wording. Nothing in this sub section appears to suggest hiring of so called minorities not suitable for the employment vacancies that require filling.... I can only suppose that this sub section addresses a need to reverse long term discriminatory hiring practices...screening out Blacks, and Latinos in favour of including non-whites.

It is bizarre for me to believe that such legislation encourages employers to import non United States citizens, who are not white to fill job vacancies...

It is equally bizarre to believe that pay differentials would not be the easiest, simplest, and best explanation over and above a bizarrely contorted theory that employers and corporations reach out of the country in their overeagerness and zealotry to make sure they are hiring minorities-- something the workforce has always dragged its feet to do when other options exist. This is a motivation (or a "legal requirement") which Ben is wishing us all into believing exists in reality.

His argument seems to have shifted lately into trying to convince everyone that the profit motive is extremely distantly marginal to employers and corporations.

 

[TX-Beau]

It is equally bizarre to believe that pay differentials would not be the easiest, simplest, and best explanation over and above a bizarrely contorted theory that employers and corporations reach out of the country in their overeagerness and zealotry to make sure they are hiring minorities-- something the workforce has always dragged its feet to do when other options exist. This is a motivation (or a "legal requirement") which Ben is wishing us all into believing exists in reality.

His argument seems to have shifted lately into trying to convince everyone that the profit motive is extremely distantly marginal to employers and corporations.

I have to agree that immigration (especially illegal) does indeed facilitate discrimination, by people like Ben, against immigrants.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day - unless it's digital, in which case it was probably shoddily made in a sweatshop in Taiwan where the immigrants have pushed all the jobs.

Hmmmm, did I get that correct? It's hard to remember which conspiracy we're pushing today.

 

[Benvolio]

..

It is equally bizarre to believe that pay differentials would not be the easiest, simplest, and best explanation over and above a bizarrely contorted theory that employers and corporations reach out of the country in their overeagerness and zealotry to make sure they are hiring minorities-- something the workforce has always dragged its feet to do when other options exist. This is a motivation (or a "legal requirement") which Ben is wishing us all into believing exists in reality.

His argument seems to have shifted lately into trying to convince everyone that the profit motive is extremely distantly marginal to employers and corporations.

You are probably right that the salary and benefit burdens are a primary motive, but since the laid off people were replaced by members of a differen race it has a discriminational effect.

 

[xbuzzerx]

..
You are probably right that the salary and benefit burdens are a primary motive, but since the laid off people were replaced by members of a differen race it has a discriminational effect.

I'm honestly stumped by this logic.

Anytime one person in the workforce loses a job, if someone else of a different race is hired to do a different job or a job with different qualifications... you believe racial discrimination has taken place?

I'm honestly sincerely torn at times if conservatives are simply bent on always painting discrimination as something other than what it actually is, or if, as your post implies, they sincerely don't even understand what it is.