>But new research published Friday and shared exclusively with the Guardian found that companies that resisted the pressure and kept their DEI practices, including Costco, Apple and Delta Air Lines, performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back.
You can also read this as "Liberal backlash had no effect on performance of companies that dismantled their DEI programs"
Turns out, no one cares either way as long as the policies are only internally focused.
The parking lot of the Costco I usually go to is completely full a good chunk of the time. It's an absolute nightmare. It isn't in a strip mall or plaza so you just spend 10-15 minutes driving around praying someone will leave.
Is that a fact or are you just assuming all Republicans are poor and shop at Walmart or something? I’d love to see statistics on that. Edit: thanks to the one person who replied with stats!
Data from Affinity Solutions’ Consumer Purchase Insights 2024
> At the brand level, the largest spending difference between Republicans and Democrats occurred at Walmart, with Republicans spending $142.89 more than Democrats at Walmart.
> Costco had the next highest difference, with Democrats spending $34.11 more than Republicans
> I don't think any conservative cares if a company voluntarily pays people more money
really? if some company gets on social media and is like "we've decided to pay non-white-men the same as white men", watch the apoplectic vitriol take over the comment section.
Maybe, but if we’re just going anecdotally— I live in a more conservative area and they love Costco and Target. So I don’t know, hence why I think it’s something we maybe need some statistics on before we make broad assumptions.
🙄. It is logical reasoning not related to income and location. Target has always marketed itself as an upscale Walmart. And therefore they chose their locations based on their marketing plan. Same with Walmart. I shop a neither. Does this make me an independent? No, they are not conveniently located to my home and it is not worth the gas money to travel there. I am not their target market. I do have a Costco membership, which also is not conveniently located to me but share the membership with my son who greatly benefits from the store convenience )along with my nephew as they buy in bulk and split the groceries as they don’t need bulk items.
I’d love to see statistics on this instead of just “republicans poor, republicans shop at Walmart”. I live in a fairly republican area and I can tell you a lot of them love Costco and Target, so I’d much rather see data on this than just going with vibes.
I mean idk if anyone has data on the political demographics of shoppers…I’m not sure what your goal here is even were we to have that data in hand
but there is widely available data that republican voters, especially in historically republican run states, are poorer, less healthy, less educated, sicker, etc on average
There is also plenty of data to show poor people are bad with their money and poor often for a reason (such as badly educated in financial literacy) so… there might never be much of a connection. They could be wasting money at target when they should be shopping at aldi. But to the other poster’s point target, or wegmans as another example, aren’t building stores in areas too poor to afford to shop at their store
My goal is just pointing out that some people seem to be making some pretty broad assumptions on a study based purely on vibes instead of having substantive data that backs it up.
Why don’t you just look at the number and location of Walmarts compared to targets around the US and you’ll probably have your answer that there are far more republican communities with access to Walmart than to Target considering there are more than twice as many Walmart locations
All you are saying is “vibes”. It is as if you have nothing but conspiracy and speculation. I mean Walmart markets everyday lower prices! Target only really promotes back to school and Christmas, basic logic can tell you their target markets and education levels. But if course that requires applying logic.
You have a phone in your hand, not hard to research locations. Just because your area is republican does not mean it is wealthy. Nor does it correlate to shopping at Costco. Go look it up? You are really just making my point. Per your speculation people who shop neither are Independents!
You miss the point of Walmart though. It's different then Costco. If Walmart had not gone back on it's internal policies and customers wanted to boycott the stores guess what? They can't. Walmart is the ONLY option for so much of the country and many of them already don't care for it. But they go anyways.
Costco has a wealthier customer base and is way more selective about store location. Walmart focuses on monopolizing an area.
Well another factor in this is "did the retention or elimination of DEI policies have any impact on the end product/service quality or price?" This article - and entire line of thought - is pretty useless without the old 'cet par' standard to check if anything else also changed besides the DEI policies.
> performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back.
Vs.
> Thrived
Why can't headlines try to remain impartial?
I'd say that there are different types of DEI policies, and companies who really cared about running a good program that would improve the company instead of torturing their employees with vapid courses and filling out quotas had no reason to remove them.
Who are the competitors to Costco and Apple? Both have a unique customer base and offer unique products. It's like Costco's competition is what... Sam's Club only? Apple's competition is Android, which is a totally different system that most Apple loyalists won't switch to. Airlines should be doing better with low cost options bankrupting out of the game.
Seems like an odd group of companies to point to and say "SEE... DEI WORKS!!!"
> Seems like an odd group of companies to point to and say "SEE... DEI WORKS!!!"
genuine question: what is the alternative hypothesis? a whites-only, men-only, straight-only hiring policy results in better products and services? because DEI is just... not that.
> It's like Costco's competition is what... Sam's Club only?
No. Costco's competition is literally everything else. They're not just competing with big box membership stores like Sam's Club and BJ's. They're in competition with grocery stores, Walmart, Target, Dick's, Bass Pro Shop, Walgreens, CVS, Best Buy, Amazon, every single store in the mall, and so on and so on.
Costco sells everything so everything is their competition.
The inability to make reasonable arguments in this thread is sad. If you think Costco is competing with Bass Pro or that fishing supplies is anything other than a small side business or Costco's core business, then you might want to read some books on logic.
It's a bad argument similar to saying that because they sell X product, they compete with the whole world of businesses that sell X product. It's a bad comparison. We could expand the competition of any business by that logic into the whole universe of businesses selling the product, when that obviously is not true.
Not only this, but Costco has raised a lot of their prices. Remember that the tariffs was taken off of them and they got a tariff refund. They said that they would lower prices after that but most of the Kirkland brand things that I buy have went up in price I am thinking about not shopping there because of significant price hikes. People who do this are the same people who says that they are having a hard time budgeing.
Even though the existing Trump tariffs were ruled as illegal, Trump immediately put on new tariffs. https://www.npr.org/2026/07/24/nx-s1-5905783/trump-tariff-trade-global-canada
So I’m not sure why you’re expecting lower prices when Trump and his cronies are trying their hardest to get rid of the middle-class. If you can’t afford to bribe Trump with millions, you’re too poor for him to give a fuck about.
Edit: It also takes time to work out what products had tariffs that were passed onto customers and which ones Costco chose to eat instead of raising prices.
Shipping and Freight charges also went up huge thanks to Trump attacking Iran earlier this year.
All fingers point back to Trump and his supporters for the high cost of living.
So in other words the author of the article has no idea what the word “thrived” means, and they should have used static as they did not perform better than their peers.
I feel like it is a chicken or the egg situation. I’m more inclined to believe that they were able to stand behind the DEI policy because they already had a trajectory towards financial success.
I agree. Costco for example already had a great business and they kept chugging along with their great business model and did not let DEI become the focal point of all business decisions.
If Costco had DEI policies they did it right. They didn’t have the need to project and plaster it all over the place.
Yeah, I was scrolling to see if someone had already posted the picture of the plane with the bullet holes. This is basically equivalent to "employees who told their disrespectful boss to go fuck himself and walked out are financially stable."
That is because most people don’t really understand DEI and try to make arguments about what it does not actually do. Most companies use DEI in training and hiring because diversity of people brings diversity of thought and innovation. It is sad that you actually have to teach people how to behave at work but that is what years of socially repressed societies produce. It has been proven that diverse teams function more effectively that homogeneous teams,
I find this funny, because its untrue. It usually screens for people with extremely similar social and political beliefs. Which have similar class and education backgrounds.
I find people who have no idea what they are talking about making random comments about their opinions think just because they feel something it is automatically true. Maybe you should actually look up the studies and review the literature on the topic. Your feelings are not facts. Racism is a disease of the mind.
You really think these pos commenting here want to learn anything? They dont even mention the social and economics reasons for inclusive policies, making one believe it's all about corporation's numbers go up.
Do you want a link to a resource that has compiled around three hundred academic publications showing DEI policies either had no effect or a negative effect on the parent institutions?
I'm pretty sure you don't, because this isn't about a critical review of the evidence and letting the chips fall where they may. It's a quasi-religious thing for most people like you, so just like my debates with young earth creationists you dont need the evidence cause you know in your heart you are right.
Racism is a disease of the mind. So why do you insist on treating people differently (be it positively or negatively) based on the color of their skin?
> It usually screens for people with extremely similar social and political beliefs
it's definitely true that DEI tries to discourage white supremacy and lgbtq-phobia, and that people who read more tend not to be either of these things. but to think that this is discriminatory is the paradox of tolerance.
It’s more like those companies saw value in having DEI programs as part of their overall strategy, and having a concrete strategy is itself a virtue. If you just change with the times every 4-8 years, you’re not very well-led.
At the end of the day, most people don't actually give much of a crap about this stuff. They're going to go where they can get stuff cheapest for the most convenience or best experience.
On a different note, it's the same reason why Chick-fil-A boycotts did nothing. People talked performatively online and then still went and ate there, or they were just a loud online subset who probably didn't eat there to begin with. That's just one other example but ineffective performative boycotts have happened dozens of times over the years.
Ironically, Bud Light was one of the few things they followed through on, but where said beer is made, is deep in red territory, so they hurt themselves.
They'll shop at Costco every week while simultaneously being sure it's almost out of business because "their people" won't shop there. It's difficult to take a principled stand when you're part of a group that has no principles and your world view is completely divorced from reality.
There was examples of that phrase being somewhat true, like the Gillette ad that was simply bad marketing. But for the most part yeah.. the people saying it had a lot of hatred and were scared of change.
Just a reminder that people like this commenter were probably lead agitators during Woke 1, and as soon as they gain power again will launch Woke 2 which will be much more severe
You guys are just completely addicted to fear and outrage. Your brain seeks it out by making shit like this up when it can't get enough of a fix from your dealer of choice.
This has nothing to do with fear and outrage. Even in a vaccum it’s easy to tell that policies that use your skin color to determine if you deserve preferential treatment aren’t good for our society. So much of what the loud minority of the left says is all about the optics of caring rather than actual caring - that’s why a lot of early woke culture was about policing language, something that is easy to see but has almost no impact on anyone’s daily life.
Homie there is no "woke culture." It's respecting everyone, understanding that everyone come from different backgrounds and upbringings and we all have more alike than different. Part of this including not calling people who espouse the kind of shit you are talking about the absolute fools they are, in public at least.
If the rational behind your actions is "it's cool to treat different people differently," you are not abiding by the social contract. There is no such thing as woke, it's just having a basic level of respect and humility.
Also, kind of the basic premise of economics is choice. You are saying people shouldnt be able to have a choice in what they buy or do or consume, at least not based on what that creator/brand is doing. Like holy snowflake batman. See and understand point A, but should have no issue with point B.
> Homie there is no "woke culture." It's respecting everyone
a culture of knowledge and respect and a willingness to engage with reality and history is for sure a culture. conscious hip hop in the 90s was for sure a cultural movement, and wokeness and consciousness are unsurprisingly related.
You must be replying to the wrong person. I never said anything about treating people differently or not allowing people to have choice. If you did mean to reply to me maybe re-read my comment - you’re so far off topic this isn’t even the same conversation anymore.
Nope, that's exactly what you said when you disguised your claim behind "preferential treatment based on skin color."
It's not about giving anyone preferential treatment, if you think anyone is getting preferential treatment it's because people haven't called your bullshit ideology out to your face enough.
We should all remember how every other anti-immigrant group in history is remembered.
The Know-Nothings hated legal immigrants.
The KKK hated legal immigrants.
The American Nazi Party hated legal immigrants.
MAGA dropped all pretense of this being about illegal immigration when they spread lies about legal immigrants from Haiti (the poorest country in North America) eating pets.
A born-rich President told lies about legal immigrants and lost no support. Trump has repeatedly attacked people born in the United States for having Immigrant parents.
And by illegal to build anything anywhere, you mean building homesat one of the highest rates in the developed world per capita.
Illegal to build anywhere but builds more homes per capita than Germany, UK, USA, on and on.
Please note I am showing you it's not illegal to build anything. We actually build more than the vast majority of our peers.
I don't know where this narrative that we don't build came from, but it's complete bullshit.
And it's also not just the housing crisis, it's also unemployment and suppressed wages.
"will work to provide the Bank of Canada with some flexibility in the pace of monetary tightening due to the taming impact of new immigrants on wage inflation,” said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist at CIBC.
and
"That said, the magnitude of the rise in youth unemployment suggests other factors are at work. One possible factor is demographics. Between 2022 and 2024, there was a large influx of young people from abroad. This intensified competition in Canada for lower‑skill and entry‑level jobs. "
Working class gets fucked by increased cost of living through the housing crisis, and then suppressed wages.
Idiots will choose Republicans because of short-term financial decision-making.
Legacy is worth more than money.
The anti-immigrant people are also the people who cause most of the debt. Cutting taxes for the super rich before starting wars overseas. Happened last two republican presidents.
You don't have to "hate" immigrants to recognize their impacts both economically (good and bad) and societally (good and bad). Sometimes it's just looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions from both what you're looking at and historical trends.
Yea. Like even illegal immigrants has a net positive on the economy and society while the billionaires who tell us to hate them are actively destroying them both. Both backed up by data.
Except there's plenty of entrepreneurs who would rather use them as untaxed labor to also avoid having to spend more on legal domestic labor and improve working conditions.
This also doesn't account for potential other issues such as people with criminal back grounds or health issues like vaccinations. Or just the fact that as a democracy the people of the country have the right to say they just don't want illegal immigrants and want the law enforced. Crazy how that works.
This is why we need to increase legal immigration to pretty much everyone who wants to come. Make the system super straight forward.
Sign up, and you're in. Let anyone who wants to come, come legally.
Honestly, America should be bringing in like 10 million people per year. There's easily that much demand. How ever many people want to come, that's how many should be allowed to come.
Did DEI go too far? Probably. Was it expensive to implement? Yes. However in study after study, creating a welcoming, inclusive and caring workplace makes workers happier, more productive, and less inclined to leave and as a result customers have a better user experience. So companies do benefit from DEI but there’s a limit as to how invasive and costly the policies are. What they don’t really go into in the article is the fact that many of these companies were called out and a targeted publicly forcing them to justify their policies and divert resources to handle the attacks, and they still performed well, if not better, than their counterparts. It seems people like companies that try to have the interest of their workers at heart.
What happened with DEI was that companies reduced their hiring of white men. They did not fire white men in powerful positions.
Either they discriminated in the past and there are powerful white men who are not qualified they decided to keep, or they started discriminating against white men in the present. Probably both are true to some extent.
DEI did not create a welcome, inclusive, and caring workplace though. It was full of with hunts, harassment, and with a moving target of thought policing.
It was implemented horribly and made many people miserable. I'm sure there were good implementations but in most companies it wasn't the kumbaya you make it sound.
I'm not afraid of anything because I never had to deal with DEI because I'm in Mexico. But for example: Lee Fang, a spectacular reporter, was viciously attacked at the intercept (1) because one of the many people who he interviewed was a black man who said that he wanted BLM to be bigger than just about police, and better for black people's lives, and was worried by black on black crime, and (2) he quoting MLK Jr. and non-violence.
Another reporter at the NY Times lost his job when he used n-word on a student trip, when one of the students asked him if a 12 year old classmate of hers should have been suspended for using the word. The reporter asked the student something like "did the student use the word "n*gr" when rapping or quoting a book title?"
Because the reporter used the n-word in that context, there was a huge scandal in the NY Times that led to him being fired, hundreds of articles including on CNN, Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, The Guardian, NBC, editorials, people calling for his head. He was eventually fired over this.
Mind you, there was no accusation that he called someone the n-word or using to refer to people. He used it when trying to understand the context in which the question was asked.
I know many friends who had free software projects and were pressured to change the branch from master to main, and cost them a lot of hours, this was part of the DEI efforts.
New York started distributing life saving COVID medications on the basis of race, instead of triaging on the basis of health risk, by saying that being non-white is a risk factor.
The FAA has a huge hiring scandal in which they asked biographical questions to select black candidates and remove relevant experience in order to hire more diverse candidates. They would then coach candidates on how to cheat on the test.
So no, acting like "oh you're upset you can't be racist" is not why people hated DEI.
I gave you several examples, arisked clear one in which the FAA clearly hired people who clearly did not have the required skills, where lives are at stake, and your reaction is to find a single one you didn't like and taking it out of context? Huh?
The FAA scandal was a pretty good one. The FAA ended up bringing candidates and selecting them depending on their biography, then an official would coach black candidates in order to have them cheat on the test to pass. The questions asked in the biographical test were "My worse subject in high school was" and the correct answer was "science". And "my worse subject in college was" and the correct answer was history.
Okay so here’s the deal: you aren’t going to get any HR person admitting to it on camera. But you are also dismissing many people who have a lived experience. AND regardless it’s a narrative that many impoverished white people buy into. So either deal with that or elect Marco Rubio in 2028. Your choice.
I didn’t ask for an HR confession on camera. Screenshots, emails, hiring statistics, literally any firsthand evidence would do. Your answer is that none exists. Anecdotes don’t cover it either. Nobody knows the exact reason they weren’t hired. A rejected applicant doesn’t see who got the job, their resume, or the hiring discussion. “I didn’t get the job, therefore DEI” is a story people tell themselves. It’s not evidence.
And whether or not “many impoverished white people buy into” this narrative, that doesn’t make it true. But it does mean it’s working as propaganda. Which raises the question of who benefits from poor white people blaming DEI instead of their employers. And for those of us who understand that it’s a narrative (such as yourself, despite your first comment stating it as fact), we are obligated to frame it that way when we discuss it.
This could be the result of those companies having strong overarching visions for their future, as well as cemented philosophies for leadership and administration of the firm. So they have DEI programs and are satisfied with them because they have an understanding of why they have such programs and what role they play in the company’s long-term strategy.
Meanwhile, if your firm is likely to immediately drop a program to align politically with one administration or another, it might be a sign that the firm’s leadership is overall weak and unclear on how to be successful in the future.
This is not to say DEI programs aren’t inherently valuable. High-level HR professionals have explained them to me as essentially uncovering more potential great candidates for jobs that would have been auto-rejected before, and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits. That has inherent monetary value.
But I also think firms that try to catch the political winds are maybe just not very well-led.
> High-level HR professionals have explained them to me as essentially uncovering more potential great candidates for jobs that would have been auto-rejected before, and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits.
Yes there was a study by HR consultants that said its important, later a study by economists said it had no effect.
> and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits
yes having the trainings does help shield.
THe most valuable part is for low skilled jobs, it reducing chances people unionize.
Both can be true. It can be an important part of your company’s strategy going forward, but that doesn’t mean other companies can’t have equally good strategies that don’t include DEI programs. It’s also worth saying that some companies may already interview a diverse pool of applicants without the need for a dedicated DEI program. It’s also possible DEI does nothing.
So there are some problems with the mindset that only the bottom line matters, of course, but I also do see some beauty in it sometimes.
When trade, service, or employment is predicated cash rather than demographics, it is it's own sort of equality. No race, gender, religion etc, just "Do you have the money? Let's talk."
Perhaps not the highest idealism, but certainly a business minded version of it.
It’s very interesting the people that get on here with Trump Derangement syndrome. DEI is bad policy and good riddance to something like that. Hire the best people, there should be no quota for minorities. I’d love to hear these “economists” views on transgenders too. This will let everybody else know your derangement has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with your own beliefs/values.
Lol, using Trump Derangement syndrome unironically is a choice. How's those gas prices by you? How's the price of anything? How great of a job are his untrained ICE army doing? How much do you love that Trump alone is adding Trillions to our deficit? How much do you love corporations being bailed out from tarrifs and we get to hold the bag? How much do you love the nonstop new vanity projects he's wasting tax dollars on? How much do you love how he's turned our military into a joke, but we continue to funnel unchecked money into that hasn't been able to pass an audit? How much do you love that he's turning the DOJ into his own army to go after people using their freedom of speech? How much do you love that he is being shielded from investigations of his many many many instances in the Epstein case?
What I can tell is that you love a president that will use his power to go after enemies, not problems.
What was your favorite Joe Biden policy? How much better would this country be if Kamala Harris was running it? She’s an absolute moron. Joe Biden was an absolute moron. Tell me about Joe Biden and Ukraine. Tell me about Bill Clinton and all his friends who committed “suicide”. And how much is Barack Obama worth now? You are an absolute fucking clown. And you are not for this country. And who do the Dems have lined up next, AOC, she’s gonna get absolutely destroyed. You point the finger at Trump, look at the people Dems have coming up the ranks and the policies you support.
Hey democrat boy, tell me about the wars the Democrats were involved in. I’d like to know more. Epstein…wasn’t your boy Clinton the number one visitor. Gas prices fluctuate with every presidency. I’m not a broke fuck like you.
Gas prices are officially at the highest levels ever lol. What wars did Democrats start? Literally every US war in the past 40 years has been from Republicans.
Fuck Clinton. But Trump was Epstein's literal best friend for decades
I actually really liked the inflation reduction act. It actually created jobs and had a plan for the future. It was something he worked with people all across the isles, not just his cronies. His CHIPs act also was a really good thing to boost the American tech that now bends their knee. So, you can't say a single good thing about Trump, but can lambast the Dems and transgenders and be like "behold, you have TDS!" Maybe you don't like presidents that have policies that have a future, just things that benefit billionaires and we end up having to pay for.
Is that the same policy that said they were going to hire 20,000 new IRS agents to come after low income taxpayers? Where did you study economics? CHIPs Act? You mean the handout to Intel Samsung, micron and TSMC? It was supposed to get hundreds of thousands of jobs and it created like 30,000 jobs. The best thing Trump has done is to try to better secure the southern border. He also cut payroll taxes, which was pretty cool. They’re trying to improve the food supply, but Dems are blocking it. And also the best thing he’s done is to support Christian values and deny ridiculous things like DEI and transgenders.
Lol, awesome. Can you point to his income tax plan and say it wasn't a giant hand out to the rich? Didn't realize making America viable in tech and adding 100,000 jobs was a bad thing. I support more tax auditors that we're going after the elite that were hiding their patriotic duty to pay a fair share offshore.
So Trump secured the boarder... How has that improved YOUR life? Are you getting up and milking cows and picking veggies now that we've got rid of the workers that farmers exploited for years?
How is Trump trying to make our food supply better? Holy smokes that is hilarious. We are currently seeing a massive diarrhea epidemic because of Trump donor Tayler farms. We've also cut the regulators making sure our food is safe.
Finally on your "Christian Vaules"... Can you point to any of Christ's teaching against DEI? In fact many of Trump actual policies (the ones you love) are exactly opposite of Jesus's teachings. Matthew 25: 34-46 lays that out quite well. Hell Leviticus (19:33-34) that you folk love to use against Gay people also says if a foreigner is in your land, don't mistreat them. So how does that square with immigrants being held in terrible conditions, fed moldy bread and dying because of mistreatment. Sure Trump must love Jesus because he sells a Bible with his name on it, but it seems like he and you havent learned from the same one I have. So who do you side with? Jesus or Trump on your beloved immigrant hatred?
There weren’t quotas on paper but there might as well have been quotas in practice. When companies say “our goal is to increase the % of [enter group here] in x place” the way you do that is by prioritizing people of that group and de-prioritizing people of other groups. There’s no set minimum of x group (quota) but the downstream effect (discrimination based on group) is the same. A meritocracy is the most equal opportunity system that exists and DEI proponents wanted it replaced by a system that selects for race and gender before ability.
That's a quota you just named. The vast vast majority of companies didn't have anything like that. And it was always a goal anyways to have groups not disproportionately represented.
A quota is a minimum enforced by policy. A goal is a loose priority. Companies didn’t use quotas because they’re obviously illegal and they leave a paper trail - by calling it a goal they’re able to change behavior while maintaining plausible deniability. If your goal is to create proportional representation and theres 10 guys and 4 women then its obvious your next 6 hires should be women. The moment you put that on paper its illegal but if you just make it a goal you can alter your hiring manager’s priorities without making gender discrimination a policy.
My dude. I've worked in sustainability for 5 years. These programs were just trainings and reinforcement to management to make them understand biases. They never bled into hiring decisions.
DEI was a package of policies. You’re ignoring the specific mechanism that I’m talking about by pointing at other things that were grouped in with it. How your specific company operated is immaterial to the global point. When United Airlines says “our goal is 50% black representation in our pilot schools by 202x” that creates a priority in their admissions department. Diversity and inclusivity trainings do not enter the conversation. I’m talking about how companies enforced equity goals in practice. Many companies didn’t have equity goals (cool) but many did and it’s not even debatable because they were very public about them when public sentiment supported it.
You keep refusing to engage with the mechanism I’m calling out. Who the preferred group was is immaterial to my example - the point is there was a preferred group and selection prioritized them. It’s proven and the numbers are there.
Your question is a non-sequiter to the mechanism conversation we’re having. Why are men underrepresented in nursing and teaching? Why are white people underrepresented in the NFL? Why are black people paid more in the NBA than any other race? Why are female models paid more than men? Do you think it’s some big conspiracy that more black people enroll in African American studies courses than white people do? The problem with viewing the whole world through an equity lense is that you purposely have to ignore natural variance within groups. Even if there is some evil group of hiring managers out there that hate minorities and keep women out of management that is not systemic oppression - its an asshole being asshole and those people come in all colors and genders.
You are dodging the question by pointing to individual jobs. I'm speaking holistically, why are minorities and women underrepresented in higher paying roles? Do you think they are inherently dumber?
Remove barriers and biases in 2026? You mean let unqualified people obtain positions they should not be in. The helicopter pilot that crashed into the plane in DC. The most recent black professor at Cambridge that lied on his résumé. The DEI guy that lied on his résumé and was a school administrator in Iowa. YOU DRINK THE KOOL-AID WITHOUT ANY RESERVATIONS.
> You mean let unqualified people obtain positions they should not be in.
Trump's Cabinet appointees are the most unqualified in American history across the board.
> The helicopter pilot that crashed into the plane in DC.
Hey, look, an easily disproven lie.
>YOU DRINK THE KOOL-AID WITHOUT ANY RESERVATIONS.
You voted three times for a draft-dodging racist conman pedophile who cheated on all his wives and wants to fuck his own daughter, so that he'd hurt all the non-white people you hate.
You mean like the pedo hiring those who bow to him?
How's the war in Iran going? Let's be real you guys don't care about hiring the best youre just the embodiment of "equality to the privileged feels like oppression"
They're using identity politics to divide us and distract us from the real issue (which is class) but I would NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER not cheer when my flavor of identity politics triumphs.
What needs to be reviewed now is which companies made the cock ups and why they got it wrong. Was it deliberate, to undermine things for the benefit of a few people and therefore against the interests of shareholders, or was it simply an error of judgement?
🙄. Once again, most people do not understand DEI. They listen to right wing propagandists and never bother to understand why it is necessary. I have gone through DEI training in many large companies. It is unfortunate that you need to train people on basic common decency and appropriate behavior but it is a fact that employees misbehaving leads to lawsuits. So the training is risk reduction and cost benefit analysis. As far as hiring, it has been proven over and over, diverse teams brings diversity of thought and innovation. Homogeneous teams just are not challenged in their thought processes because the people in them have all been raised and trained the same way. So you will see companies that depend on innovation to grow and succeed will always have DEI hiring and DEI training. This is just effective business. I find it laughable that people think otherwise. Those same people also don’t acknowledge that white men are the original DEI. The whole trope is a diversion from the Republicans absolutely abysmal performance in governance. And I guess it works because they flood the zone with nonsense articles, pithy slogans and transgender bullshit. This is what brought you Trump and another stupid war in the Middle East and higher inflation.
I am sure it changed quite a bit. There have been plenty of studies showing that the same exact resumes submitted with different names and addresses proved repeatedly the bias in hiring people who were not women and were either gender presenting other than white. People have bias. Now those biases are built into algorithms.
Thank you. I am tired of this woke bullshit nrrative going around.
It is easier to function as a society when you recognize that different people are different, we all bring something to the party and we all have more alike than different. We just need to be aware of different cultural attitudes and adjust. It's about basic fucking human respect and decency and I don't understand why this is constantly missed.
>But new research published Friday and shared exclusively with the Guardian found that companies that resisted the pressure and kept their DEI practices, including Costco, Apple and Delta Air Lines, performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back
so such policies dont increase profits and dont actually do anything other than potentially reduce the risk of unionization.
Just for keeping unions down i'd push for more DEI policies
lumpialarry | 6 hours ago
>But new research published Friday and shared exclusively with the Guardian found that companies that resisted the pressure and kept their DEI practices, including Costco, Apple and Delta Air Lines, performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back.
You can also read this as "Liberal backlash had no effect on performance of companies that dismantled their DEI programs"
Turns out, no one cares either way as long as the policies are only internally focused.
PunkPirate56364 | 6 hours ago
Or... Democrats spend more in Costco, Republicans spend more in Wallmart.
Both companies did what their larger customer wanted, so there was no negative impact.
Gillette did what their larger customer did not want, so there was a negative impact.
Head-Gift2144 | 5 hours ago
Republicans didn’t even abandon Costco. Turns out cheaper products and better customer service is a pretty powerful value proposition.
XLauncher | 3 hours ago
I wish they would. It would be nice if the parking lot wasn't a total nightmare at any point during their business hours.
Head-Gift2144 | 2 hours ago
The parking lot of the Costco I usually go to is completely full a good chunk of the time. It's an absolute nightmare. It isn't in a strip mall or plaza so you just spend 10-15 minutes driving around praying someone will leave.
greenroom628 | an hour ago
I swear some Costco parking lots were designed by people who designed torture devices in their previous lives.
UncleNedisDead | 20 minutes ago
No, they got promoted to a bigger project after excelling on the Trader Joe’s parking lots.
Bay1Bri | 58 minutes ago
Oh, so it's not just mine
mattjouff | 6 hours ago
I know, this article is the height of silliness
lumpialarry | 6 hours ago
True.
I would say that Gillette's fumble was an outward facing one criticizing its own customers rather than interal policies around training/hiring.
ComputersReadYouBlue | 2 hours ago
So just don’t advertise you are discriminating. Got it.
ILKLU | 2 hours ago
The term "larger customer" has a double meaning when referring to Walmart!
hill-o | 5 hours ago
Is that a fact or are you just assuming all Republicans are poor and shop at Walmart or something? I’d love to see statistics on that. Edit: thanks to the one person who replied with stats!
PunkPirate56364 | 3 hours ago
Data from Affinity Solutions’ Consumer Purchase Insights 2024
> At the brand level, the largest spending difference between Republicans and Democrats occurred at Walmart, with Republicans spending $142.89 more than Democrats at Walmart. > Costco had the next highest difference, with Democrats spending $34.11 more than Republicans
hill-o | 3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks. :) I appreciate the statistics.
teshh | 4 hours ago
I mean go to any walmart, majority of people there are poor. The white ones generally turn out to be Republicans. Its a stereotype for a reason.
hill-o | 4 hours ago
So vibes then?
TIMPA9678 | 4 hours ago
This reads like the only reason you're not a bigot is you were born in a blue state
teshh | 3 hours ago
Born and raised in a hard-core conservative red area in Georgia, so no not really. I just know the demographics of those in my area.
The people shopping at Walmart aren't going to trader joes/whole foods and vice versa.
TIMPA9678 | 2 hours ago
Your assumption that poor white people are all republican is asinine and discriminatory. It's basically prosperity gospel but for politics.
Go ahead and continue to base your world view on stereotypes though, you have a lot in common with your neighbors apparently.
dust4ngel | 55 minutes ago
> Your assumption that poor white people are all republican is asinine and discriminatory
are you saying it's bad to be republican?
TIMPA9678 | 53 minutes ago
Are you always intentionally obtuse?
BroughtBagLunchSmart | 4 hours ago
Costco pays their employees too much for conservatives. They love walmart because it sucks up tax dollars and gives them something to complain about.
lumpialarry | an hour ago
I don't think any conservative cares if a company voluntarily pays people more money.
dust4ngel | 52 minutes ago
> I don't think any conservative cares if a company voluntarily pays people more money
really? if some company gets on social media and is like "we've decided to pay non-white-men the same as white men", watch the apoplectic vitriol take over the comment section.
lumpialarry | 45 minutes ago
If that company is ignoring experience, perfomance and qualifications and solely equalizing pay based on race, I think most people would get mad.
dust4ngel | 25 minutes ago
the people getting mad about women getting equal pay would be the people claiming that women can't possibly be as qualified as a man.
hill-o | 4 hours ago
Maybe, but if we’re just going anecdotally— I live in a more conservative area and they love Costco and Target. So I don’t know, hence why I think it’s something we maybe need some statistics on before we make broad assumptions.
BluCurry8 | 4 hours ago
🙄. It is logical reasoning not related to income and location. Target has always marketed itself as an upscale Walmart. And therefore they chose their locations based on their marketing plan. Same with Walmart. I shop a neither. Does this make me an independent? No, they are not conveniently located to my home and it is not worth the gas money to travel there. I am not their target market. I do have a Costco membership, which also is not conveniently located to me but share the membership with my son who greatly benefits from the store convenience )along with my nephew as they buy in bulk and split the groceries as they don’t need bulk items.
hill-o | 4 hours ago
I’d love to see statistics on this instead of just “republicans poor, republicans shop at Walmart”. I live in a fairly republican area and I can tell you a lot of them love Costco and Target, so I’d much rather see data on this than just going with vibes.
XYZvillager | 4 hours ago
I mean idk if anyone has data on the political demographics of shoppers…I’m not sure what your goal here is even were we to have that data in hand
but there is widely available data that republican voters, especially in historically republican run states, are poorer, less healthy, less educated, sicker, etc on average
There is also plenty of data to show poor people are bad with their money and poor often for a reason (such as badly educated in financial literacy) so… there might never be much of a connection. They could be wasting money at target when they should be shopping at aldi. But to the other poster’s point target, or wegmans as another example, aren’t building stores in areas too poor to afford to shop at their store
hill-o | 4 hours ago
My goal is just pointing out that some people seem to be making some pretty broad assumptions on a study based purely on vibes instead of having substantive data that backs it up.
XYZvillager | 4 hours ago
Why don’t you just look at the number and location of Walmarts compared to targets around the US and you’ll probably have your answer that there are far more republican communities with access to Walmart than to Target considering there are more than twice as many Walmart locations
BluCurry8 | 4 hours ago
All you are saying is “vibes”. It is as if you have nothing but conspiracy and speculation. I mean Walmart markets everyday lower prices! Target only really promotes back to school and Christmas, basic logic can tell you their target markets and education levels. But if course that requires applying logic.
You have a phone in your hand, not hard to research locations. Just because your area is republican does not mean it is wealthy. Nor does it correlate to shopping at Costco. Go look it up? You are really just making my point. Per your speculation people who shop neither are Independents!
mosthandsomechef | 27 minutes ago
You miss the point of Walmart though. It's different then Costco. If Walmart had not gone back on it's internal policies and customers wanted to boycott the stores guess what? They can't. Walmart is the ONLY option for so much of the country and many of them already don't care for it. But they go anyways.
Costco has a wealthier customer base and is way more selective about store location. Walmart focuses on monopolizing an area.
Gamer_Grease | 3 hours ago
This is a good point as well.
ActualSpiders | 3 hours ago
Well another factor in this is "did the retention or elimination of DEI policies have any impact on the end product/service quality or price?" This article - and entire line of thought - is pretty useless without the old 'cet par' standard to check if anything else also changed besides the DEI policies.
solid_reign | 3 hours ago
> performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back.
Vs.
> Thrived
Why can't headlines try to remain impartial?
I'd say that there are different types of DEI policies, and companies who really cared about running a good program that would improve the company instead of torturing their employees with vapid courses and filling out quotas had no reason to remove them.
Leading-Debate-9278 | 4 hours ago
Go ask Target how they are doing.
lumpialarry | 2 hours ago
Their revenues were up 6.7% y/y in their last earnings.
hereditydrift | 3 hours ago
Who are the competitors to Costco and Apple? Both have a unique customer base and offer unique products. It's like Costco's competition is what... Sam's Club only? Apple's competition is Android, which is a totally different system that most Apple loyalists won't switch to. Airlines should be doing better with low cost options bankrupting out of the game.
Seems like an odd group of companies to point to and say "SEE... DEI WORKS!!!"
dust4ngel | 43 minutes ago
> Seems like an odd group of companies to point to and say "SEE... DEI WORKS!!!"
genuine question: what is the alternative hypothesis? a whites-only, men-only, straight-only hiring policy results in better products and services? because DEI is just... not that.
bobandgeorge | 3 hours ago
> It's like Costco's competition is what... Sam's Club only?
No. Costco's competition is literally everything else. They're not just competing with big box membership stores like Sam's Club and BJ's. They're in competition with grocery stores, Walmart, Target, Dick's, Bass Pro Shop, Walgreens, CVS, Best Buy, Amazon, every single store in the mall, and so on and so on.
Costco sells everything so everything is their competition.
Edit: /u/hereditydrift why would you block me?
hereditydrift | 3 hours ago
That's a horseshit argument. Costco is not competing with Target or Bass Pro Shop.
Willing_Activity_855 | 3 hours ago
So when you buy fishing supplies from costco you then turn around and buy the same exact thing from bass pro shop?
Why do you think people buy the same thing twice?
babablablabla | 3 hours ago
The inability to make reasonable arguments in this thread is sad. If you think Costco is competing with Bass Pro or that fishing supplies is anything other than a small side business or Costco's core business, then you might want to read some books on logic.
bobandgeorge | 3 hours ago
Could you educate me then? Why is it unreasonable to say that Company A is in competition with Company B when they sell the same thing?
evilcounsel | an hour ago
It's a bad argument similar to saying that because they sell X product, they compete with the whole world of businesses that sell X product. It's a bad comparison. We could expand the competition of any business by that logic into the whole universe of businesses selling the product, when that obviously is not true.
ItsSpaghettiLee2112 | 58 minutes ago
Why wouldn't they be? They sell the same products.
corycrazie1 | 3 hours ago
Not only this, but Costco has raised a lot of their prices. Remember that the tariffs was taken off of them and they got a tariff refund. They said that they would lower prices after that but most of the Kirkland brand things that I buy have went up in price I am thinking about not shopping there because of significant price hikes. People who do this are the same people who says that they are having a hard time budgeing.
UncleNedisDead | 12 minutes ago
Even though the existing Trump tariffs were ruled as illegal, Trump immediately put on new tariffs. https://www.npr.org/2026/07/24/nx-s1-5905783/trump-tariff-trade-global-canada
So I’m not sure why you’re expecting lower prices when Trump and his cronies are trying their hardest to get rid of the middle-class. If you can’t afford to bribe Trump with millions, you’re too poor for him to give a fuck about.
Edit: It also takes time to work out what products had tariffs that were passed onto customers and which ones Costco chose to eat instead of raising prices.
Shipping and Freight charges also went up huge thanks to Trump attacking Iran earlier this year.
All fingers point back to Trump and his supporters for the high cost of living.
PlanetCosmoX | an hour ago
So in other words the author of the article has no idea what the word “thrived” means, and they should have used static as they did not perform better than their peers.
dust4ngel | 58 minutes ago
> no one cares either way as long as the policies are only internally focused
and if you're target and you focus your anti-DEI externally, you get boycotted by your target demographics for years.
todo0nada | 5 hours ago
I feel like it is a chicken or the egg situation. I’m more inclined to believe that they were able to stand behind the DEI policy because they already had a trajectory towards financial success.
ohhhbooyy | an hour ago
I agree. Costco for example already had a great business and they kept chugging along with their great business model and did not let DEI become the focal point of all business decisions.
If Costco had DEI policies they did it right. They didn’t have the need to project and plaster it all over the place.
rtc9 | an hour ago
Yeah, I was scrolling to see if someone had already posted the picture of the plane with the bullet holes. This is basically equivalent to "employees who told their disrespectful boss to go fuck himself and walked out are financially stable."
Super_Mario_Luigi | 6 hours ago
It was always a dishonest premise to take the most successful companies, inject dei policies, and then pretend they were the cause of the success
BluCurry8 | 4 hours ago
That is because most people don’t really understand DEI and try to make arguments about what it does not actually do. Most companies use DEI in training and hiring because diversity of people brings diversity of thought and innovation. It is sad that you actually have to teach people how to behave at work but that is what years of socially repressed societies produce. It has been proven that diverse teams function more effectively that homogeneous teams,
Willing_Activity_855 | 3 hours ago
> brings diversity of thought
I find this funny, because its untrue. It usually screens for people with extremely similar social and political beliefs. Which have similar class and education backgrounds.
BluCurry8 | an hour ago
I find people who have no idea what they are talking about making random comments about their opinions think just because they feel something it is automatically true. Maybe you should actually look up the studies and review the literature on the topic. Your feelings are not facts. Racism is a disease of the mind.
Competitive_Door_427 | an hour ago
You really think these pos commenting here want to learn anything? They dont even mention the social and economics reasons for inclusive policies, making one believe it's all about corporation's numbers go up.
Diligent-Hurry-9338 | 29 minutes ago
Do you want a link to a resource that has compiled around three hundred academic publications showing DEI policies either had no effect or a negative effect on the parent institutions?
I'm pretty sure you don't, because this isn't about a critical review of the evidence and letting the chips fall where they may. It's a quasi-religious thing for most people like you, so just like my debates with young earth creationists you dont need the evidence cause you know in your heart you are right.
Racism is a disease of the mind. So why do you insist on treating people differently (be it positively or negatively) based on the color of their skin?
dust4ngel | 22 minutes ago
> It usually screens for people with extremely similar social and political beliefs
it's definitely true that DEI tries to discourage white supremacy and lgbtq-phobia, and that people who read more tend not to be either of these things. but to think that this is discriminatory is the paradox of tolerance.
Willing_Activity_855 | 6 minutes ago
Remember if an outcome shows discrimination than the intent was discrimination.
If everyone you hire the same political and social beliefs then its the opposite of diverse. protip skin color is not diversity. Thoughts are.
Gamer_Grease | 3 hours ago
It’s more like those companies saw value in having DEI programs as part of their overall strategy, and having a concrete strategy is itself a virtue. If you just change with the times every 4-8 years, you’re not very well-led.
DruidicMagic | 6 hours ago
Go woke or go broke is a short way to say...
Embrace fascist Nazi white supremacy or Trumps 20 million supporters will boycott your business.
zs15 | 6 hours ago
But then they don’t, because they have no real follow through off of social media
RedDawn172 | 5 hours ago
At the end of the day, most people don't actually give much of a crap about this stuff. They're going to go where they can get stuff cheapest for the most convenience or best experience.
On a different note, it's the same reason why Chick-fil-A boycotts did nothing. People talked performatively online and then still went and ate there, or they were just a loud online subset who probably didn't eat there to begin with. That's just one other example but ineffective performative boycotts have happened dozens of times over the years.
bobandgeorge | 3 hours ago
Target is feeling it though.
Ullallulloo | 3 hours ago
?
Target's had virtually no drop in revenue or profit, and its stock has nearly doubled over the last year.
bobandgeorge | 3 hours ago
Targets stock is down 38% from 5 years ago. Costco's is up. Walmart's is up... Weird.
SwindlingAccountant | 2 hours ago
Target's primary customers were liberal so their predicament is more a reaction to Target's reaction to right wing faux outrage
RedDawn172 | 3 hours ago
No it isn't lol.
Maxpowr9 | 4 hours ago
Ironically, Bud Light was one of the few things they followed through on, but where said beer is made, is deep in red territory, so they hurt themselves.
NoConfusion9490 | an hour ago
They'll shop at Costco every week while simultaneously being sure it's almost out of business because "their people" won't shop there. It's difficult to take a principled stand when you're part of a group that has no principles and your world view is completely divorced from reality.
Generalfrogspawn | 6 hours ago
There was examples of that phrase being somewhat true, like the Gillette ad that was simply bad marketing. But for the most part yeah.. the people saying it had a lot of hatred and were scared of change.
Overtons_Window | 25 minutes ago
I was looking forward to the political rhetoric. Didn't have to wait long.
DruidicMagic | 24 minutes ago
Free Palestine from fascist genocidal Nazi Zionist Israel!
Decent_Visual_4845 | 6 hours ago
Just a reminder that people like this commenter were probably lead agitators during Woke 1, and as soon as they gain power again will launch Woke 2 which will be much more severe
reluctant_deity | 5 hours ago
You guys are just completely addicted to fear and outrage. Your brain seeks it out by making shit like this up when it can't get enough of a fix from your dealer of choice.
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
This has nothing to do with fear and outrage. Even in a vaccum it’s easy to tell that policies that use your skin color to determine if you deserve preferential treatment aren’t good for our society. So much of what the loud minority of the left says is all about the optics of caring rather than actual caring - that’s why a lot of early woke culture was about policing language, something that is easy to see but has almost no impact on anyone’s daily life.
GhostofBeowulf | 3 hours ago
Homie there is no "woke culture." It's respecting everyone, understanding that everyone come from different backgrounds and upbringings and we all have more alike than different. Part of this including not calling people who espouse the kind of shit you are talking about the absolute fools they are, in public at least.
If the rational behind your actions is "it's cool to treat different people differently," you are not abiding by the social contract. There is no such thing as woke, it's just having a basic level of respect and humility.
Also, kind of the basic premise of economics is choice. You are saying people shouldnt be able to have a choice in what they buy or do or consume, at least not based on what that creator/brand is doing. Like holy snowflake batman. See and understand point A, but should have no issue with point B.
dust4ngel | 29 minutes ago
> Homie there is no "woke culture." It's respecting everyone
a culture of knowledge and respect and a willingness to engage with reality and history is for sure a culture. conscious hip hop in the 90s was for sure a cultural movement, and wokeness and consciousness are unsurprisingly related.
GhostofBeowulf | 6 minutes ago
I should have said "there is no woke conspiracy," but I think you understood what I meant.
elbuentinaco | 3 hours ago
You must be replying to the wrong person. I never said anything about treating people differently or not allowing people to have choice. If you did mean to reply to me maybe re-read my comment - you’re so far off topic this isn’t even the same conversation anymore.
GhostofBeowulf | 3 minutes ago
Nope, that's exactly what you said when you disguised your claim behind "preferential treatment based on skin color."
It's not about giving anyone preferential treatment, if you think anyone is getting preferential treatment it's because people haven't called your bullshit ideology out to your face enough.
DruidicMagic | 3 hours ago
Oh look,
another right wing propaganda bot that hides its comments and can't verify a simple email
reluctant_deity | 3 hours ago
Don't you have a migrant caravan to freak out about?
elbuentinaco | 3 hours ago
Holy projection. Where did anyone talk about migrants?
Scrandon | 2 hours ago
Bro has ptsd from woke 1. Bro lost his family and barely made it out alive of woke 1.
DruidicMagic | 4 hours ago
Just a reminder that right wing propaganda bots hide their comments and can't verify a simple email.
Decent_Visual_4845 | 2 hours ago
Anybody I don’t like is a bot
DruidicMagic | 2 hours ago
By all means prove me wrong...
Decent_Visual_4845 | 2 hours ago
Why the fuck do you think you’re worth caring about?
DruidicMagic | 2 hours ago
www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar
SP4CEM4N_SPIFF | 4 hours ago
this is hilarious
dust4ngel | 37 minutes ago
> Woke 2 which will be much more severe
where do i sign up for oblivion 2? i don't want to be conscious of reality because i'm a patriot.
Full_Prof | 6 hours ago
We should all remember how every other anti-immigrant group in history is remembered.
The Know-Nothings hated legal immigrants.
The KKK hated legal immigrants.
The American Nazi Party hated legal immigrants.
MAGA dropped all pretense of this being about illegal immigration when they spread lies about legal immigrants from Haiti (the poorest country in North America) eating pets.
A born-rich President told lies about legal immigrants and lost no support. Trump has repeatedly attacked people born in the United States for having Immigrant parents.
defaultedebt | 5 hours ago
What the fuck does this have to do with economics?
Canadianwinters12345 | 5 hours ago
Immigration is a huge part of economics lol.
defaultedebt | 5 hours ago
Indeed it is, but economists understand this through data, not rhetoric. To be clear, immigration is a positive in most cases for an economy.
But the point I am making is this: political rhetoric, void of any data, void of any economic discussion, on an economics forum is utterly irrelevant.
Full_Prof | 21 minutes ago
The entire foundation of America’s financial system is on population growth for fucks sake.
Canadianwinters12345 | 5 hours ago
That rhetoric greatly influences economics though.
>immigration is a positive in most cases for an economy.
It really comes down to the specifics. It's been a negative to the working class in Canada for awhile now.
Willing_Activity_855 | 3 hours ago
> It's been a negative to the working class in Canada for awhile now.
that's not immigration, thats the fact its basically illegal to build anything anywhere in canada.
Canadianwinters12345 | 3 hours ago
And by illegal to build anything anywhere, you mean building homesat one of the highest rates in the developed world per capita.
Illegal to build anywhere but builds more homes per capita than Germany, UK, USA, on and on.
Please note I am showing you it's not illegal to build anything. We actually build more than the vast majority of our peers.
I don't know where this narrative that we don't build came from, but it's complete bullshit.
And it's also not just the housing crisis, it's also unemployment and suppressed wages.
"will work to provide the Bank of Canada with some flexibility in the pace of monetary tightening due to the taming impact of new immigrants on wage inflation,” said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist at CIBC.
and
"That said, the magnitude of the rise in youth unemployment suggests other factors are at work. One possible factor is demographics. Between 2022 and 2024, there was a large influx of young people from abroad. This intensified competition in Canada for lower‑skill and entry‑level jobs. "
Working class gets fucked by increased cost of living through the housing crisis, and then suppressed wages.
Fucked coming and going.
Full_Prof | 4 hours ago
Idiots will choose Republicans because of short-term financial decision-making.
Legacy is worth more than money.
The anti-immigrant people are also the people who cause most of the debt. Cutting taxes for the super rich before starting wars overseas. Happened last two republican presidents.
Never before in American history.
Butane9000 | 5 hours ago
You don't have to "hate" immigrants to recognize their impacts both economically (good and bad) and societally (good and bad). Sometimes it's just looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions from both what you're looking at and historical trends.
ItsSpaghettiLee2112 | 52 minutes ago
Yea. Like even illegal immigrants has a net positive on the economy and society while the billionaires who tell us to hate them are actively destroying them both. Both backed up by data.
Butane9000 | 42 minutes ago
Except there's plenty of entrepreneurs who would rather use them as untaxed labor to also avoid having to spend more on legal domestic labor and improve working conditions.
This also doesn't account for potential other issues such as people with criminal back grounds or health issues like vaccinations. Or just the fact that as a democracy the people of the country have the right to say they just don't want illegal immigrants and want the law enforced. Crazy how that works.
ItsSpaghettiLee2112 | 23 minutes ago
Yes to all of that but they still have a net positive impact on society and the economy.
Canadianwinters12345 | 6 hours ago
This right here.
This is why we need to increase legal immigration to pretty much everyone who wants to come. Make the system super straight forward.
Sign up, and you're in. Let anyone who wants to come, come legally.
Honestly, America should be bringing in like 10 million people per year. There's easily that much demand. How ever many people want to come, that's how many should be allowed to come.
Blink182childhood | 6 hours ago
lol
MrP1anet | 5 hours ago
Someone got triggered
Canadianwinters12345 | 5 hours ago
How so?
xabc8910 | 5 hours ago
What impact would this have on housing prices?
Canadianwinters12345 | 5 hours ago
Lowered houses per capita. Increased cost of rent and ownership.
Line go up.
wailferret | 5 hours ago
I bet the capital owners would love this.
Unlimited wage slaves competing in a race to the bottom.
Screw American workers - we need cheap labor!!
Canadianwinters12345 | 5 hours ago
100%.
But if you're against this you're anti-immigrant and you're against legal immigration.
u/Full_Prof
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
That doesn’t make sense. You can be in favor of legal immigration and still think it needs to be controlled.
Canadianwinters12345 | 4 hours ago
How is having a legal process where we approve it not controlled?
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
You just said the opposite. From your earlier comment: “increase legal immigration to everyone who wants to come. Sign up and you’re in.”
Having an intake process is not the same as having controlled immigration.
Canadianwinters12345 | 4 hours ago
If the government is choosing to bring in 10 million a year, that's still controlled.
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
If they’re choosing the number 10 million, then yes. “Sign up and you’re in” is not a control though.
Canadianwinters12345 | 4 hours ago
Ok, sign up, and do a quick back ground check, and you're in.
Now it's controlled.
Still_Interview6360 | 6 hours ago
Rapists and murderers, come on in
Low skilled workers, come on in
Daviddom92 | 5 hours ago
Like the president?
JohnnyLesPaul | 3 hours ago
Did DEI go too far? Probably. Was it expensive to implement? Yes. However in study after study, creating a welcoming, inclusive and caring workplace makes workers happier, more productive, and less inclined to leave and as a result customers have a better user experience. So companies do benefit from DEI but there’s a limit as to how invasive and costly the policies are. What they don’t really go into in the article is the fact that many of these companies were called out and a targeted publicly forcing them to justify their policies and divert resources to handle the attacks, and they still performed well, if not better, than their counterparts. It seems people like companies that try to have the interest of their workers at heart.
Overtons_Window | 26 minutes ago
What happened with DEI was that companies reduced their hiring of white men. They did not fire white men in powerful positions.
Either they discriminated in the past and there are powerful white men who are not qualified they decided to keep, or they started discriminating against white men in the present. Probably both are true to some extent.
solid_reign | 3 hours ago
DEI did not create a welcome, inclusive, and caring workplace though. It was full of with hunts, harassment, and with a moving target of thought policing.
It was implemented horribly and made many people miserable. I'm sure there were good implementations but in most companies it wasn't the kumbaya you make it sound.
ritzybitz | an hour ago
> and with a moving target of thought policing
What's the moving target you are afraid you won't hit here? It's pretty easy to not be a racist, misogynistic dick to people.
solid_reign | an hour ago
I'm not afraid of anything because I never had to deal with DEI because I'm in Mexico. But for example: Lee Fang, a spectacular reporter, was viciously attacked at the intercept (1) because one of the many people who he interviewed was a black man who said that he wanted BLM to be bigger than just about police, and better for black people's lives, and was worried by black on black crime, and (2) he quoting MLK Jr. and non-violence.
Another reporter at the NY Times lost his job when he used n-word on a student trip, when one of the students asked him if a 12 year old classmate of hers should have been suspended for using the word. The reporter asked the student something like "did the student use the word "n*gr" when rapping or quoting a book title?"
Because the reporter used the n-word in that context, there was a huge scandal in the NY Times that led to him being fired, hundreds of articles including on CNN, Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, The Guardian, NBC, editorials, people calling for his head. He was eventually fired over this.
Mind you, there was no accusation that he called someone the n-word or using to refer to people. He used it when trying to understand the context in which the question was asked.
I know many friends who had free software projects and were pressured to change the branch from master to main, and cost them a lot of hours, this was part of the DEI efforts.
New York started distributing life saving COVID medications on the basis of race, instead of triaging on the basis of health risk, by saying that being non-white is a risk factor.
The FAA has a huge hiring scandal in which they asked biographical questions to select black candidates and remove relevant experience in order to hire more diverse candidates. They would then coach candidates on how to cheat on the test.
So no, acting like "oh you're upset you can't be racist" is not why people hated DEI.
Low-Notice972 | 48 minutes ago
Your extrapolation on why DEI has people in a tizzy is an anecdote about one reporter and his misuse of the N word leading to his firing?
Huh?
solid_reign | 40 minutes ago
I gave you several examples, arisked clear one in which the FAA clearly hired people who clearly did not have the required skills, where lives are at stake, and your reaction is to find a single one you didn't like and taking it out of context? Huh?
Low-Notice972 | 22 minutes ago
You really didn't give many examples at all. Are there articles to substantiate these claims?
ComputersReadYouBlue | 2 hours ago
DEI isn’t just creating a welcoming environment for all. It’s saying if you are white you shouldn’t be hired.
ritzybitz | an hour ago
> [DEI is] saying if you are white you shouldn’t be hired.
I'd be curious if you have any actual documented examples of this. Because this kind of rhetoric is usually backed up only by hearsay and fear.
solid_reign | an hour ago
The FAA scandal was a pretty good one. The FAA ended up bringing candidates and selecting them depending on their biography, then an official would coach black candidates in order to have them cheat on the test to pass. The questions asked in the biographical test were "My worse subject in high school was" and the correct answer was "science". And "my worse subject in college was" and the correct answer was history.
ComputersReadYouBlue | an hour ago
Okay so here’s the deal: you aren’t going to get any HR person admitting to it on camera. But you are also dismissing many people who have a lived experience. AND regardless it’s a narrative that many impoverished white people buy into. So either deal with that or elect Marco Rubio in 2028. Your choice.
ritzybitz | 26 minutes ago
I didn’t ask for an HR confession on camera. Screenshots, emails, hiring statistics, literally any firsthand evidence would do. Your answer is that none exists. Anecdotes don’t cover it either. Nobody knows the exact reason they weren’t hired. A rejected applicant doesn’t see who got the job, their resume, or the hiring discussion. “I didn’t get the job, therefore DEI” is a story people tell themselves. It’s not evidence.
And whether or not “many impoverished white people buy into” this narrative, that doesn’t make it true. But it does mean it’s working as propaganda. Which raises the question of who benefits from poor white people blaming DEI instead of their employers. And for those of us who understand that it’s a narrative (such as yourself, despite your first comment stating it as fact), we are obligated to frame it that way when we discuss it.
ComputersReadYouBlue | 20 minutes ago
Sad that you’re voting for more Republicans…
Low-Notice972 | 52 minutes ago
Not white victimhood from a 25 day old account.
Gamer_Grease | 3 hours ago
This could be the result of those companies having strong overarching visions for their future, as well as cemented philosophies for leadership and administration of the firm. So they have DEI programs and are satisfied with them because they have an understanding of why they have such programs and what role they play in the company’s long-term strategy.
Meanwhile, if your firm is likely to immediately drop a program to align politically with one administration or another, it might be a sign that the firm’s leadership is overall weak and unclear on how to be successful in the future.
This is not to say DEI programs aren’t inherently valuable. High-level HR professionals have explained them to me as essentially uncovering more potential great candidates for jobs that would have been auto-rejected before, and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits. That has inherent monetary value.
But I also think firms that try to catch the political winds are maybe just not very well-led.
Willing_Activity_855 | 3 hours ago
> High-level HR professionals have explained them to me as essentially uncovering more potential great candidates for jobs that would have been auto-rejected before, and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits.
Yes there was a study by HR consultants that said its important, later a study by economists said it had no effect.
> and as a way to reduce discrimination lawsuits
yes having the trainings does help shield.
THe most valuable part is for low skilled jobs, it reducing chances people unionize.
Gamer_Grease | 3 hours ago
Both can be true. It can be an important part of your company’s strategy going forward, but that doesn’t mean other companies can’t have equally good strategies that don’t include DEI programs. It’s also worth saying that some companies may already interview a diverse pool of applicants without the need for a dedicated DEI program. It’s also possible DEI does nothing.
ICLazeru | 3 hours ago
So there are some problems with the mindset that only the bottom line matters, of course, but I also do see some beauty in it sometimes.
When trade, service, or employment is predicated cash rather than demographics, it is it's own sort of equality. No race, gender, religion etc, just "Do you have the money? Let's talk."
Perhaps not the highest idealism, but certainly a business minded version of it.
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 6 hours ago
It’s very interesting the people that get on here with Trump Derangement syndrome. DEI is bad policy and good riddance to something like that. Hire the best people, there should be no quota for minorities. I’d love to hear these “economists” views on transgenders too. This will let everybody else know your derangement has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with your own beliefs/values.
Digga-d88 | 6 hours ago
Lol, using Trump Derangement syndrome unironically is a choice. How's those gas prices by you? How's the price of anything? How great of a job are his untrained ICE army doing? How much do you love that Trump alone is adding Trillions to our deficit? How much do you love corporations being bailed out from tarrifs and we get to hold the bag? How much do you love the nonstop new vanity projects he's wasting tax dollars on? How much do you love how he's turned our military into a joke, but we continue to funnel unchecked money into that hasn't been able to pass an audit? How much do you love that he's turning the DOJ into his own army to go after people using their freedom of speech? How much do you love that he is being shielded from investigations of his many many many instances in the Epstein case?
What I can tell is that you love a president that will use his power to go after enemies, not problems.
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 6 hours ago
What was your favorite Joe Biden policy? How much better would this country be if Kamala Harris was running it? She’s an absolute moron. Joe Biden was an absolute moron. Tell me about Joe Biden and Ukraine. Tell me about Bill Clinton and all his friends who committed “suicide”. And how much is Barack Obama worth now? You are an absolute fucking clown. And you are not for this country. And who do the Dems have lined up next, AOC, she’s gonna get absolutely destroyed. You point the finger at Trump, look at the people Dems have coming up the ranks and the policies you support.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 5 hours ago
Oh boy. You must love high gas prices and the Iran war.
And Epstein.
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 5 hours ago
Hey democrat boy, tell me about the wars the Democrats were involved in. I’d like to know more. Epstein…wasn’t your boy Clinton the number one visitor. Gas prices fluctuate with every presidency. I’m not a broke fuck like you.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 5 hours ago
Gas prices are officially at the highest levels ever lol. What wars did Democrats start? Literally every US war in the past 40 years has been from Republicans.
Fuck Clinton. But Trump was Epstein's literal best friend for decades
Digga-d88 | 6 hours ago
I actually really liked the inflation reduction act. It actually created jobs and had a plan for the future. It was something he worked with people all across the isles, not just his cronies. His CHIPs act also was a really good thing to boost the American tech that now bends their knee. So, you can't say a single good thing about Trump, but can lambast the Dems and transgenders and be like "behold, you have TDS!" Maybe you don't like presidents that have policies that have a future, just things that benefit billionaires and we end up having to pay for.
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 5 hours ago
Is that the same policy that said they were going to hire 20,000 new IRS agents to come after low income taxpayers? Where did you study economics? CHIPs Act? You mean the handout to Intel Samsung, micron and TSMC? It was supposed to get hundreds of thousands of jobs and it created like 30,000 jobs. The best thing Trump has done is to try to better secure the southern border. He also cut payroll taxes, which was pretty cool. They’re trying to improve the food supply, but Dems are blocking it. And also the best thing he’s done is to support Christian values and deny ridiculous things like DEI and transgenders.
Digga-d88 | 5 hours ago
Lol, awesome. Can you point to his income tax plan and say it wasn't a giant hand out to the rich? Didn't realize making America viable in tech and adding 100,000 jobs was a bad thing. I support more tax auditors that we're going after the elite that were hiding their patriotic duty to pay a fair share offshore.
So Trump secured the boarder... How has that improved YOUR life? Are you getting up and milking cows and picking veggies now that we've got rid of the workers that farmers exploited for years? How is Trump trying to make our food supply better? Holy smokes that is hilarious. We are currently seeing a massive diarrhea epidemic because of Trump donor Tayler farms. We've also cut the regulators making sure our food is safe.
Finally on your "Christian Vaules"... Can you point to any of Christ's teaching against DEI? In fact many of Trump actual policies (the ones you love) are exactly opposite of Jesus's teachings. Matthew 25: 34-46 lays that out quite well. Hell Leviticus (19:33-34) that you folk love to use against Gay people also says if a foreigner is in your land, don't mistreat them. So how does that square with immigrants being held in terrible conditions, fed moldy bread and dying because of mistreatment. Sure Trump must love Jesus because he sells a Bible with his name on it, but it seems like he and you havent learned from the same one I have. So who do you side with? Jesus or Trump on your beloved immigrant hatred?
Mysterious_Umpire684 | 5 hours ago
Are they going about improved food supply by number of farm closures and bankruptcies?
By that measure, it has been a smashing success for the admin.
Scrandon | an hour ago
Joe Biden crippled our largest geopolitical foe with like $50B in Ukraine. But you’re a Russia loving traitor.
Trump’s fucked up clown show in Iran embarrassed our whole country and he needs a diaper change.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 6 hours ago
What's sad is you don't even know what DEI is. DEI's whole purpose is to hire the best person regardless of gender, race, etc.
None of these companies had quotas. It's purpose was to remove barriers and biases
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
There weren’t quotas on paper but there might as well have been quotas in practice. When companies say “our goal is to increase the % of [enter group here] in x place” the way you do that is by prioritizing people of that group and de-prioritizing people of other groups. There’s no set minimum of x group (quota) but the downstream effect (discrimination based on group) is the same. A meritocracy is the most equal opportunity system that exists and DEI proponents wanted it replaced by a system that selects for race and gender before ability.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 4 hours ago
That's a quota you just named. The vast vast majority of companies didn't have anything like that. And it was always a goal anyways to have groups not disproportionately represented.
elbuentinaco | 4 hours ago
A quota is a minimum enforced by policy. A goal is a loose priority. Companies didn’t use quotas because they’re obviously illegal and they leave a paper trail - by calling it a goal they’re able to change behavior while maintaining plausible deniability. If your goal is to create proportional representation and theres 10 guys and 4 women then its obvious your next 6 hires should be women. The moment you put that on paper its illegal but if you just make it a goal you can alter your hiring manager’s priorities without making gender discrimination a policy.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 4 hours ago
My dude. I've worked in sustainability for 5 years. These programs were just trainings and reinforcement to management to make them understand biases. They never bled into hiring decisions.
elbuentinaco | 3 hours ago
DEI was a package of policies. You’re ignoring the specific mechanism that I’m talking about by pointing at other things that were grouped in with it. How your specific company operated is immaterial to the global point. When United Airlines says “our goal is 50% black representation in our pilot schools by 202x” that creates a priority in their admissions department. Diversity and inclusivity trainings do not enter the conversation. I’m talking about how companies enforced equity goals in practice. Many companies didn’t have equity goals (cool) but many did and it’s not even debatable because they were very public about them when public sentiment supported it.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 3 hours ago
Their goal was 50% of women OR people of color. Women or people of color make up more than 50% of the population.
Answer a simple question, why are women and minorities underrepresented in management positions, even when accounting for education?
elbuentinaco | 3 hours ago
You keep refusing to engage with the mechanism I’m calling out. Who the preferred group was is immaterial to my example - the point is there was a preferred group and selection prioritized them. It’s proven and the numbers are there.
Your question is a non-sequiter to the mechanism conversation we’re having. Why are men underrepresented in nursing and teaching? Why are white people underrepresented in the NFL? Why are black people paid more in the NBA than any other race? Why are female models paid more than men? Do you think it’s some big conspiracy that more black people enroll in African American studies courses than white people do? The problem with viewing the whole world through an equity lense is that you purposely have to ignore natural variance within groups. Even if there is some evil group of hiring managers out there that hate minorities and keep women out of management that is not systemic oppression - its an asshole being asshole and those people come in all colors and genders.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 3 hours ago
Lol it's not proven.
You are dodging the question by pointing to individual jobs. I'm speaking holistically, why are minorities and women underrepresented in higher paying roles? Do you think they are inherently dumber?
Low-Notice972 | 37 minutes ago
Do you think POC (specifically black people since they've come up in a couple of comments already) and women are inherently dumber?
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 6 hours ago
Remove barriers and biases in 2026? You mean let unqualified people obtain positions they should not be in. The helicopter pilot that crashed into the plane in DC. The most recent black professor at Cambridge that lied on his résumé. The DEI guy that lied on his résumé and was a school administrator in Iowa. YOU DRINK THE KOOL-AID WITHOUT ANY RESERVATIONS.
AlmanorDiscard | 3 hours ago
> You mean let unqualified people obtain positions they should not be in.
Trump's Cabinet appointees are the most unqualified in American history across the board.
> The helicopter pilot that crashed into the plane in DC.
Hey, look, an easily disproven lie.
>YOU DRINK THE KOOL-AID WITHOUT ANY RESERVATIONS.
You voted three times for a draft-dodging racist conman pedophile who cheated on all his wives and wants to fuck his own daughter, so that he'd hurt all the non-white people you hate.
Everyday_ImSchefflen | 6 hours ago
Lol. You think unqualified only happens for minorities?
Answer this simple question and don't dodge it. Why are minorities disproportionately represented in well paying roles?
https://www.epi.org/publication/racial-representation-prof-occ/
SkyNet_Admin_1 | 3 hours ago
😂
enderpanda | 5 hours ago
> It’s very interesting the people that get on here with Trump Derangement syndrome.
Indeed, I count exactly one of you in this thread.
AFewForLeftyToo | 6 hours ago
Quiet trash, adults are talking.
Pockydo | 5 hours ago
>Hire the best people
You mean like the pedo hiring those who bow to him?
How's the war in Iran going? Let's be real you guys don't care about hiring the best youre just the embodiment of "equality to the privileged feels like oppression"
MrP1anet | 5 hours ago
Stop acting like you know what you’re talking about when it’s clear you don’t. Stay in your lane and go back to posting memes on Facebook.
devliegende | 5 hours ago
>Hire the best people.
Matt Gaetz, Pam Bondi, Kristi Noem, Dr. Oz, RFK jnr. Bill Pulte, Jared Kuschner, Steve Witkopff, Pete Hegseth, Janine Pirro, Lincoln pool contractor
Just a short list of people who were/are completely unqualified for the jobs they were hired for.
Duckbilling2 | 5 hours ago
Boycotts.
It's a funny thing, here in the USA. Sometimes remarkably effective, but sometimes highly ineffective.
Of course, switching to a competitor will take away business, but sometimes it isn't so black and white.
Plenty of customers switched to our company and when I asked them why, they stated reasons our company would do exactly the same.
It's the information that sometimes gets lost in the sauce
variegated68409 | 4 hours ago
They're using identity politics to divide us and distract us from the real issue (which is class) but I would NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER not cheer when my flavor of identity politics triumphs.
CountSuma | 6 hours ago
What needs to be reviewed now is which companies made the cock ups and why they got it wrong. Was it deliberate, to undermine things for the benefit of a few people and therefore against the interests of shareholders, or was it simply an error of judgement?
BluCurry8 | 4 hours ago
🙄. Once again, most people do not understand DEI. They listen to right wing propagandists and never bother to understand why it is necessary. I have gone through DEI training in many large companies. It is unfortunate that you need to train people on basic common decency and appropriate behavior but it is a fact that employees misbehaving leads to lawsuits. So the training is risk reduction and cost benefit analysis. As far as hiring, it has been proven over and over, diverse teams brings diversity of thought and innovation. Homogeneous teams just are not challenged in their thought processes because the people in them have all been raised and trained the same way. So you will see companies that depend on innovation to grow and succeed will always have DEI hiring and DEI training. This is just effective business. I find it laughable that people think otherwise. Those same people also don’t acknowledge that white men are the original DEI. The whole trope is a diversion from the Republicans absolutely abysmal performance in governance. And I guess it works because they flood the zone with nonsense articles, pithy slogans and transgender bullshit. This is what brought you Trump and another stupid war in the Middle East and higher inflation.
Magjee | 3 hours ago
A client had an interesting HR policy of reviewing resumes without the applicants name visible
So it would be a code instead
I'm not sure if it changed much, but it was interesting to see
BluCurry8 | an hour ago
I am sure it changed quite a bit. There have been plenty of studies showing that the same exact resumes submitted with different names and addresses proved repeatedly the bias in hiring people who were not women and were either gender presenting other than white. People have bias. Now those biases are built into algorithms.
GhostofBeowulf | 3 hours ago
Thank you. I am tired of this woke bullshit nrrative going around.
It is easier to function as a society when you recognize that different people are different, we all bring something to the party and we all have more alike than different. We just need to be aware of different cultural attitudes and adjust. It's about basic fucking human respect and decency and I don't understand why this is constantly missed.
Willing_Activity_855 | 3 hours ago
>But new research published Friday and shared exclusively with the Guardian found that companies that resisted the pressure and kept their DEI practices, including Costco, Apple and Delta Air Lines, performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back
so such policies dont increase profits and dont actually do anything other than potentially reduce the risk of unionization.
Just for keeping unions down i'd push for more DEI policies