I figure that much.. . Sure it make him feel better about the numbers ..
but thats not really what he point was .:kewl:

Let's be clear about my point so there's zero misunderstanding then. If you want to call me a racist, be a man and say it, don't dance around it like a coward.

My point was this...blacks are far more likely to be poor, than whites. Saying that doesn't make me a racist. The numbers make that clear with zero ambiguity. The numbers are not racist, they just are what they are.

An ignorant racist might say there's a genetic reason for that. Nonsense. But there is a cultural reason for that, starting with the fact that almost 75% of black children born today, are born into a home without a dad. That is staggering and appalling, and until we fix that, blacks will continue to live in poverty at a heartbreaking rate. When you give girls a financial incentive to have kids out of wedlock, guess what? More of them will have kids out of wedlock.

In my opinion, liberalism also contributes significantly to this. Because instead of giving blacks the tools they need to actually rise out of poverty in big numbers (which is precisely what conservatives would love to do), liberals pat them on the head and say "there there, it's not your fault, here's your welfare check, and keep voting for me so the big mean republican doesn't take this check away from you". Liberals give blacks just enough to stay alive (and dependent, and therefore a reliable voting block), not nearly enough to get ahead. Liberals don't want blacks to get ahead, because if they did, many of them would no longer feel the need to vote for Democrats.

I remember what Hartford and New Haven and Bridgeport looked like 40 years ago. And I see EXACTLY what 40 years of pure, unchecked liberalism has done for those people. I say it's a disgrace and they deserve a different outcome. Liberals advocate for more of the same.

I'd say that makes liberals the racists, because I want a better outcome for all of them. But according to the media, somehow, that makes me the racist.

That makes all kinds of sense.

Where am I wrong, WDMSO? You may answer freely and openly, I am a big boy and can take it.

When the current form of welfare reform came about, a man in Washington, the late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan (a very liberal Democrat, who later was a senator from NY) warned that the welfare changes would annihilate the black nuclear family, which would lead to a cultural disaster in the black community. It was a bold thing to say. Moynihan was vilified by the left for saying what he said. He was called a racist and a bigot. And yet history shows that he was exactly, EXACTLY correct.

We're committing cultural genocide against them. It makes me sick. I don't see how my concern for their welfare makes me a racist.

Yup, liberals are the racist

(1) is there any discernible connection, between the fact that a) people who live in urban cities are doing horribly, and b) urban cities are almost unanimously hard core liberal?

(2) if the answer to question (1) is yes, and of course it is...then what would motivate anyone to look at how blacks are faring in our cities, and not conclude that we need to try something different?

Not all liberals are racist Paul, obviously. But the ideology of liberalism, has been an abject disaster for blacks. I say they deserve better. I presume that liberals, by virtue of identifying as liberals, believe that liberalism is working for blacks. Right?

True. Parse stuff down to facts and remove the happy snowflake talk and try to get people to work together. Then stop turning a blind eye to importing the competition of those lower paying, lower skilled "workers" and increasing the pressure at the bottom. We should offer assistance to those that need it but it should be assistance on top of earned, not in place of (with limited exceptions). We can then tune and allow for more legal immigration.



Sometimes they are. The Diversity Industry at large

Paul and WDMSO, let me put it another way.

A huge percentage of poor blacks in this country, live in places that are liberal.

So, here's my question...is liberalism working well for those poor blacks, in your opinion?

My answer to that question (which is hell, no) is a big part of what caused me to switch from being a registered Democrat to a registered Republican.

Here in my home of CT, the liberals can't bring themselves to admit that liberalism has been an economic failure in all of our cities. Instead of suggesting that we try something different, they say that the failures are because rich white hedge fund managers in Greenwich aren't paying their fair share. Liberals don't care that those folks pay a ton more in CT than they would if they lived in Florida, so many of them are moving to Florida, which is why now, on top of all our other problems, our income tax receipts are finally dropping like a rock. So we have far less revenue than we thought, and even what we thought we were going to get, wasn't nearly enough to fund all the liberal pet projects.

In business, when you are in a self-perpetuating state of increasing debt and decreasing revenue, we call that the "death spiral". It is a perfectly accurate term. And because my elderly parents refuse to leave, I will be the last sucker left here, paying a 500% income tax rate.

So let see I post numbers and whites are listed before black and people take exception .. and questioning the Order ? then you post

"We can sort based on the % of each ethnicity on welfare, relative to each race's makeup of the general population. He won't like that sort one bit."




"Let's be clear about my point so there's zero misunderstanding then. If you want to call me a racist, be a man and say it, don't dance around it like a coward.

My point was this...blacks are far more likely to be poor, than whites. Saying that doesn't make me a racist."

So Why would I not Like that bit of info ?? But I'll be clear Was I to infer you're meaning was what you wrote in your follow up response? I made the statement "but thats not really what he point was ..." . but if you say your only point was "blacks are far more likely to be poor, than whites" we'll leave it at that

John Blind eye?? you say this as if importing the competition hasn't been going on for 100 years .. it has zero impact on Jobs losses in America .. or whos on welfare it comes down do wage per hour and expect people to work 80hrs a week at 8-15 dollars an hour, pay rent buy food is unrealistic, while corporate America fleeces America and its worker ...


Most US manufacturing jobs lost to technology, not trade
https://www.ft.com/content/dec677c0-...5-95d1533d9a62

What do you base that on? have you ever worked in corporate America?

I have worked at Aetna, Travelers, The Hartford, and 2 small companies. Those companies creates thousands and thousands of good, middle class, white collar jobs, with good, dependable benefits.

Is corporate America perfect? Far from it. Is there widespread "fleecing" of the employees? Not even close.

As to the welfare stats. Most people thought you put whites first to imply that whites are the biggest welfare drain based on absolute numbers. I'd bet money that's what you were trying to convey, but I can't know. Many people feel that you need to look at how many welfare recipients there are for a given race, relative to the proportion that race make sup of the entire population. If whites make up X% of the general population, but more than X% of those on welfare, that whites are disproportionately on welfare. I don't think I said that well, hopefully it made sense.

I wasn't just trying to say that blacks are disproportionately poor, I tried to say other things too.

Some people lack a simple understanding of economics. Hopeless souls with doomsday attitudes is not the solution. Some choose to rise up,rather than wallow in their destiny.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Its called History .. if you think there isn't widespread fleecing of workers you need to expand your search . 1 or 2 examples of Good business are no longer the norm they are the exception ..

How does that Lyndon Johnson quote go about keeping blacks voting Democrat for the next 200 years ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe YOU need to expand your search:

http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-lab...owing-together

I'm not sure why hourly compensation is expected to move in exact proportion to productivity...and if it doesn't, I'm not sure why that's indicative of companies "fleecing" their workers.

I do know that we have all kinds of laws that regulate how companies must treat employees, and that many companies go beyond what's required by law. Not every private company is a sweat shop owned by a sinister billionaire.

I'll ask again, have you aver worked in corporate America?

Lyndon Johnson, it turns out, was correct. So was Daniel Patrick Moynihan (a diehard liberal) when he predicted what it would do to the black culture.

It's not so much a prediction, he was stating the lefts game plan.
It is pretty well documented he was as big a racist as they get.
He used the N word the way a lot of people talk today and every sentence includes the word f***
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes. The immigrants coming here illegally are not taking up large swaths of middle class or upper class jobs. Surely they are working somewhere, right?

So then where are they working? I am talking about lower skilled jobs which includes some manufacturing but we are now more a service economy which means they are taking service jobs in addition to some manufacturing.

Yes, this has been going on for 100 years but break that down into legal and illegal immigration, please.

As for the wages, I worked for under 3 in HS, 4-6 in my late teens, and commission for years after that had lower hourly pay then asking if you want extra salt with your fries. But I worked my way out of that and chased skills and positions that allowed me to grow.

Grow so I would not have a family in the projects or on welfare. So yes, I know precisely what this is about.

He made a prediction that the Democrats would secure that vote for 200 years if they expanded welfare, and so far, he was correct.

I think you need to rethink your word "fleecing ". Getting the most out of a worker is good business . If you ran a company you would do the same thing or you wouldn't own company for long . You always need to be competitive . Nowadays workers feel they are protected from being fired and some take advantage of that .
Bottom line... if you don't work hard , always strive for better and never settle , then I have no sympathy for you and niether should the government or anyone else .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

WDMSO, do you think that every single job in our economy, should pay a wage that can support a family in minimum comfort? Tell that to a guy who owns a small pizzeria, that he needs to pay his bus boys and cashier $40k a year.

Some jobs just don't add that much value to the business. They just don't, not even close. But businesses need people in those roles. And it's still a good thing to put people in those jobs, as an entry level experience to learn basic skills.

I don't want anyone trying to raise a family on $12 an hour. But SOME jobs cannot pay more than that. It's not about what we want for the individual (we all want them to thrive)...if the job is in the private sector, then the pay must be connected to the economic value added by the person in that role. That's how the private sector works. And it's not all bad.

We can't all work in public labor unions. Most of us have to work in the private sector, and in the private sector (unlike public labor unions) we must get our customers to freely choose to exchange their money for our services. And to do that, the customer has to feel like he's getting his money's worth. Which means that business owners can't pay more than the economic value (as perceived by the customer) for each job.

WDMSO, if I owned a pizzeria and paid everyone who works for me at least $40k a year so they could support a family, how much am I going to then need to charge for a large pie? Are you going to pay $50 for a large pie so that I can pay my cashier $40k a year?

Your idea (pay every single person a livable wage regardless of the job they are in) sounds great. It's not remotely possible in the real world.

Liberals seem to think that every single business owner is fabulously wealthy, and can easily absorb the impact of paying every single employee a wage that a family can survive on. It's just not so. If that were the case, I would be screaming at the top of my lungs that minimum wage should be $20 an hour. But if we made that the minimum wage, huge numbers of businesses would go out of business, and millions of people would be unemployed. And many businesses that remained, would have to triple their prices.

I think you've spent too much time in the public union sphere, and not nearly enough time in the private sector. The next time you go out to eat, ask the restaurant manager what would happen if he had to pay everyone 40k a year, or whatever it would take to support a family the way you think they should be supported.

The liberals aren't putting any thought into this. It's not even close to being realistic. Part of me says, fine, let's make minimum wage $20 an hour, and then watch what happens, just so liberals can't claim that there's no downside. Part of me wonders if they propose these idiotic things on purpose, knowing that conservatives will oppose it, just so libs can say "see, I want to pay everyone a fair wage, but that mean white guy over there is opposed to it. So vote for me, hooray!!"

Can you point me to something showing me where he said that bc I know I have heard that previously (except he used the N word) but everytime I try finding that quote it is always in stories on like Alr right websites or by the KKK, etc.?

I know he did say when the civil rights act was passed that he thought they just delivered the South to the Republican party for a long time to come.

What do you suppose he meant by that?

I don't think there are official White House recordings of LBJ saying wither of the quotes you refer to Paul. The one where he supposedly said he'd get those people to vote Democratic for 200 years, appears in a biography of LBJ by Ronald Kessler. There are many, many, many White House recordings where LBJ used the "n" word. That was the world then.

If LBJ said the South was delivered to the GOP for a generation, it would appear he was correct on that, too, wasn't he? Both quotes appear to have come true.