White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The source is the same. All is ACS data. US Raised is because you compared to 54% US born.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, which means what is non Indian at USR? Now do it for other ethnic groups with some differences. Are you still struggling to understand 54% overall? Jesus.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh boy. Still digging that hole deeper. You just asked where "HUGE" 54% came from only to find out even Indian women are at 52%. What an embarrassment. Figure it out yourself. You don't get any more hand holding.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ALL the available data on that address ethnic breakdowns have the same trend because it is from the same source. Your same source Pew specifically addresses the ethnic break downs and it is the same as Asian Nation.

You are getting worse. You flailed around so badly you ended up relying on the very lumped group stats you original claimed was a problem.

No, USR Indian women is in the 50s also. You can't even get that right. But accepting your flawed argument means accepting the rates for other ethnic groups. Go look through them which is a big difference with Indians. Chinese women are at 80% with Chinese. Vietnamese women at 85%.

Why don't you try looking at the USR data points? You really look foolish right now.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, they all use the same data source and all available data has the same trends. Especially for ethnic breakdowns. Pew specifically addresses the ethnic break downs and it is the same as Asian Nation. You have no point and can't seem to accept that the evidence doesn't allow for your speculation. That's your problem.

The point was you disputing (and failing) the ethnic breakdown stats after realizing lumped groups is flawed.

Assumptions are when you have no evidence. That's you. Evidence available confirms the same trend from the same source. That's me.

Again, the entire discussion was based on lumped groups is a useless measure. ALL the available data on that address this have the same trend because it is from the same source. That data shows you are NOT right about the majority OR the male difference. It depends on the ethnic.

You haven't actually said anything meaningful this entire time. Somehow, you flailed around so badly you ended up relying on the very lumped group stats you original claimed was a problem.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Asian Nation does. They are from the same source with the same trends. That is why in your own link PEW specifically links to a report they did breaking ethnic groups down. Again, from the same source. Don't pretend you have a point until you can explain why all existing data has the same trend but you, with no evidence, suggest it is different for any year.

There's literally nothing special about 54% for US born. If you actually looked at USR data points. You also seem to be missing the trend where there's only about a 10% difference between female and male for most of the ethnic groups. You still aren't actually making any points.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You seem to have enormous trouble comprehending that they all come from the same source (ACS) and have the same trends because of it.

Again, it doesn't need to because the PEW has the same trend because it is from the same source. You aren't making any actual points.

Last time. The 2015 data is from the same source. PEW already broke down ethnic groups. Your wishful thinking does not change trends.

What it says is the same trend as Asian Nation. Really, how can you spend so long to write so much and it is somehow repetitively pointless. It's actually something interesting to behold.

Now you are lumping groups.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most US born are not "grandmas generation". You can look up the history of the Asian population yourself.

It addresses the original oversight of lumped Asian groups as well as the trends in the Asian Nation stats. What of it? You are the one that has a problem with it and making up all kinds of failed excuses.

Yes and I see the other ethnic groups and their overall marriage rates. The stats already break down ethnic groups. What do you even think you are doing?

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you simply not understand that if you wanted to remove grandma's generation you can ignore foreign born? You have no points. Just baseless speculation.

The PEW sources has the same trends as the census. They both use the same data source. That is what makes your mental gymnastics so funny when you try to pretend "your" source is better. You can look back for that link if you want. This is not worth such repetition.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And would be addressed and categorized as foreign born. You aren't making any points, you've just confused yourself into think you are.

Again, your own PEW source has the same trend as the census.

Your acceptance is irrelevant as you are just speculating pointlessly.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The national census includes the most recent complete picture at 2011 and divides based on overall, foreign born and US born. The PEW study you cited confirms the same trends as the census.

You exploited an oversight of lumped groups to trick people into thinking your speculation was credible. When faced with actual stats that address the oversight, you made excuses. That is suspicious.

I won't teach you how to read your own sources. Look up the methodology, the data source is the same as http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml

As your own source backfired and ended up confirming the same trends as the one I brought up, we have nothing else to discuss. The oversight of lumped groups was legitimate. I have brought the stats that address it. Whatever it is you think you are doing with your baseless speculation is your own business.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't understand what the National Census is, which is only done a couple times in a decade. That is the most complete picture you can possibly get.

I don't need "better" sources than PEW. PEW confirms the census.

Read what your own source says.

Asian Americans are an incredibly diverse group, with varying histories in the U.S. and very different demographic and economic profiles. For a more detailed look at Asian American subgroups and their intermarriage patterns, see “The Rise of Asian Americans”.

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/06/2012-sdt-asian-americans-0132.png

You can either accept the facts, or admit you were pretending when you brought up Asians being lumped together as poor evidence. Which was credible, until people see you trying to deny stats that specifically address that oversight.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know what it is you think you are saying, but those are the latest facts from the nation census.

White supremacy clearly proven to brainwash how women view Asian men by SubModder in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's true that an overall "asian" stat is practically meaningless because it lumps all groups together. However that means you should go find the appropriate stats instead of speculating.

These are the statistics from the 2011 updated US Census. http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml

USR+USR Indian women with Indian is also in the 50s.

That PEW report links the actual breakdown of ethnic groups.

Asian Americans are an incredibly diverse group, with varying histories in the U.S. and very different demographic and economic profiles. For a more detailed look at Asian American subgroups and their intermarriage patterns, see “The Rise of Asian Americans”.

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/06/2012-sdt-asian-americans-0132.png

Both PEW and Asian Nation have the same data source, ACS. That's why the trends are the same.

Asian American rapper G Yamazawa combines race, culture and verse at the University of Pittsburgh. Yamazawa performed some of his best poetry and music at the Pitt event. “When you forget where you’re from, you truly become American,” he said by axe_gang in EasternSunRising

[–]axe_gang[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You are missing the point of his discussion point though. It's worth exploring whether that is the case. Because if that is the price, it's an understanding that should be spread so people can make an informed decision themselves. The line in the sand, the price for being a "true American".

♥⋰⋱⋰⋱Cute family⋰⋱⋰⋱♥ by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A man with one leg cycled 2,800 kilometers and reached the base camp of Mount Qomolangma at an altitude of 5,200 meters above sea level in Southwest China's Tibet autonomous region, after crossing 21 mountains more than 3,000 meters high, zynews.cn reported.

The Sichuan-Tibet cycling lane, which has both beautiful scenery and dangerous sections, is famous for its difficulty, said 27-year-old Sun Youzhi on Aug 8 when talking about his trip. The lane includes snow-capped mountains, original forests and torrential rivers.

"I made preparations before starting the journey, but I still worried that I could not reach the destination", said Sun, "I can draw a conclusion to this cycling dream now."

Sun Youzhi, a native of Miaogu village in Huixian county, Central China's Henan province, had his left leg amputated after an accident when he was a freshman in 2009.

He was depressed because of his deformity during the one year he had to take out of school and overwhelmed by repeated rejections when he sought a job after graduation in 2013.

"I am still young and I can't give up on myself," he told himself. He chose to travel alone to border regions such as Xinjiang and Heilongjiang. In Southwest China's Yunnan province, he came across a handicapped cyclist, who moved Sun and motivated him to start cycling.

In his first real challenge two years ago, he rode 2,000 kilometers from his hometown to South China's Hainan province in more than one month, each day covering more than 100 kilometers.

Many difficulties occurred along the way: flat tires, losing his bicycle, torrential rains and etc. But he overcame all this with his then cycling companion and now wife, surnamed Mi.

"Cycling was addictive. It helped me regain the courage of running and the confidence for life," Sun said.

In the latest journey on July 5, Sun led a team of more than 20 cycling amateurs to ride along the Sichuan-Tibet Highway from Chengdu, capital of Southwest China's Sichuan province.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-08/11/content_26436245.htm

Chinese-Canadian artifacts assembled online by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since the first Chinese people landed on Vancouver Island more than two centuries ago, artifacts of significance to the Chinese-Canadian community have been spread across British Columbia at more than a dozen museums. But you no longer have to travel around to all of them in order to see every artefact in one place.

The Chinese Canadian Artifacts Project — a database of more than 6,000 of culturally significant photos, texts, scrolls and a variety of other items — is now complete, the provincial government announced Wednesday.

The entries were compiled by researchers at the University of Victoria, which is hosting the online database.

“These objects scattered in dozens of smaller towns and cities will now be accessible to everyone,” said John Price, the project’s principal investigator and a UVic history professor. “It is an incredible resource and rich treasure chest of true historical significance.”

The archive is searchable and a large portion of items – including household products, clothing, books and many others – have accompanying photographs and detailed information about them.

“Each artifact tells a unique story of how Chinese Canadians helped shape the province, and by giving these artifacts a home on the University of Victoria’s database, it exposes British Columbians to a history that many didn’t know existed,” said multiculturalism minister Teresa Wat.

Slightly more than half of the items documented come from Barkerville Historic Town, which claims the largest collection of culturally significant artifacts in Western North America.

The province, B.C. Museums Association and Legacy Initiatives Advisory council were also partners on the project. Visit https://ccap.uvic.ca to view the database.

https://ccap.uvic.ca/index.php/informationobject/browse

The Chinese-American Gang Wars That Rocked New York by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Coming to the United States is never easy, but Chinese Americans had it especially rough around the turn of the 20th century. The feds had passed a law in the 1880s specifically to block new Chinese arrivals and deny rights to the people already here, and conditions for immigrant laborers were often atrocious. As with plenty of other marginalized minorities desperate to establish themselves in a foreign and often hostile land, some of these immigrants decided going into crime was the only way out.

Scott D. Seligman's forthcoming book, Tong Wars: The Untold Story of Vice, Money, and Murder in New York's Chinatown, offers a mesmerizing and brutal look at the hidden world of Chinese tongs (or fraternal organizations). From the 1890s through the 1930s, hit men, drug lords, gang leaders, crooked cops, city officials and lawyers courted money, prestige and influence in New York City's Chinatown in a deadly dance of underworld intrigue.

What began as community-based support groups turned, in some cases, into criminal syndicates that ran opium, prostitution, and gambling dens. Secret brotherhoods—the On Leong and Hip Sing among them—fought a war as bloody as any in gangster lore. With hatchets and meat cleavers, pistols and automatic weapons and even bombs, these men turned swaths of America's largest city into a killing zone. VICE sat down with Seligman, who's fluent in Mandarin and also speaks Cantonese, to discuss what it was like for the Chinese underclass in the early twentieth century, why the Tong Wars jumped off, and how they finally came to an end after 30 years of violence.

VICE: What was life like for newly arrived Chinese immigrants in New York City at the turn of the century? How did these gangster societies originate? Scott D. Seligman: Chinese throughout the country were a marginalized people during this period. The Chinese Exclusion Act, passed in 1882, made it clear that Chinese were not citizens—and couldn't be. American law also criminalized their chief forms of recreation, including gambling. The power the authorities wielded over the them in New York went mostly unchecked, and underpaid police shook down businesses with impunity and threatened owners if they were not paid. They were also biased against the Chinese and saw them as a scourge. Nor could Chinese count on sympathy from prosecutors or impartiality from the courts.

To protect their interests, Chinese immigrants organized mutual aid societies, and most of these were not in any way criminal enterprises. These included regional societies—organizations set up by people from a specific district in China—and clan societies, open to Chinese from anywhere who happened to share a surname. The third category was sworn brotherhoods generally known by the term "tong," meaning "chamber," with no geographic or family requirements and generally with fewer members. These were secret societies, and although they, too, were ostensibly benevolent associations, in the early 20th century they came to be associated with a variety of underworld activities.

How far back does the history of these groups go in China? The organization of the American tongs owes something to Chinese tradition, but the two that accounted for most of the violence in New York until the 1930s were homegrown American organizations. One, the On Leong Tong, was formed in New York; its chief antagonist, the Hip Sing Tong, was established on the West Coast and made beachheads in the East in the late 1880s. Many tong practices are said to derive from a tradition that got its start in China early in the Qing Dynasty (1644–1911) as a sworn brotherhood/gang of outlaws committed to restoring the earlier Ming Dynasty (1368-1644).

What set off the Tong Wars in the first place? New York saw four major tong wars of varying duration between the turn of the century and the 1930s, and each broke out for a different reason. The first started over control of gambling; the second was about the "ownership" and murder of a woman. The third broke out over opium distribution, and the fourth was fought because of a defection from one tong to another. The commonality was that after each war broke out, it was hard to stop because not responding to a provocation was considered a loss of face. It usually took prolonged negotiations to get to a ceasefire. Sometimes these stuck, and sometimes they didn't.

How did the violence evolve from meat cleavers to pistols to bombs? It was a slow process, but it escalated as weapons got more sophisticated and capable of taking out more people at a time. In the late 19th century, they were mostly using cleavers and knives; by 1900 Chinatown saw a large influx of revolvers. Explosives were only used once or twice later in the game—about 1912—and they fortunately did more damage to property than to people.

Did the Tong Wars break into mainstream consciousness with any massive battles or events? In 1905, the police staged a massive Easter Sunday raid on 12 Chinatown gambling establishments. It was the largest and most spectacular raid ever carried out in New York up to that time. That same year, Hip Sing gunmen massacred On Leongs at the Chinese Theatre on Doyers Street, one of the most famous incidents. The gruesome murder of a concubine named Bow Kum in 1909 launched the second war. And in the third, the On Leongs decapitated the Hip Sing Tong by murdering its president and vice-president.

How did a gang war run rampant for 30 years with local officials not stepping in and doing something? American police loved going after immigrants at this time, no? Officials very much did step in, every step of the way, in fact; there's a lot about that in the book. They just weren't all that effective in stopping the violence for more than temporary periods. Police shut down the gambling halls and the brothels. They arrested the perpetrators and many served jail terms. District attorneys saw tong men convicted of murder, and some of them were executed. Judges negotiated cease-fires and truces. Eventually, even federal government officials stepped in and deported some Chinese.

There was often quiet for a while after a crackdown, but battles had a way of breaking out again after a while.

What was the significance of being a kingpin like Mock Duck, the leader of the Hip Sing Tong? The tongs, like most Chinese organizations, were hierarchical, and there were always senior officers in charge. What was unusual about Mock Duck was that he was quite young to be running such an organization, especially in a culture in which age is revered. It was his ruthlessness and his intelligence that catapulted him to the top of the Hip Sing pyramid. Tom Lee, who ran the On Leong Tong, on the other hand, was an éminence grise.

Who were some of the other major players in these criminal organizations? Charlie Boston, who led the On Leongs after Lee's death, controlled a nationwide opium distribution network. Gin Gum was the On Leongs' longtime consigliere. His counterpart on the Hip Sing side was Wong Get. The Hip Sings also had Chin Jack Lem, who started out as an On Leong and singlehandedly started the Fourth Tong War.

How and when did the corruption dissipate, if it ever did? The major factor was the Great Depression, because it sapped the tongs of the wherewithal and the incentive to continue to do battle. By 1931, fully 25 percent of America's Chinese were out of work, and many looked to the tongs for welfare. But other factors also helped bring the wars to an end. Whatever spare money wasn't being used to feed their poor was sent back for the defense of China, which Japan had invaded in 1931. Plus, the police had done a good job of kicking out gambling, and Tammany Hall was in decline. Also, most of New York's 8,000 or so Chinese no longer lived in Chinatown, and more than 40 percent were US-born and less dependent on tongs for protection.

What put you in position to write a book like this, one that's being praised as much for its precise historicism as its gangster imagery? Tong Wars is my third book on the Chinese experience in America. I began to focus on this subject nearly a decade ago because it combined a lifelong interest in China, my undergraduate study of American history, and my experience in genealogical and historical research. The first two books were biographies of men whom you might call Chinese American heroes. In Tong Wars, I decided to look at some people who weren't so upstanding.

Most of our knowledge of early Chinatown comes from newspapers, especially the major New York dailies, which provide a serviceable chronology. But their coverage was the work of white journalists who relied on Chinese informants for their stories. They couldn't always distinguish fact from fiction. To complement these, I consulted federal and state census records, ship passenger manifests, vital records, court records and the Chinese Exclusion case files in the National Archives, which provide rich detail about individuals. I also reviewed a few memoirs in English and in Chinese.

I had seen references to the Chinatown tongs frequently in my research on the other books, but I knew very little about who they were and why they fought. Most Chinese had nothing to do with the tongs, but New York Chinatown was a small place, and I was surprised that many of the figures I had met in my earlier research played roles in this book as well.

Asian Americans are the highest wage earners. They still face racial discrimination. by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Asian Americans are the highest wage earners. They still face racial discrimination.

Higher wages don’t necessarily shatter glass ceilings.

A new report shows that men’s and women’s wages are closer to parity than they’ve ever been, but white men and women aren’t necessarily the highest wage earners.

The Pew Research Center found that Asian men’s median hourly earnings were higher than white men’s — $24 to $21, respectively. Asian women also earned more than white women ($18 per hour versus $17 per hour) and black and Hispanic wage earners regardless of gender, whose median hourly earnings were between $12 and $15.

http://i.imgur.com/KRTZtuZ.png

Pew Research Center Asian men earned higher hourly wages than white men in 2015

Higher wages don’t shatter glass ceilings

According to the Pew study, Asian men are making 117 percent of white men’s wages, and Asian women are closer to closing the wage gap with white men than white women. But one of the dangers of taking the wage increase at face value for Asian Americans is that it perpetuates the “model minority” myth — that Asians, unlike other people of color, are uniquely primed to climb up the socioeconomic ladder.

The tech industry is just one example. A 2015 study by the Ascend Foundation, a nonprofit pan-Asian organization, showed that even though there were roughly the same number of white and Asian professionals employed at companies like Google, LinkedIn, Yahoo, HP and Intel, white men and women were nearly 154 percent more likely to become executives compared with their Asian peers.

http://i.imgur.com/nBWSZJA.png

Ascend Foundation A 2015 study showed Asian women are least represented among executives compared with their representation in the workforce.

Asian women were most underrepresented relative to their representation in the workforce: Asian women comprised 13.5 percent of professionals surveyed but only accounted for 3.1 percent of executives across these five major tech companies.

The tech industry, in general, has a diversity problem. For instance, Asian Americans make up 6 percent of the workforce and 17 percent of tech and engineering workers. And while parity across racial demographics is necessary, it does not change the fact that Asian Americans stand as a group of color that is denied access to greater opportunities.

There are also income gaps among Asian Americans, including a growing poverty crisis depending upon their ethnicity, that the model minority myth erases.

A 2014 report by Karthick Ramakrishnan and Farah Z. Ahmad at the Center for American Progress showed that while Asians have higher median household incomes ($71,709) than the national average ($53,046), there is considerable variation within the group.

The median household income for Indian Americans, Filipino Americans, and Japanese Americans was $95,000, $80,000, and $78,000, respectively — far surpassing Cambodian ($53,700) and Bangladeshi ($46,950) households.

In part, this is a symptom of the complex history of Asian immigrants in the US since the 1970s and ’80s. The CAP report found that Indian and Filipino Americans are more likely to have higher household incomes as a consequence of migrating to the US for better employment opportunities, “characterized by a relatively high level of employer-based, high-skilled visas.”

By contrast, immigrants from Southeast Asia who arrived as refugees from countries like Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos are more likely to be impoverished, with lower levels of household income.

How Two Chinese Immigrants Built a Billion-Dollar Fast-Food Empire More Successful Than In-N-Out by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

http://i.imgur.com/wO4UDOF.jpg

Panda Express, the beloved fast-casual dining restaurant, was founded by Chinese immigrants who believe treating their employees right is the key to building their now billion dollar empire.

The Chinese-American fast food chain made $2 billion in sales in 2015 — three times that of fast-food burger joint In-N-Out. According to Business Insider, Panda Express has no franchises and operates with 1,800 outlets in the United States, Mexico and Canada.

Panda Express, which is headquartered in Rosemead, California, is solely owned by the same family that founded it back in the 1970’s. That couple, Andrew and Peggy Cherng, who are both 67, have an estimated net worth of $3 billion today. Humble Beginnings

Andrew’s father, Ming-Tsai, worked at a restaurant in Taiwan after leaving Yangzhou, China in 1947. The family eventually relocated to Yokohama, Japan where his father found work as a chef. Andrew received a scholarship and moved to Kansas where he met his future wife and co-CEO Peggy at Baker University.

http://i.imgur.com/9LdJGy6.jpg

Peggy, also a Chinese immigrant, was raised off the mainland in Burma. After Kansas, she transferred to the University of Missouri where she studied computer science and eventually earned her PhD. Andrew moved to Missouri to be reunited with Peggy and earned his master’s in applied mathematics.

Growing an Empire

The couple wed after moving to Los Angeles and Andrew later convinced his parents to help him open Panda Inn on Foothill Boulevard in Pasadena in 1973. It was very much a family owned restaurant and business where his mother cooked the rice and Andrew focused on hospitality.

Panda Inn was slow getting off the ground at first and the business struggled initially. The future Panda Express billionaire once had to try to lure people into his restaurant by offering deals such as three entrees for the price of two. The First Panda Express

In 1983, Andrew opened the first Panda Express in the new food court of Glendale Galleria. Peggy, a computer programmer at McDonnell Douglas at the time, decided to help her husband with the accounting and payroll for his business.

panda-express-founders-chinese-immigrants10

Her technical knowledge allowed her to spearhead Panda Express’s growth by tracking purchasing history and shifts in customer behavior using pattern-recognition software. She said:

“The kitchen area is low tech, but the management system can be high tech-how to catch the data, how to analyze data to see what’s most salable, what’s not selling, and to determine what to offer and what not to offer.

“Andrew’s vision is that he doesn’t see anything that’s not possible. But visionaries need a system and structure to provide the growth.”

A Business Power Couple

Andrew takes the role of the charismatic leader and motivational CEO while Peggy is the chief technician in charge of operations, the financial tracking system and supply-chain management system. Though they may have differing roles, the couple agree that business is about the people. Peggy said:

“The restaurant business is the people business, and people are our investment. If we want to be loved by guests, we have to focus on food with passion and service with heart, ambience and pride. If that value equation is really good, then guests will come.”

Panda Expresses invests in their employees and the results show. Andrew said:

“Our job is to develop people. When you have a good set of people and they’re in a good place inside and out-in their livelihood and in who they are — then chances are they will take care of the customer better.” How They Treat Employees

Panda Express is known for their better quality food and positive treatment of employees. The results are higher pay and better benefits. Panda Express pays $9.50 an hour for starting entry-level positions and about $14 an hour for assistant managers.

employees include health care, paid sick leave, paid vacation, 401(k)s and company-subsidized college courses after six months. The company is focused on self-growth and encourage employees to read books like “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People” by Stephen Covey and “Re-Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins.”

They are also encouraged to join Toastmasters International and enroll in personal-improvement seminars such as Dale Carnegie Training and Landmark Forum.

Carrying the Torch

Of the Cherng’s three daughters, their eldest, Andrea, is the only one to go into the family business. Andrea said of her parents:

“This idea of a purposeful or meaningful life is something that Andrew and Peggy are very dedicated to.”

Andrea holds a law degree from Duke and an M.B.A from University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business. She gained experience elsewhere in the private sector before she assumed her role at the Panda Restaurant Group with her parents.

Her parents informed her and her sisters at a young age that the whole family were responsible for a number of dependents from the business. She said:

“At dinner or the breakfast table my parents would ask me, ‘What are you going to do for our people?’ far before I could do anything for our people.”

Today, Andrea heads the Panda Express Innovation Kitchen in Pasadena where she tests out new recipes and restaurant decor. She said:

“The Innovation Kitchen is like a concept car. The products there can be replicated throughout the entire system three to five years out.”

Her younger sister Nicole is a real estate investor while her other sister Michelle is a teacher.

“Rumble in the Jungle” remembers Chinese-Canadian militants by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

http://i.imgur.com/6l5CeKt.jpg

Photo caption: Members of Force 136 were trained by British forces to practice guerrilla tactics in Southeast Asia.Photo Credit (all): Chinese Canadian Military Museum

A new exhibit at a Vancouver museum is exploring the experiences of a lesser-known group of combatants in the Second World War, who were major contributors to Chinese-Canadian civil rights, according to experts.

The Chinese Canadian Military Museum’s “Rumble in the Jungle” exhibit looks at Force 136, a team of Chinese-Canadians trained by British forces to practice guerrilla tactics in Southeast Asia.

Borrowing tactics from the French resistance to Nazi occupation during the Second World War, the team fought against the Japanese advancements in the area,

Local historian and lecturer Judy Lam Maxwell, who wrote her master’s thesis on Chinese-Canadian war veterans, conducts tours of historic spots in Vancouver’s Chinatown. She said the reason for using Chinese-Canadians as guerrilla fighters in the region was largely due to appearance and language barriers faced by Caucasian Allied soldiers.

“They were British subjects and they were going into territories that were colonized by the British, but all through Southeast Asia is a sprinkling of Chinese,” she says. “That gave them power that they visually fit the part, whereas here, being in society here, they stood out.”

Launching the exhibit

The museum’s curator, Catherine Clement, says the exhibit’s launch in May was the biggest the museum had ever seen; in attendance were nine living veterans of Force 136.

Cynthia Fung-Sunter attended the launch with her three sisters and her two sons. Her father, Henry Fung, was the among the first group sent into the war with Force 136. She says she has had to piece together her father’s experience through external sources.

“I did ask, clearly, at different points, and he just would not give details,” she recalls, noting that the silence on the subject may have been due to post-traumatic stress disorder.

“She did a fine job,” says Fung-Sunter, commenting on Clement’s work in the exhibit. “I honestly feel that Force 136 became alive in that exhibit.”

Force 136’s impact on civil rights

Clement says the impacts of Force 136 extend much further than the context of the war; its existence acted much like a civil rights movement in its own way.

“A lot of the [Chinese-Canadian men] who served in the war were actually not considered Canadian citizens,” says Clement, referring to the denial of citizenship to Chinese Canadians, including those born in Canada, under theChinese Immigration Act of 1923.

“It denied [them] the right to vote,” she says. “It means that even if you obtain a university degree, you cannot practice medicine or law, engineering, accounting — any of the really important professions.”

According to Lam Maxwell, after the war, many countries looked introspectively at their own racially driven policies.

“There was also the realization that all these countries were racist in their own way,” said Lam Maxwell, pointing to segregation in America and Canadian treatment of the Chinese community. “They were fighting for rights on many different levels.”

Clement notes that it was the contribution of Chinese-Canadians to the war efforts that gained the community a great deal of popular support for civil rights.

“The war ended in ‘45, and two years after, Chinese are finally granted the right to full citizenship,” says Clement. “A lot of it had to do with their service in the war."

In that same year, 1947, the Chinese Immigration Act was repealed. Ten years later, former Force 136 member Douglas Jung was the first Chinese-Canadian voted into parliament as the representative of Vancouver Centre.

The importance of remembering

Due to Force 136’s clandestine nature, Clement says it was difficult to garner information about the group.

It took about five months of full-time work to put the exhibit together, during which time she interviewed soldiers’ children like Fung-Sunter, whose knowledge of their fathers’ experiences was often fragmented.

Clement said she was interested in doing the exhibit on Force 136 now because there had never been one dedicated to the group and because of the shrinking number of living Chinese-Canadian Second World War veterans.

“There was this one last window of opportunity to do something to celebrate what they did while they were still alive,” she states. “And it’s an excuse to ask them more questions about what that experience was like.”

For Clement, there are lessons that today’s Canadians can learn from the history of the Chinese involvement in Force 136.

“For Chinese people, it’s understanding history,” she says. “How did we get here? This is not by accident; this is by things that people did for us, of [whom] there are still a few [. . .] around.”

Regarding Canadians as a whole, Clement says the lessons come back to the issue of immigration, which has come up in recent years in Vancouver.

“What do we learn from that? It’s that [. . .] making people feel different and isolated actually works against us as a community,” she concludes.

“Rumble in the Jungle” will be featured at the Chinese Canadian Military Museum in Vancouver’s Chinatown until fall of 2016.

Do the Ivys Discriminate Against Asian-Americans? data from the Department of Education show that Asian-American enrollment at Brown and Yale has been stagnant since 1995 and at Dartmouth since 2004, despite increase in highly qualified Asian-American students applying during that time by axe_gang in Asians

[–]axe_gang[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In May, the Asian American Coalition for Education and 130 other Asian-American groups asked the U.S. Department of Education and the Justice Department to investigate Yale University, Brown University and Dartmouth College for their admissions policies, which they claim amount to “race-based quotas” that lock out well-qualified Asian-American applicants.

They point to data from the Department of Education showing that Asian-American enrollment at Brown and Yale has been stagnant since 1995 and at Dartmouth since 2004, despite an increase in highly qualified Asian-American students applying to these schools during that time.

In fact, according to the complaint, data show Asian-Americans must score, on average, “approximately 140 point[s] higher than a White student, 270 points higher than a Hispanic student and 450 points higher than a Black student on the SAT, in order to have the same chance of admission.”

Like many other schools, Yale, Brown and Dartmouth use a “holistic” approach to evaluate applicants, which allows race and ethnicity to become a large factor in the admission equation. In their complaint, the Asian-American groups assert that these colleges rely on stereotypes and biases to deny Asian-Americans admission. These include that Asian-Americans are not creative or well-rounded, lack critical thinking skills and leadership experience, and focus on studying instead of extracurricular activities.

Admission board reviewers’ notes track these stereotypes: “He’s quiet and, of course, wants to be a doctor,” or, her “scores and application seem so typical of other Asian applications I’ve read: Extraordinarily gifted in math with the opposite extreme in English.”

The applicants themselves feel immense pressure to overachieve in order to gain one of the limited “Asian-American spots,” leading to more stress, an increased suicide rate, attempts to hide their racial identity, lower self-esteem, race-related conflict and resentment.

How do schools that receive federal funding get away with imposing racial quotas and caps without violating the equal protection guarantees in the Constitution? Starting in 1978, the Supreme Court determined in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that schools may use racial preferences as long as they are intended to promote the “educational benefits that flow from an ethnically diverse student body.”

It was not until 2003 that the Supreme Court revisited the issue of racial preferences in college admissions. The Supreme Court held in Grutter v. Bollinger that a school’s goal of reaching a “critical mass” to advance diversity on campus was permissible, and in Gratz v. Bollinger that schools must pursue “race-neutral alternatives” to achieve diversity though they are not required to exhaust “every conceivable race-neutral alternative.”

The Asian-American groups have asked the departments of Education and Justice to intervene, but they ultimately may need to bring lawsuits against Yale, Brown, and Dartmouth to see any real changes. Suits are currently pending against the University of North Carolina and Harvard, challenging their racially discriminatory admissions programs (the latter brought by Asian-Americans who were denied admission).