From: Terry.Parks@launchpad.unc.edu (Terry Parks)
Subject: Re: Institutional racism in education
Organization: UNC Office of Information Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 04:56:08 GMT

>>>After all of this junk, Mr. Parks, could you explain why whites are still
>>>3 to 5 times more likely to be hired over a black applicant with the same
>>>qualifications as the white applicant.

>>Because this is incorrect.

>   Terry Parks shows how smart she is here.  Without even seeing the study, she
>states for the world to know that it is incorrect.  I would love to have a
>professor like Terry Parks, she would be able to hand your papers back
>instantly, without even looking at it to grade, she would just say, "this paper
>stinks, this one is correct" just on intuition!  Come on Terry, you are showing
>your ignorance, loud and clear!

You apparently are hoping that after reading your cute story, people will
forget that the details of this "study" still remain secret. But, since
you are lacking facts, keep your stories coming.

>>>This study was done by the US department of labor.

>   Terry Parks obviously knows nothing about the Federal Government.  I am
>a researcher for the Fed Gov. and I can tell you from experience that the
>government doesn't like to put out anything that shows that the U.S. is still
>a racist society.

Not true.  A classic case is their study of mortage applications. Over 5.3
millions mortgage application were examined and not one, not a single case
was found in these over 5.3 million applications where an applicant was
denied a mortage because their race. And is this how the government reported
the results? No, they cooked the data to introduce a racial bais, one 
that poor Blaks receive fewer loans than wealthy Caucasians (with the
terms "poor" and "wealthy" omitted, to save on printing costs no doubt).

>For this report to be made public, the evidence must be
>pretty overwhelming!  But Terry Parks says the study is incorrect and thus we
>should all ignore it!

And what could be thought of as the "smoking gun" in this case, evidence of
a malicious intent to deceive, the study producers claimed that the racial
comparison was between people making the same income (and neatly omitting
the many other financial data actually used in granting or denying
a mortgage). Might sound good except for the unbelieveably loose
redefinition of the term "same". Here, all people were divided into
three income categories, above, at, and below average. This was such that
a person with an $8000 annual income made the "same" as a person
with a $4000 annual income (a two to one difference) and a person with
a $200,000 annual income made the "same" as a person with a $50,000
annual income (a four to one difference). So the data that poor
people can less afford a loan than wealthy people was successfully
cooked into the claim the blacks are denied loans because of their race.

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination,alt.politics.correct,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc