That’s because it doesn’t matter. When a Police Officer asks you to comply with a lawful order the proper response is to comply. Not run…not fight…not slander, simply comply.
And…we already talked about this as well.
The same chart shows 56% of violent crimes committed against whites were by whites my God if that isn’t a slanted quote lol
That equates to 2,290,960 violent crimes in case you were wondering.
Are you surprised? Most people on the right do what you’re doing right now. Lol
Well I’ll be a somethingorother. I guess a blind pig actually can find a truffle sometimes.
I shoulda been more academical.
4 Likes
I understand your point. But, as I have repeatedly said the above things such as slavery etc. have little to do with a young black man not complying with a lawful order of a Police Officer. And as I have also said if that particular young black male had a positive male role model in the home that he grew up with I am reasonably certain that the order by that officer would be complied with. Then…non of the points that you use as a reason for young black males not complying would not be needed.
Point being I agree slavery was bad, Jim Crow laws were bad and everything else that you have mentioned certainly very bad. But…we are here in 2016 and about 70% of young black males grow up without a positive male role model and I believe that …that one thing to be the main reason as to why young black males have a higher violent crime rate and hence a higher incarceration rate.
But, we have plowed this ground about three times prior. And we just do not agree. I respect your opinion and admire your tenacity up to this point.
Again…Merry Christmas
As Thomas Shapiro, a sociologist at Brandeis and the co-author of the seminal book “Black Wealth/White Wealth,” told me, “History and legacy created the racial gap. Policies have maintained it.” Together, they contribute to what he’s called “the hidden cost of being African-American.”
Start with history. Beginning in the New Deal and on into the postwar years, the federal government invested heavily to help ordinary Americans buy homes and go to school, via programs like the Federal Housing Administration and the G.I. Bill. That fuelled an economic boom and fostered the growth of a prosperous middle class. But black Americans received little of this assistance. Redlining by banks and by government agencies prevented black families from buying homes in white neighborhoods; in a thirty-year period, just two per cent of F.H.A. loans went to families of color. G.I. Bill benefits went disproportionately to white veterans. Black agricultural and domestic workers were excluded from Social Security until the fifties. As Dedrick Asante-Muhammad, the co-author of the CFED/I.P.S. report, told me, “Massive government investment helped create an American middle class. But it was a white American middle class.”
The effects of this history are still with us, because wealth, unlike income, accumulates and can be passed down from generation to generation. If you have less wealth to start with, you’ll likely spend any added income on bills or paying down debt rather than saving or investing it. A 2013 study co-authored by Shapiro found that for white families every dollar increase in income yields an increase of $5.19 in wealth; for black households the figure is just sixty-nine cents. [emphasis mine]
2 Likes
Yes, and I believe that I am correct as do most on the right I bet. And you being on the left believe that you are correct.
No harm done–good debate but it won’t be settled on an Internet message board.
She probably does.
But it’s kind of like arguing with my sister. She’s schizophrenic. She also has one of the higher IQ ever measured. Sometimes she’s crazy. Often times she is right though.
The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
3 Likes
Ha ha…you are as “academical” as anyone on T Nation.
Thanks, humbly, but that is just as one friend of mine puts it “raw horsepower.”
The difference is I think we’re both correct in different spaces and have acknowledged that many times. You have failed to acknowledge anything outside of “listen when a cop tells you to do something.” But you are right. It will not be solved on a message board.
I’m left of center on this issue. More moderate on taxes/capitalism/immigration.
Merry Christmas.
Hey you mentioned taxation.
Now there is a topic where I’d like to hear your opinion.
Plus I still have about 40 minutes to kill before my company gets here. I also admire your ability to stay on topic and avoid the personal insults.
I have to say, I think this is exactly how it will be solved–by people of disparate viewpoints discussing the matter civilly via a convenient, ‘safe’ medium; ie, a message board such as this one.
Happy Holidays to all.
3 Likes
I disdain personal insults, prevents any progress.
I’m still forming my beliefs around taxation but I like to think I’m more conservative there. I mean shit if social security and Medicare are unsustainable and I won’t benefit from it in 2060 why am I paying it? No company is going to give me a pension if I stay there for 30 years like AT&T did for my grandma or Dupont for my Grandad. Let me put as much in my 403b/401k as I can.
But I do think we need some safety net programs – we have to avoid dependence though. Things like SNAP – you have to work to get for the most part. I think that should be the standard…should be workfare vs welfare.
Well we agree completely on this topic so far. It seems to me that way back in the day when I took Psychology 101 there was something about when you reward a behavior you get more of that same behavior. Therefore, paying someone to stay home and do nothing will not encourage that person to go to work.
With that said I do believe in safety nets for those who fall on hard times. But I think that should be limited to a certain period of time and no more than so many times in a period of years. In fact, not to rehash, I think the welfare system has harmed the black community and made them dependent on government and less self reliant (certainly not all). Of course there are many white people who have fallen into this trap as well.
I am also for a flat tax. Why should people who have succeeded through their own best efforts have to pay a higher percentage to the government? They are already paying a high amount because they are making more. Let’s say a 20% flat tax with absolutely no deductions with perhaps one exception, that being a home mortgage for their first house only. That would prevent wealthy folks from taking a deduction on vacation homes.
If someone makes $60,000 per year they pay $6,000. If someone makes $600,000 per year they pay $60,000. The less government takes and the more money that is left in the hands of consumers and entrepreneurs the better. This will grow the tax base and most likely shrink the size of government.
Those at the top 20% income level actually pay 84% of all federal taxes! How does that encourage or reward those who have worked hard and prospered? But it does discourage many from moving up the financial ladder.
Your thoughts on all of the above would be most interesting to read.
Agreed. It is extremely difficult to admit that the “other Tribe” might have some serious points, because it calls into question the correctness of one’s own opinions. Both sides are godawful at this, but unwilling to admit that they are because “they started this”. Acknowledging the fallibility (not even incorrectness, just fallibility) of dearly held opinions is supremely difficult and takes an act of will.
Add social media, viral tweets, and the complete lack of a functional frontal lobe in those same folks, and the rational voices can’t have a productive conversation for all the noise (included in things that I believe but can’t prove is my idea that this viral noise can influence or contaminate said rational voices and assimilate them into the hysteria)
Sort of off topic, but wrt police officers…
There’d be a LOT fewer problems if everyone just realized that 80% (no stats to justify the #, just using the general KISS rule) of these guys think of it as just a job, but one where they can get injured or killed from out of nowhere for no reason, and are scared to death of being injured or killed. How do people who are scared to death of being injured or killed behave? -they lash out at the first sign of trouble, real or imagined.
I am not black, but I am a “minority”, and I grew up in a poor neighborhood where there were gangs, so I don’t take my “rights” for granted, even though the Constitution guarantees them lol. I only expect to have “rights” in the “right”…context.
To this day, you will not see me traipsing around the South, especially away from the big cities, for “fun”. Paranoid? probably.
And yes, I understand inflammatory and taking sides, no matter how polished and learned the words used. And in my humble opinion, Obama has been inflammatory, and takes sides all the time, in an un-Presidential-like fashion.
Not that it matters, but the first time around I hopefully watched Obama’s inauguration on TV, and expected great things like everybody else. The second time around, I just shook my head and wondered…then I essentially stopped following the political scene for the next 4 years, because it was such an unbearable clusterfc*k.
1 Like
Or, and this might be easier to understand (even though I don’t really agree with it), think of cops as the largest gang around, who are all packing heat, and who all start out with the law on their side.
Do not think of them as people who are there to “serve” the people.
I’m sure a lot fewer people would dare to provoke them then, and there’d be a lot fewer problems.
1 Like
Not necessarily. One could say that anyone who is scared to death of being injured or killed would try to avoid a physical confrontation at all costs…and that is exactly what most of them do. They only respond when they must.