Boris Johnson resignation: Did the outgoing prime minister meet his pledges?

[patman post]

And the notion that certain Asian ethnicities are genetically predisposed to be good shopkeepers isn't patronising?

Because it is certainly a racist assertion.

Families growing and/or making things and then selling them to make a living is more prevalent in certain societies. So it is understandable that some families, who move away from their homeland, might well concentrate more on selling — a job they're familiar with — to earn a living. Genetics would only be relevant in that context because of the family's origin. And it seems a likely explanation for the large number of convenience stores (and post offices) run by people of south Asian heritage.

Why are certain heritages attracted to, and good at, certain jobs? It can't be all economic factors, social pressures, parental expectations, or lack of availability or inclination of others to do the jobs.

For instance, it is a fact that for, whatever reason, certain Native American males proved adept at high-level girder assembly during the erection of tall buildings And, in the UK, many south-Asians (mainly women) proved skilled in the UK's textile and weaving industries. This skill of handling delicate material also had the bespoke electronics/telecommunications systems manufacture recruiting from the same personnel pool.

I can't see that any of those examples belittle, demean or racially disparage any of the people involved...

[Nick]

And the notion that certain Asian ethnicities are genetically predisposed to be good shopkeepers isn't patronising?

Because it is certainly a racist assertion.

Did anyone mention genetics?

[srb7677]

But to throw a hissy fit any time someone recognises that there are differences in aptitudes, abilities in different cultures, ethnicities, heritages through concern of being called racist is, for me, at the very least, patronising...

And the notion that certain Asian ethnicities are genetically predisposed to be good shopkeepers isn't patronising?

Because it is certainly a racist assertion. 

[patman post]

No I am not demonstrably wrong. At best you are conflating cultural differences with ethnic cognitive ones. The former can potentially be emulated by anyone. The latter is genetic intellectual differences, for which there is zero scientific evidence beyond that arising from cultural differences.

To assume that some people are genetically inferior or superior in terms of intelligence or any other cognitive attribute is inherently racist. To assume for example that a white person or a black person cannot run a shop as well as an Asian even if they operate exactly the same business model is an inherently racist assumption.

As for genetic physical differences, most are superficial. A black athlete can run faster than most people of any ethnicity. But so too can a white athlete. Or an Asian one.

Some is nurture, but a lot is definitely nature.

That's not to say the various habits and traits of different cultures and/or ethnicities should necessarily categorise people as, overall, inferior or superior.

But to throw a hissy fit any time someone recognises that there are differences in aptitudes, abilities in different cultures, ethnicities, heritages through concern of being called racist is, for me, at the very least, patronising...

[srb7677]

You're demonstrably wrong.

Look at the most successful in straightforward strength and speed athletics of some ethnicities, or look at the greater proportion of school pupils achieving highest scores in exams (no doubt someone will pick me up on my choice of wording).

Even if it's a case of culture (as in S E Asian pupils), or working long hours without holidays (as among many sub continent people), obvious differences are there.

I don't think it's wrong to speak about these differences, or do so in hushed tones. They are there, and some good ones might even be successfully emulated. Or bad ones striven to be worked against...

No I am not demonstrably wrong. At best you are conflating cultural differences with ethnic cognitive ones. The former can potentially be emulated by anyone. The latter is genetic intellectual differences, for which there is zero scientific evidence beyond that arising from cultural differences.

To assume that some people are genetically inferior or superior in terms of intelligence or any other cognitive attribute is inherently racist. To assume for example that a white person or a black person cannot run a shop as well as an Asian even if they operate exactly the same business model is an inherently racist assumption.

As for genetic physical differences, most are superficial. A black athlete can run faster than most people of any ethnicity. But so too can a white athlete. Or an Asian one.

[patman post]

To say that people of certain ethnicities often succeed as shopkeepers because of the working practices and business practices that they adopt, and that anyone of any ethnicity adopting those same practices would be equally likely to succeed, is fair enough.

To say that anyone does well or badly at anything because of their ethnicity is inherently racist.

You're demonstrably wrong.

Look at the most successful in straightforward strength and speed athletics of some ethnicities, or look at the greater proportion of school pupils achieving highest scores in exams (no doubt someone will pick me up on my choice of wording). 

Even if it's a case of culture (as in S E Asian pupils), or working long hours without holidays (as among many sub continent people), obvious differences are there. 

I don't think it's wrong to speak about these differences, or do so in hushed tones. They are there, and some good ones might even be successfully emulated. Or bad ones striven to be worked against...

[srb7677]

It's not racist in the slightest, it is a fact. There was a duo in the 90's that actually called themselves CornerShop.

To say that people of certain ethnicities often succeed as shopkeepers because of the working practices and business practices that they adopt, and that anyone of any ethnicity adopting those same practices would be equally likely to succeed, is fair enough.

To say that anyone does well or badly at anything because of their ethnicity is inherently racist.

[papasmurf]

In short you want someone else to pay you bills

No I don't,  I want the criminals illegal assets to be distrained. (I was VERY clear about that,)

[patman post]

In my opinion to set up a successful village store usual takes an ethnic minority immigrant family who are prepared to open as near to 24/7/365 days a year as they can.

That's certainly true round here. The five food shop/mini-marts within 5 min walking distance that are open 24/7 are all run by ethnic minorities.

Unfortunately, about four years ago, reports of a large Sainsbury's opening right in the centre of N16 prompted a couple of others to close.

It looks like the land's being sat on until more shops shut, because there's no sign of any building work...

[Borchester]

That is more lies about me from you.  I am for chasing down the £multibillion tax evaders and Mickey Mouse "avoiders." There is now so much involved taxes for the honest citizens could be lowered.

In short you want someone else to pay you bills

[patman post]

I'm all for avoiding as much tax as I can. That's why we have ISAs, private pension schemes, and tax-exempt savings.

I would also support a reduction in, or abolition of, death duties/inheritance taxes...

[papasmurf]

Not as cheap as you and Pappy. You are all for spending other folk's money, but it is a different matter when it comes to your own

That is more lies about me from you.  I am for chasing down the £multibillion tax evaders and Mickey Mouse "avoiders." There is now so much involved taxes for the honest citizens could be lowered.

[Borchester]

It takes more than one person buying somewhere to keep a business afloat.

So your gibes are cheap.

Not as cheap as you and Pappy. You are all for spending other folk's money, but it is a different matter when it comes to your own

[Nick]

To assume that ethnicity itself is relevant, rather than simply opening hours, affordability, and other economic factors is a racist assumption.

Do you think some races are genetically better equipped to run shops than others?

Because it is but a short step from that to assuming that some races are inherently fitter to rule than others and suchlike racist bollox.

If ethnic minorities of any particular stripe succeed as shopkeepers because they open all hours, it is the fact that they open all hours that is decisive, not their ethnicity.

It's not racist in the slightest, it is a fact. There was a duo in the 90's that actually called themselves CornerShop. 

[Nick]

Ethnicity is irrelevent. Shops that are prepared to open all hours every day obviously have a greater chance of success, whatever the ethnic origins of the shopkeeper and his employees.

Nevertheless, they still need customers to be viable and this could constrain opening hours.

For example, there is no point in paying someone to keep the store open til midnight if there are hardly any customers after 10pm. In such a situation, closing at 10pm would make the most business sense.

It's relative because usually it's a family affair and the children that help out don't get a normal wage making the shop more streamlined. So unfortunately I have to agree with PS.