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

[The Rabbi]

Frank, most blacks aren't on welfare, and the majority of people on welfare are white.

So why do you make welfare a racial issue?

BEcause welfare disproportionately affects blacks since a disproportionate percentage of the black community is on gov't assistance of some sort.
But nice try at deflection.

What percentage is that?

39.8% of people on public assistence are black. Blacks constitute 13.1% of the population. So their representation on assistance rolls is far out of proportion to their presence in the general population.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you are not afraid why do you insist on telling me over and over again that i should be afriad of another Black man? Historically whites in this country alone have killed more Black people by far. I'm really trying to understand why you feel the need to warn me. Are you trying make sure I dont keep my eye on people like you?

Please post where I said you should be afraid. It is simple fact here we are discussing.

I dont really feel like going back to see if you used the exact term "afraid". I do recall you saying "enemy". People fear and hate their enemies. I dont fear or hate Black people in general. I dont see anyone discussing anything. I see pot shots being taken. I dont call that discussion.

IN other words yet another statement you cannot defend or back up.

We go back to it. Black men are more likely to suffer death at the hands of other black men than they are from all other causes combined.
So what do you propose to do about this shameful statistic?

 

[Asclepias]

BEcause welfare disproportionately affects blacks since a disproportionate percentage of the black community is on gov't assistance of some sort.
But nice try at deflection.

What percentage is that?

39.8% of people on public assistence are black. Blacks constitute 13.1% of the population. So their representation on assistance rolls is far out of proportion to their presence in the general population.

So what does that mean?

 

[Asclepias]

Please post where I said you should be afraid. It is simple fact here we are discussing.

I dont really feel like going back to see if you used the exact term "afraid". I do recall you saying "enemy". People fear and hate their enemies. I dont fear or hate Black people in general. I dont see anyone discussing anything. I see pot shots being taken. I dont call that discussion.

IN other words yet another statement you cannot defend or back up.

We go back to it. Black men are more likely to suffer death at the hands of other black men than they are from all other causes combined.
So what do you propose to do about this shameful statistic?

Why are you asking me that when you have a problem with white people killing other white people? I think thats the major question and point of contention here. You are pointing out something when you have the exact same problem. What are you going to do about that?

 

[Oldstyle]

Wow! I thought I asked you that because I was trying to find out why you got offended over something I said about someone you dont know personally.

I'm not "offended". I'm amused. Tank offends me with some of his racist posts. You amuse me because you think you're more intelligent than him yet you make the same sort of stupid comments and then pretend that you haven't.

You were definitely offended. Now your trying to save face. You made Bush's stupidity the whole point when our conversation prior to and during was about heritage and success determining where you start in life. I keep asking you why you missed that but I guess you wont answer.

Why would I be "offended" by you making an ill advised comment that you then tried to walk away from? THAT is just as amusing to me as your declarations that all human knowledge stems from Africa.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not "offended". I'm amused. Tank offends me with some of his racist posts. You amuse me because you think you're more intelligent than him yet you make the same sort of stupid comments and then pretend that you haven't.

You were definitely offended. Now your trying to save face. You made Bush's stupidity the whole point when our conversation prior to and during was about heritage and success determining where you start in life. I keep asking you why you missed that but I guess you wont answer.

Why would I be "offended" by you making an ill advised comment that you then tried to walk away from? THAT is just as amusing to me as your declarations that all human knowledge stems from Africa.

Whats your explanation then for getting totally off the point? Can you answer that simple question? Sounds to me like you got emotional about my reference to GW Bush's intellect.

 

[Oldstyle]

You're amusing. You declare that Bush is stupid then go on to talk about legacy waivers and the advantage that successful people's children have over the children of people not successful and somehow you're dumbstruck that anyone would question the Bush being stupid comment at all.

Here's a bit of advice...if you don't MEAN to say something...then don't type it on your keyboard!

You are equally amusing. How did you possibly forget we were talking about heritage and legacy before i even mentioned Bush? That would be like me taking your opinion that I am amusing and mistaking it for the point of the rest of your post.

So let me see if I understand how this works...

Because you were talking about heritage and legacy before you made the statement that Bush was stupid...you feel that the statement about Bush should be ignored? Interesting concept...

It allows you to make inflammatory statements like that one and then blithely continue on as if nothing were said. Got it...

 

[Asclepias]

You're amusing. You declare that Bush is stupid then go on to talk about legacy waivers and the advantage that successful people's children have over the children of people not successful and somehow you're dumbstruck that anyone would question the Bush being stupid comment at all.

Here's a bit of advice...if you don't MEAN to say something...then don't type it on your keyboard!

You are equally amusing. How did you possibly forget we were talking about heritage and legacy before i even mentioned Bush? That would be like me taking your opinion that I am amusing and mistaking it for the point of the rest of your post.

So let me see if I understand how this works...

Because you were talking about heritage and legacy before you made the statement that Bush was stupid...you feel that the statement about Bush should be ignored? Interesting concept...

It allows you to make inflammatory statements like that one and then blithely continue on as if nothing were said. Got it...

Wait a minute. I thought you just said you werent offended? How can my comment be inflammatory if it did not offend you? You should stop now this is getting embarrassing. Lets just get back to the point. Are you disagreeing or not that where you start out in a socio-economic context determines the likelihood of you having future success?

 

[Oldstyle]

You were definitely offended. Now your trying to save face. You made Bush's stupidity the whole point when our conversation prior to and during was about heritage and success determining where you start in life. I keep asking you why you missed that but I guess you wont answer.

Why would I be "offended" by you making an ill advised comment that you then tried to walk away from? THAT is just as amusing to me as your declarations that all human knowledge stems from Africa.

Whats your explanation then for getting totally off the point? Can you answer that simple question? Sounds to me like you got emotional about my reference to GW Bush's intellect.

Why would I get "emotional" about someone else saying something that makes them look ignorant?

Save yourself some time, Asclepias...I'm not someone that you can distract with nonsense about my lack of intellect, my emotional well being or whether or not I'm a racist. You made what I view to be a stupid statement and I called you on it and explained why I thought it WAS stupid.

 

[Oldstyle]

You are equally amusing. How did you possibly forget we were talking about heritage and legacy before i even mentioned Bush? That would be like me taking your opinion that I am amusing and mistaking it for the point of the rest of your post.

So let me see if I understand how this works...

Because you were talking about heritage and legacy before you made the statement that Bush was stupid...you feel that the statement about Bush should be ignored? Interesting concept...

It allows you to make inflammatory statements like that one and then blithely continue on as if nothing were said. Got it...

Wait a minute. I thought you just said you werent offended? How can my comment be inflammatory if it did not offend you? You should stop now this is getting embarrassing. Lets just get back to the point. Are you disagreeing or not that where you start out in a socio-economic context determines the likelihood of you having future success?

I'm not offended. That doesn't mean that your comment wasn't inflammatory...it simply means I chose to treat it with amusement rather than getting offended. I view racism as a sign of ignorance. Those that play the race card might as well hold up a sign over their heads that reads "I'm not that bright!"

 

[The Rabbi]

Comments can be inflammatory generally but that doesnt mean someone is necessarily offended. I think your English is poor. In fact I know so.
Generally socio economic status is a predictor of success. But it is only a predictor and plenty of people have risen above what they were born into. Or fallen below it.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for the point that you made that being born into success heightens your chances to also be successful...it's quite obvious that IS the case. How you take THAT and make it somehow prove that Bush is stupid eludes me however. Or was that something you said that we were supposed to ignore? It's hard to tell with your posts which is which...

 

[Asclepias]

So let me see if I understand how this works...

Because you were talking about heritage and legacy before you made the statement that Bush was stupid...you feel that the statement about Bush should be ignored? Interesting concept...

It allows you to make inflammatory statements like that one and then blithely continue on as if nothing were said. Got it...

Wait a minute. I thought you just said you werent offended? How can my comment be inflammatory if it did not offend you? You should stop now this is getting embarrassing. Lets just get back to the point. Are you disagreeing or not that where you start out in a socio-economic context determines the likelihood of you having future success?

I'm not offended. That doesn't mean that your comment wasn't inflammatory...it simply means I chose to treat it with amusement rather than getting offended. I view racism as a sign of ignorance. Those that play the race card might as well hold up a sign over their heads that reads "I'm not that bright!"

Well I guess you want to avoid my question while still pretending to not be offended. I dont find comments inflammatory if they don't offend me. You sure made a big deal out of a few words about about Bush that had nothing to do with the conversation we were having to not be offended. You totally derailed the conversation over it. If it wasn't something that offended you then you would have ignored it as just my opinion. Does that make sense to you?

 

[boedicca]

50 years ago Martin Luther King shared his dream of a nation where black and whites would seamlessly interweave in making a larger and better American fabric; where skin color was irrelevant.

That is perfectly in line with the American ideal: come here with an idea, with a talent, with a skill, with a mission and nurture it and tend to it until it blossoms.

Instead we heard yesterday blacks need more government programs and support

Was MLK's vision the path that's been followed, or is that the road not taken?

MLK's vision has been perverted and abused by the race baiting industry. Instead of a true color blind society in which each individual stands on his or her own merits, race has been used as a cudgel to concentrate political power and control of taxpayer money.

The Reactionary Progressive government programs, such as Johnson's "Great Society", have destroyed family creation by paying teenage girls to have babies out of wedlock. The result has been generations of Feral Young Men who lack a healthy, productive set of values. They don't know how to act like responsible men, and turn to lives of idleness at best, and crime at worst.

As the last Great True Liberal, Daniel Patrick Moynihan so wisely said:

"There is one unmistakable lesson in American history: a community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future - that community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, disorder - most particularly the furious, unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure - that is not only to be expected; it is very near to inevitable. And it is richly deserved."

 

[Asclepias]

Comments can be inflammatory generally but that doesnt mean someone is necessarily offended. I think your English is poor. In fact I know so.
Generally socio economic status is a predictor of success. But it is only a predictor and plenty of people have risen above what they were born into. Or fallen below it.

Would that predictor be higher for a person with high socio-economic status than someone of low socio-economic status?

 

[squeeze berry]

frank, most blacks aren't on welfare, and the majority of people on welfare are white.

So why do you make welfare a racial issue?

because welfare disproportionately affects blacks since a disproportionate percentage of the black community is on gov't assistance of some sort.
but nice try at deflection.

what percentage is that?

25%

 

[Oldstyle]

Wait a minute. I thought you just said you werent offended? How can my comment be inflammatory if it did not offend you? You should stop now this is getting embarrassing. Lets just get back to the point. Are you disagreeing or not that where you start out in a socio-economic context determines the likelihood of you having future success?

I'm not offended. That doesn't mean that your comment wasn't inflammatory...it simply means I chose to treat it with amusement rather than getting offended. I view racism as a sign of ignorance. Those that play the race card might as well hold up a sign over their heads that reads "I'm not that bright!"

Well I guess you want to avoid my question while still pretending to not be offended. I dont find comments inflammatory if they don't offend me. You sure made a big deal out of a few words about about Bush that had nothing to do with the conversation we were having to not be offended. You totally derailed the conversation over it. If it wasn't something that offended you then you would have ignored it as just my opinion. Does that make sense to you?

As I said before...if you don't want to defend comments that you make...don't make them in the first place. You don't seem to have a filter between what's bouncing around in your brain and what gets typed on the page.

Now you come here and accuse me of making " a big deal out of a few words" that you posted? LOL Let's be honest here, my liberal friend. You make comments like that not because it's germane to the discussion that was taking place but because you KNEW it would get a rise out of the people who supported Bush.

All I did was point out that doing so was just one more example of your habit of making over the top claims that you can't back up.

 

[Asclepias]

As for the point that you made that being born into success heightens your chances to also be successful...it's quite obvious that IS the case. How you take THAT and make it somehow prove that Bush is stupid eludes me however. Or was that something you said that we were supposed to ignore? It's hard to tell with your posts which is which...

Wow! Are you sure you are not offended? I think Bush was as dumb as a chicken. Just my opinion. This is not about how stupid he is or not. He got into a school he never could have dreamed of if he did not have help by virtue of the fact his father graduated from Yale. Because of that he had more opportunity. His environment was conducive to success. If you have that type of head start do you agree that your chances of success are exponentially larger than someone that grew up in a broken home and was never exposed to an environment that taught them how to succeed?

 

[Tank]

 

[Asclepias]

As I said before...if you don't want to defend comments that you make...don't make them in the first place. You don't seem to have a filter between what's bouncing around in your brain and what gets typed on the page.

Now you come here and accuse me of making " a big deal out of a few words" that you posted? LOL Let's be honest here, my liberal friend. You make comments like that not because it's germane to the discussion that was taking place but because you KNEW it would get a rise out of the people who supported Bush.

All I did was point out that doing so was just one more example of your habit of making over the top claims that you can't back up.

So you want me to be able to predict what is going to offend you and whats not? How can I possibly know you would get offended by that? You did in fact make a big deal of it. You continue to. I already said lets move on.