Police State USA

[Bogtrotter07]

In response I will quote Thomas Sowell:

The higher rate of imprisonment among young men in black ghettos of America today as compared to the 1950s…undermines the very argument in which these imprisonment rates are cited. Surely the supposed “root causes” of crime –poverty, discrimination, and the like– were not less in the 1950s, before the civil rights laws and policies of the 1960s. And what of those blacks who do not drop out of high school but who go onto college instead, and seldom end up in prison? It should also be noted that, from 1994 on into the twenty-first century, the poverty rate among black husband-wife families was below 10 percent. Are these blacks living in a different external “system” or do they have a different internal culture, representing different values in their families or among others who have influenced them? Yet such questions are seldom asked, much less answered. Instead, today’s higher rate of incarceration is blamed on drug laws, tighter sentencing rules, and a general failure of society. In short, society is to blame, except apparently for those members of society who actually commit the crimes.

Intellectuals and Race (Basic Books, 2013), 116.

Of which this is surely one of the stupidest. Arrest rates were lower in respect during the 50's for a broad range of reasons. (Including less dope, fewer weapons, greater distances between the haves and have nots, leading to less opportunity, fewer individual liberties and a more rigid set of social mores, etc.) Of course in those days the effect of 3,000 lynchings and no public release of information related to deaths of prisoners in police custody helped, also!

Like Thomas Sowell, you portend to be an intellectual, fair, even-handed person, but in fact, there is no compassion, or deeper understanding of the human soul in anything either of you have written. This isn't black versus white, it isn't even have versus have nots. It is about any who cannot through social position, illness, disease, mental or physical defect, or whatever, pull themselves out of the misery that comes with poverty.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I have no clue what happened in the wagon, However I do agree with BGIF that Gray did not look ok when he was being put in the wagon. Or maybe his neck was broken due to a break check. Does anyone know if the other prisoner stated anything about a sudden abrupt stop?

I just put a few pieces together today and was surprised to find that he was loaded and unloaded from the wagon several times. Have you seen the timeline (elapsed time from when he was first taken into custody, to when he was finally administered medical attention? Or the eratic path the wagon took?

 

[Bishop2b5]

Who does the most to help the poor or really shows the most real concern for them? The person who tells them they're helpless, they have no control over whether they're poor or not, and gives them a fish... or the person who tells them they can escape poverty, tells them they can control their own destiny, shows them how, and teaches them how to fish?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

The out-of-wedlock birth rate has risen pretty consistently, every year since the early 1960s, for every race. So you are right that the relative drop in crime is not attributable to that. It is probably partially attributable to the increase in incarceration. I guess the question is whether poverty, racism, etc., cause out of wedlock births, or the other way around. It does occur to me that having a child out of wedlock is still a choice, however much pressure there is to have such a child, whatever conditions there are, etc. I certainly think it is preferable to have a child out of wedlock than to have an abortion (another theory about the crime drop, by the way, and one which I doubt but which many liberals accept and cite as a reason for legal abortion).

There are many countries with far more generous welfare states than ours which still have high out of wedlock birth rates but where (liberals will argue) the children are not harmed. These countries tend to be far smaller and more ethnically and socioeconomically homogenous than America. Furthermore, what constitutes harm is a relative thing because even the countries commonly cited (usually Scandinavian) have seen a rise in the out of wedlock birth rate in the past several decades.

I of course agree the issue is complicated. We disagree about the primary driver. For me, the key historical fact continues to be that prior to the 1960s, black crime was lower, even as poverty, segregation, racism, etc., were higher. Significantly, the number of blacks being raised in two parent families was also much higher prior to the 1960s than today. Something was different then, but it was not more welfare, or racial tolerance, or funding for largely or entirely black public schools. I do not mean to romanticize the past, as conservatives are often accused of doing, but only to emphasize that in my view we have chosen the wrong future in many ways.

I should also add that I am not saying that blacks are uniquely "irresponsible" by having kids out of wedlock. Most groups have seen a major increase in illegitimacy, but it has been particularly high among blacks. It has also affected whites, especially poorer whites.

And of course this effing gem : Do you know what the "rate of having kids out of wedlock is in any of the Scandinavian countries? But no crime or social unease, you say. That is because parents, (mothers or fathers are provided the services they need to survive and for their families to thrive.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Who does the most to help the poor or really shows the most real concern for them? The person who tells them they're helpless, they have no control over whether they're poor or not, and gives them a fish... or the person who tells them they can escape poverty, tells them they can control their own destiny, shows them how, and teaches them how to fish?

What the hell does this have to do with the situation in America?

Who is telling them they are helpless and gives them a fish? Big10 schools? And who helps them to self-actualization, and teaches them to fish? [SEC] Bagmen?

 

[Bishop2b5]

Like Thomas Sowell, you portend to be an intellectual, fair, even-handed person, but in fact, there is no compassion, or deeper understanding of the human soul in anything either of you have written. This isn't black versus white, it isn't even have versus have nots. It is about any who cannot through social position, illness, disease, mental or physical defect, or whatever, pull themselves out of the misery that comes with poverty.

You're the one who said the above. Just pointing out that your caring and compassion and understanding has done them damned little good over the past 50 years. Instead of patting yourself on the back about how much you care and how good you feel about all the fish you've given them, how about stop making them permanently dependent and impoverished, and teach them how to escape poverty. That's probably a lot more meaningfully helpful and compassionate.

 

[pkt77242]

Who does the most to help the poor or really shows the most real concern for them? The person who tells them they're helpless, they have no control over whether they're poor or not, and gives them a fish... or the person who tells them they can escape poverty, tells them they can control their own destiny, shows them how, and teaches them how to fish?

Really nice strawman argument since neither of those two sides exist. You have not portrayed either side accurately, but I hope that your belief in what you said helps you to sleep at night because it missed the truth (on both sides) by about a mile or two.

 

[IrishinSyria]

What black people need is more rich white people telling them what to do.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Really nice strawman argument since neither of those two sides exist. You have not portrayed either side accurately, but I hope that your belief in what you said helps you to sleep at night because it missed the truth (on both sides) by about a mile or two.

It's exactly spot on, 100% true and that's why it aggravates you so much... and why you have no effective or meaningful argument against it. Those of you who've spent the past 50 years infantilizing and enabling the poor have done not a whit to actually help them. But hey, as long as you can pat yourself on the back about how good you feel about trying, all's good huh?

Stop complaining about poverty while doing the very things to perpetuate it. Do something that actually helps the poor escape it. And if you need a hint about what that is, it's NOT sitting on their hands waiting for handouts and becoming permanently dependent while making one miserably bad life choice after another.

Look at all the people who HAVE escaped poverty, find the common factors in their stories, then teach those to the poor. That'll work a heck of a lot better than an endless supply of fish and you telling them they're incapable of doing better, their own choices aren't a factor, and it's all somebody else's fault. Start being part of the solution instead of the problem.

 

[Redbar]

Of which this is surely one of the stupidest. Arrest rates were lower in respect during the 50's for a broad range of reasons. (Including less dope, fewer weapons, greater distances between the haves and have nots, leading to less opportunity, fewer individual liberties and a more rigid set of social mores, etc.) Of course in those days the effect of 3,000 lynchings and no public release of information related to deaths of prisoners in police custody helped, also!

Like Thomas Sowell, you portend to be an intellectual, fair, even-handed person, but in fact, there is no compassion, or deeper understanding of the human soul in anything either of you have written. This isn't black versus white, it isn't even have versus have nots. It is about any who cannot through social position, illness, disease, mental or physical defect, or whatever, pull themselves out of the misery that comes with poverty.

I agree.

Why did the French Revolution happen in France when there were opulent rulers and suffering peasants throughout Europe and the world? There was the right amount of oppression and the right amount of freedom to do something about it. The latter prerequisite did not exist for blacks in the 1960's. The response we are witnessing from some in the black community in our cities today will never seem reasonable or rational or fit any logical model that Thomas Sowell crafts until they consider that some segments of the black community are still dealing with the very real aftermath of the violence and hatred of the institution of slavery in their daily lives in 2015. When that type of negative energy-evil, is unleashed and woven into the fabric of a nation, the damages are residual and collateral.

 

[pkt77242]

It's exactly spot on, 100% true and that's why it aggravates you so much... and why you have no effective or meaningful argument against it. Those of you who've spent the past 50 years infantilizing and enabling the poor have done not a whit to actually help them. But hey, as long as you can pat yourself on the back about how good you feel about trying, all's good huh?

Stop complaining about poverty while doing the very things to perpetuate it. Do something that actually helps the poor escape it. And if you need a hint about what that is, it's NOT sitting on their hands waiting for handouts and becoming permanently dependent while making one miserably bad life choice after another.

Look at all the people who HAVE escaped poverty, find the common factors in their stories, then teach those to the poor. That'll work a heck of a lot better than an endless supply of fish and you telling them they're incapable of doing better, their own choices aren't a factor, and it's all somebody else's fault. Start being part of the solution instead of the problem.

I am not arguing with you because there is no point in arguing with someone who is so divorced from reality.

 

[Bubbles]

No, I am not arguing with you because there is no point in arguing with someone who is so divorced from reality. I might as well argue with a rock.

There is so much closed-mindedness on both sides. I would urge everyone to stop speaking in absolutes. There is culpability from everyone involved and to argue otherwise is 'divorced from reality'. The left argues X the right argues Y.....both are wrong, but ironically, working hand in hand to ensure nothing changes.

 

[pkt77242]

There is so much closed-mindedness on both sides. I would urge everyone to stop speaking in absolutes. There is culpability from everyone involved and to argue otherwise is 'divorced from reality'. The left argues X the right argues Y.....both are wrong, but ironically, working hand in hand to ensure nothing changes.

I am not arguing that I am right or that the other side doesn't have some good posts (for example NDGRADSTUDENT had some interesting posts on out of wedock children, cime, poverty etc) but I am not going to engage in debate with someone who thinks that his side shots gold and the other side knows nothing.

 

[Bishop2b5]

No, I am not arguing with you because there is no point in arguing with someone who is so divorced from reality. I might as well argue with a rock.

OK, speaking of being divorced from reality: tell me how well endless handouts have worked in raising the poor out of poverty. We're now seeing families where multiple generations have remained poor living on the public dole. Why? Wasn't it supposed to give them a hand up to escape that grinding poverty? Instead, it's created a permanent impoverished underclass. Nice job there. Way to help 'em out!

Tell me why the vast majority of those who get an education, don't have children until they can afford to support and raise them, don't have children with multiple partners who won't or can't be there to help support & raise them, don't engage in criminal activity and don't associate with those who do, treat every job as an opportunity to learn and improve their job skills, and put off immediate gratification in favor of long term rewards escape poverty. Explain then why those who do the opposite rarely if ever do.

Go find 1000 people who grew up in poverty and escaped it. Other than the very small minority who became pro athletes, successful criminals who avoided jail, or made it in the entertainment industry, you'll find almost none of them achieved that escape by habitually making poor lifestyle choices or just living on welfare. The ones who escape are the ones who did just what I described. They made good decisions, worked hard, got an education, and put off immediate gratification in favor of long-term rewards.

That's how most people actually escape poverty. It's how my family did it. It's how the ancestors of most of the people who came to this country and succeeded did it. It's how so many of the Vietnamese boat people from a couple of generations ago did it. It's how the poor Italian, Irish and Jewish immigrants did it a century ago. It's how today's middle-class and upper-class Blacks did it. It's how the poor have been climbing their way up out of poverty throughout history. It's what works. Go teach those lessons to the poor if you really want to help them instead of treating them like helpless children who can't do better and who aren't responsible for their own failures or successes.

 

[Bubbles]

I am not arguing that I am right or that the other side doesn't have some good posts (for example NDGRADSTUDENT had some interesting posts on out of wedlock children, crime, poverty etc) but I am not going to engage in debate with someone who thinks that his side shots gold and the other side knows nothing.

All due respect, shots fired on both sides, its not productive. Sorry for quoting your post in particular......but to discount his post offhand as 100% inaccurate and divorced from reality with no hints of truth is exactly what I was arguing against.

Some perspective: I watched both the police union claim that the officers 'did nothing wrong' when that's clearly a load of crap given that they have admitted to failing to secure their prisoner (at the very least) on one hand.....and a community organizer champion people caught red handed looting and causing property damage as heroes on the other. From what I can tell, both sides have their heads far up their collective asses and are smelling nothing but roses.

 

[GoIrish41]

It's exactly spot on, 100% true and that's why it aggravates you so much... and why you have no effective or meaningful argument against it. Those of you who've spent the past 50 years infantilizing and enabling the poor have done not a whit to actually help them. But hey, as long as you can pat yourself on the back about how good you feel about trying, all's good huh?

Stop complaining about poverty while doing the very things to perpetuate it. Do something that actually helps the poor escape it. And if you need a hint about what that is, it's NOT sitting on their hands waiting for handouts and becoming permanently dependent while making one miserably bad life choice after another.

Look at all the people who HAVE escaped poverty, find the common factors in their stories, then teach those to the poor. That'll work a heck of a lot better than an endless supply of fish and you telling them they're incapable of doing better, their own choices aren't a factor, and it's all somebody else's fault. Start being part of the solution instead of the problem.

So you are advocating for Obama's sending everyone to community college to give the this chance you are talking about? Or lowering the rates on student loans? You must want to back infrastructure renewal projects that would put these people to work and off the streets while providing an urgent need for everyone. Maybe put a little money in their pockets to get the economy rolling again? That would help them get on the right track ...

Or are you saying that we should continue to target them for BS crimes and send them to prison? Should we gut food programs so they starve or remove the safety not altogether so if hunger does not kill them homelessness will. Because obviously they will not have access to healthcare if we are really going to impose meaningful tough love. Your view of the the social magic of conservative policies is the only thing that is generous here which is why conservatives will have trouble winning national office for the foreseeable future.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I am not arguing that I am right or that the other side doesn't have some good posts (for example NDGRADSTUDENT had some interesting posts on out of wedock children, cime, poverty etc) but I am not going to engage in debate with someone who thinks that his side shots gold and the other side knows nothing.

Nobody, including myself, thinks gold comes out of my ass. I'm just frustrated that your side keeps doing the same thing with the same results and won't or can't see that it's an abysmal failure and has hurt the very people you claim you want to help. It doesn't work. It DOES NOT WORK! Never has. Never will. Look at the freakin' results! All the "But we meant well" bs is just utterly ridiculous and a darn poor excuse for the results it's gotten.

Now look at what HAS worked in virtually every case. It's worked for just about everyone, everywhere. Try that for awhile. It has a proven track record. It sure can't produce any worse results.

 

[pkt77242]

Nobody, including myself, thinks gold comes out of my ass. I'm just frustrated that your side keeps doing the same thing with the same results and won't or can't see that it's an abysmal failure and has hurt the very people you claim you want to help. It doesn't work. It DOES NOT WORK! Never has. Never will. Look at the freakin' results! All the "But we meant well" bs is just utterly ridiculous and a darn poor excuse for the results it's gotten.

Now look at what HAS worked in virtually every case. It's worked for just about everyone, everywhere. Try that for awhile. It has a proven track record. It sure can't produce any worse results.

The reason I don't want to discuss it with you is that you are completely misrepresenting the liberal view point (along with the conservative viewpoint) to make you side look good and to discredit the other side. Most liberals don't believe what you stayed about them. Sorry.

Edit: What has worked? The best countries at preventing poverty are the nordic countries. Why don't we copy some of their ideas. Map: How 35 countries compare on child poverty (the U.S. is ranked 34th) - The Washington Post

 

[pkt77242]

So you are advocating for Obama's sending everyone to community college to give the this chance you are talking about? Or lowering the rates on student loans? You must want to back infrastructure renewal projects that would put these people to work and off the streets while providing an urgent need for everyone. Maybe put a little money in their pockets to get the economy rolling again? That would help them get on the right track ...

Or are you saying that we should continue to target them for BS crimes and send them to prison? Should we gut food programs so they starve or remove the safety not altogether so if hunger does not kill them homelessness will. Because obviously they will not have access to healthcare if we are really going to impose meaningful tough love. Your view of the the social magic of conservative policies is the only thing that is generous here which is why conservatives will have trouble winning national office for the foreseeable future.

Thank you.

 

[GoIrish41]

Nobody, including myself, thinks gold comes out of my ass. I'm just frustrated that your side keeps doing the same thing with the same results and won't or can't see that it's an abysmal failure and has hurt the very people you claim you want to help. It doesn't work. It DOES NOT WORK! Never has. Never will. Look at the freakin' results! All the "But we meant well" bs is just utterly ridiculous and a darn poor excuse for the results it's gotten.

Now look at what HAS worked in virtually every case. It's worked for just about everyone, everywhere. Try that for awhile. It has a proven track record. It sure can't produce any worse results.

Remember when the republicans had the White House and the full congress and they dismantled those programs and put policies in place to make the lives of African Americans better? ... Yeah me neither. I wonder why that is?

 

[Bubbles]

Remember when the republicans had the White House and the full congress and they dismantled those programs and put policies in place to make the lives of African Americans better? ... Yeah me neither. I wonder why that is?

Both sides are far too entrenched in the righteousness of their position.

Holy crap....can't believe the sad serendipity of having to quote you to yourself....anyway....wiping my hands of this and i'm out. Have fun everyone.

 

[GoIrish41]

Holy crap....can't believe the sad serendipity of having to quote you to yourself....anyway....wiping my hands of this and i'm out. Have fun everyone.

I was simply pointing out that when the GOP had the opportunity to change things, they did not. They chose not to solve these decades old problems. Why? They are either just talking points they are spewing or they do not really care about poor black people. Period.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Remember when the republicans had the White House and the full congress and they dismantled those programs and put policies in place to make the lives of African Americans better? ... Yeah me neither. I wonder why that is?

Well, the GOP passed No Child Left Behind (with Democratic support), which was supposed to improve the lives of African-Americans but apparently has not done so. Welfare reform was passed by a GOP Congress with plenty of Democratic support and was signed by a Democratic President. In general, though, much education, welfare, legal reform, etc., are handled by states. Strikingly, blacks are moving back to the Republican-controlled South. Also, the more Republican a state, the lower its black to white imprisonment ratio (see page 11, table 6 of this chart). So I guess the liberal states are more racist than the Southern states?

We also now know that three of the cops charged in this case are black, so I am not sure how the GOP, white racism, etc., continue to fit into this story. The Narrative is starting to collapse.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

You're the one who said the above. Just pointing out that your caring and compassion and understanding has done them damned little good over the past 50 years. Instead of patting yourself on the back about how much you care and how good you feel about all the fish you've given them, how about stop making them permanently dependent and impoverished, and teach them how to escape poverty. That's probably a lot more meaningfully helpful and compassionate.

To the best of my ability, I haven't patted anyone on the back, jacked anyone off, or kissed anything that would leave a bad taste.

And I am certainly not trying to convince anyone that I have the answerers; in fact I thought I made it painfully clear that there are no easy answers. I just think that many start in the wrong direction, and have followed the footsteps of many others over the years. I would start in a different direction, one that may involve prayer, and love.

But I will pat Buster on the back, now that you mention it. Of all the posters, more idiot things have been said about him in this thread, each with less basis of truth than I have ever seen. And he handled it with impeccable class!

Reminds me of the joke about the research scientist that was experimenting on frogs. He taught a frog to jump on voice command; and then he recorded the distance the frog leaped. After that he cut off one of the frog's legs and again commanded it to jump, recording the diminished distance of the attempt. He continued this until he cut off the last of the frog's legs. When he commanded it to jump, nothing! The scientist promptly recorded in his book, "Removal of all of a frog's legs results in the frog becoming deaf!"

Some test frogs just can't leap out of their conditions, I guess.

 

[Bishop2b5]

So you are advocating for Obama's sending everyone to community college to give the this chance you are talking about? Or lowering the rates on student loans? You must want to back infrastructure renewal projects that would put these people to work and off the streets while providing an urgent need for everyone. Maybe put a little money in their pockets to get the economy rolling again? That would help them get on the right track ...

Or are you saying that we should continue to target them for BS crimes and send them to prison? Should we gut food programs so they starve or remove the safety not altogether so if hunger does not kill them homelessness will. Because obviously they will not have access to healthcare if we are really going to impose meaningful tough love. Your view of the the social magic of conservative policies is the only thing that is generous here which is why conservatives will have trouble winning national office for the foreseeable future.

I read something recently that said the US spends a bit over $14,000/year on each person below the poverty line in aid of one type or another. I'm saying we should spend that money in ways that help them improve their situation and escape poverty instead of perpetuating it and making them permanently dependent on aid. I'd be all for putting more money into schools as long as it actually resulted in kids from poor families getting a real education. I'm in favor of sending all kids who've taken advantage of that education and met certain academic standards showing they're willing to work and better themselves getting free tuition to community colleges and even universities if they show the effort and ability to succeed there. It's hard to change a culture of poverty and academic underperformance, but it can be done in a generation or two and it's a huge step towards getting the poor out of that hole.

I'd gladly see some of that money (and more) go to improving infrastructure and creating jobs. A person without a job who can't support their family or themselves and has to rely on government assistance takes a huge hit to their ego and self esteem. When they begin working and earning their own hard-earned money, standing on their own two feet, and gaining pride in ownership of something, they get a different feeling about themselves and hopefulness for the future.

This isn't the entire solution, but a good start: enlistment in the military or a Public Service Corp (something like Job Corp or some of the Depression-era work organizations) where you're doing something constructive and needed like serving your country, rebuilding inner cities, working for the public highway or utilities department, etc. They'd earn a reasonable pay, learn a skill, and further college, tech school, or trade school education would be paid for just like in the military. Full medical benefits would be provided during service and during the time afterwards while continuing their education.

I'm all in favor of us having a safety net. People go through temporary hard times. Some people genuinely are not capable of taking care of themselves due to mental or physical issues. Nobody wants to see those people cast aside and suffer. Most of us need a hand up at some point in our lives. However, it's supposed to be a bridge, not a highway for most people. Nobody begrudges the truly disabled being supported, even in perpetuity. Nobody begrudges the help for someone trying hard who hits a rough patch. The anger and frustration and unwillingness to help comes when living on the public dole becomes a lifestyle for otherwise capable people or their poverty is created by one bad lifestyle choice after another and they make no attempt to better themselves or stop doing the stupid stuff that has them in this situation.

It's extraordinarily frustrating to see people who didn't take advantage of a free HS education or the opportunity to get a free college education by working hard in HS and earning scholarships or other financial aid, who had multiple children with multiple partners who weren't dependable or willing to help raise those children and did so with no way to support them. It's extraordinarily frustrating to see people who have quit countless jobs because they were "beneath them" or they didn't like the hours or how the boss talked to them, didn't apply themselves at those jobs to learn anything or work their way up or improve their job skills. Or people who have chosen every short term solution to all of life's long term problems and put immediate gratification ahead of long term reward... and then claim it's someone else's fault that they're poor and society should take care of them.

It's common for 20-somethings to end up back home with mom & dad after screwing up or not finding their way. Not the end of the world. The parents help them through a bad patch and eventually the kid grows up and stands on his own two feet. It's not good for anyone when the kid keeps coming back without ever bettering his situation or growing up, or just decides he's gonna live in their basement and never leave, let them support him forever, and never makes any attempt to do better... and the parents aren't helping him if they allow that and enable him. And I speak from experience on this.

I have a relative who's ridiculously smart and capable. He lost his dream job making beau coup money, lost his girlfriend, and moved back home temporarily. Except that 6 years later he's still there, has only had one part time job that lasted 4 months, and has become the most useless, low self esteem, depressed, hopeless thing you've ever seen. He's not the slightest bit motivated to do anything to improve his situation because his parents are enabling him by supporting him, coddling him, and not demanding of him what he's capable of. They've offered to pay for him to go back to college. I've arranged two good jobs for him. He's had countless job offers, but he finds some excuse for all of them for the simple reason that he's getting most of his needs met without having to do anything except sleep all day and stay up all night surfing the Net and eating the food his parents provide (along with a roof over his head, utilities, a mom who does his laundry, and drive a car his parents bought). They've crippled him with their "help." Instead of providing him with a bridge over troubled waters, it's become a highway for life.

It's the reason the National Park Service says not to feed the wild animals. It makes them dependent and they lose the ability to fend for themselves. It's why wildlife rescue facilities teach injured or orphaned animals from the wild to fend for themselves instead of becoming permanently dependent on us.

I don't want to see anyone hungry or homeless or poor. Heck, I've been all three of those things myself at one point many years ago, and I DO sympathize with anyone there now. We disagree about how to avoid that or correct it where it already exists. I firmly believe in the old proverb about how if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day, but if you teach him to fish, you feed him for life. I believe that the solution lies in making public assistance a temporary measure for the vast majority, teaching those in poverty the tried & true methods for how to get out (or avoid it in the first place), helping them do the things to escape poverty, demanding responsibility and effort from them to do so, holding them accountable for their actions, helping provide the opportunity or helping them find it, and providing a temporary safety net as a last resort, not a permanent way of life.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

No idea if the charges make sense or not. Only the state's attorney knows. I will say though, she didn't make her own job any easier by the manner in which she addressed the protesters. I would think that will be used by defense at some point...SMH. Could have just said allow me to do my job w/o burning shit down please...nope, had to pander. Came off a bit like..."I got you man, don't worry". Won't play well IMHO.

I am wondering what you mean by this. Because, to the best of my knowledge, she only addressed the media once, in the press conference where she outlined the criminal case, and stated that was all the information she would give, mentioning specifically that she would hold all her evidence close.

(Once again, I feel that the snippet from the conference featured in the news article that you posted, showed her in a poor light. Radical, militant, and uppity. When in fact she was very tough, and purposefully.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Well, the GOP passed No Child Left Behind (with Democratic support), which was supposed to improve the lives of African-Americans but apparently has not done so. Welfare reform was passed by a GOP Congress with plenty of Democratic support and was signed by a Democratic President. In general, though, much education, welfare, legal reform, etc., are handled by states.

And yet barring black communities from FHA loans for decades and (immediately after that ended) the launching of the disastrous War on Drugs is the fault of the federal government. Yet I haven't heard one iota from you about it. We're given two options from you, personal responsibility/family structure and liberals. It's like you're grooming yourself to be a Fox News talkinghead.

Strikingly, blacks are moving back to the Republican-controlled South.

Why is that striking? The entire fucking country is moving south and west and has been since the Mayflower. It's noteworthy when that isn't the case. "I'm moving south because of the Republicans!" has been proclaimed exactly six times by migrating blacks (source).

Also, the more Republican a state, the lower its black to white imprisonment ratio (see page 11, table 6 of this chart). So I guess the liberal states are more racist than the Southern states?

Is this a rhetorical question? This isn't even worth a response. I would think a guy who supposedly goes to grad school at Notre Dame would have the ability to make better use of statistics and avoid asinine generalizations (ie "liberal states").

We also now know that three of the cops charged in this case are black, so I am not sure how the GOP, white racism, etc., continue to fit into this story. The Narrative is starting to collapse.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Me too!

 

[Buster Bluth]

I read something recently that said the US spends a bit over $14,000/year on each person below the poverty line in aid of one type or another. I'm saying we should spend that money in ways that help them improve their situation and escape poverty instead of perpetuating it and making them permanently dependent on aid. I'd be all for putting more money into schools as long as it actually resulted in kids from poor families getting a real education. I'm in favor of sending all kids who've taken advantage of that education and met certain academic standards showing they're willing to work and better themselves getting free tuition to community colleges and even universities if they show the effort and ability to succeed there. It's hard to change a culture of poverty and academic underperformance, but it can be done in a generation or two and it's a huge step towards getting the poor out of that hole.

I'd gladly see some of that money (and more) go to improving infrastructure and creating jobs. A person without a job who can't support their family or themselves and has to rely on government assistance takes a huge hit to their ego and self esteem. When they begin working and earning their own hard-earned money, standing on their own two feet, and gaining pride in ownership of something, they get a different feeling about themselves and hopefulness for the future.

This isn't the entire solution, but a good start: enlistment in the military or a Public Service Corp (something like Job Corp or some of the Depression-era work organizations) where you're doing something constructive and needed like serving your country, rebuilding inner cities, working for the public highway or utilities department, etc. They'd earn a reasonable pay, learn a skill, and further college, tech school, or trade school education would be paid for just like in the military. Full medical benefits would be provided during service and during the time afterwards while continuing their education.

I'm all in favor of us having a safety net. People go through temporary hard times. Some people genuinely are not capable of taking care of themselves due to mental or physical issues. Nobody wants to see those people cast aside and suffer. Most of us need a hand up at some point in our lives. However, it's supposed to be a bridge, not a highway for most people. Nobody begrudges the truly disabled being supported, even in perpetuity. Nobody begrudges the help for someone trying hard who hits a rough patch. The anger and frustration and unwillingness to help comes when living on the public dole becomes a lifestyle for otherwise capable people or their poverty is created by one bad lifestyle choice after another and they make no attempt to better themselves or stop doing the stupid stuff that has them in this situation.

It's extraordinarily frustrating to see people who didn't take advantage of a free HS education or the opportunity to get a free college education by working hard in HS and earning scholarships or other financial aid, who had multiple children with multiple partners who weren't dependable or willing to help raise those children and did so with no way to support them. It's extraordinarily frustrating to see people who have quit countless jobs because they were "beneath them" or they didn't like the hours or how the boss talked to them, didn't apply themselves at those jobs to learn anything or work their way up or improve their job skills. Or people who have chosen every short term solution to all of life's long term problems and put immediate gratification ahead of long term reward... and then claim it's someone else's fault that they're poor and society should take care of them.

It's common for 20-somethings to end up back home with mom & dad after screwing up or not finding their way. Not the end of the world. The parents help them through a bad patch and eventually the kid grows up and stands on his own two feet. It's not good for anyone when the kid keeps coming back without ever bettering his situation or growing up, or just decides he's gonna live in their basement and never leave, let them support him forever, and never makes any attempt to do better... and the parents aren't helping him if they allow that and enable him. And I speak from experience on this.

I have a relative who's ridiculously smart and capable. He lost his dream job making beau coup money, lost his girlfriend, and moved back home temporarily. Except that 6 years later he's still there, has only had one part time job that lasted 4 months, and has become the most useless, low self esteem, depressed, hopeless thing you've ever seen. He's not the slightest bit motivated to do anything to improve his situation because his parents are enabling him by supporting him, coddling him, and not demanding of him what he's capable of. They've offered to pay for him to go back to college. I've arranged two good jobs for him. He's had countless job offers, but he finds some excuse for all of them for the simple reason that he's getting most of his needs met without having to do anything except sleep all day and stay up all night surfing the Net and eating the food his parents provide (along with a roof over his head, utilities, a mom who does his laundry, and drive a car his parents bought). They've crippled him with their "help." Instead of providing him with a bridge over troubled waters, it's become a highway for life.

It's the reason the National Park Service says not to feed the wild animals. It makes them dependent and they lose the ability to fend for themselves. It's why wildlife rescue facilities teach injured or orphaned animals from the wild to fend for themselves instead of becoming permanently dependent on us.

I don't want to see anyone hungry or homeless or poor. Heck, I've been all three of those things myself at one point many years ago, and I DO sympathize with anyone there now. We disagree about how to avoid that or correct it where it already exists. I firmly believe in the old proverb about how if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day, but if you teach him to fish, you feed him for life. I believe that the solution lies in making public assistance a temporary measure for the vast majority, teaching those in poverty the tried & true methods for how to get out (or avoid it in the first place), helping them do the things to escape poverty, demanding responsibility and effort from them to do so, holding them accountable for their actions, helping provide the opportunity or helping them find it, and providing a temporary safety net as a last resort, not a permanent way of life.

A+

I think the Obama community college thing will fall on its face. A big government handout to prop up college budgets, and it won't solve the problem.

I'm no welfare expert, or even that knowledgeable about it, but it has always struck me as odd that there isn't some government-funded awareness campaign with celebrities who are popular in inner cities who promote a simple thing called "don't have kids when you're young!" I'd go as far as offering those birth control shots for free, or even pay them a small amount (assuming the science says they don't harm teenagers).

But that doesn't change much if prisons look at fourth grade test scores to gauge future populations. Clearly, according to the private sector, the damage is done by the time they're ten. I would guess we need funding for preschool and pre-preschool. (Okay so I read into that and it's disputed online. Politifact says it's not true, but Forbes says it is. Either way I know enough inner city teachers to know that the scores many have by the time they're in first grade are so low that they're basically guaranteed to stay that way.)

I think we could give 120% of the GI bill benefits for inner city youth. Hell give them a $5,000 signing bonus and $20,000 if they last two years in the military. If it can actually change the course of their lives.

I don't know, I'm just a dude with a keyboard but I sure as shit am with you about being against pumping money down the same old drain. We need programs/ideas that work. Great now I'm going to spend $200 on Amazon reading welfare solution ideas haha

making them permanently dependent on aid.

Which is my reason #2 for ending the Drug War. Why the hell are we giving people felonies for nonviolent drug offenses? Felonies = unemployable = stuck in da hood.

Reason #1 is marijuana is neat.

 

[GoIrish41]

Reason #1 is marijuana is neat.

You would say that you leftist hippy!

Agree Bishops post deserves reps.