Put their lack of money where their mouth is. Based.
Apply to the EU instead.
Other good choices would be: BRICS, Canada, Australia
Is BRICS an actual org? Like isn’t it just a collection of countries that, on paper, had a collective amount of economic weight to potentially sway the rest of the world economy.
Also I doubt, it’s illegal to be gay, Russia is high on the support ticket here
I decided to read the article for once and holy shit.
“These terms included affirming the statement that we “do not, and will not during the term of this financial assistance award, operate any programs that advance or promote DEI, or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws.”
Good on them for refusing but also government just hindered all the cybersecurity infrastructure involving python because they hire non-white people.
discriminatory equity ideology
… are they trying to change what DEI even means in the process here? Incredible.
Yup. It’s like one of those facebook “DND secretly stands for Devils New Day” rhetoric.
Holy shit
Removed by mod
Using the word “irregardless” disqualifies you from any job, anyway. So shouldn’t really matter to you.
I like that word. It’s like an in-joke that you try to sneak under the radar to see who’s paying attention.
Please provide proof that this is in use at the PSF.
Quotas for minorities are a very outdated practice and were used to break the most entrenched norms (women in C-suites).
More modern practices include preferring diversity between equally qualified candidates, ad retargeting and messaging efforts, and inclusive norms at workplaces.
Also, diversity is profitable, it increases both innovativeness and productivity. It seems uniquely stupid to kneecap the economy to benefit your cronies. Then again, maybe that’s the whole point of the GOPedo platform: rob the commons.
Please provide proof that this is in use at the PSF.
I suppose that
advance or promote DEI, or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws.
say everything.
To my understanding of the language (which is not my primary language) they simple ask that no DEI initiative is carried forward and that there is no violation of anti-discrimination laws, so what I read is that PSF is not confident that they will not be able to not carried forward some DEI initiative or to not violate anti-discrimination laws.
Assuming this is the only reason they pulled out and given the usual definition of “DEI”Quotas for minorities are a very outdated practice and were used to break the most entrenched norms (women in C-suites).
Cinically speaking, only in cushy jobs…
More modern practices include preferring diversity between equally qualified candidates, ad retargeting and messaging efforts, and inclusive norms at workplaces.
Well, between equally qualified candidates (if really true) you can just toss a coin.
Also, diversity is profitable, it increases both innovativeness and productivity. It seems uniquely stupid to kneecap the economy to benefit your cronies.
Diversity could be profitable. Uniformity could be profitable.
The only thing that benefit economy is to choose the best candidate for a given work.Then again, maybe that’s the whole point of the GOPedo platform: rob the commons.
Then good I am not from US.
It seems evident you’re not giving an informed opinion.
The Trump administration has deemed presentations of employed women and poc as part of DEI.
I find it hard to see that describing your employee diversity is discriminatory. And the law is quite settled on this not being discriminatory. Changes are being forced by executive order, many of which have been illegal under the current administration.
Diversity has repeatedly been shown to be more profitable than homogeneity, in both academic and gray literature. Besides being good for societal cohesion, fairness, stability, happiness, and moral virtue.
The best candidate is indeed best, but there are too narrow and outdated ideas on how to identify the best candidate, and humans have a bias to choose/hire for safety and similarity over actually relevant criteria, which is why we have the problem in the first place.
Diversity has repeatedly been shown to be more profitable than homogeneity, in both academic and gray literature. Besides being good for societal cohesion, fairness, stability, happiness, and moral virtue.
I did not say that diversity could not be more profitable, just that it is not always more profitable.
The best candidate is indeed best, but there are too narrow and outdated ideas on how to identify the best candidate, and humans have a bias to choose/hire for safety and similarity over actually relevant criteria, which is why we have the problem in the first place.
There is no way to solve this problem. I can be the best fit as person but the worst from a technical point of view, like you can be the best from a techincal point of view but the worst from a personal point of view.
Both of us would be a problem, although in different ways, in a team.And I’m showing you, with sources, that you are wrong on both your points.
It can be reliably and reproducibly measured that diversity is more profitable. It’s as “always” as tylenol helps against headaches, trains for travel, google for searches, gravity for keeping you on the ground. Yes, there technically are times these don’t work, but it works more often than not, and typically there’s other factors when it doesn’t.
And similarly, yes you might not always pick the best candidate, but applying robustly provable best practices will lead you to doing it more often.
Do you go through anything else in life in this manner? That if you can’t do it perfectly, you’d rather not try? I’d wager not, as trying gets you closer to your goals, even when not meeting them immediately.
I don’t know how you didn’t spot that Trump is a massive racist and just wants to make life shit for people who aren’t white and that’s all he cares about. When Trump says DEI, he means black people or hispanic people or anyone who isn’t white having a job at all. He calls it equality but he means it racist. I don’t know how that can have passed you by. Supporting the racist in chief for equality’s sake is insane.
Supporting the racist in chief for equality’s sake is insane.
I don’t care about Trump, it is not my problem, in EU Trump policies are irrelevant.
But Trump is a consequence, not a cause. You people voted for him. Maybe choose better candidate (both sides of course)Supporting the racist in chief for equality’s sake is insane.
I don’t care about Trump, it is not my problem, in EU Trump policies are irrelevant.
And yet here you are, arguing in support of his policies.
But Trump is a consequence, not a cause.
You have that really fucked up for two reasons.
- Trump is instigating all kinds of racist shit policies
- Racism is NOT caused by inclusive words or actions, it’s a reaction against them by people who were racist from the start.
You people voted for him.
No one like me voted for Trump. People like you voted for him then blamed people like me for their reactionary shit.
Supporting the racist in chief for equality’s sake is insane.I don’t care about Trump, it is not my problem, in EU Trump policies are irrelevant.And yet here you are, arguing in support of his policies.
Yeah, I should find something more productive to do… you are right.
But Trump is a consequence, not a cause.
You have that really fucked up for two reasons.
Trump is instigating all kinds of racist shit policies
Racism is NOT caused by inclusive words or actions, it’s a reaction against them by people who were racist from the start.True, but Trump was elected, he do not magically appeared one night. And if Trump was elected, this can mean two things
- US are fundamentally racist
- you are no better than him, only on the opposing side.
choose what better suit yourself, because the point is that people voted for him and not that Trump “created” the voters.
If you wanted to win, you should have put against him someone more credible than Kamala Harris who had as only point the fact that she is a black woman: she got less than 1000 votes during the primary elections of her own party, listening to her TV debates it was chilling. Maybe you should care also about all the non $MINORITY_OF_THE_DAY people.
And that assuming that the Democratic voters even went to vote instead of staying at home horrified by what the party did.
You people voted for him.
No one like me voted for Trump.
Nodoby even voted for Berlusconi, yet somehow he won more than one election, just saying…
People like you voted for him then blamed people like me for their reactionary shit.
The problem is that people like me are the ones that see what happen, do not say anything but in the end vote based on what they see and what candidates say.
When we can put all of our brains into robotic bodies with hydraulic tits and have chainsaws for hands the world will be a better place.
I’d vote for you.
Get a load of this ®etard. Gonna be Secretary of White Trash later this regime.
It’s good the PSF withdrew, they shouldn’t feel obligated to align with the “MAGA crowd” to secure funding.
Good move PSF
very based
Good 👏
