Zone1 Black MAGAs are a clear and present danger

[Lisa558]

Yup.

One thing to consider: the nature of employment today. More and more jobs are in a "gig" economy, part time in nature, few or minimal benefits.

More excuses.

These people need to train for something that involves a full-time job. We even have a taxpayer-funded system (Pell Grants) that will cover the cost of their training.

 

[Lisa558]

Nice taunt.

I pointed out the issues with your one size fits all view.

No you didn’t. You just made excuses.

We are raising a nation of wusses - full of excuses as to why they can’t work, and with Democrats enabling that way of thinking. The answer is NOT to take money from people who work and give it to people who won’t.

The deal regarding work-for-welfare didn’t go far enough, allowing anyone with dependents to skip a job. It should be anyone with a child younger than six. People with kids in school all day should get a job if they want to keep taking money from other people.

 

[22lcidw]

Hey, Candace has a great scam going. She goes in front of audiences of white people and tells you what you want to hear.

Give Republicans a chance. You will not. African American Republicans are trail blazers who are constantly destroyed from the Progressive Socialist Party dictums. All it costs is a little time. Waiting for centuries according to progs for progress means very little in this view. Especially when in the ghettos the family destruction is apparent in everyday living.

 

[Hector12]

Look at some of the cartoons below from the 19th century, and how much they have in common with the anti-Mexican rhetoric we hear out of "race realists", "nativists", and "MAGA" today.



Um, okay. Except now Japan is in a demographic death spiral, as many couples choose not to have children. China is even worse shape, as attempts to curb overpopulation have backfired on them. So your "Welcome to the You are now white enough" Club might be a little premature.

Europe and East Asia are on the decline,
Hispanic, middle eastern and sub-Saharan African people are on the rise. Ebb and Flow.

By equating race realists with nativists and MAGA you are committing the guilt by association fallacy. Race realists acknowledge the average racial superiority of East Asians, as I have explained.

"Hispanic, middle eastern and sub-Saharan African people" aren't producing much but more people with IQ averages that are lower than Orientals and whites. That is why whites and Orientals are not moving to their countries. They are moving to white countries. East Asians keep them out.

The Chinese have overcome the foolishness of Maoism. Chinese geneticists are looking for gene alleles that determine intelligence. While we gush over the imaginary benefits of diversity, inclusion, and equity, the Chinese know that matters are merit, qualifications, and excellence. They are perfecting their meritocracy based on superior intelligence.

 

[Lisa558]

By equating race realists with nativists and MAGA you are committing the guilt by association fallacy. Race realists acknowledge the average racial superiority of East Asians, as I have explained.

"Hispanic, middle eastern and sub-Saharan African people" aren't producing much but more people with IQ averages that are lower than Orientals and whites. That is why whites and Orientals are not moving to their countries. They are moving to white countries. East Asians keep them out.

The Chinese have overcome the foolishness of Maoism. Chinese geneticists are looking for gene alleles that determine intelligence. While we gush over the imaginary benefits of diversity, inclusion, and equity, the Chinese know that matters are merit, qualifications, and excellence. They are perfecting their meritocracy based on superior intelligence.

When you talk about “racial superiority,” different races are superior in different ways. On average, African-Americans are athletically superior, which is why they are so overrepresented in sports - and particularly those that involve speed.

 

[Markle]

Yup.

One thing to consider: the nature of employment today. More and more jobs are in a "gig" economy, part time in nature, few or minimal benefits.

 

[Coyote]

No you didn’t. You just made excuses.

Welcome to reality. Obviously you are right. There is only one set of causes and solution to all poverty in America! How stunningly simple and brilliant! People just need to get with the program....

Although it has yet to work...and poverty was much worse before welfare (I'm gussing those were the "good old days" for rightists).

We are raising a nation of wusses - full of excuses as to why they can’t work, and with Democrats enabling that way of thinking. The answer is NOT to take money from people who work and give it to people who won’t.

I am reminded of something one your ideological sisters said..."let them eat cake".

The deal regarding work-for-welfare didn’t go far enough, allowing anyone with dependents to skip a job. It should be anyone with a child younger than six. People with kids in school all day should get a job if they want to keep taking money from other people.

How many minumum wage would give them the flexibility to be home when their children are or pay enough for child care?

 

[Markle]

How many minumum wage would give them the flexibility to be home when their children are or pay enough for child care?

What is the average household income where one of the workers is earning minimum wage?

 

[Lisa558]

Welcome to reality. Obviously you are right. There is only one set of causes and solution to all poverty in America! How stunningly simple and brilliant! People just need to get with the program....

When you can’t refute the point, use sarcasm.

Although it has yet to work...and poverty was much worse before welfare (I'm gussing those were the "good old days" for rightists).

There’s been very little progress since LBJ figured out he could get all the poor votes if he just handed them OPM.

I am reminded of something one your ideological sisters said..."let them eat cake".

Ridiculous analogy. I’m just saying people should be incentivized to work, especially when employers are begging for workers, instead of getting full support from other people’s earnings.

How many minumum wage would give them the flexibility to be home when their children are or pay enough for child care?

More excuses, I see. You’re already assuming they can’t get a part-time job during school hours - there are plenty of jobs going begging.

 

[Hector12]

Welcome to reality. Obviously you are right. There is only one set of causes and solution to all poverty in America! How stunningly simple and brilliant! People just need to get with the program....

Although it has yet to work...and poverty was much worse before welfare (I'm gussing those were the "good old days" for rightists).



I am reminded of something one your ideological sisters said..."let them eat cake".



How many minumum wage would give them the flexibility to be home when their children are or pay enough for child care?

When Aid for Families with Dependent Children was introduced during the New Deal it was specifically restricted to widows, deserted wives, and their legitimate children. When it was extended to single mothers with illegitimate children as part of the War on Poverty illegitimacy rates soared.

 

[Coyote]

I have had to deal with both male and female employers who preferred to hire men as they were far less likely to need time off to be with sick kids or on snow days or in the summer when schools were closed or whatever. In fact that is often why some women's salaries are lower than men's because they have kids and aren't as free to travel or work overtime etc. and that's okay. And sensible women know they make that choice when they choose to have kids and put those kids first in priorities which is as it should be.

There are also the issues of militant women who are offended by any off color remark or the sexy pinup in a cubicle or whatever and create a hostile or uneasy work environment protesting 'sexual harassment' or being made 'uncomfortable' or whatever when people are just being themselves. The threat of litigation is always hanging over the boss's head. I would avoid hiring such people every single time.

And if the activist black person is going to make his race the most important thing about him or her, and is likely to sue if he or she is fired or not hired, I can understand why an employer would be reluctant to interview him/her in the first place.

It is not sexism or racism in these cases. Most employers are not into social activism or social work. They want people who can do the job and work together effectively, a cohesive and congenial work force, and with as few personnel problems for the boss as possible.

And all people regardless of race, ethnicity, creed or whatever should understand that.

And again those who promote a 'black culture' as something that should be defended or recognized are proactively separating people into groups via skin color and promoting racism rather than promoting a culture in which skin color is of no more importance than eye color or hair color.

See...this is where I disagree...it is the assumption that a person, because of certain characteristics or views or to further religion, can't also be a professional and set those views aside.

For example, assuming that a professional mother can't coordinate childcare and family responsibilities in such avway as to do her job reliably and professionally (and still be a good parent). It is attitudes like that that have held women back in the professional world.

Similarly, a Black man, named Jamal, who wears his hair in neatly groomed dreads and maybe engages in activism on his own time, can't also be a professional, reliable worker who doesn't allow is views to effect his professionalism.

Or, consider religion. If you had an application from someone who had a background of religious schools and affiliations and work history, would you automatically discount them because strongly religious people can be activist and might disrupt the harmony of the group?

Black culture is not something that is promoted. It is something that exists because centuries of American history created it and shaped it. Recognizing it as one of our MANY unique American cultures isn't seperating people into groups any more than Appalachian culture, Cajun culture, Southern culture or the many cultures cultures of our indiginous people.

How is recogozing a very defined, historic American culture racist? Is Inuit culture racist? Navajo culture?

And...what then IS American culture?

 

[Foxfyre]

See...this is where I disagree...it is the assumption that a person, because of certain characteristics or views or to further religion, can't also be a professional and set those views aside.

For example, assuming that a professional mother can't coordinate childcare and family responsibilities in such avway as to do her job reliably and professionally (and still be a good parent). It is attitudes like that that have held women back in the professional world.

Similarly, a Black man, named Jamal, who wears his hair in neatly groomed dreads and maybe engages in activism on his own time, can't also be a professional, reliable worker who doesn't allow is views to effect his professionalism.

Or, consider religion. If you had an application from someone who had a background of religious schools and affiliations and work history, would you automatically discount them because strongly religious people can be activist and might disrupt the harmony of the group?

Black culture is not something that is promoted. It is something that exists because centuries of American history created it and shaped it. Recognizing it as one of our MANY unique American cultures isn't seperating people into groups any more than Appalachian culture, Cajun culture, Southern culture or the many cultures cultures of our indiginous people.

How is recogozing a very defined, historic American culture racist? Is Inuit culture racist? Navajo culture?

And...what then IS American culture?

My point is that certainly while some people CAN do those things effectively and efficiently, a person's experience can be that most cannot or do not. And those having to make choices that affect the lives of others including their own will often just go via experience rather than possibilities. Any of us might like the widgets sold at a place down the road much better than the ones we usually buy but when you're in a hurry you usually go to the place that provides the satisfactory product you want at a price you can afford and avoid the hassle of trial and error with something new.

That isn't prejudice or racism or sexism or anything else. It's much more likely a matter of practicality, maybe restrictions of time, maybe fatigue in dealing with problems.

 

[JoeB131]

No you didn’t. You just made excuses.

We are raising a nation of wusses - full of excuses as to why they can’t work, and with Democrats enabling that way of thinking. The answer is NOT to take money from people who work and give it to people who won’t.

The deal regarding work-for-welfare didn’t go far enough, allowing anyone with dependents to skip a job. It should be anyone with a child younger than six. People with kids in school all day should get a job if they want to keep taking money from other people.

I agree... all these lazy retired people, but them back to work.

 

[JoeB131]

By equating race realists with nativists and MAGA you are committing the guilt by association fallacy. Race realists acknowledge the average racial superiority of East Asians, as I have explained.

Um, no, you people are all pretty much the same. If anything, "race realists" are worse than the MAGA crowd. They actually have some legitimate concerns.

"Hispanic, middle eastern and sub-Saharan African people" aren't producing much but more people with IQ averages that are lower than Orientals and whites. That is why whites and Orientals are not moving to their countries. They are moving to white countries. East Asians keep them out.

Um, here's the reality... Except for a few Nobel Prize winners, and other exceptional people, 99% of the population is mediocre and won't be remembered for anything in 100 years. You won't. I won't.

Take for instance, my Grandpa Ludwig. Smart man, machine engineer. Served in World War I, spoke three languages, probably smarter than most other white people of his day. Today there are all of four people who remember him at all (myself and three siblings). When we are gone, he will be forgotten. In 50 years or so, you and I will be largely forgotten.
The problem with you race realists is that you look at the mediocrity of your own lives, but try to latch onto the greatness of a racial identity. I could take great pride in my German Ancestry, with the composers and philosophers, or I could have great shame because of the whole Nazi thing. But the reality is, I didn't do any of those things.

The Chinese have overcome the foolishness of Maoism. Chinese geneticists are looking for gene alleles that determine intelligence. While we gush over the imaginary benefits of diversity, inclusion, and equity, the Chinese know that matters are merit, qualifications, and excellence. They are perfecting their meritocracy based on superior intelligence.

Um, here's the thing. Mao killed a lot of people. I actually had a discussion with my Chinese fiancé and one of her friends about Mao. Mao is still revered in China to this very day. If anything, China under Xi has kind of regressed, while the reforms of Deng Xiaoping are seen as a failure.

In many ways, China is a diverse nation. They have autonomous zones for Guangxi, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, Tibet, and Xinjiang
There are 56 recognized languages or dialects spoken in China.

When Aid for Families with Dependent Children was introduced during the New Deal it was specifically restricted to widows, deserted wives, and their legitimate children. When it was extended to single mothers with illegitimate children as part of the War on Poverty illegitimacy rates soared.

Actually, it was specifically limited to White Women...

But here's what really happened.

We had something called the "Sexual revolution". It meant that women didn't see their role in life as just being a baby machine for whatever guy they ended up with. Women no longer felt the need to marry a guy because he fathered her children. Men no longer felt the obligation to marry women they weren't in love with. After all, she should have taken birth control or had an abortion.

Now, I don't think this was an entirely positive thing, to be honest. We were better off when men took their responsibilities seriously and did the right thing. But blaming the government for changes in cultural attitudes is a bit silly.

 

[Markle]

Black culture is not something that is promoted.

Frog wash.

Regardless, if something isn't working for you, time, after time, after time. Maybe it's tome to try something else.

 

[Hector12]

Um, no, you people are all pretty much the same. If anything, "race realists" are worse than the MAGA crowd. They actually have some legitimate concerns.

How can having legitimate concerns be worse than lacking them?

 

[Hector12]

Um, here's the reality... Except for a few Nobel Prize winners, and other exceptional people, 99% of the population is mediocre and won't be remembered for anything in 100 years. You won't. I won't.

Take for instance, my Grandpa Ludwig. Smart man, machine engineer. Served in World War I, spoke three languages, probably smarter than most other white people of his day. Today there are all of four people who remember him at all (myself and three siblings). When we are gone, he will be forgotten. In 50 years or so, you and I will be largely forgotten.
The problem with you race realists is that you look at the mediocrity of your own lives, but try to latch onto the greatness of a racial identity. I could take great pride in my German Ancestry, with the composers and philosophers, or I could have great shame because of the whole Nazi thing. But the reality is, I didn't do any of those things.

I am not a white nationalist. Generally speaking I prefer East Asians to whites. Attributing my opinions to what you think are my personal shortcomings is an example of the ad hominem fallacy. Let's keep insults and name calling out of this and discuss important social problems calmly and rationally.

 

[JoeB131]

How can having legitimate concerns be worse than lacking them?

The MAGA people have legitimate concern. The race realists do not. They just need someone to hate to feel better about themselves.

I am not a white nationalist. Generally speaking I prefer East Asians to whites.

Somehow, I doubt Asian people feel the same about you.

Attributing my opinions to what you think are my personal shortcomings is an example of the ad hominem fallacy.

Well, no, you never see a racist who is an accomplished person in this day in age. Just simply doesn't happen. Show me a racist, it's usually a person who hates himself even more.

Let's keep insults and name calling out of this and discuss important social problems calmly and rationally.

Nope, the first step in dealing with our race problems is the throw the racists out of the room and all admit they are just awful people who shouldn't be in polite society.
THEN we can discuss the past injustices against people of color and how to correct them.

 

[Hector12]

Somehow, I doubt Asian people feel the same about you.

I have never known an East Asian I did not like. I have never known one who did not like me.

 

[Hector12]

The MAGA people have legitimate concern. The race realists do not. They just need someone to hate to feel better about themselves.

Well, no, you never see a racist who is an accomplished person in this day in age. Just simply doesn't happen. Show me a racist, it's usually a person who hates himself even more.

You are the one who is expressing hatred here. I am posting facts about average intractable racial differences. You attack me personally because you cannot refute my arguments.