I was watching a debate where liberals were citing studies showing workplace diversity improves innovation. The studies are sketchy, but it won the audience
and more importantly it lets them get influence in the business world. Mass immigration is sold on the dual basis of helping the economy and feeling good about it.
should there be a push for financing studies, gathering information, and formulating positions that help the dissident right enter the policy debate?
libertarians are more established with think tanks than nationalists, and it might be something to emulate
>trusting what a liberal says >ever if any of this was even remotely true nobody would need gender/women/minority/diversity quotas
Noah Davis
the point is bias leads businesses to neglect untapped potential
Hudson Flores
Innovation and firm efficiency are negatively impacted by racial diversity due to internal conflict
>“We show that ethnic diversity or fractionalization and values diversity are distinct and while the former has a negative effect on innovation, the latter contributes positively. However, countries are bound to have both types of diversity. We find that countries that are ethnically homogenous but diverse in values orientation are the best innovators.”
>race doesn't exist >we need to hire different races because they inherently think differently due to their race
Kayden Long
or maybe those companies that have higher earnings the their industrial mean can afford to waste time and money on diversity hires?
Correlation does not imply causation, Harvard Business Review.
William Allen
>untapped potential dunno how you handle it on the other side of the pond but i hire people based on skill instead of personal preferences its the main reason i don't need the goberment to tell me who i can/cannot hire because the penis/vagina-ratio in my department is already off or whatever the main goal of all private run businesses is to generate revenue if your potential/skill can help me increase this revenue consider yourself hired
>can afford to waste time and money on diversity hires most likely this
Aaron Rodriguez
>why diverse teams are smarter
I used to live with this guy from Vietnam who was a hardcore socialist. He tried to argue that diversity is a strength in the workforce. I said to him something along the lines of:
"Don't you think a company should hire people based on how well they are qualified for the job, rather than their race, age, gender, etc? If you were in charge of hiring people, wouldn't YOU want to hire the BEST people for the job?"
He immediately conceded, but the most surprising thing is that he didn't even consider a meritocracy before I mentioned to him. His response was:
"Hm... the best person for the job... thats actually a really good idea!"
Like, the idea didn't even fucking occur to him. It was a COMPLETELY foreign concept to him.
I'll never forget that conversation.
Colton Hernandez
i feel like we need more of this sort of post, but with financed independent research, a think tank that gathers information and formulates positions and talking points, and some public speakers
less autism and counterculture/meme war and more serious politicking, which will take money to afford people the time to dedicate to this
yes, but the idea is by leaving behind minorities unemployed in the ghetto and women in the kitchen, you're less productive and therefore less competitive in the globalized market
all I'm saying is the left is aligning with moneyed interests while the dissident right is just popular in nature. it doesn't have an intellectual class of people behind it or much for money, so it appears less credible
the point of the OP is that we should try to have codified positions supported by research
Grayson Peterson
FYI they load these statistics by comparing already made companies like Apple or Google who have already established their commercial success and then use their plentiful capital to indulge in diversity hires like 'Spanish lunch authenticity engineers' while their farm of whites and asians continue to do most of the output. Smaller companies who don't have the excess capital to engage in HR bullshit of course are less diverse because if they were more diverse it would kill them before they have a chance to grow.
Jacob Bell
also if Sup Forums is any indication there's a lot of bright young people that aren't being used outside of meme wars
Nathaniel Johnson
First world native population is falling. They are the best consumers for multinational corporations. If their population falls economic growth falls. Their answer is to import non-whites ( importing whites is mostly a zero sum game) and "upgrade" them to first world consumers.
The existence of races and nations is problematic for multinationals. It means multiple markets, laws, and preferences. One world, one race is their goal. In the long term they consolidate power, but in the short term it makes it easier to grow very large businesses that need major revenue increases to show growth.
Gavin Barnes
>hire cheaper labor >Get higher returns
really activates the almonds, that does.
Ian Young
yes, this the end goal of capitalism, which has been consolidating the work market since the 19th century. it's under that system that we saw the unprecedented consolidation of provinces etc into unitary nation-states, the next logical step is gathering nations into regional states that better adapt and compete on a global scale especially with huge competitors like china
Bentley Long
isn't this quite clearly because only very successful and rich firms like google can afford to think about irrelevant (or even silghtly negative) details like diversity? Google was spectacular long before the diversity mantra, in fact it's gotten worse since then. Same with apple, facebook, microsoft. All white man companies originally.
Christopher Perry
good post with valid reasoning, have a (you)
James Sullivan
that gook would hire a vietnamese in a heart beat over a white person. Don't let them fool you.
Jose Campbell
Well, technocally they are not right. Sup Forums is by far the most diverse group manking has ever produced and we work pretty well.
The thing is that diversity is good, as long each one is on their own country working thourgh the internet.
I like SOPA DE MACACO. SOPA DE OPOSSUM and HORSE MEAT is not for me.
It's also a numbers game. There are more talented people out of 7.5 billion globally compared to 325 million domestically. Despite the average quality of life of China, India, or ME, there are people who can afford decent education. Combining them with other 1st world nations makes the talent pool for a company capable of sponsoring international workers much larger.
Ryan Lopez
>that pic whoever eats that nitrate packed overcooked garbage is going to destroy their kidneys and lymph system..
Christopher Lewis
does anyone have a compilation of studies for redpilling purposes
Bentley Nelson
>Detouring attention from the link below. Hue.
Leo Robinson
most big corps are already under performing, simply because they can afford it departments stuffed with employees "working" 9 to 5 will the actual work is done by somebody else now offer them money to hire "diverse" and your net gain, at least on paper, will increase, simply because your expenses decreased small to medium businesses can't afford this practice as they still need to make ends meet at the end of the month
>not eating at least one Zwiebelmett Semmel per week whats wrong with you
Samuel Hall
Such obviously beneficial things shouldn't have to be enforced at gunpoint.
Dylan Lewis
can we prove this though? like how would you put this in a debate
Benjamin Edwards
I suspect that there are some factors that yield lower profit margins/innovation rate for un-diverse businesses: >family businesses are obviously non-diverse and almost always lean towards 'sustain' model, i.e. low profits and no innovation >smart black people are very expensive, firms with huge R&D budgets promise high wages, so smart black people are overrepresented >generally asian IQ, duh >innovation comes mostly from metropolitan areas, metropolitan areas are diverse
