state of the onion

Discussion in 'Politics' started by sculptor, Jan 31, 2018.

  1. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    And the most segregated and income disparate cities today have been run by Democrats for decades.
    Positive economic effects doesn't mean positive effects on the family, which is the biggest predictor for generational poverty.
    Single-parent families are the biggest predictor of generational poverty.
    Of all the factors most predictive of economic mobility in America, one factor clearly stands out in their study: family structure. By their reckoning, when it comes to mobility, “the strongest and most robust predictor is the fraction of children with single parents.”
    If privilege is only parents who stay together, how is that beyond blacks?
    And we use general labels based on readily apparent characteristics. Or do you go ask every black person if they consider themselves "African-American"?
    I wouldn't advise trying that in some neighborhoods.
    "African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans"
    How is that hard to understand? Here's some more:

    : an American of African and especially of black African descent

    African American
    a black American of African descent.​
    Well, Russia isn't in Europe. And I don't remember anyone having any problem being called "white". But there are communities which pride themselves on being German-American, etc..
    Is it as unusual as you seem to think?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Drug legislation originally asked for by black community leaders to stem the crime there. You'd have to find that Nixon quote to be believed.
    What biased welfare, healthcare, and schooling?
    Unions which Democrats are still the champions of.
    Capitalist corporate pressures that have brought 100% black poverty to only 30%?
    There are laws against redlining, and you already acknowledged that property values are a factor in lending.
    I see you'd rather condemn them to fifty more years of poverty than actually address root causes.
    That's on you.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    I'd rather address root causes, like racism.

    When the president of the United States regularly expresses racist sentiments, it's a big problem. Let's solve that.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Is that correlation or causation? Republicans have nothing to offer minorities anyway.
    You seem rather black and white in your thinking. Of course it's not beyond blacks. But black dads are more likely to get sent to prison. Gangs and drugs are superficially to blame, but lack of blue collar jobs is a root cause.
    Public schools are financed for some reason with property taxes. And since blacks have been excluded for decades from other neighborhoods, their schools suffer.

    Unions depend on a thriving domestic industry, which has been lost under globalism.

    I would only add that the world of an African-American shouldn't be a mystery. It's been spoken and sung about since the invention of the blues, and later jazz and hip hop. If you're still confused, it's because you haven't been paying attention.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  8. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    What does that even mean?

    A big part of the reason your patchwork political argumentation—

    —doesn't work is that you don't actually know the history you're referring to.

    Nobody really knows how to answer you because you're not really saying anything.
  9. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    So the choices that lead to single-parent homes (the largest predictor of generational poverty) aren't the root cause?
    If racism is, then that seems to assume that they are incapable of making good decisions in the face of actions by others. I think they have more agency that that, because I know I do, and I believe them my equal.
    I think you're tilting at windmills.
    High predictive correlation among all factors.
    You must not ever listen to minorities who identify as Republicans. Do you just not want to believe some do?
    Some academics and advocates, including Cohen here, counter that mass incarceration is actually creating more single-parent families. That argument rests on the questionable assumption that men who are in prison would become reliable presences in their children's lives if freed. Worse, it implies that children—or their mothers—would be better off with a violent father in the house than on their own. There are valid concerns about our harsh drug policies, but the truth is the percentage of prisoners behind bars for drugs is relatively modest.
    And minimum wage and geographic segregation, both largely thanks to Democrats, contribute to the availability of jobs.
    Again, property values, in relation to things like the local crime rate, are more causative than racism.
    And while decades-long Democrat run cities are most segregated, Republicans are always running on school voucher platforms.
    What does globalization and unions have to do with welfare, healthcare, or schooling?
    Music and literature are cultural, so of course they reflect the problems of a culture.
    Other posters seem to have understood just fine. Maybe they can explain it to you?
    Without any correction of my history, or something, it seems you're not saying much either.
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    And vice versa. Common cause.
    Racism influences property values. It also drives the local crime rate. And it kills the school systems. Common cause.
    Nonsense. No such assumption is involved.
    Targets are simply less able to gain from good choices when the selection is so poor and difficult, and more likely to suffer from bad luck when they have fewer resources to support recovery.
    Irrelevant, and obscures history.
    There's no point in taking you seriously if all you're going to post is stereotypical racist swill downloaded from the sewers of the Republican media feed.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  11. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Meanwhile, state of the onion, the media reports that the US is now listed as harboring the second largest money laundering system in the world - knocking the Cayman Islands out of second place.

    In the last year of record, including parts of 2016 iirc, 70% of the real estate purchases from Trump's business were paid in cash by shell buyers for anonymous persons.
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Of racism? No, they're not. The root cause of racism is racists.
    That's true of everyone. If someone hits you in the face until you are barely conscious, you will not be able to make good decisions. If someone acts to deny you any good job, you will not be able to make good decisions about employment. If someone acts to deny you any good home, you will not be able to make good decisions on where to live.
    See above. You can make good decisions because other people do not act to prevent you from making them.
    You can think whatever you like.
  13. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Correct. Democrats didn't cause their problems.
    There are very few. They mostly want lower taxes or connect with right wing religious patronizing.
    Which defund public schools.
    Unions have nothing to work with if there are no jobs, something Republicans and conservative Democrats have been working towards for a long time. Jobs also provide health care. And reduce the need for welfare.
    Yes, including the basic unfairness of American society towards minorities.
  14. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Predicting generational poverty (children growing up to be poor as well) by single-parenthood would be a reverse causation fallacy, since one clearly comes after the other.
    And we know that single-parent/single-income families are generally poorer than two-income families.
    Racism causes single-parenthood? How?
    Blacks being arrested and convicted of trumped up charges? That's a huge conspiracy theory that includes police, judges, juries (average citizens), and maybe even lawyers.
    Racism makes people break the law?
    Racism makes people not want to buy property in objectively bad neighborhoods?
    Poor selection is a result of Democrat segregation, lack of school choice, etc..
    You're avoiding uncomfortable facts.
    "Racist swill" black Republicans and black conservatives agree with?
    That doesn't even make any sense. Why on earth would "choices that lead to single-parent homes" be the root cause of racism?
    I guess you mean to say racism is the root cause of generational poverty, but you've not made that case.
    Jobs and homes are largely only denied to those in highly segregated Democrat-run cities.
    People could deny me loans and good jobs. But there are always other, even lesser, jobs, and I can work hard to advance and save for a house.
    It's only my unwillingness to do what is necessary that holds me, or anyone else, back.
    How do you know?
    So that's a "no".
    Which are already failing miserably.
    More unsupported claims? Oo, oo, oo! Just noise.
    Perceptions from a culture objectively making bad decisions.
    People who blame others rarely get ahead, and those who don't often get ahead even when oppressed.
    Otherwise, how do we explain well-off white children ending up in poverty or ghetto blacks becoming successful?
    spidergoat likes this.
  15. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    BINGO! Welcome to America.
    Maybe not directly, but it does create conditions of separation and poverty. Otherwise black life would be indistinguishable from white life.
    Because in Republican controlled districts, blacks who stepped out of their place were simply murdered. Yes, even until the 1970s there was housing discrimination in the North. Why did freed slaves go north in the first place? Because they tried to buy land in the South and were largely prevented from doing so.
    We are talking populations, not individuals, that's your basic fallacy. Of course an individual can be a statistical anomaly, but it's an exception, not a rule. Why should Trump save coal jobs, because Bill Gates is rich. Thus it should be no problem for everyone to get rich. That's how stupid you sound.
    By design.
    Statistical outliers. Not a way to run a country, but enough to fool some people, apparently.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  16. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    To reiterate: Nobody really knows how to answer you because you're not really saying anything.

    So, you know, you see that bit where you say, "Without any correction"? Yeah, you see, that's the problem, isn't it?

    How smart do you need to be in order to point back to the problem?

    There's no history to correct; you're just making it up as you go. Like this:

    None of that actually means anything. They're disconnected talking points any mad-libbing machine could spit out. Every one of those sentences gets a half a shrug and an, "And?"

    These days later you still can't explain your own attempt to connect general crime statistics to targeted killing. Think of it this way: Maybe you think you're being smart, playing close to the vest, or something like that; for the rest of the world, it's a week later and you're just not capable of saying anything substantial.

    So take the note: It's kind of giveaway when the people wander in pretending to be some manner of high and mighty clueless; after a while, we notice the cluelessness, and, what's more, when such people insist, the community will eventually believe them.

    People respond to you at all because there is an underlying social instinct to do so, in the first place, and, to the other, there comes a point at which people, either instinctively or, with unfortunate practice, through devices they can explain, come to recognize and guard against antisocial behavior. They respond to your racist tropes because at some point the community is damaged if everyone just leaves you to shit all over everything.

    Remember, this is all your digression↗. Eight days and over a hundred posts later, the state of the discussion is still in orbit around your trolling.

    Here, let's try going back to your response to Gmilam:

    If I choose to see that wager, the proposition to you is that you must now demonstrate a twenty-five year street riot.

    And the thing is anyone can look at me and say, "Why 1993?" And I'll do my bit about the rise of anti-government sentiment according to the proposition that voters should be able to use government as a weapon against people they don't like for arbitrary reasons; a prior-wave feminist will remind me of what came before, and people of color—especially African-Americans—will clear their throats and say their two cents, and then the other two cents they have a right to according to history, and then the other two cents they have a right to, according to history. Who's next? Jews? American First Nations? So, yeah. Why '93? Because there emerged in the early Nineties a particular arc of supremacism and culture war still in effect; I'm just choosing a particular moment in which the screeching chorus of white Christian masculinity tried to roar, and that is when they discovered their traditional authority to abuse was waning.

    Nonetheless, those who wish to point to prior screeches and roars from the white male Christian supremacist bully chorus are certainly welcome to; I would not contest. For our purposes, though, we might attend Gmilam's↑ point, and your response, and consider that between you, me, and everybody else, yeah, you're on: Go ahead and show us a twenty-five year street riot.

    There might someday come a point at which white Christian males need to riot for their own sakes, but that will come about only if everybody else, as such, is so loathsomely terrible about exercising societal power as the white Christian males have preferred, instructed, and demanded. I mean, seriously, we get it. If they presume everyone else will behave just like they do except worse because they're all inferior, then of course they would be terrified at the prospect of mere equality.

    Which is the other reason '93 is important: Part of the reason they're panicking is because somebody else won, and 1993 is the year injunctions started coming down against Colorado Amendment 2. Think about that for a moment; one could turn twenty-five years old, this year, and have spent their entire life in a family and community paradigm whereby courts are the enemy because they say people can't vote against other people's—i.e., nonwhite, nonchristian, nonbinary male—civil and human rights. No, really, between the 1992 elections and the Obergefell decision in 2015, we witnessed a hypercompressed reiteration of the American civil rights tragedy play out in under a quarter-century, and for once we got a happy ending, and the traditionalist—i.e., white male Christian—empowerment majority is snarling furious. And this historical arc emerged because they panicked at not getting their way. As far as their perceived loss of traditional authority is concerned, they did this to themselves.

    And this whole mess that just happens to sound like↑ the latest iteration of the same bland supremacism we've been hearing for a quarter century.
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    No, the order is not clear. As is typical of common cause correlations.
    By destroying the benefits and increasing the costs of marriage, in many different ways.
    Racism is of course a "conspiracy" of a kind - in this particular aspect (injustice under the law) it includes far more than "trumped up charges" (although they are common, as the recent cop trial in Baltimore illustrated). It also includes disproportionate real charges, disproportionate penalties, coerced plea bargains, oppressive policing, excessive bail and fees, inhumane and destructive jail environments, and so forth.
    It's a result of racist oppression by white racial bigots who control everything from mortgage lending, school funding, and law enforcement priorities, to the routing of freeways and maintenance of public utilities.
    Not when they are funded and governed well. The well-funded public schools in the wealthy northern suburbs of America are quite successful - as are the public schools of other countries.
    The opposite is the case. The jobs and homes were denied elsewhere - that's what segregated the cities. And still does (in my community, the areas of fastest job growth lack both housing affordable on low wages and transit service from the areas of highest unemployment - and efforts to change that have been blocked, largely by racist white people.)
    It's called "statistics" - look into it.
    Yep. Stereotypical stuff, completely familiar in the US.
    You're on your way to throwing every turd in the tank - it's only a matter of time before something about IQ shows up.
    spidergoat likes this.
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Great question! Yes, it was nonsensical for you to claim that.
    Nope. What I said was very simple. Racists are the cause of racism.
    Yes, perhaps you could. But you'd have to not live in a very good area as a result.

    Then you'd go to buy the best house you can afford in an OK neighborhood - only to be denied a home to "protect property values." So you'd have to move into a worse neighborhood.

    Then one night your home gets broken into. And your insurance deductible puts you in debt trying to repair the damage, and you start to struggle. And some fool on the Internet tells you that that's your own fault - because you didn't care enough to get a good, high paying job, and were then so stupid that you bought a house in a democrat-controlled, crime-ridden neighborhood.
    That's because you are privileged. You've never experienced anyone holding you back.
  19. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Proof it is possible from the exact same background.
    We're long past that bit of the conversation, and you ignored the direct answer I gave to this complaint of your. Do I need to point it out, or can I trust you're capable enough to find it yourself?

    Yep, I guess you're free to straw man my post.
    Then you probably shouldn't have said "And vice versa." Vice versa is reversed cause, not common cause.
    It's all a conspiracy, huh? Okay.
    More conspiracy.
    Yep, by Democrats, then and now.
    What, it's just bound to happen eventually?
    I think blacks have enough personal agency to do it by more than just luck.
    Why would you bring up IQ? Oh right, that "Book of the Klan" you're so fond of.
    You didn't answer why some blacks do agree with Republicans.
  20. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    I didn't. It was a straw man.
    Meaningless tautology.
    Not initially.
    Where does that still happen?
    If I couldn't get a loan, I had to save for my house. If I could save enough for a house, I don't think a single break-in would sink me.
    Yet blacks from ghettos succeed all the time.
  21. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Who saves for 30 years to buy a house? No one.
  22. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    I would like to see some numbers on this.
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    The argument from ignorance again.
    How about three breakins, one of which gets you evicted? Homeless is kind of the definition of being sunk.
    In wingnut world, observations of physical reality are conspiracy theories. This holds for many aspects of reality - global warming, corporate wealth election rigging and influence, Republican Party fascism, the invalidity of supply side economics, etc etc etc
    By Republicans, in my town. And also in every other such setup I know of personally - Detroit and Flint, say. I'm sure there are white racist Democrats, of course - that used to be the Party that represented white racism, until around 1968, so you know there's a good number - but it is what it is, now.
    You keep making these basic errors in logic - supposed null hypotheses that deny the assumptions of the argument, cause and effect from correlation, labeling as "fallacies" simple observations without argument, it's become a long list.
    Vice versa tells you all you've got is a correlation: your cause may - and probably does - lie elsewhere. And I provided you with an obvious likelihood - a known factor of great influence, causal for both.

    See: Being poor is being one minor piece of bad luck from disaster at all times. And black people are disproportionately poor in part - a large part - as a consequence of white racism, in the US. So black people in general are more vulnerable to bad luck than white people, just on the grounds of poverty, because of white racism.
    In every State and metropolitan area in the United States. And even if it didn't - "still" - the argument of its influence holds.
    The fact that it did happen - acknowledged by you with the word "still" - demonstrates the continuing malign influence of the racism you've been attempting to deny.
    You didn't ask, and it's irrelevant anyway.
    A lower percentage than whites, largely because of white racism, in the US.

    And that's a major factor - some think the major factor, the weakness at the center that's going to bring the country down - in the state of this onion.

Share This Page