The article is saying unemployment is very low so your point doesn't stand. The minimum wage isn't hurting employment. What's hurting people are the low wages.
Most profitable company in the tech world creates new product and uses prior manufacturing skill, brand awareness/loyalty, device lock-in, advertising experience and retail channels to sell it and makes more profit that arbitrary list of companies in different business areas. What's the point?
The point is that one little product is HUGE. Just MASSIVE. People may not think it’s very big because it’s such a small share of Apple’s revenue but it would be a success everyone talked about if a third party had got those numbers.
You can always adopt or foster children if you really regret it later. There are plenty of children that exist that need good homes without having to create more.
As someone who knows several people who wanted to adopt - it's not as easy as you might think (at least unless you are able to spend a lot of money adopting children from abroad).
Adopting older kids who come from problematic backgrounds has a significant probability of them having experienced some sort of trauma before they got to you. It's absolutely a great thing to do to take care of these kids but potentially very difficult as well.
This is why it's very difficult to get to adopt babies - they are the ones that everyone wants. Not saying this should make anyone not adopt just that it's not as easy as you seem to think - western countries actually don't have that many orphans & a lot of people who want to adopt them (which is of course a good thing!).
> Does the fact that black Americans used to be slaves in the US, or were kept out of certain housing markets, contribute towards the fact that black Americans, on average, have lower credit scores, income, wealth, and collateral? Of course. But is this model racist? Literally not at all.
Saying that because history was racist means I'm absolved of responsibility going forward is not a strong argument. Redlining was literally a racist behavior. The point of the article is to be aware of it so you can try do better than in the past.
So your claim is despite the black ridership being 10%, black people are more likely to be beligerant or do something else that is somehow hidden but illegal so citing for eating is justified?
You're really bending over backwards to give Bart police a pass.
That is my impression from reading many other anecdotes from police describing their daily work, as well as various videos and true cop shows. You don't necessarily even have to attribute it to race; just that a demographic of employed programmers is going to have better impulse control, protective social status, habits of deference to cops, and overall good behavior than a demographic of low-income "frequent fliers" who have had many negative interactions with the police before. Being in that second demographic is what causes the disproportionate citations. Not in the choices made by the police.
Did you watch the video that the article cites? Please do. It's what sparked this study of the statistics and the police behavior in it is completely unreasonable. What you're saying doesn't align at all with what was recorded. He could easily be an "employed programmer", your biases are showing. A lot of programmers I know would respond similarly.
> San Francisco transit boss apologizes to rider detained over a sandwich
I have watched the video now (I skimmed because I hate confrontation, which is part of why I take the cops' side when people are belligerent).
This guy was not doing anything illegal that doesn't leave evidence, but he does perfectly match my description of "people who are inclined to belligerence when requested to stop eating on the BART". Employed programmers and black people who do that are likely arrested at nearly the same rates.
I'm totally fine if you tell me "It's racist that cops only ever ask black people to stop eating on the BART." Or "It's systemically racist to apply the same rules to people who get a lunch hour at their jobs and people who don't." I'm just saying that arresting 84% blacks is not necessarily racist _by the cops_, because every one of those 46 arrests may well have a video like this one, and this guy deserved it.
> I'm just saying that arresting 84% blacks is not necessarily racist _by the cops_, because every one of those 46 arrests may well have a video like this one, and this guy deserved it.
Deserves to be detained for eating a sandwich? Beligerant for expressing how stupid that is? The police department apologized for this so even they don't agree with you. I think we're done here. Good luck.
The entire system of police does not work if you are allowed to just not do what the police tell you to because you think it is stupid. You can do that democratically, but not individually. Just like companies allow you to tell your boss they are being stupid, but not to stand up and say so at the employee meeting. The authority hierarchy is more important than the actual issue.
I should say that purposely getting arrested on video to highlight the stupidity of the sandwich thing is a good tactic for getting it changed. I support the guy's actions if that was his intent.
Sharing a story to a more widely read platform than medium is the value add. But yeah the original article is the source so probably better to start there.
I prefer this drawing pad :)