Charlottesville riots

[BOBB]

If 2 generations is a blink of the eye, then it only takes half a blink to get out of poverty, and the steps are not especially difficult. How long does it take to escape poverty? One generation. Why is anyone saying that slavery, which ended nearly 8 generations ago is holding people back?

If your argument is that life isn't fair, I agree with you. Now that we understand reality what are the options knowing that everyone is equal under the law? Overthrow the system or do the best you can. What are the possible outcomes of each? Socialism (not awesome for USSR, China, N Korea, Cuba, Venezuela) or equal opportunity but not equal outcome.

You are engaging in the fallacy of composition. What is true for an individual is not true for the whole.

[wufan]

How is it that you have come to know the steps aren't difficult? Did you grow up with poorly educated parents in a neighborhood where no one had good jobs and poverty was the rule?

Is that your only argument? My use of the word difficult? Let's say it is difficult. What do you propose to do? I advocate for improving education and improving job opportunities.

[Aargh]

I guess the billion dollar question is how do you get folks off of government assistance, re-connect families, and re-establish work ethic?

I don't think it can be done with the current employment situation. Wages at and somewhat above the minimum wage qualify for government assistance. We would require massive job growth in wage scales starting at maybe 1.5 times the current minimum wage. That doesn't work well because there would still be all the jobs at or somewhat above the minimum wage that would not have employees as those employees would move to the better-paying jobs.

Immigration could fill the low-paying jobs, but encouraging immigrants to come here and then having them qualify for government assistance doesn't seem like a politically survivable policy.

If you apply free market principles to a global economy, then eventually the standard of living for working classes around the world becomes the same. We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg of the effects of American workers competing for jobs with foreign workers.

There is intense pressure from business leaders to hold down labor costs. That means there is intense pressure to pay people less than they are earning now. Follow it one more step and connect the dots and business leaders are creating intense pressure to put more people on government assistance. But don't even think about raising their taxes to pay for the result they are pursuing.

I play guitar, so let me use an example where I'm familiar. These are all prices for new guitars. I can buy an American-made Fender Stratocaster guitar for around $1,000. It's got a one-piece wood body. I can buy one made in Mexico for $400 - $600. It's got a body made of multiple pieces of wood joined together, which may cause a problem in 20 years, but it sounds the same. I can buy one made in China for $150 - $200. Craftsmanship is not the same, very little is hand-built, but it sounds so close to the same that only an expert could tell by listening. I can pick up the Mexican version in a pawn shop for around $250.

The Mexican and Chinese models made that instrument available to more people, but they significantly reduced the demand for the American-built models. That took people out of manufacturing jobs, which is almost always a one-way ticket to a significantly lower-paying job.

When citizens demand low prices, they demand that American workers either be laid off or paid less. Downward pressure on the number of jobs and the wages for those jobs means more people qualify for government assistance.

I don't have a good outlook for the plight of American workers 40 or 50 years down the road. It's going to get ugly. I'm glad I will not be around to see that.

Oh, one more thing. The Fender corporation is doing nicely. Those working at the headquarters and the stockholders are doing pretty good. It's just their American workers who are taking it in the shorts.

[shockmonster]

I don't think it can be done with the current employment situation. Wages at and somewhat above the minimum wage qualify for government assistance. We would require massive job growth in wage scales starting at maybe 1.5 times the current minimum wage. That doesn't work well because there would still be all the jobs at or somewhat above the minimum wage that would not have employees as those employees would move to the better-paying jobs.

Immigration could fill the low-paying jobs, but encouraging immigrants to come here and then having them qualify for government assistance doesn't seem like a politically survivable policy.

If you apply free market principles to a global economy, then eventually the standard of living for working classes around the world becomes the same. We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg of the effects of American workers competing for jobs with foreign workers.

There is intense pressure from business leaders to hold down labor costs. That means there is intense pressure to pay people less than they are earning now. Follow it one more step and connect the dots and business leaders are creating intense pressure to put more people on government assistance. But don't even think about raising their taxes to pay for the result they are pursuing.

I play guitar, so let me use an example where I'm familiar. These are all prices for new guitars. I can buy an American-made Fender Stratocaster guitar for around $1,000. It's got a one-piece wood body. I can buy one made in Mexico for $400 - $600. It's got a body made of multiple pieces of wood joined together, which may cause a problem in 20 years, but it sounds the same. I can buy one made in China for $150 - $200. Craftsmanship is not the same, very little is hand-built, but it sounds so close to the same that only an expert could tell by listening. I can pick up the Mexican version in a pawn shop for around $250.

The Mexican and Chinese models made that instrument available to more people, but they significantly reduced the demand for the American-built models. That took people out of manufacturing jobs, which is almost always a one-way ticket to a significantly lower-paying job.

When citizens demand low prices, they demand that American workers either be laid off or paid less. Downward pressure on the number of jobs and the wages for those jobs means more people qualify for government assistance.

I don't have a good outlook for the plight of American workers 40 or 50 years down the road. It's going to get ugly. I'm glad I will not be around to see that.

Oh, one more thing. The Fender corporation is doing nicely. Those working at the headquarters and the stockholders are doing pretty good. It's just their American workers who are taking it in the shorts.

You have made one of the arguments for reducing illegal immigrants (especially the poor, low educated immigrants) and regulate our borders, therefore driving up wages for the workers. I've never cared whether our legislature wants to do this and try to help the worker or not, and i don't even know if it would work but it might be worth a try. The liberals and big business tend to work against this idea and maybe that is what is keeping working wages low. Liberals say that it is discrimination and business just doesn't want to pay more for wages. Supply and Demand. Maybe it's worth a try.

[Aargh]

You have made one of the arguments for reducing illegal immigrants (especially the poor, low educated immigrants) and regulate our borders, therefore driving up wages for the workers. I've never cared whether our legislature wants to do this and try to help the worker or not, and i don't even know if it would work but it might be worth a try. The liberals and big business tend to work against this idea and maybe that is what is keeping working wages low. Liberals say that it is discrimination and business just doesn't want to pay more for wages. Supply and Demand. Maybe it's worth a try.

I've also made a reasonable argument for eliminating government subsidies to employed people. If people don't take jobs because they can't live on what they would be paid, wages would be forced upward. Government assistance to employed people is really a subsidy to the people who employ those workers. The Walton family pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars by having the government subsidize their employees.

How do you feel about paying tax dollars to put in the pockets of the WalMart heirs?

[wufan]

You are engaging in the fallacy of composition. What is true for an individual is not true for the whole.

Actually, no I am not. There is a correlation between what I stated and results rendered. Try engaging in the discussion instead of arguing time or misusing logical fallacy.

[pinstripers]

I've also made a reasonable argument for eliminating government subsidies to employed people. If people don't take jobs because they can't live on what they would be paid, wages would be forced upward. Government assistance to employed people is really a subsidy to the people who employ those workers. The Walton family pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars by having the government subsidize their employees.

How do you feel about paying tax dollars to put in the pockets of the WalMart heirs?

Of course, government assistance discourages job seeking.

[ShockTalk]

How is it that you have come to know the steps aren't difficult? Did you grow up with poorly educated parents in a neighborhood where no one had good jobs and poverty was the rule?

You are engaging in the fallacy of composition. What is true for an individual is not true for the whole.

OK. Maybe semantics gets in your way. First, @wufan: said "not especially difficult". Nothing there says easy or moderately easy and doesn't rule out that it still could be moderately difficult to difficult. What's your proposals to make sure everyone not only one gets a high school education, but a legitimate high school education with no "just passing you through the grades" crap? What's your proposal to make sure high school age girls don't get pregnant? How about drugs, gangs? Those are probably some of the first hurdles that youth face to have any chance in the future. Just how far are you willing to go to control these things?

Even if your solutions are reasonably successful, you still have the "lead the horse to water, but can't make him drink" problem. Somewhere in this equation there needs to be family-type support systems and a lot of individual effort to make the right choices. These things more than anything else will most likely lead to success. So, yes, a lot of it is on the individual and family to make sure things don't get de-railed.

This isn't a problem we can totally eliminate or probably greatly reduce in a short time. Unfortunately, after seeing some of those college kids in videos, they think things can change with the flick of a switch. They will not find employers who will put up with those loud, cursing attitudes. They, too, must make adjustments just as we all do.

[ShockingButTrue]

Bullshit. It does not CREATE career criminals. There are drug programs, school programs etc etc. Stop blaming everything but the people doing the wrong!

That opinion has no place in the kind of debate (?) taking place in college lecture halls, halls of legislature, political stumps, and newsroom studios all over the Republic, to say nothing of E. Holders mind, as sad as that is. To postulate such a common sense truth could most likely be considered an acknowledgement of racism, etc., etc... And that's a mondo bizarro, as well as just plain reckless, ideological "dogma." But, nature will balance out such willful stupidity, unfortunately for the rest of us.

What happened to the "Tolerance and Love" Obama and Lynch spoke of? Oh that's right, they weren't talking about "bad Americans." I forgot.

[asiseeit]

Life is unfair. That is a reality that probably isn't ever going to change.
People have to adjust to their individual circumstances cause
circumstances seldom adjust to the individual. People can choose to
adjust ( grow up )or choose to whine and be miserable.

[jdshock]

Fringe related to the topic:

There's a trial going on in St. Louis right now for a cop named Jason Stockley who killed a guy during a traffic stop. The facts in this case are pretty bad. There's apparently a video of the cop during the car chase where he says "I'm going to kill this motherf*****." Once he gets the car pulled over, he basically executes the victim. The cop was carrying an AK-47 at the time, even though it was against department policy to carry that type of personal weapon while on duty. And the weapon that was found in the victim's car only had fingerprints belonging to the cop. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ockley-n787996

But, for some reason, I've heard basically nothing about it here (meaning St. Louis). On its face, the facts seem far worse than in the Michael Brown incident. This is one thing that really bothers me about "movements" or whatever you want to call them. They always seem to put all their eggs in one basket. If you agree with the idea that people of color face discrimination from police officers, you had to get fully on board with EVERY aspect of the Michael Brown case, rather than just saying "yeah, as a whole, they face discrimination." And it seems like movements always pick the wrong incidents to use as evidence. Then the other side just gets to respond by saying "well, Michael Brown did X thing wrong" rather than having to address the fact that you believe the whole system has problems. Who knows, though. If this guy is found not guilty, maybe there will be riots. I just haven't heard very much build up.

[WuDrWu]

Fringe related to the topic:

There's a trial going on in St. Louis right now for a cop named Jason Stockley who killed a guy during a traffic stop. The facts in this case are pretty bad. There's apparently a video of the cop during the car chase where he says "I'm going to kill this motherf*****." Once he gets the car pulled over, he basically executes the victim. The cop was carrying an AK-47 at the time, even though it was against department policy to carry that type of personal weapon while on duty. And the weapon that was found in the victim's car only had fingerprints belonging to the cop. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ockley-n787996

But, for some reason, I've heard basically nothing about it here (meaning St. Louis). On its face, the facts seem far worse than in the Michael Brown incident. This is one thing that really bothers me about "movements" or whatever you want to call them. They always seem to put all their eggs in one basket. If you agree with the idea that people of color face discrimination from police officers, you had to get fully on board with EVERY aspect of the Michael Brown case, rather than just saying "yeah, as a whole, they face discrimination." And it seems like movements always pick the wrong incidents to use as evidence. Then the other side just gets to respond by saying "well, Michael Brown did X thing wrong" rather than having to address the fact that you believe the whole system has problems. Who knows, though. If this guy is found not guilty, maybe there will be riots. I just haven't heard very much build up.

I'll take your description as fact, and I think 99.99% of us find that deplorable and unacceptable. I also think roughly 99% of us accept there are bad cops here and there and we should continue to try and weed them out best as we can.

But you know what? There are bad politicians. Bad business men. Bad lawyers. Bad doctors. Bad military personnel too. With the notable exception of politicians though, the numbers are small and the problems are few.

I DO NOT agree that "people of color" face "discrimination" from police officers. I do agree on rare occurrences, a few people of color face discrimination from the rare police officer.

That being said, what's the FAR BIGGER problem? The few bad apples of police officers or all the criminals they are charged to police?

What's the FAR BIGGER problem? A few hundred, I'll even say a few thousand whack job KKK, neo-Nazis, etc or the hundreds of thousand black gang members terrorizing innocent people all over the country on a daily basis?

A black man is pulled over for doing 100 in a 50 zone. His girlfriend screams and hits the police officer claiming innocence and police brutality, all caught on film. You think that's an isolated instance?

Everyone knows there are problems from time to time. That's why there are 50 safeguards built in. BUT THE FAR bigger problem are the criminals.

And Michael Brown shouldn't have attacked the policeman. Nothing wrong happened there. Get over it.

[jdshock]

I'll take your description as fact, and I think 99.99% of us find that deplorable and unacceptable. I also think roughly 99% of us accept there are bad cops here and there and we should continue to try and weed them out best as we can.

But you know what? There are bad politicians. Bad business men. Bad lawyers. Bad doctors. Bad military personnel too. With the notable exception of politicians though, the numbers are small and the problems are few.

I DO NOT agree that "people of color" face "discrimination" from police officers. I do agree on rare occurrences, a few people of color face discrimination from the rare police officer.

That being said, what's the FAR BIGGER problem? The few bad apples of police officers or all the criminals they are charged to police?

What's the FAR BIGGER problem? A few hundred, I'll even say a few thousand whack job KKK, neo-Nazis, etc or the hundreds of thousand black gang members terrorizing innocent people all over the country on a daily basis?

A black man is pulled over for doing 100 in a 50 zone. His girlfriend screams and hits the police officer claiming innocence and police brutality, all caught on film. You think that's an isolated instance?

Everyone knows there are problems from time to time. That's why there are 50 safeguards built in. BUT THE FAR bigger problem are the criminals.

And Michael Brown shouldn't have attacked the policeman. Nothing wrong happened there. Get over it.

I'm honestly not sure you even read my posts anymore. Like how earlier in this thread you said problems 1-99 are single parents, and I cited several sources explaining how that could be tied to historical or institutional racism, and you never responded. I don't think you're interested in engaging in honest debate most of the time. I think you see my name on a post and know you have to disagree with it.

My post was about how frustrating it is that movements I mostly agree with as a general proposition can put all their eggs in the wrong basket.

[wufan]

Fringe related to the topic:

There's a trial going on in St. Louis right now for a cop named Jason Stockley who killed a guy during a traffic stop. The facts in this case are pretty bad. There's apparently a video of the cop during the car chase where he says "I'm going to kill this motherf*****." Once he gets the car pulled over, he basically executes the victim. The cop was carrying an AK-47 at the time, even though it was against department policy to carry that type of personal weapon while on duty. And the weapon that was found in the victim's car only had fingerprints belonging to the cop. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ockley-n787996

But, for some reason, I've heard basically nothing about it here (meaning St. Louis). On its face, the facts seem far worse than in the Michael Brown incident. This is one thing that really bothers me about "movements" or whatever you want to call them. They always seem to put all their eggs in one basket. If you agree with the idea that people of color face discrimination from police officers, you had to get fully on board with EVERY aspect of the Michael Brown case, rather than just saying "yeah, as a whole, they face discrimination." And it seems like movements always pick the wrong incidents to use as evidence. Then the other side just gets to respond by saying "well, Michael Brown did X thing wrong" rather than having to address the fact that you believe the whole system has problems. Who knows, though. If this guy is found not guilty, maybe there will be riots. I just haven't heard very much build up.

The movement did jump on the wrong case. There are a half dozen or so obviously racist police lead events in the last year that should be the focus. That said, neither the rare yet obvious events, nor the protested wrongfully events serve to demonstrate that there is or is not institutional racism. I'd like to see the argument that shows there is institutional racism. I will also lead with my rejection of proof, I.e., why are people of color worse off? Racism; therefore racism exists. That is a circular argument.

[WuDrWu]

I'm honestly not sure you even read my posts anymore. Like how earlier in this thread you said problems 1-99 are single parents, and I cited several sources explaining how that could be tied to historical or institutional racism, and you never responded. I don't think you're interested in engaging in honest debate most of the time. I think you see my name on a post and know you have to disagree with it.

My post was about how frustrating it is that movements I mostly agree with as a general proposition can put all their eggs in the wrong basket.

Perhaps my reaction is part of the systemic issue of too few people trying to find solutions?