Phatbob said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Dan Carlin said:

---

Detmersdislocatedshoulder said:

---

there has been, and is a war against christian white males and it has been going on for quite
some time.

i wonder why that is

---

Weird. As a member of the alleged oppressed demographic, I have had no problem succeeding in the world and am surrounded by men of similar story in my career arc.

Maybe you guys should just learn to network better?

---

Screw your own kids amirite? I made it, who cares about anyone else.

---

White men will continue to be successful because they will have to deal with adversity and not have excuses. The path to success is not ultimately through being hired by the DEI block. DEI will ultimately cause those companies to fall to the wayside the same way other anti-competitive practices eventually do. The market will fix it, and the white male kids, if they actually deserve to be successful, will change the market by their own reaction to the existing conditions.

In other words, if DEI is keeping your white male kid from succeeding, then they aren't built to overcome the excuses. I'd say the same to any minority in a non-DEI world, which will be soon enough as DEI is causing businesses to fall.

---

In a true free market this would be true. However in the crony capitalism that we have where the large companies actively lobby to control industries and freeze out innovative startups, this is not the way it works.

Phatbob said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

Good luck with screening the hundreds or thousands of resumes that are sent to hiring companies. I got my current job because of networking. They stopped taking resumes for the position and left it unfilled for 6 months because they were inundated with unqualified applicants, most of which didn't even live in the country, and they didn't have time to sift through each one for the few actually qualified applicants.

The process itself will have to change because it is not working for a multitude of reasons.

---

Hence the reason it is broken. Jobs receive 1000 applications in minutes nowadays. The entire method of online applications and resume submittal is broken to the core. It's automated across the board. Companies automate the job posting, people automate resume writing, people automate applying to jobs, and companies automate the review process.

What are we even doing here anymore?

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

If you get 1000 resumes, that is 8 hours assuming it only takes 30 seconds per. Complete waste of time on first level triage.

Whatever analysis you do, software can also do, AI or other software.

Are you InfinityAg?!

MaxPower said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Yep.

I know someone who is left leaning, who complained that their kid was 'the wrong color' to get any academic scholarships.

I said, "but I thought it was illegal to discriminate...who could possibly support this?"

You vote these silly doctrines in, you suffer the consequences.

---

This is an area of disagreement in my household. I have 3 white pre-teens but my wife is convinced this won't be a problem for them at all but I'm very concerned about it. I'm old enough and been fortunate enough that I have some cash saved away but I got well into my career before this really became a thing.

---

oh...it's absolutely a thing. Unless they score extremely high, or are involved in an org/activity which issues the scholarship directly to them, they are at an extreme disadvantage. We applied for a lot of scholarships, but were awarded none of the public ones. My son got a small bball scholarship, that was awarded from the team. He also got $1,000 for being on the Dean's list after his first semester (which was just an auto-issued one to anyone on the Dean's list).

But if you're not part of a 'marginalized group' in some way, good luck. A white person who make a good income is eliminated from consideration for the majority of public scholarships. I'm not meaning this in a racist way, but a simple matter of fact.

If she doesnt' believe you, have her log onto one of the scholarship websites and read the descriptions and qualifications. It's just the way it is.

Might be controversial, but I think the parent's income should be completely eliminated from any scholarship qualification. Did my kid earn it? Yes?...Then he should be considered. His hard work, and what he earned, should not be taken away because his parents also worked hard.

Would think this is a huge opportunity for companies that hire on merit to explode past the DEI focused ones.

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

There WILL be collateral damage. Yes; the individual should maximize their individual chance to succeed. But at a statistical level a group whose opportunities get throttled will suffer in the interim while they shift to new careers. A competitor to a woke Fortune 500 who offers alternative employment doesn't spring up overnight.

You can scoff all you want, but that nonchalance is part of why so many in the younger generation are embracing systemic destruction. Men we dismiss without a modicum of sympathy will find alternatives to follow and vote for.

---

You are misinterpreting what I am saying. What this younger generation is going through is unique in the specifics, but it is also not all that different than every other generation. There is nothing about what they are going through that is special enough to "embrace systemic destruction", and if you look at the Boomers, they embraced that even more than this one. That didn't exactly work well for anyone.

The market is always changing all the time. Planning to benefit the most from it is a moving target and is very difficult to do. The message to the younger generation should be "be flexible" and "make yourself indispensable" instead of dwelling on whatever sucks about the current snapshot of society.

This isnt as new as the OP links show, and it predates a lot of woke dei stuff as we know it.

Many millennials were dumped out of college into a horrible recession. And in many places (namely blue cities) the white men were discriminated against while companies hired "diverse" background people.

White boomer and X women running HR are a big part of the problem. I think they started favoring other races to make them feel good about themselves... Mexicans work hard and both the Mexicans and black people surely overcame so much. Great way to pat yourself on the back while you drive home in your prius... saving the world while helping your company.

White straight men had their time of being in control, so its okay if we discriminate against these young kids that had nothing to do with it (that are already being taught they are the problem on college campuses).

It set a lot of us back years in our career path, not to mention there was limited opportunities for small businesses as well... the whole thing discouraged a lot of us from the "normal" and then you boomers are surprised when we dont want to toe the line.

Just need to get a bunch deported and then have a bunch of boomers retire.

Quote:

---

The market is always changing all the time. Planning to benefit the most from it is a moving target and is very difficult to do. The message to the younger generation should be "be flexible" and "make yourself indispensable" instead of dwelling on whatever sucks about the current snapshot of society.

---

Yes it is. During the dot.com boom in the 90s, graduates were getting absurd signing bonuses, stock options, absurd salaries and other perks just for accepting a job. Heady times for them. But that too changed.

Another example was the housing market bubble. People who could barely operate a calculator could become "mortgage brokers" when subprime mortgages were bundled and sold. Again, heady times. Again, that too changed.

Every ten to twelve year period has its own economic benefits and challenges for the job market.

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

There are ways to fix this. The first is region locking the website so you won't get any foreigners at all because many of these submittals come from overseas and are done by bots nowadays.

If you allow the whole world to apply then your company is full of idiots. The rest of the world isn't a high trust society and will lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead.

If you simplify down to just "change is inevitable" then sure, it is exactly the same.

But boomers unwillingness to see the huge differences baffles me. The "systemic" problems are things you have created and control. The overbearing goverment and restrictions are nothing like what you dealt with. You have shipped a ton of our jobs overseas, dont want to hire white men for entry level positions and made the barriers to starting a company ridiculous (unless we hire a bunch of illegals).

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

Good way to sort those resumes, throw out any that have pronouns.

Spergin said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

Good luck with screening the hundreds or thousands of resumes that are sent to hiring companies. I got my current job because of networking. They stopped taking resumes for the position and left it unfilled for 6 months because they were inundated with unqualified applicants, most of which didn't even live in the country, and they didn't have time to sift through each one for the few actually qualified applicants.

The process itself will have to change because it is not working for a multitude of reasons.

---

Hence the reason it is broken. Jobs receive 1000 applications in minutes nowadays. The entire method of online applications and resume submittal is broken to the core. It's automated across the board. Companies automate the job posting, people automate resume writing, people automate applying to jobs, and companies automate the review process.

What are we even doing here anymore?

---

In 2000, I got a new job at a major corporation in telecom. The job wound up not being as advertised as the specific project I was hired for was cancelled just weeks after I got there. My direct supervisor admitted to me I got a raw deal.

Though I eventually got an internal transfer to a better position, I immediately started a new job search. I put my resume on monster.com with my freshy-learned telecom buzzwords and acronyms. It appears I chose well because I got all kinds of contacts out of Silicon Valley. I may have passed up an opportunity to earn a fortune, but I was simply not interested in moving there.

In the over thirty years I have been out of school, every position I have gotten has been from personal contacts. Either I knew a guy who knew a guy, or I was able to find the right place to send my resume. Good thing I've only got a few years of working life left.

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

There are ways to fix this. The first is region locking the website so you won't get any foreigners at all because many of these submittals come from overseas and are done by bots nowadays.

If you allow the whole world to apply then your company is full of idiots. The rest of the world isn't a high trust society and will lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead.

---

Actually 95% are in the US, though a large percentage will require a visa at some point. I've been recruiting in tech for 30 years and it's pretty clear you don't understand the business or current environment very well. Your first 2 issues (AI isn't necessary and most of the applicants don't live in the US) simply aren't reality.

First of all, I'm no boomer and second... fine, you are a special and unique person whose generation is going through something no one has ever experienced that super incredibly has no parallel in human history. Happy?

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

There are ways to fix this. The first is region locking the website so you won't get any foreigners at all because many of these submittals come from overseas and are done by bots nowadays.

If you allow the whole world to apply then your company is full of idiots. The rest of the world isn't a high trust society and will lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead.

---

Actually 95% are in the US, though a large percentage will require a visa at some point. I've been recruiting in tech for 30 years and it's pretty clear you don't understand the business or current environment very well. Your first 2 issues (AI isn't necessary and most of the applicants don't live in the US) simply aren't reality.

---

If you're in tech then yeah they are foreigners. Either H1-Bs here or overseas. It's certainly not American citizens.

The fact that jobs often get hundreds of applicants minutes after being posted says everything.

Everyone already knows that tech has locked out white men.

torrid said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

Good way to sort those resumes, throw out any that have pronouns.

---

Our hiring manager said that 5 years ago.

Anyone who puts pronouns on a resume, e-mail signature, etc. goes right into File 13.

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

There are ways to fix this. The first is region locking the website so you won't get any foreigners at all because many of these submittals come from overseas and are done by bots nowadays.

If you allow the whole world to apply then your company is full of idiots. The rest of the world isn't a high trust society and will lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead.

---

Actually 95% are in the US, though a large percentage will require a visa at some point. I've been recruiting in tech for 30 years and it's pretty clear you don't understand the business or current environment very well. Your first 2 issues (AI isn't necessary and most of the applicants don't live in the US) simply aren't reality.

---

If you're in tech then yeah they are foreigners. Either H1-Bs here or overseas. It's certainly not American citizens.

The fact that jobs often get hundreds of applicants minutes after being posted says everything.

Everyone already knows that tech has locked out white men.

---

Completely untrue.

I know three people who work for large IT firms, two of whom just changed jobs due to their employers shutting down the divisions they worked for. All three are white males. The two who had to change jobs both got hired within a couple of months.

All of them can program in pretty much any computer language in existence. One was hired on the spot. The other had to wait a while longer because the company rules required a certain number of candidates to be interviewed before they could make the offer. As soon as they did, he was offered the job. Both of them are making bank.

Is there an outsourcing/H1B issue in IT, yep. It every job in IT done by H1B visa holders? Not even close.

Flagging the OP because it's InfinityAg. No doubt.

We have over 400,000 new bachelor degree grads in STEM every year in this country who are citizens. But yeah, if I get 1000 resumes, it's from overseas or h1b!!! Idiotic.

This is why the Trump administration has so dedicated itself to eradicating racist discrimination. We've eliminated funding for DEI, required government grantees to certify that they're not engaged in DEI, fired a number of DEI employees, and asked the great @HarmeetKDhillon to…

— JD Vance (@JDVance) December 17, 2025

One final observation about the above essay: so much of this was generational. Older white men created a system whereby they'd be fine, but millenials and GenZ would get screwed.

Cowardice and evil are a deadly combination.

— JD Vance (@JDVance) December 17, 2025

Vance has now commented the article. First time an elected official has addressed it.

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

92% of hiring managers say they are using AI for screening resumes or pre-screening interviews, per Insight Global's 2025 AI in Hiring Survey.

— Barefoot Student (@BarefootStudent) December 17, 2025

For those of you who don't know, this is what the job application process is now. It's horrific.

---

Resumes have always been prescreened. You are not guaranteed an interview because you simply submit a resume.

My employer does it, but still has a person do it since we're not huge.

AI can look for certain things that are automatic qualifiers or disqualifiers and save people time.

Given the amount of absolute garbage resumes we see, it is not horrific to have something scream out most of the crap.

---

If you're using AI at all for anything related to resume screening then you're doing it wrong, end of story. It takes 30 seconds max to easily determine if someone is qualified or if the resumes is good/crap.

This is exactly why people have AI write their resumes now. The system sucks so everyone just tailors their resume exactly to the keywords. It's all a joke.

---

I recently opened a job for a Junior level Software Engineer in the Bay Area and got over 1000 applicants in 24 hours. So at 30 seconds per that would mean over 8 hours of time to review those resumes. Of course by then I would have another 1000.

I have issues with AI but it's just reality now. Either adapt or die. The real lesson is applying for jobs the old fashioned way and expecting to get a callback as your primary way of searching for a job is a great way to be unemployed.

---

There are ways to fix this. The first is region locking the website so you won't get any foreigners at all because many of these submittals come from overseas and are done by bots nowadays.

If you allow the whole world to apply then your company is full of idiots. The rest of the world isn't a high trust society and will lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead.

---

Actually 95% are in the US, though a large percentage will require a visa at some point. I've been recruiting in tech for 30 years and it's pretty clear you don't understand the business or current environment very well. Your first 2 issues (AI isn't necessary and most of the applicants don't live in the US) simply aren't reality.

---

If you're in tech then yeah they are foreigners. Either H1-Bs here or overseas. It's certainly not American citizens.

The fact that jobs often get hundreds of applicants minutes after being posted says everything.

Everyone already knows that tech has locked out white men.

---

What do I know, I'm just the guy who posts the req and looks at the resumes.

You said overseas. Very few overseas resumes for those jobs. Now you are saying foreigners which is accurate, lots of those. The tools you need to be notified and apply for jobs quickly are available to anyone though, it's just many Americans don't use them and overthink the jobs they are applying for. Not all though, especially in tech. A lot of folks simply don't play the game very well and blame the game which I understand but it doesn't change the game. The solution is to understand the game and play it better. Trump making a concerted effort against H-1's and other visas though is definitely making an impact though for US Citizens in a favorable way though it will take some time for most to see it.

He's not wrong.

texagbeliever said:

---

One thing is for certain it definitely is not the fault of boomers who were in leadership positions when anti-white policies were implemented.
It wasnt the fault of boomers and gen x in leadership positions who shut the country down over covid..
It wasnt the fault of boomers and Gen x that our schools became utter trash and federalized over the past 30 plus years.

---

How did Gen X get roped in here?

Since when did anyone listen to us?

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

One thing is for certain it definitely is not the fault of boomers who were in leadership positions when anti-white policies were implemented.
It wasnt the fault of boomers and gen x in leadership positions who shut the country down over covid..
It wasnt the fault of boomers and Gen x that our schools became utter trash and federalized over the past 30 plus years.

---

How did Gen X get roped in here?

Since when did anyone listen to us?

---

Millennials and GenZ needed a new boogieman to blame for all their troubles.

What's a "Gen X"? I haven't heard about them in years.

texagbeliever said:

---

One thing is for certain it definitely is not the fault of boomers who were in leadership positions when anti-white policies were implemented.
It wasnt the fault of boomers and gen x in leadership positions who shut the country down over covid..
It wasnt the fault of boomers and Gen x that our schools became utter trash and federalized over the past 30 plus years.

---

Runaway HR departments and knowing you will be fired for even questioning all the DEI nonsense pushed out ultimately by the world of finance...

Brett Cooper with a good discussion about the article. Also at the end a point about the rise of independent media and the marginalization of MSM. Her point, keep doing what men have always done in the face of hardship and injustices, build the means to correct those injustices and fight for justice and build the means to survive and even thrive.

MaxPower said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Yesterday said:

---

My wife's cousin who is a white male and graduated college in 2013 with a hard liberal lean had a terrible time getting any kind of meaningful work. I remember talking to him in 2021 and I'm not sure if he switched ideologies completely but it surprised me how he was talking about minorities getting preferential treatment in his field and how he agreed a lot with Trump about woke culture and the border. He may have been one of those demographics that swung hard for Trump in 24

---

Yep.

I know someone who is left leaning, who complained that their kid was 'the wrong color' to get any academic scholarships.

I said, "but I thought it was illegal to discriminate...who could possibly support this?"

You vote these silly doctrines in, you suffer the consequences.

---

This is an area of disagreement in my household. I have 3 white pre-teens but my wife is convinced this won't be a problem for them at all but I'm very concerned about it. I'm old enough and been fortunate enough that I have some cash saved away but I got well into my career before this really became a thing.

---

No kidding. I have white sons and I worry about it too.

This isn't just about jobs. Try applying to med school as a white man.

AgBQ-00 said:

---

They've now expanded the blame to gen x too.

---

This was my thought as well. It's Marxist and the young people are falling for it.

Divide and conquer. Marxism wants to divide on anything it can and it's taking a hold in generation hate in America. There's little respect for elders these days because, "hey, these old people MUST be responsible for all of my problems"

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

One thing is for certain it definitely is not the fault of boomers who were in leadership positions when anti-white policies were implemented.
It wasnt the fault of boomers and gen x in leadership positions who shut the country down over covid..
It wasnt the fault of boomers and Gen x that our schools became utter trash and federalized over the past 30 plus years.

---

How did Gen X get roped in here?

Since when did anyone listen to us?

---

Gen X were some of the biggest losers during the Obama years. I stayed on a technical track but my company made a big push to put women into senior management and all the Gen X line managers who paid their dues got passed by the older millennial women.

This is not new, just worse.

In 1994 my manager told me that the female candidate I selected to interview was "the right gender".

Corporations have been trying to increase their female and minority staffing for decades.

Spergin said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Quote:

---

This forum is repeatedly surprised though...

---

Is it?

The board seems apt to discuss, maybe appalled, etc...but surprised? I think it's what most on here have predicted would be the outcome for a long while.

---

Yes it 100% is. Boomers act like it's the fault of those younger than them and not the system. They act like the free market will solve it when it won't, at all. They act like the civil rights movement was a good thing when all it did was lead to exactly this scenario.

Anyone and everyone who says or implies a bootstrap concept is just ignoring the issue and telling those who happened to be born at the wrong time, "tough ****, figure it out" instead of being angry at the system that caused it to happen.

---

What the heck do you mean?

I have white sons who have been the target of discrimination for most of their life. I and I think all conservative parents (regardless of color) care very much and have been pointing out this very topic for years while those IIR us who are white are being told to shut our white fragility pie holes and those that are black are told to get back on the plantation.

The difference between whatever you are trying to say and how I raised my sons is that I told them they would face a world of people pushing division on every front so they can get the races, ethnicities, orientations, and the genders to hate each other. My white kids are not surprised by it and will openly speak to it.

If you define the system as the vile, racist democrats then yes it's the system.

Unfortunately, what I see from the youth are a bunch of cowed idiots who rationalize the actions of the democrats because they are told the republicans do it to and that conservatives are unfeeling, racist nazis.

So help us understand what you mean by the systems fault.

Edit to add that I just saw the JD Vance comments and the last one is wrong. Older generations are not a monolith and did not all move to screw over the generations to come.

Those of us who hated collectivism voted and unbalanced budgets voted for anyone who said they would fight those issues. It wasn't until Trump and the anger of the abandoned working man did anyone actually do anything about the first issue.

Logos Stick said:

---

Flagging the OP because it's InfinityAg. No doubt.

We have over 400,000 new bachelor degree grads in STEM every year in this country who are citizens. But yeah, if I get 1000 resumes, it's from overseas or h1b!!! Idiotic.

---

flag all you want but I am not the OP here.