Racial Bias

[Gulo Blue]

Why? I can't question a conclusion without first proving it's something else? That's ridiculous. Why do I need an explanation when there is clear evidence in the study contradicting the conclusions of the researchers? I'm not buying your theory if it's simply racism because it's not impacting black women AT ALL and the gap for Hispanics is narrowing - the study projects convergence within a few generations. So now America is only fundamentally racist against black men?

The study indicated that “Black men raised in the top 1 percent – by millionaires – were as likely to be incarcerated as white men raised in households earning about $36,000” but it also finds that the relationship between racism in a given area and “incarceration rates is not statistically significant."

Personally, I think it's more complicated and can't be explained by any one factor.

It's not that black women don't see inequality. It's just that white women face just as much. It's not that far off from how much black men face. The relationship between inequality and bias is complicated. I'm not saying it isn't. But to look at this and not see it as a big deal seems really strange to me.

How you see evidence contradicting the authors is a mystery. That could involve moving the goalposts. What claim do you think is contradicted?

 

[Spartanmack]

My argument is, in order 1) finish high school 2) get a job and stay employed and 3) don't have kids until you are in a committed relationship (i.e. married) and you won't be poor in America.

by the way, did you miss this part of the study, “the fraction of low-income black fathers present is most predictive of smaller intergenerational gaps…black boys who grow up in areas with high father presence are also significantly less likely to be incarcerated, which could explain part of the association with higher employment rates.” The study also finds that higher levels of racism in a given community is correlated with low income for everyone which indicates it's not clear - does racism drive poverty or does poverty drive racism?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Here are the findings from the executive summary:

Finding #1:Hispanic Americans are moving up in the income distribution across generations, while Black Americans and American Indians are not.

Finding #2: The black-white income gap is entirely driven by differences in men?s, not women?s, outcomes.

Finding #3: Differences in family characteristics ?parental marriage rates, education, wealth- and differences in ability explain very little of the black-white gap.

Finding #4: In 99% of neighborhoods in the United States, black boys earn less in adulthood than white boys who grow up in families with comparable income.

Finding #5: Both black and white boys have better outcomes in low-poverty areas, but black-white gaps are bigger in such neighborhoods.

Finding #6: Within low-poverty areas, black-white gaps are smallest in places with low levels of racial bias among whites and high rates of father presence among blacks.

Finding #7: The black-white gap is not immutable: black boys who move to better neighborhoods as children have significantly better outcomes.

 

[Spartanmack]

It's not that black women don't see inequality. It's just that white women face just as much. It's not that far off from how much black men face. The relationship between inequality and bias is complicated. I'm not saying it isn't. But to look at this and not see it as a big deal seems really strange to me.

How you see evidence contradicting the authors is a mystery. That could involve moving the goalposts. What claim do you think is contradicted?

No, it's not that white women face just as much inequality. Black and white women attend college at a higher rate than white men. the gender pay gap has to do with career choices (types of jobs, flex time, hours worked, leaving the workforce to have children, etc) than gender discrimination. Anyway, how can you say racism is such a huge factor when it doesn't effect women? Do you think gender works less against black women but they are brought back down to the level of white women because of their race? That's absurd. If racism played a huge role then black women should be more impacted than black men, certainly not significantly less.

I'm not saying racism and bias don't exist but it's not clear that it's the missing link that explains the bulk of the difference in outcomes for black men.

 

[Gulo Blue]

My argument is, in order 1) finish high school 2) get a job and stay employed and 3) don't have kids until you are in a committed relationship (i.e. married) and you won't be poor in America.

by the way, did you miss this part of the study, ?the fraction of low-income black fathers present is most predictive of smaller intergenerational gaps?black boys who grow up in areas with high father presence are also significantly less likely to be incarcerated, which could explain part of the association with higher employment rates.? The study also finds that higher levels of racism in a given community is correlated with low income for everyone which indicates it's not clear - does racism drives poverty or does poverty drive racism?

I thought you used to say #3 was the #1 predictor of avoiding poverty. I knew there were other factors, but I thought that was your main one. Either way, as true as that stat about parents and education may be when you lump everyone together, the point of this paper is that when you separate by race, there's a significant different that that stat does not account for.

I don't know why you think I miss that point about incarceration, or why you think it explains away any significant part of this data.

Poverty driving racism and racism driving poverty is an idea that I'm absolutely into. If you're open to considering that, I think there's probably some truth there.

 

[Gulo Blue]

No, it's not that white women face just as much inequality. Black and white women attend college at a higher rate than white men. the gender pay gap has to do with career choices (types of jobs, flex time, hours worked, leaving the workforce to have children, etc) than gender discrimination. Anyway, how can you say racism is such a huge factor when it doesn't effect women? Do you think gender works less against black women but they are brought back down to the level of white women because of their race? That's absurd. If racism played a huge role then black women should be more impacted than black men, certainly not significantly less.

I'm not saying racism and bias don't exist but it's not clear that it's the missing link that explains the bulk of the difference in outcomes for black men.

I absolutely think race and gender interact. Why would you expect biases for black men and black women to be the same?

Any this idea that the pay gap has been explained away by career choices is an oversimplifacation too. I expect you already knew I knew that though. Old argument.

 

[Spartanmack]

I thought you used to say #3 was the #1 predictor of avoiding poverty. I knew there were other factors, but I thought that was your main one. Either way, as true as that stat about parents and education may be when you lump everyone together, the point of this paper is that when you separate by race, there's a significant different that that stat does not account for.

I don't know why you think I miss that point about incarceration, or why you think it explains away any significant part of this data.

Poverty driving racism and racism driving poverty is an idea that I'm absolutely into. If you're open to considering that, I think there's probably some truth there.

not it's not. the point is there's a significant difference for black boys when you separate by race.

I'm open to considering all of this but if you're not open to not arguing like MC, then I don't see much point in any of this.

 

[Gulo Blue]

not it's not. the point is there's a significant difference for black boys when you separate by race.

I'm open to considering all of this but if you're not open to not arguing like MC, then I don't see much point in any of this.

Yeah boys. Of course.

What do you mean? What am I doing that you object to?

 

[Spartanmack]

I absolutely think race and gender interact. Why would you expect biases for black men and black women to be the same?

Any this idea that the pay gap has been explained away by career choices is an oversimplifacation too. I expect you already knew I knew that though. Old argument.

I wouldn't expect them to be the same - if you believe the current popular opinion among "intersectional studies" academics, black women should have it worse than black men because they are a double minority, but they don't. They are on par, even a little ahead of white women.

Facts often have a way of oversimplifying things, particularly when they debunk a popular narrative. I don't know whether you knew I already knew that but I expect you know it now.

 

[Spartanmack]

What do you mean? What am I doing that you object to?

this...

Well, part of it is I don't think you have room to move the goalposts here. The 2 parent thing was your main go-to argument to explain inequality as something other than bias. This study shows that inequality between boys is still dramatic "even if they grow up in two-parent families with comparable incomes, education, and wealth, live on the same city block, and attend the same school". I'm curious to see how you react to this since you don't seem to be shifting your take in response to this new data, but I think any attempt to move the goalpost would be so transparent, you'd know nobody would take you seriously if you posted it.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I wouldn't expect them to be the same - if you believe the current popular opinion among "intersectional studies" academics, black women should have it worse than black men because they are a double minority, but they don't. They are on par, even a little ahead of white women.

Facts often have a way of oversimplifying things, particularly when they debunk a popular narrative. I don't know whether you knew I already knew that but I expect you know it now.

I'm not up on the current intersectional studies stuff. I thought it had something to do with sexual orientation.

 

[Gulo Blue]

this...

Yeah. I really thought this was going to be a narrow discussion. Your claim about 2-parent being a big deal not holding up to this study.

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm not up on the current intersectional studies stuff. I thought it had something to do with sexual orientation.

I think intersectional studies encompasses any category that can claim victim status - any race, gender, sexual orientation and any combination thereof. Basically anyone who isn't a straight white male with the possible exception of gingers.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I think intersectional studies encompasses anyone category that can claim victim status - any race, gender, sexual orientation and any combination thereof. Basically anyone who isn't a straight white male with the possible exception of gingers.

Well, that would be a change from where I thought we were. I have no idea what theories there may be with regard to biases "stacking". I do think biases vary from race to race and between genders of each race. At least, I see no reason to think they should be the same. I think it's surprising black men end up as close as they do to women, not because I had any expectation that one would earn more than the other, but because it seems coincidental given how far off white men are from the other 3 groups.

I don't see how a lack of stacking in the case of black women would help maintain this idea that 2 parents plays a dominant role. That idea is shot.

There's also something in here about the children of immigrants, particularly poor immigrants based on the all Americans -vs- mothers born in US chart. Maybe there's a bilingual benefit.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I'm still at "But that comparison of black men with 2 parents making $140,000 to white boys with 2 parents making $60,000, that's one heck of a data point, don't you think?"

 

[Michchamp]

I'm still at "But that comparison of black men with 2 parents making $140,000 to white boys with 2 parents making $60,000, that's one heck of a data point, don't you think?"

Oh, so teh blacks actually earn more? where's the bias then?

you just unproved everything else you posted, dunce.

 

[Spartanmack]

Well, that would be a change from where I thought we were. I have no idea what theories there may be with regard to biases "stacking". I do think biases vary from race to race and between genders of each race. At least, I see no reason to think they should be the same. I think it's surprising black men end up as close as they do to women, not because I had any expectation that one would earn more than the other, but because it seems coincidental given how far off white men are from the other 3 groups.

I don't see how a lack of stacking in the case of black women would help maintain this idea that 2 parents plays a dominant role. That idea is shot.

There's also something in here about the children of immigrants, particularly poor immigrants based on the all Americans -vs- mothers born in US chart. Maybe there's a bilingual benefit.

I don't think the idea is shot - the study even indicates that black boys do better in communities with high levels of fatherhood in the community, suggesting that stronger social fabric not just in the home but in the community at large plays a role.

I think it's much more complicated than the Times indicates. There are behavioral aspects that are largely left unanswered. Also, they don't consider the peer effect - there are a few studies that indicate black children are penalized for "acting white" meaning they are denigrated for taking school seriously and speaking properly. Obama made public statement about this saying ?there?s an element of truth [in the accusation that too many black parents denigrate education], where, OK, if boys are reading too much, then, well, why are you doing that? Or why are you speaking so properly?? If I'm not mistaken, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice both made similar statements. Here are some links to studies about this:

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/an_economic_analysis_of_acting_white.pdf

John Ogbu's Wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ogbu

Then there's this study that indicates black students spend significantly less time on homework than any other ethnic group.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brow...-the-homework-gap-among-high-school-students/

Again, I'm not saying bias doesn't play a role or that racism doesn't exist. But I hardly think it's unreasonable to say the study doesn't show what the NYT says it does.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't think the idea is shot - the study even indicates that black boys do better in communities with high levels of fatherhood in the community, suggesting that stronger social fabric not just in the home but in the community at large plays a role.

Yeah, that's not being challenged. What this data allows is seeing the difference between 1- and 2-parent situations for black and white boys separately. So you can easily see how big the differences are relative to each other.

The social fabric thing does remind me of the discriminatory practices in home selling and home loans.

I don't discount all cultural factors being contributors and I think it's safe to assume my guess leans more towards bias being a bigger factor than in your guess, and neither of us are saying culture or bias is zero. But I think this study shows is that some of the elements are pretty small contributors.

 

[Spartanmack]

Yeah, that's not being challenged. What this data allows is seeing the difference between 1- and 2-parent situations for black and white boys separately. So you can easily see how big the differences are relative to each other.

The social fabric thing does remind me of the discriminatory practices in home selling and home loans.

I don't discount all cultural factors being contributors and I think it's safe to assume my guess leans more towards bias being a bigger factor than in your guess, and neither of us are saying culture or bias is zero. But I think this study shows is that some of the elements are pretty small contributors.

Well if it's not being challenged then maybe I misunderstood your argument. But I don't think I misunderstood the NYT's argument and I maintain the study doesn't indicate what the NYT seems to think it indicates.

You're right, I'm not saying bias isn't a contributor and I'm definitely not saying culture isn't a contributor - I think the cultural contribution is very large. The study shows 2 parent household is not be a significant contributor when it comes to differences between black boys and everyone else but it definitely does not show, holding all else equal that the two parent household in general has no predictable impact on outcomes. This study does nothing to reduce the significance of that nor does it claim too but the Times seems to believe it does.

There are studies that indicate bias definitely plays a roll, but it's kind of a chicken or the egg situation. In one study, it was found that employers who performed background checks hired blacks at much higher rates than those that didn't. Another study indicated that employers who were prohibited from performing credit checks on candidates hired fewer blacks. In either case, it's not clear what the driver is - blacks commit crimes at higher rates than other ethnic groups and they tend to have lower credit ratings. If an employer is unable to verify one or the other, is that bias driven by behavior or racial animus?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Well if it's not being challenged then maybe I misunderstood your argument. But I don't think I misunderstood the NYT's argument and I maintain the study doesn't indicate what the NYT seems to think it indicates.

You're right, I'm not saying bias isn't a contributor and I'm definitely not saying culture isn't a contributor - I think the cultural contribution is very large. The study shows 2 parent household is not be a significant contributor when it comes to differences between black boys and everyone else but it definitely does not show, holding all else equal that the two parent household in general has no predictable impact on outcomes. This study does nothing to reduce the significance of that nor does it claim too but the Times seems to believe it does.

Did you see the chart where I posted the thumbnail? It depend where on the scale you're talking about, but you can compare white boys with 1 or 2 parents or black boys with 1 or 2 parents. That 2nd parent bumps you up a couple, or maybe a few percentile points across most of the range. I'd eyeball it at about 20-30% as big a deal as race.