First link I found off ddg. There are plenty more with a simple search

> So, the effects of our decisions end up with racist results, yet we aren't racists?

It seems like you use a different definition of the word "racist" to me. What exactly is a "racist result"?

Likewise, you use a different definition of the word "statistics" to me also. Even you don't think it's a great example.

And no matter what link I post, someone will have a problem with it. It's easy to find these stats, they aren't new. How about this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonoberholtzer/2012/07/17/stop... or this: https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-racial-d... or this: https://mic.com/articles/96452/one-troubling-statistic-shows..., I could do this all day, but I wont. Those were just on the first page of results. There are stats everywhere about how bad we are.

My definition would be that you are disproportionately less likely to have violent police actions taken against you, disproportionately less likely to be in poverty, disproportionately more likely to go to college, etc. if you are white. While I don't think the stats of these ever will be proportional (nor necessarily should they be), it's clear from everything I've seen that there is what I would define as an unofficial "class separation".

Anecdotally: I have met seen people who "wouldn't hire blacks" or "didn't want no mexican working above any whites". These people are hard to gets statistics on, because they would never admit to being racist. These statistics reflect that hidden reality that nobody would openly admit to.

The results you are posting have the same problems HuffPo have. The fact that there are a large number of these sites isn't relevant to their quality. Again "stats" need to be high quality, not just stated and repeated.

> My definition would be that you are disproportionately less likely to...

Does that mean that if asians are doing better than whites, then there is something racist there to?