So, I've been thinking

The strongest correlations are with IQ and blackness.

Into the trash it goes.

Detroit in RUINS! (Crowder goes Ghetto)

youtube.com/watch?v=1hhJ_49leBw

Equality of opportunity is objectively a good thing.
Every human being has the ability to contribute to society, and should be presented with the opportunity.

our education system is heavily subverted and the reason our society is so fucked up in the first place.

Easiest way to test your theory is any sort of negro immigrants anywhere but in the US which is run down after years of bad policies and general lax negro upkeep. Take for instance, Brazil, Argentina, the UK; wherever you remove the low standards of the US, but keep the negro, even if the overall quality of life is worse than in America, the negro is always at the bottom of the equation. Incapable as a group of people to rise to the level of whites or even white/black mischlings.

A handout by another name, m8.

Your presenting it as if the Americans that made your country had money pouring out their asses and that's why they didn't rob, steal and murder each other for as long as to build the USA. Money is not a magic bullet, commodities need to be earned or else the average person doesn't value them.

An influx of jobs would definitely reduce the crime in their communities and improve the quality of their lives, but don't for a minute imagine that you can improve their average intelligence to that of a white or an asian. It's just not possible, work with what you've got.

As if being progressive is a good thing. RL is a term made up to hide the fact how horrible the left is given it's natural conclusion.

Additionally, have you considered that people of different races rank differently on these scales specifically because they don't have the same opportunities?

Calling it a handout is nonsense. The idea is that a better educated populous will contribute more to society than the costs required to educate them. In any regard, I've already seen why this line of thinking is wrong, as there are cities with massive amounts of money thrown at them that still turn out terribly.

Saying "regressive left" doesn't imply being progressive is a good thing. It implies that sjws are regressive.

Is it? For everything?
Should every latino who sends half his money home to Mexico, but is a far cheaper worker while also delivering less quality product, be chosen above an American who costs more, but is guaranteed to reinvest in the local economy by paying taxes and eventually reinvesting in society by raising American children there? Why shouldn't loyalty of race and nation be a factor assessing these things when it is the most prominent quality creating conflict in the world whenever different races compete?

because like fuck borders and shit man

Hiring a latino because he's latino is equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity.

The person who should be hired in this case is the person who offers the highest quality work for the lowest pay. It doesn't matter where the money goes, as it's their money to spend.

Additionally, is the Latino not American? Am I supposed to gather that? I don't agree with hiring non-Americans to do American jobs.