Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
236 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [10] | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Is it time to stop systematic theft from blacks in America? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would rather set up a society where blacks live as long as whites.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Tama
United States
Iowa City
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Instead of using "blacks" and "the blacks", consider substituting "black people". It will read better.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grand Admiral Thrawn
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
I would rather set up a society where blacks live as long as whites.
So would I. I'm not sure that will ever happen as long as sickle cell anemia is fatal, but admittedly, that only accounts for a low percentage of deaths.

However, that is the ideal, and we live in reality. Why not make SSI fairer for black people in the world we live in now?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eric_Tama wrote:
Instead of using "blacks" and "the blacks", consider substituting "black people". It will read better.
I agree. Thank you.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grand Admiral Thrawn
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In all seriousness, this is a good (long) read.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-cas...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
I’m divided on the options, and the politics of addressing this and other inequalities would likely get tangled enough that practicalities would strongly influence what policies I’d support. But, an interesting issue!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Jythier wrote:
I would rather set up a society where blacks live as long as whites.
So would I. I'm not sure that will ever happen as long as sickle cell anemia is fatal, but admittedly, that only accounts for a low percentage of deaths.

However, that is the ideal, and we live in reality. Why not make SSI fairer for black people in the world we live in now?

Pretending that health outcomes are genetic might make you feel better but are obscuring the fact that average life expectancy is pretty well predictable at birth if you look at the socio-economic background. You could adjust for any number of genetic conditions if you wanted too, some of which are prominant in other population groups.
BTW as a man am I entitled to more money as my life expectancy is less than a woman? Actually at the moment I will be expected to work longer.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DavidDearlove wrote:
BTW as a man am I entitled to more money as my life expectancy is less than a woman? Actually at the moment I will be expected to work longer.
You will notice that I did not suggest that Hispanic people be disadvantaged in the SSI system due to their longer life expectancy. Why do you think that is?

Yes, the current SSI system gives an "unfair" advantage to Hispanic people. I purposely did not mention that, because they have unfair disadvantages elsewhere and their advantage in the SSI system doesn't begin to make up for their disadvantages elsewhere.

How about men? They are also disadvantaged by the SSI system purely based on life expectancy. However, they are advantaged by the fact that they make more for the same job and that advantage more than outweighs their disadvantage in life expectancy. I'm not arguing that this shouldn't happen; mind you, somebody who sticks with their career for 44 straight years is more likely to be valuable to their company that somebody that misses a lot of time due to maternity leave (if paternity leave takes hold, this factor should somewhat go away.)

How about black people? Except for some affirmative action events and quotas which are insufficient to level the field, they never get the advantage. Thus, I suggest that they stop subsidizing non-black people in the SSI system.

Why do I do that?

Giving black people what they deserve in the SSI system is not only right, it is probably politically feasible, meaning it could happen. Even if men should get more or Hispanics should get less (which I don't believe or support), neither of those could ever get any political backing.

I have no doubt that liberal voters would support this.

Some conservative voters would also support based on their sense of being fair. After all, I not only support it, I brought it up. Implementation would cost me money (albeit a pittance) but I think it's the right thing to do.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A. It's racist. Blacks are individuals. Some blacks live past 100. Some people of other heritage know due to family history and personal conditions the will probably die before 65.

B. Define black. Seriously... with tens of thousands of dollars at stake, it would create a huge incentive to be "black".

C. Once defined, Need to see how dramatic the effect is for wealthy blacks. How much of the effect is a proxy for being poor with bad medical care.

I would rather see general means testing to provide higher benefits for the poorest with the lowest benefits.


It's great to see you posting your own speculations.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Badolato
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
I would rather set up a society where blacks live as long as whites.


I agree. To do that we can start by training police not to shoot them during routine traffic stops. We could also help by ensuring that the school districts where they live are given equal funding as the more affluent mixed population or majority white population districts. And we could ensure that the poorest of the population, both black and white receive good medical care from birth to death. That would be a good start.




7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott O'Brien
United States
Connellsville
PA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.



America is first come first serve.
there is no systematic theft.
The american dream isnt everyone gets the same standard of living, its that everyone reaps the fruits of their labor.

Everyone deserves nothing, except what they can scrap together for themselves. Opportunities are everywhere. Want to get ahead? Work 3 jobs. The rest of us did in our early years.

the cycle repeats because their children do not assert themselves in school the way other children do.

if you want to reverse that trend, then poor people need to learn to live modestly, get educated, get a better job and move out of low income towns and educate their children instead of perpetuating the cycle.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sao123 wrote:
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.



America is first come first serve.
there is no systematic theft.
The american dream isnt everyone gets the same standard of living, its that everyone reaps the fruits of their labor.

Everyone deserves nothing, except what they can scrap together for themselves. Opportunities are everywhere. Want to get ahead? Work 3 jobs. The rest of us did in our early years.

the cycle repeats because their children do not assert themselves in school the way other children do.

if you want to reverse that trend, then poor people need to learn to live modestly, get educated, get a better job and move out of low income towns and educate their children instead of perpetuating the cycle.

Whereas people born rich can be lazy fucks.
Perhaps poor people can never break out of the cycle of poverty.
we only get one life why should some people have to work three jobs?
why should clever people never get educated as they are too busy surviving?
why do conservatives like you think this is moral?

11 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dickie Crickets
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DavidDearlove wrote:

why do conservatives like you think this is moral?


Because he lives indoors and has the luxury of free time he can spend spouting naive gibberish on the Internet he can afford to access.

If the system worked for him, it works for everyone. QED.
14 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
DavidDearlove wrote:
sao123 wrote:
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.



America is first come first serve.
there is no systematic theft.
The american dream isnt everyone gets the same standard of living, its that everyone reaps the fruits of their labor.

Everyone deserves nothing, except what they can scrap together for themselves. Opportunities are everywhere. Want to get ahead? Work 3 jobs. The rest of us did in our early years.

the cycle repeats because their children do not assert themselves in school the way other children do.

if you want to reverse that trend, then poor people need to learn to live modestly, get educated, get a better job and move out of low income towns and educate their children instead of perpetuating the cycle.

Whereas people born rich can be lazy fucks.
Perhaps poor people can never break out of the cycle of poverty.
we only get one life why should some people have to work three jobs?
why should clever people never get educated as they are too busy surviving?
why do conservatives like you think this is moral?



What about the Native Americans? What about those whose ancestors were enslaved by the Romans and the Vikings?

And the relevance of this to today is?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
sao123 wrote:
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.



America is first come first serve.
there is no systematic theft.
The american dream isnt everyone gets the same standard of living, its that everyone reaps the fruits of their labor.

Everyone deserves nothing, except what they can scrap together for themselves. Opportunities are everywhere. Want to get ahead? Work 3 jobs. The rest of us did in our early years.

the cycle repeats because their children do not assert themselves in school the way other children do.

if you want to reverse that trend, then poor people need to learn to live modestly, get educated, get a better job and move out of low income towns and educate their children instead of perpetuating the cycle.
...and not have 5 or 6 children, whom you can’t afford to feed, by 3 different men who are no where to be seen.

I love seeing a self-unemployed mother get free childcare so she can stay home. Stay home to do what? Take online classes so she can get her 5th associates degree just to get financial aid. This goes for all races.

The number of people with large families in the USA is slowly falling. The social-economic class of the mothers of larger families is actually rising.
But continue with your prejudices.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
I’ve seen it first hand on numerous occasions.

Do you spend most of your time interacting with the wealthy and successful? Or do you interact almost exclusively with the lower classes of society?

Do you think that perhaps your anecdotes will be radically skewed towards negative things? No one calls a cop when their kid graduates college and gets a nice place in the suburbs. They do call them when their dropout kid steals their grocery money to buy crack.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
damiangerous wrote:
recon28501 wrote:
I’ve seen it first hand on numerous occasions.

Do you spend most of your time interacting with the wealthy and successful? Or do you interact almost exclusively with the lower classes of society?

Do you think that perhaps your anecdotes will be radically skewed towards negative things? No one calls a cop when their kid graduates college and gets a nice place in the suburbs. They do call them when their dropout kid steals their grocery money to buy crack.



If it’s occuring, it doesn’t matter who sees it. It just takes someone to point it out. Get out, ride around with your car window down, radio off, look around. There are people everywhere mooching off the system, which is what democrats want. The party of old slavers, and the party of new slavers. Let’s give stuff away so we can get those votes.

Does it make sense for a married couple to both work 40 hours a week, and after paying bills, not having much to show, as compared to someone who sits home all day, eats good, burns all the lights in the house, gets free healthcare, and lives better than the working family? Nothing more appealing than seeing a cart full of groceries being payed for with an EBT card and then seeing the groceries loaded into a new vehicle.

Of course it's occurring. Any system has fraud. My point is that you vastly over-estimate the amount of fraud because you are constantly exposed to criminals, exactly the sort of person who commits fraud. You don't spend your day dealing with honest, upstanding people.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
damiangerous wrote:
recon28501 wrote:
damiangerous wrote:
recon28501 wrote:
I’ve seen it first hand on numerous occasions.

Do you spend most of your time interacting with the wealthy and successful? Or do you interact almost exclusively with the lower classes of society?

Do you think that perhaps your anecdotes will be radically skewed towards negative things? No one calls a cop when their kid graduates college and gets a nice place in the suburbs. They do call them when their dropout kid steals their grocery money to buy crack.



If it’s occuring, it doesn’t matter who sees it. It just takes someone to point it out. Get out, ride around with your car window down, radio off, look around. There are people everywhere mooching off the system, which is what democrats want. The party of old slavers, and the party of new slavers. Let’s give stuff away so we can get those votes.

Does it make sense for a married couple to both work 40 hours a week, and after paying bills, not having much to show, as compared to someone who sits home all day, eats good, burns all the lights in the house, gets free healthcare, and lives better than the working family? Nothing more appealing than seeing a cart full of groceries being payed for with an EBT card and then seeing the groceries loaded into a new vehicle.

Of course it's occurring. Any system has fraud. My point is that you vastly over-estimate the amount of fraud because you are constantly exposed to criminals, exactly the sort of person who commits fraud. You don't spend your day dealing with honest, upstanding people.


Chief, you don’t know how I spend my day. There is more to police work than hunting criminals. Proactive and reactive duties.

Yes, there are honest people who do need assistance, but that is what it should be...assistance. Help people get on their feet if they have fallen down, put there comes a time when they have to stand on their own. People can not rely on the government to take care of them from birth to death.

Also, I’m a citizen just as you. One does not have to be a police officer to see these things.

That's fine, "Chief". You're still basing your worldview on anecdotes, which is basically making policy based on "your feelings". There is plenty of data on the rates of fraud and waste in various government programs should you care to avail yourself of it. But I doubt you will because you know what you know and you can't be reasoned out of something you didn't reason into.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am happy to see that not all the conservative posters have been banned. You may not know it from my OP but I am one of you. My first ever RSP post should convince you:

Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
In the last Democratic debate, Ms. Clinton was asked why she should be president. Her answer: "Because I'm a woman!" This was met with one of the loudest applauses of the event - apparently the audience thought this was a good reason. This tells me that I am equally qualified to be president of the USA - I am also a woman. So I present to you my platform:

1. I will not use any executive orders. I see no reason why my will should override the will of the people.

2. Since I don't golf, I'll have plenty of time to make my own decisions, so I won't need any czars.

3. I'll get rid of many of the agencies that do very little except harass the American public and give me more power. This will also save the taxpayers much money by getting rid of a lot of employees that don't do a lot but they'll be able to find jobs where they have to work or be fired when the sudden lack of regulation spawns many small businesses. You see, I really don't want the power; I'd like to put it back where it belongs with the states as specified in the ninth and tenth amendments. The federal government's job is to protect the people of the United States and they aren't doing a really good job of that now, and that will change under my administration.

I have other ideas but since I've already got the blood boiling of some readers who would prefer a different type of government (socialism, communism, European-type, Sharia, etc.), I'll just point out that there are plenty of places that people who want these alternative types of government can live and I'll be more than happy to let them give up their citizenship and live there.

Compare this to my opponent's platform: Take guns away from the good citizens of the country so that only the rapists, murderers, robbers, and terrorists will have them.


I'm still convinced that one of the best things that happened politically recently is when Newt Gingrich & Co. took many people off of welfare and put them back to work. I have spent much time on these forums trying to talk to liberals, trying to understand where they get those crazy ideas from (found out some weren't so crazy), and trying to show that some conservative ideas had merit.

Now I have some questions for the other conservative posters here.

I'm more or less a fan of people living with the consequences of their bad decisions. However, that brings up some dilemmas, both political and moral:

1. Many of you (on the conservative side) have pointed out that a single mom who got pregnant four times from three different guys probably deserves the life she is going to get, which is going to be really sad.

But what about her four children? Why do they deserve the life they are going to get based on her bad decisions? Likely, they are going to live in poverty, go to schools where little learning goes on because the other kids act out, with the boys going to gangs and likely to end up on drugs, and the girls starting the cycle all over again with four of their own kids by three fathers. (Before some of you call me a racist, I didn't mention ethnicity here, the same can happen to poor white mothers too.)

Why should these children be damned to live an awful life based on their mother's mistakes?

If you decide that the children should not be damned for the mistakes of their mother, how do you propose that the children have a shot to lead a normal life?

The only way that you can punish the mother for her mistakes but let the children lead a "normal" life is to remove the children from her, but unless they all get adopted by good homes, you are now giving them a different path to an awful life (or at least an awful childhood.) Besides, even if you think that's the right solution, that would never fly politically in the USA.

2. Take the plight of the very hard working child who grew up in a very poor inner city environment. Although he went to a school where learning was impossible, he went to the library and learned a lot, and made some extra money carrying groceries from the local store to housebound elderly people. However, even with all his hard work, he wasn't a genius and couldn't land a scholarship and couldn't attend a college. He graduated high school at a bad time for the economy and had a difficult time landing a job, and for quite a few years, couldn't get a decent job because he lacked the experience. He tried to get in the Armed Forces to gain experience but had some disability that prevented him from enlisting.

Here's a person who has worked like heck all his life and gets nowhere. How does that fit in with your theory about people deserving the life they get based on their decisions?

3. Worse yet, take scenario #2, except the child couldn't go to the library or deliver groceries because he was forced to look after his five younger siblings when he got home from school, so when he started looking for work, he had no marketable skills.

4. A minority child is doing all the right things, he is both very hard working and smart enough to get into college and is destined to be a top student at a decent college. However, in his senior year in high school, he is shopping for groceries when a gang fight breaks out and a couple of people get murdered. Although this kid is just in the wrong place at the wrong time, the cop doesn't believe him when he says he had nothing to do with the gang violence. His protests of innocence just make the cop angrier and angrier and when the cop grabs him, he tries to pull away and accidentally slugs the cop, and is charged with assault of a police officer. Any chance for a good life is over; he is now branded a violent criminal and no college or employer wants him.

In all four of these cases, the children involved not only did nothing wrong, but were hard workers with good intentions, and in every case, with the laws as currently written, their lives are going to suck.

To the other conservatives: Let's say you had the power to make the laws the way you want them. Would you create a set of laws that would make these children's lives better, and how would you do that?

Edit to add: Come to think of it, I'd like to hear anyone's ideas on how they would improve the lot of the children described here, although I suppose it's a lot easier to do if you believe in universal healthcare and free college for all (which also rewards the people that make awful decisions and don't work that hard.)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
It’s not all about fraud...don’t forget laziness.

How could we forget about laziness?




 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott O'Brien
United States
Connellsville
PA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
I'm still convinced that one of the best things that happened politically recently is when Newt Gingrich & Co. took many people off of welfare and put them back to work. I have spent much time on these forums trying to talk to liberals, trying to understand where they get those crazy ideas from (found out some weren't so crazy), and trying to show that some conservative ideas had merit.

Now I have some questions for the other conservative posters here.

I'm more or less a fan of people living with the consequences of their bad decisions. However, that brings up some dilemmas, both political and moral:

1. Many of you (on the conservative side) have pointed out that a single mom who got pregnant four times from three different guys probably deserves the life she is going to get, which is going to be really sad.

But what about her four children? Why do they deserve the life they are going to get based on her bad decisions? Likely, they are going to live in poverty, go to schools where little learning goes on because the other kids act out, with the boys going to gangs and likely to end up on drugs, and the girls starting the cycle all over again with four of their own kids by three fathers. (Before some of you call me a racist, I didn't mention ethnicity here, the same can happen to poor white mothers too.)

Why should these children be damned to live an awful life based on their mother's mistakes?

If you decide that the children should not be damned for the mistakes of their mother, how do you propose that the children have a shot to lead a normal life?

The only way that you can punish the mother for her mistakes but let the children lead a "normal" life is to remove the children from her, but unless they all get adopted by good homes, you are now giving them a different path to an awful life (or at least an awful childhood.) Besides, even if you think that's the right solution, that would never fly politically in the USA.


First and foremost, if the mother is going to be on welfare where she is, she might as well move to somewhere else. Its hard for people to realize, but smaller 'single A' rural schools are better than ANY and EVERY inner city school in education. Sure they don't have lots of money for sports and extra curricular activities, but one thing they do have is small class sizes and individualized teachers who care about each student. It is a 1000% better education.

Move. Move out of the city. Period.
Or the mom can home school her children.

Quote:

2. Take the plight of the very hard working child who grew up in a very poor inner city environment. Although he went to a school where learning was impossible, he went to the library and learned a lot, and made some extra money carrying groceries from the local store to housebound elderly people. However, even with all his hard work, he wasn't a genius and couldn't land a scholarship and couldn't attend a college. He graduated high school at a bad time for the economy and had a difficult time landing a job, and for quite a few years, couldn't get a decent job because he lacked the experience. He tried to get in the Armed Forces to gain experience but had some disability that prevented him from enlisting.

Here's a person who has worked like heck all his life and gets nowhere. How does that fit in with your theory about people deserving the life they get based on their decisions?


In this day and age, most people shouldn't go to college. There is a glut of college educated workers in every field. There are thousands of good paying jobs which do not require a college degree.

Tech School costs 20% of college and can get you a job in Nursing, HVAC, CnC Work, Carpentry, Wood Work, Brick Laying, Mortar Work, Steel Mills, Warehouse work.

Quote:

3. Worse yet, take scenario #2, except the child couldn't go to the library or deliver groceries because he was forced to look after his five younger siblings when he got home from school, so when he started looking for work, he had no marketable skills.


You can get a job with a HS diploma and a CDL Class A Drivers License which you can get the school for free to get. If you are willing to work and work hard, there are hundreds of thousands of opportunities. The work smarter, not harder movement is dead. All we need now is people who work hard.

Quote:

4. A minority child is doing all the right things, he is both very hard working and smart enough to get into college and is destined to be a top student at a decent college. However, in his senior year in high school, he is shopping for groceries when a gang fight breaks out and a couple of people get murdered. Although this kid is just in the wrong place at the wrong time, the cop doesn't believe him when he says he had nothing to do with the gang violence. His protests of innocence just make the cop angrier and angrier and when the cop grabs him, he tries to pull away and accidentally slugs the cop, and is charged with assault of a police officer. Any chance for a good life is over; he is now branded a violent criminal and no college or employer wants him.

In all four of these cases, the children involved not only did nothing wrong, but were hard workers with good intentions, and in every case, with the laws as currently written, their lives are going to suck.


Move. The cost of living is lower in rural areas, and there is less crime/drugs there. Moving out of the city goes a long way toward prevention.

If the kid punches a cop, he is responsible. He no logner meets you definition of a "good kid". Take responsibility for your actions. Don't punch the cop.

But...This being In the wrong spot at the wrong time can happen to anyone including those not minorities. Take preventative steps to not be a victim. Don't be out after dark. Don't go to questionable areas of town. Don't hang out with the wrong friends. Don't live in areas with heavy gang/drug activity.

Quote:

To the other conservatives: Let's say you had the power to make the laws the way you want them. Would you create a set of laws that would make these children's lives better, and how would you do that?



Eliminate welfare in favor of assistance programs which are only for those who have recently became unemployed, and has a time limited factor to force you to become employed again.

Assistance programs give you approved groceries (breads, cerials, dairy products, vegetables, lean meats, pastas) for your family instead of cash. Groceries will not include premium foods such as Fillet Mignons and Lobster. Also will not include non-healthy snacks such as soda's, Candy, chips, beer, wine.

Assistance program will will never give you cash but will pay money directly to vendors to pay bills such as electricity, natural gas, heat, water, rent, phone, job retraining, doctors appointments, and necessary transportation. Money used to pay for cell phone is for voice only, no data service will be paid for.

While on any assistance program, you are to be tested to be free of drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, or your assistance ends immediately. While you are on assistance, you provide public volunteer services (litter clean up, jury duty etc) in your town or state at least 4 days per month. Failure to volunteer results In termination of program.

Illegal to have more than 2 children. All jobs unionized. All retirement is pension based. Eliminate social security and replace it with the national railroad retirement plan for all working peoples.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
I'm still convinced that one of the best things that happened politically recently is when Newt Gingrich & Co. took many people off of welfare and put them back to work.


Well, that's one way to spin it. The good part of the reform bill that Gingrich and Clinton worked out were ways to cut down on fraud and freeloading. But the "moved to work" provisions are now and always have been bullshit. "Cut from welfare rolls?" Yes. "Moved to work?" No, that's much harder to demonstrate.

For example: if you want people to work, don't you think we should make getting daycare easier and less expensive? Don't you expect that you'd do more to offer job training and education?

See, the problem with the US welfare programs is that they really aren't targeted well to make it easy to work. Hell, our tax system isn't designed for it (you typically can't deduct childcare expenses unless your employer offers an FSA).

Quote:
...and trying to show that some conservative ideas had merit.


See, it's these comments that don't help. There are a lot of conservative ideas that have merit. That's not the question. I want my taxes to be lower. I want regulation to be streamlined and easier to comply with. I want people to succeed on their merits. Ask and I'll bet that the overwhelming majority will say these things (particularly when you consider that US liberals would be conservatives just about anywhere else in the world).

The disagreement is usually about "how far?" or "how much?" or "is that the best way to get there?" For example - I'm of the opinion that the best way to get parents to work is the make sure their kids have a safe place to be. So I'd love to see schools offer after-school programs/care that lets them work a job without worrying about their child being at home alone. Or better programs to pay for daycare. I suspect most conservatives would see that as entirely the parent's responsibility.

Quote:
Edit to add: Come to think of it, I'd like to hear anyone's ideas on how they would improve the lot of the children described here, although I suppose it's a lot easier to do if you believe in universal healthcare and free college for all (which also rewards the people that make awful decisions and don't work that hard.)


I'd ask the question differently because government programs really don't address individuals. They deal with groups and populations. So instead of focusing on the individual like your questions do, I'd ask "Are there programs that produce more positive results than negative? Are we helping real people change their condition?"

The individuals you describe in your questions are all great cases for a moral argument, but let's pretend that after trying for 10 years all of them fail and give up. They stop trying and start turning into all of the things we'd like them to avoid.

Even under those conditions, do they "deserve" to live on the street, go hungry, have difficulty getting consistent work, etc. Why would we ever want people to end up in a condition where they basically can't get out of it once they're there?

One way or another, we pay the price for such events. Whether it's programs that keep them off the streets, lost productivity, kids who will never reach their potential, we pay a price. I'd prefer to err on the side of actual opportunity minus the punitive "Well, at this point you're just screwed" approach of most conservative proposals these days.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
recon28501 wrote:
DavidDearlove wrote:
sao123 wrote:
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Disclaimer: The following is only my opinion. There were no news stories or articles that prompted me to post this; and I have never seen this point argued anywhere before.

It's hard to argue against the fact that blacks have got a raw deal in America. Many are descendants of slaves whose families have never had an opportunity to leave poverty, and locales with poor education which lead ot poverty. There is much talk of reparations and affirmative action programs to give the American black population a fair shake. There is significant resistance to both of these; the idea that reparations, essentially a gift, would likely be squandered and not help the blacks as a whole has merit, and certain affirmative action programs may force a company or government to fill a position with someone less qualified to do the job.

That being said, there is one instance where blacks are taking it on the chin and any American who believes in fair play should be in favor of a change to restore equity. Even the most conservative voter should realize that blacks deserve better than what they currently receive.

That instance is Social Security. A black at age 65 is expected to live 1.3 years less than a 65-year old white.

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/TodaysResearchAging28.pdf

Although they have contributed in the same fashion that whites have, they will receive less benefits because they won't live as long.

There are two ways to fix this problem. I prefer the second one because it will help them when they are younger with children when they most need it. I don't see a problem with them getting the same sized check as a comparable white person when they are elderly.

1. Increase their Social Security distribution so that their expected lifetime income from Social Security matches that of a white person who would have collected the same monthly amount.

2 Decrease the amount deducted from their paycheck for Social Security so that they pay a proportional amount based on their life expectancy.

While you could deduct an equal amount of SSI cost from the employer's portion (effectively Affirmative Action by making blacks cheaper to hire), I would advocate passing the entire SSI savings onto the employee to help his family stay out of poverty.

In fact, the amount of reduction in SSI should probably be more than that based on life expectancy at age 65. For blacks are far more likely to pay into the SSI system for years and never collect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/0...

I am not suggesting a gift or reparations here. All I am suggesting that the Social Security system be set up in such a way that blacks stop subsidizing non-blacks.



America is first come first serve.
there is no systematic theft.
The american dream isnt everyone gets the same standard of living, its that everyone reaps the fruits of their labor.

Everyone deserves nothing, except what they can scrap together for themselves. Opportunities are everywhere. Want to get ahead? Work 3 jobs. The rest of us did in our early years.

the cycle repeats because their children do not assert themselves in school the way other children do.

if you want to reverse that trend, then poor people need to learn to live modestly, get educated, get a better job and move out of low income towns and educate their children instead of perpetuating the cycle.

Whereas people born rich can be lazy fucks.
Perhaps poor people can never break out of the cycle of poverty.
we only get one life why should some people have to work three jobs?
why should clever people never get educated as they are too busy surviving?
why do conservatives like you think this is moral?



What about the Native Americans? What about those whose ancestors were enslaved by the Romans and the Vikings?


What is your opinion on them?




Regarding the four kids...

If you see they get a good education and don't deny them fair housing, credit, and job opportunities they will probably produce about 40,000 a year in taxes while also performing productive jobs.

If you don't, they will probably cost you between 76,000 and 124,000 per year (much, much more in New York city). And that's if they don't burn down your business, rob your car, sell drugs to your kids, shoot hour police officers, etc.

Racism costs taxpayers a lot of money every year.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [10] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.