An observed discrepancy on health outcomes between racial groups does not prove that race is the guiding factor, jfc. This kind of argument would only be valid in a controlled setting where you can hold constant or factor out all the potential confounders, but that's fundamentally impossible in social sciences where there's a gazillion of them.

In particular, the type of job (service job vs work-from-home job) is a variable that is clearly correlated with both race and covid outcomes, but will be missing in most pre-covid empirical studies on racial differences in health outcomes, so that we cannot take it for granted that these studies would carry over to covid.



At the end of the day, you're advocating for racial discrimination and try to justify it with mere correlations instead of looking at the actual, causal factors underlying inequality in healthcare.

You are so full of shit.

Race does not need to be a biologically guiding factor if it's a societally guiding factor. We fucked over certain groups based on race, those groups now have worse healthcare outcomes even with the same socioeconomic condition because of lingering biases in healthcare, job distribution, zip codes, and everything else.

This isn't a hard concept but for some reason I have to explain this and similar things to you every single week because you like to deep throat right wing propaganda and then come to me and challenge me to pull the dick out of your throat.

The amount of tears you would produce as an actual minority would be staggering

Denying life-saving healthcare is "taking away rights", the right to life. Furthermore, distributing something in a way that discriminates on the basis of skin color would be illegal and unconstitutional for the same reason.
The civil rights act didn't say you can discriminate as long as you add additional steps, nor did it say you can discriminate when giving benefits just not taking away rights.



Oh man
Here you are, openly defending "being racist", we're getting into the juicy stuff now



I'm using the definition of "racist" to mean discriminating against someone on the basis of their race or skin color. The same definition used by the civil rights act of 1964, which makes these policies illegal, and which will be used to strike down the racist New York policy in court if the state doesn't fold like Utah and Minnesota already have. Personally, I'm opposed to racism, but you demonstrate this fine appreciation for racism where you add the caveat that racism is okay as long as it favors the same races as you favor. But I think the real issue here is that you don't respect all the hard work and theorizing done in the past by the bureaucrats of the third reich who were tasked with formalizing the metrics for racism and figuring out how to define the races they intended to discriminate against. They had such detailed and comprehensive methods of establishing one's race, I think it would be a great starting point for you to establish how you intend to distinguish Barack Obama from Wentworth Miller. To the Nazis, they're both subhuman scum and the product of illegal miscegenation.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jan 23 2022 03:13pm

Goom lies again. What a surprise. Not

You are not taking away a life saving treatment by distributing it preferentially to groups with higher risk. If that were the case then 30 year olds could sue because the government prioritized 60 year olds.

If you have to lie in every single post it's a good indication you're full of shit.

Like I said, kenw oozing racism

Nothing new here

Enough white people are anti-vaxxers to account for any % of whites who shouldn't take the vaccine for affirmative action.

The bolded part has not been proven for covid, lol. And how the fuck can you admit that certain biases like job distribution are driving these differences in health outcome and then still advocate for rules which would deny life-saving treatment to a white person working a high-risk job while granting it to his black coworker (all else being equal)? Why on earth do you not advocate for prioritizing people in high-risk jobs instead of prioritizing by race in such a situation?



If anyone has deep-throated propaganda here, it is you with the woke ideology of "righting past discrimination by present-day discrimination in the opposite direction".

Oh look you're full of shit again. We don't need to do an explicit study for every condition, but even if we did Sioux already posted the rates that are more than enough to justify this.

Stop. Deep. Throating. Right. Wing. Cock.

Age discrimination doesn't apply in all the same scenarios as racial discrimination under US law, nice try. Age discrimination is codified under separate statutes than the civil rights act, like the age discrimination act of 1975, which purposefully distinguishes between permissible and impermissible forms of discrimination based on age, specifically considering health care applications like this. You'd know this, if you hadn't forgotten everything you ever knew about civil rights when the DNC decided to regress to the 1950s.