CIRCLE WITH A DOT

@cyberlyra @InkySchwartz @rubbel @popcornreel So basically you're now redefining terms to include what they have never included before - contractors have never been considered part of the federal workforce, specifically because these people usually _also_, even _primarily_, work on non government projects.

Sure, you may as well go and say "federal workers" mean "everyone working at all within the US, as opposed to any particular state", but that's not what the term means.

The statistic quoted however was about all sectors combined. Let's just say Trump caused 2.5% of black employed women to lose their job. That's true, it demonstrates the racism of their policies, and also big enough to be a proper scandal.

The next scandal should be that Trump caused none of those groups to _gain_ employment. His policies literally made everyone worse off. They just harmed blacks and women _more_. Which also contradicts the right-wing claims of "meritocracy" - as the US are going _down_ by those policies being enacted, not _up_.

@InkySchwartz @cyberlyra @rubbel @popcornreel No dictionary defines it like this. The standard definition of the term is "all public sector workers of the Federal government".

What you describe includes Federal contractors, which adds basically employees of any company that has Federal government contracts. Every employee who works on things that may be part of a contract for the Federal government is a Federal contractor (and that's usually the case for employees of most larger corporations, as e.g. has been shown when the Biden administration applied a vaccine mandate to all "Federal contractors", which then was interpreted to cover every employee of every company that has a Federal government contract).

They're not part of the Federal workforce, but they indeed probably are almost the entire rest of the 300k.

All I'd be asking for is to rephrase the OP to say that Trump's policies caused 300k Black women to lose their jobs. Just remove the word "federal". Then it's the cold truth. And 300k - that's 0.1% of all Americans, and almost 3% of all working black women. This is definitely a scandal.

If I go by the official stats, then 0.1% of employed white men, 0.2% of employed white women, 1.5% of employed black men, 2.5% of employed black women and 0.3% of employed Asians lost their jobs. Now THAT's clear racism

@cyberlyra @rubbel @popcornreel Your 319,000 number is quoted as "Between February and July, Black women lost 319,000 jobs across the public and private sectors, according to an analysis by gender economist Katica Roy."

So this does include the private sector. The number is _not_ the reduction of black women in the federal workforce, but in the _total_.

I do not doubt that this was due to Trump's involvement, including making government contracts depend on shutting down DEI initiatives, or even just threatening to.

But let's not state false facts when the true facts already suffice to show how racist this government is. Inaccurate reporting like this makes our case _worse_.

@rubbel @popcornreel I should add: the OP said _federal_ workforce... the number indeed seems to be more like the total, including private sector as well. The federal workforce only _had_ 260,000 black women under Biden.

Let's be accurate about this, or else this can be easily "debunked" as "lies", and the last thing we need is such an easy target for the fascists.

@rubbel @popcornreel I did, and the numbers I found would imply the OP to be a lie, as I found less total black women federal employees than Trump is claimed to have fired here. So I hope I was wrong and someone can help finding the real numbers.

@popcornreel I'd like such numbers to be put in perspective, as this sure will demonstrate blatant racism much better than the absolute number. What was the total number of people fired? What was the previous total number of black women in the federal workforce?