Cardiac posted:

Edit: lol, trust V to provide.
https://amp.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/v-kongressen-rostade-for-att-samla-in-statistik-over-etnicitet?__twitter_impression=true

quote:

...

SCB använder sig regelbundet av olika former av enkätundersökningar som riktar sig till befolkningen för att samla information och data inom olika samhällsområden t.ex. arbetsmarknaden, socio-ekonomiska förutsättningar osv, eller till brukarna av de olika statliga verksamheterna (t ex i relation till skola och utbildning, individ- och familjeomsorg, äldreomsorg, barn och unga, bibliotek o s v). I stort sett alltid frågas det om ålder och kön och ibland om födelseland och bostadsområde. Kön och ålder är båda lagstadgade diskrimineringsgrunder men det finns ett antal diskrimineringsgrunder och kategorier som det bara ibland frågas om i enkäterna såsom könsöverskridande identitet eller uttryck, funktionshinder och tillgänglighet samt sexuell läggning. Ingen av dessa diskrimineringsgrunder och kategorier går det att få fram siffror på via befolkningsregistret så det enda sättet att ta reda på om exempelvis HBTQ-personer är missgynnade i något sammanhang är att fråga om det och denna metod kallas oftast utanför Sverige för jämlikhetsdata.

Mycket tyder tyvärr på att klyftorna fortsätter att växa i Sverige. Segregationen och ojämlikheten är just nu som allra mest tydlig i relation till just diskrimineringsgrunderna etnisk tillhörighet, nationellt ursprung eller hudfärg samt religion eller annan trosuppfattning. Att börja fråga om etnicitet, hudfärg och religion är tillåtet enligt svensk lagstiftning, det har DO utrett på regeringens uppdrag i rapporten "Statistikens roll i arbetet mot diskriminering" (2012), och Sverige får också regelbundet kritik från FN och EU för att inte ha några data och siffror om dessa diskrimineringsgrunder.

Diskrimineringsgrunder som sällan eller aldrig inkluderas i undersökningar är etnisk tillhörighet, nationellt ursprung eller hudfärg samt religion eller annan trosuppfattning. Uppemot 20 % av invånarna idag har någon form av utländsk bakgrund men som i stort sett aldrig frågas om sin etniska tillhörighet, nationella ursprung eller hudfärg samt religion eller annan trosuppfattning.

Att välja att synliggöra olika gruppers utsatthet är ett oerhört viktigt steg i processen för att skapa ett jämlikt samhälle, för det är bara när man kan identifiera, synliggöra och mäta människors utsatthet som man kan ta fram riktade och effektiva politiska åtgärder mot de specifika problemen. Att inte samla jämlikhetsdata är att blunda för och därmed också upprätthålla rådande normer om ojämlika förutsättningar och socio-ekonomiska klyftor som drabbar olika grupper i samhället

Yrkande

att Vänsterpartiet ska jobba för att Sverige, genom Statistiska Centralbyrån, SCB ska upprätta jämlikhetsdata, som bygger på samtliga diskrimineringsgrunder, i de relevanta årliga enkätundersökningar som görs

Momodou Malcolm Jallow, Malmö, Daniel Riazat, Falun, Rossana Dinamarca, Trollhättan

McCloud posted:

By that measure, then we should also agree with M and SDs proposal, because if imcertain demographics are mote prone to commit crime then we should take actions to pre-empt and help these people.

McCloud posted:

By that measure, then we should also agree with M and SDs proposal, because if imcertain demographics are mote prone to commit crime then we should take actions to pre-empt and help these people.

MiddleOne posted:

'if we are doing one thing, then we should also do this completely different other thing' - McCloud, Feb 11, 2018 13:58

Cerebral Bore posted:

lol yeah, that sure sounds like what M and SD are after here.

SplitSoul posted:

Leader of the Social Democrats, Mette Frederiksen, September 19, 2015: "I'm convinced that the time where you could get away with symbolic policy, proposals for refugee camps in Kenya, slamming the brakes [on asylum] and quick fixes, is a thing of the past. Kristian Thulesel-Dahl. Lars Løkke. Welcome to reality." (actual quote)

Leader of the Social Democrats, Mette Frederiksen, present day: "Yes, we're now running on a platform of completely eliminating asylum applications at the border, shipping refugees to camps in Northern Africa, mandating pork in public daycare and schools, and banning exactly 23 women from wearing the niqab. Why do you ask?"

McCloud posted:

Well my arguement is that it's not so different, in that both can be used to help us localize vulnerable people and offer assistance and help to them

Potrzebie posted:

Potrzebie posted:

MiddleOne posted:

There's something very different about doing a voluntary census to get a more complex image of discrimination and a wholesale combing and re-definition of crime-data to support racist beliefs and policy proposals.

Mercrom posted:

doing a cost benefit analysis of rescuing starving orphan refugees seems obvious to me as a consequentialist.

Revelation 2-13 posted:

If we really want to bring up the economic issues, everyone who has actually studied the effect of migration on the economy have agreed that it's a net positive. You'll find few lone paid shills and racists who think otherwise though. It's basically like climate change research (except a little more fragmented when it comes to reasons/causalities why it is the case). In particular, racist assholes typically point to one, incredibly flawed and highly problematic, piece of research on how diversity is bad. Comically ignoring that the vast consensus of research on both migration and diversity shows the exactly opposite.

evil_bunnY posted:

What the gently caress is wrong with people.

Fader Movitz posted:

Talking about economic benefit I think you need to separate asylum seekers and other immigration, they're very different things. We can't really tell what the long term economic effects of the last few years massive migration wave. I have seen conflicting arguments for economic benefit and it hurting the economy.

If you want to take in refugees, the humanitarian argument is better than trying to argue that its a net positive for the economy.

Poil posted:

The solution is obviously just to get rid of all immigration laws and regulations and leave it in the divine hand of the free market.

MiddleOne posted:

Current academic consensus in economics on immigration is that it's very likely good, but the actual reasons that we do it and have done it so many times are ideological.

MiddleOne posted:

Oh so he used citations, that makes everything different. Pack it up scientists, this one guy released another questionable book on a topic he has published literally nothing peer-reviewed on through his entire academic career (because his specialty is still loving entrepreneurship Cardiac, if you thought we had forgotten) but oh boy this time he used citations. This is totally how academia works.

I mean I'd push through his entire book, if I literally had nothing else going on in my life, but even just going through some parts of it there are some laughable displays of analysis going on (pages 13-14 really say I all). I mean just look at that those citations you wanted to bring attention to. Almost nothing from academia and or state reports when it comes to the economical side of the argument. And that makes sense because Tino's analysis is not built around any kind of theoretical framework, model or even a falsifiable hypothesis. He haphazardly uses data from SCB (mostly unemployment data) by entirely robbing it of context, both regional, historical and for the economy as a whole, cherry picking whatever fits his pre-supposed conclusion. These chapters wouldn't even pass as a bachelor thesis because they make unsourced claims sometimes 2-5 times per page.

Massutmaning is not an academic critique of the current consensus in economics, it's a sloppily cobbled together consumer product to profit off the current anti-immigration sentiment.

Cardiac posted:

As always with you, there is only scapegoating the messenger and cherrypicking.
I note that you picked one of the chapters without any form of academic citations as well as not having a single example where the data is wrong.

But admittedly (by Tinos own words) this is not a rigorous academic work (since no one outside academia reads those) but popular science anthology.
As for falsifiable hypothesisis in social sciences, lol.

Retarded Goatee posted:

hey friends serious questions

how do we actually as a society solve the social issues arising in the wake of migration

because if your solution is "nothing is wrong" or "it'll solve itself", you're just setting yourself up to get ganked by the right wing every fourth year

MiddleOne posted:

Maybe, just maybe, it's time that we start trying to deal with the causes of our growing inequality on the structural level instead of the individual.