Because it's diversity for diversity's sake. It encourages people to maximize on their unchangeable attributes like skin color or sexual orientation instead of any actual skills.
The assumption of rational actors is standard practice in economics, basically every single theorem depends on that. When I pointed out that racism isn't rational, the argument changed to "well, you can't assume that everyone is rational".
Yes. I know. I have a fucking degree in this field. Believe it or not, people have figured out how to deal with that problem a long time ago. Look up the Efficient Market Paradox, and you'll see why rationality is still a sensible assumption to make.
If rationality is overrated and DEI is rational, isn’t this an argument to discard it? Conversely, if it isn’t, isn’t this an argument that DEI is irrational?
If DEI made companies more money it wouldn't have to be legislated, would it. Anyone with a smidge of business sense would absolutely crush it by hiring all the people that racists routinely overlook.
If racist businesses will fail on their own because racism is not sustainable, why does there need to be a law against it? Let them fail of their own accord. It might take a while, but if you're right, they most certainly will.
Right, so if race is irrelevant, any company who's willing to hire race-blind would be able to easily outdo all of the racist ones by hiring the people others won't. What part about that are you not understanding?
Then why doesn't someone go and create a company to hire all of that untapped non-white talent, surely they'd be running circles around their competition...
As opposed to posting memes to elicit emotional responses?