50 years later: has government dependency helped or hurt blacks?

[KissMy]

Single parent, crime & income inequality between blacks & whites has soared since 1960.

73% of blacks believe in single parents, entitlements, Robin-Hood & drug thug culture. 27% of blacks are good & decent people.

The inverse is true of whites. 73% of whites are good & decent people & 27% of whites believe in single parents, entitlements, Robin-Hood & drug thug culture.

The way to wipe out the marriage penalty is simply tax married couples as if each spouse were a single person earning half the total family income. This "income splitting" approach was the law in the U.S. until it was repealed in 1969. That is when erosion of society began. You can see the change in marriage & divorce rates.

Reduced IV drug use & illegitimate birth rate due to the fear or aids reduced crime more than any government policy. Two parent structure households create the best well adjusted children. Single parent & divorced households & unwanted children create criminals. The marriage tax penalty & LBJ's Great Society Welfare are what caused the soaring illegitimate birth & crime rates.

November 7, 1991, basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson shocked the world by announcing he tested positive for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Within 2 months the number of people getting tested for aids was up 50%. Illegitimate birth rates dropped within 9 months due to gestation period after all the multiple partner unprotected sex stopped. Heroin & other injected drug use that had been soaring since 1960 slowed their accent. No businessman, scientist, political policy or abortion had any positive affect on these social problems until Magic scared the riffraff straight.

 

[ClosedCaption]

so there is no single case of someone on welfare not working because being on welfare is good enough for them? Not a SINGLE one?

And the chart is reality, you are the one trying to ignore it, not me.

If you think that's what I'm saying have fun with your pudding

Its sad to see someone not be able to admit they have been owned.

So just admit it and move on

 

[martybegan]

If you think that's what I'm saying have fun with your pudding

Its sad to see someone not be able to admit they have been owned.

So just admit it and move on

Nice try, tough-guy. So, so sad.

 

[Vox]

government dependency hurts anybody( we are talking about able-bodied people here) so of course it did hurt them.

 

[Oldstyle]

MLK supported AA programs. Don't go being stupid


Yes, Henry Payne, Martin Luther King Really Did Support Affirmative Action*?* Deadline Detroit


Will that change the way you feel about MLK? Yes it will but in order to keep lying to yourself you have to unsee what I just posted

The question you should be asking is not whether Martin Luther King supported Affirmative Action before it was tried...the question you should be asking is would he support it NOW after watching what it's done to the black community as a whole?

King always struck me foremost as a pragmatist. He wasn't a dumb man. I have no way of knowing how his views would have changed over the years but I would guess that he would have been disappointed with many of the "side effects" of Affirmative Action and how programs to do something "special" for blacks have instead trapped them in State sponsored poverty.

That's addressed as well:

That kind of sounds like affirmative action. Now, true, you'll never see King refer to such compensatory policies as affirmative action and with good reason. Affirmative action as we know it was essentially created by the Nixon Administration (look up Arthur Fletcher and the Philadelphia Plan) in the years following King's assassination.

One is also unlikely to find John Quincy Adams writing about NASA. Adams, however, given his support for federally-funded scientific expeditions and research, it's unreasonable to assume (if he were alive in modern America) Adams would oppose NASA.

The same standard applies to King. Judging by the (ahem) content of speeches and writings, King believed special measures must be taken to level the racial playing field made uneven by centuries of slavery and institutional racism.

I'll remind you again that King was basing his opinions on what he thought was good for blacks going by what he knew BEFORE Affirmative Action was adopted and before the concept of a "Nanny State" existed. It's hard for me to believe that someone as intelligent and pragmatic as Martin Luther King was, wouldn't be wincing as he surveyed the aftermath of fifty years of Affirmative Action and the welfare State. I think it's very likely that someone who believed in self-reliance, which King did...would see the inherent danger of depriving self-reliance to any group of people. To be quite blunt what he called for back then has caused as much harm to the black community as it has provided help. I think King would have seen that quite clearly.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The question you should be asking is not whether Martin Luther King supported Affirmative Action before it was tried...the question you should be asking is would he support it NOW after watching what it's done to the black community as a whole?

King always struck me foremost as a pragmatist. He wasn't a dumb man. I have no way of knowing how his views would have changed over the years but I would guess that he would have been disappointed with many of the "side effects" of Affirmative Action and how programs to do something "special" for blacks have instead trapped them in State sponsored poverty.

That's addressed as well:

That kind of sounds like affirmative action. Now, true, you'll never see King refer to such compensatory policies as affirmative action and with good reason. Affirmative action as we know it was essentially created by the Nixon Administration (look up Arthur Fletcher and the Philadelphia Plan) in the years following King's assassination.

One is also unlikely to find John Quincy Adams writing about NASA. Adams, however, given his support for federally-funded scientific expeditions and research, it's unreasonable to assume (if he were alive in modern America) Adams would oppose NASA.

The same standard applies to King. Judging by the (ahem) content of speeches and writings, King believed special measures must be taken to level the racial playing field made uneven by centuries of slavery and institutional racism.

I'll remind you again that King was basing his opinions on what he thought was good for blacks going by what he knew BEFORE Affirmative Action was adopted and before the concept of a "Nanny State" existed. It's hard for me to believe that someone as intelligent and pragmatic as Martin Luther King was, wouldn't be wincing as he surveyed the aftermath of fifty years of Affirmative Action and the welfare State. I think it's very likely that someone who believed in self-reliance, which King did...would see the inherent danger of depriving self-reliance to any group of people. To be quite blunt what he called for back then has caused as much harm to the black community as it has provided help. I think King would have seen that quite clearly.

I think its a matter of semantics. The thing you call "depriving self reliance" is the way you see it. The way I see it is leveling the playing field. MLK would've been for leveling the playing field.

Additionally, compare hundreds of years of racism, jim crow, unequal justice, discrimination etc to 50 years of AA. Its very hard to believe that you think that AA is the cause of all the problems and none of it stems from legalized racism and discrimination.

 

[Oldstyle]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

 

[Oldstyle]

And Affirmative Action is NOT "leveling the playing field", Closed. It is in fact tilting it the opposite way to try and make up for past slights. Let's be honest here...

 

[ScienceRocks]

Hurt...

Advancement and innovation comes with hard work...Skipping that = opps.

 

[ClosedCaption]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

The people voted for him, you're mad and pretending he was given the job by the supreme court like Bush.

 

[ClosedCaption]

And Affirmative Action is NOT "leveling the playing field", Closed. It is in fact tilting it the opposite way to try and make up for past slights. Let's be honest here...

What happens when you tilt a see saw that's leaning to one side? Does it go all the way or is there a moment there when it becomes balanced?

Unless you're saying that AA puts blacks in front of whites then your analogy fits. Except that white women use it more than blacks do sooooo

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Government dependency, widespread sense of entitlement, perceived racism and a self defeating culture (especially) has done more to harm blacks than real racism did in the entire history of America.
By farrrr...I would wager as many blacks have been murdered at the hands of each other than by the hands of white slave owners.

 

[Asclepias]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

I guess it depends on who is doing the looking, what they are looking at, and what they are trying to prove. I look around and I see a lot of Black kids becoming the first member of their family to go to college. I see Black families making high six figure incomes. I see Black kids learning the truth about their history. Yes there are problems unresolved. However, thats how you can tell the difference in who is built to succeed and those that give up when things get tough. People that give up citing doom and gloom usually end up being losers unless they figure it out later. Those that keep pushing and stay on the path no matter the barriers are winners. If you know your goal who cares what the road getting there looks like?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Government dependency, widespread sense of entitlement, perceived racism and a self defeating culture (especially) has done more to harm blacks than real racism did in the entire history of America.
By farrrr...I would wager as many blacks have been murdered at the hands of each other than by the hands of white slave owners.

Until they can help themselves = they're fucked.

Socialism and socialist are playing them like a flute!

 

[Asclepias]

And Affirmative Action is NOT "leveling the playing field", Closed. It is in fact tilting it the opposite way to try and make up for past slights. Let's be honest here...

That depends on if it was flat and balanced to begin with. In this case opportunity was not balanced. AA's intent was to do just that.

 

[ClosedCaption]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

I guess it depends on who is doing the looking, what they are looking at, and what they are trying to prove. I look around and I see a lot of Black kids becoming the first member of their family to go to college. I see Black families making high six figure incomes. I see Black kids learning the truth about their history. Yes there are problems unresolved. However, thats how you can tell the difference in who is built to succeed and those that give up when things get tough. People that give up citing doom and gloom usually end up being losers unless they figure it out later. Those that keep pushing and stay on the path no matter the barriers are winners. If you know your goal who cares what the road getting there looks like?

Like Oprah....She knows the history and doesn't sugar coat it AND shes a billionare. According to some you cant look at history and be successful

 

[Oldstyle]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

The people voted for him, you're mad and pretending he was given the job by the supreme court like Bush.

Did the people vote for him because he was a proven commodity with the job skills needed to handle the ensuing position...or did then vote for him because our main stream media bent over backwards in not properly vetting him?

We elected a man based on a narrative about him that was in many ways what a liberally leaning press WANTED him to be...not who he actually was! Hope & Change? That's a platform? Yet the most vague platform in the history of American politics was given a wink and a nod by CNN, NBC, CBS and ABC. The very people who SHOULD have been holding this man's feet to the fire instead gave him a foot massage while they went after Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin and John McCain.

I'm really not "mad", Closed. I found his entire rise to power and subsequent election to be fascinating to be quite honest with you. The fact that someone with almost no notable accomplishments in any of his chosen adult endeavors would rise out of obscurity to become President of the United States is amazing. I don't think you could sell it as a Hollywood script it so far fetched...yet it happened.

 

[ClosedCaption]

One has only to look at the state of blacks in the US today to quickly realize that something has gone awry with King's notion of "doing something special" for them to make up for slavery and discrimination. It's one of those things that sounds so good in theory (like income redistribution) but never works in practice.

You've got generations of blacks that have been trapped by welfare handouts from politicians that gave lip service to equal justice and opportunity but really used the black vote to consolidate political power. You've got a President who sits in the Oval Office after short stints as both a US Senator and an Illinois State Senator in which he really did nothing to prove an understanding of the legislative process...a President who got to where he is BECAUSE of the color of his skin and not because of outstanding accomplishments as a lawyer...a college instructor...or as a legislator. THAT unfortunately is the legacy of Affirmative Action at the moment...people promoted because of their pigmentation rather than the content of their character.

The people voted for him, you're mad and pretending he was given the job by the supreme court like Bush.

Did the people vote for him because he was a proven commodity with the job skills needed to handle the ensuing position...or did then vote for him because our main stream media bent over backwards in not properly vetting him?

We elected a man based on a narrative about him that was in many ways what a liberally leaning press WANTED him to be...not who he actually was! Hope & Change? That's a platform? Yet the most vague platform in the history of American politics was given a wink and a nod by CNN, NBC, CBS and ABC. The very people who SHOULD have been holding this man's feet to the fire instead gave him a foot massage while they went after Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin and John McCain.

I'm really not "mad", Closed. I found his entire rise to power and subsequent election to be fascinating to be quite honest with you. The fact that someone with almost no notable accomplishments in any of his chosen adult endeavors would rise out of obscurity to become President of the United States is amazing. I don't think you could sell it as a Hollywood script it so far fetched...yet it happened.

Oh I get it...You're using that machine that shows the motivations and reasoning behind millions of peoples choices.

That or you're assuming that to be true.

The people voted for him, no Affirmative Action was involved

 

[Oldstyle]

And Affirmative Action is NOT "leveling the playing field", Closed. It is in fact tilting it the opposite way to try and make up for past slights. Let's be honest here...

What happens when you tilt a see saw that's leaning to one side? Does it go all the way or is there a moment there when it becomes balanced?

Unless you're saying that AA puts blacks in front of whites then your analogy fits. Except that white women use it more than blacks do sooooo

See saws by their very nature don't balance. If that's your analogy then you're reinforcing my point that Affirmative Action wasn't designed to "level" anything...it was designed to tilt it the other way...in essence making up for unfairness by being unfair.

 

[Politico]

Hurt.