Jump to content

strathavenarab

Gold Members
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by strathavenarab

  1. 1 hour ago, hk blues said:

    There are still some jobs where race/gender/age are acceptable criteria -

    Not much 50+ males working in strip joints for example.  And, by some coincidence the majority of staff in the local Indian restaurant are Indian (or at least look like they might be).

     

    A 50+ male is not the most competent person for the job in a strip joint though - the point still stands. Part of the job description is literally based on your ability to arouse men.

    I don’t take your point on Indian restaurants either. It would be poor business practice to hire an inferior chef just because of skin colour. It just so happens that Indian people tend to be better at cooking Indian food - and it’s pretty obvious why that’s true.

    That’s why equality of outcome is a terrible idea. There are natural reasons why we see higher percentages of some groups in certain fields. Denying a person an equal shot in an interview is shocking though.
     

  2. It’s a very dangerous road when we go down the path of not hiring the most competent person selected in an interview process. The moment you want to add someone’s identity (race, gender, age …the list can become endless) into the mix is a step into pretty extreme views. Equal opportunity for everyone! 

  3. I’ve been reading this thread for a while and just want to make a quick observation around cases rates and the published hospitalisation figures. First I want to say that I am not in favour of any more  restrictions but I have noticed a few comments which don’t make mathematical sense.

    The case numbers we see on a daily basis are the rate of cases per day. The hospital figures are the absolute number of people in hospital.

    Based on this, it is not possible to say with certainty that “the case numbers have peaked therefore the hospital numbers will peak x days later”.  You can say that the rate of  hospitalisations will peak but not the absolute number of people in hospital.

    To calculate when the absolute number of people in hospital will peak, you need to know the discharge rate. This isn’t (to my knowledge) reported in the daily figures.

    The hospital numbers will peak when the rate of people entering hospital is below the rate of people leaving the hospital. You could still in theory have peaked in case numbers and have rising hospital figures for quite some time (if the case number do not fall quickly)

    I know this seems obvious to most people on this thread but I have seen multiple comments which don’t grasp this concept.

     

     

  4. No it isn't. He is exploiting a failing business. In a capitalist system failure is simply flushed out of the system and bad investments go down with it. You sound like you have no idea about capitalism whatsoever. If it leaves a gap in the marketplace to exploit then something will fill that gap, whether that happens to be a new club along pretty much the exact same lines or not I have no idea. But something will turn up.

    The money not going to HMRC is tough titty actually, and I dont care about it whatsoever, the less money they get the better. The money not going to creditors is the actual bit of capitalism that IS working. They decided to do business with Rangers (bad investment) and will subsequently lose money. HMRC can just get to f**k as it is simply a parasitical tick on the body of the free market. dry.gif

    One of the silliest things i have ever read on the internet....what a fud.

×
×
  • Create New...