Zone1 Who Benefits from the Suppression of Racial information on Crime?

[miketx]

Amid recent uptick in violence, North Side life goes on as normally as possible

Few outward signs remained Saturday of the chaos and trauma wrought by gunmen a day prior at the Destiny of Faith Church on Pittsburgh’s North Side. Police...

www.post-gazette.com

There has been a recent surge of apparently gang or turf-related violence in the North Side of Pittsburgh. Reports of North Side shootings are almost a daily phenomenon. A week or so ago, a "white" woman was killed in the crossfire as she left a neighborhood supermarket. Other than that, everyone else involved - perpetrators, victims, uninvolved bystanders, and intended victims, are all Black.

And it's not like everyone on the North Side is Black. There are several neighborhoods that are fully integrated, and some that are quite posh, with the usual inflated real estate values, trendy eateries, fern bars, and so on. Franco Harris, NFL HOFer lives in the heart of the North Side as does my son.

A couple generations ago - say in the '50's - this overall story would have been reported on as a "Negro" problem on the North Side. Now, you can read the reports, word by word, and there is no mention of the race of anyone involved. The "white" woman victim last week was pictured - which was entirely appropriate.

So what is the benefit of the cloaking of racial information in the Media? Even the most obtuse reader/viewer knows what's going on, and what to do about it (avoid certain neighborhoods). It is not a problem of the North Side population going lawless, the violence is confined to a specific demographic. But the Media dare not mention it.

Parenthetically, the newly-elected Black mayor seems absolutely apoplectic in his intention to stop - or at least suppress - the deadly violence, but one wonders what can be done to improve the locals' skills at non-violent dispute resolution.

Politicians and criminals benefit.

 

[Coyote]

Why do you ignore it? I am just offering the observation that is substantiated by facts. There are also areas of white poverty and they also have a disproportionate crime rates, however, it is not as pronounced as the areas the OP is suggesting.

Most white poverty is rural. And rural blacks and rural whites both have lower crime rates than urban areas.

 

[Concerned American]

They are told they will get out of jail quicker because if they don’t take a plea and they can’t afford bail, they stay in jail until trial.

You sound like you think it is only black youth that are treated this way. That is absolutely false. I was arrested in 1972 and I was in similar circumstances. I took the plea deal and the lesser penalty rather to spend any time in jail. Prosecutors offer plea deals to lessen the load on the courts and save the state money. It has absolutely nothing to do with race. To suggest anything else is pure gaslighting.

 

[Concerned American]

Most white poverty is rural.

You have been suggesting that the problem is from poverty, now you have switched to geography. I believe you are jaded and refuse to see the realities of the situation. Poverty, urban or rural is NO excuse for flaunting the law. By excusing it, you are perpetuating the problem.

 

[Coyote]

You sound like you think it is only black youth that are treated this way. That is absolutely false. I was arrested in 1972 and I was in similar circumstances. I took the plea deal and the lesser penalty rather to spend any time in jail. Prosecutors offer plea deals to lessen the load on the courts and save the state money. It has absolutely nothing to do with race. To suggest anything else is pure gaslighting.

Not gaslighting at all. Blacks are more likely to be unable to afford bail, and then negotiate for a better plea. Blacks are also more likely to be given a worse plea deal than whites, all other factors being equal. So the white ends up with most charges dismissed and the ends up with a conviction. In both cases, it has little to with actual guilt or innocence.

When Race Tips the Scales in Plea Bargaining

New research finds that prosecutors give white defendants better deals than black defendants.

www.themarshallproject.org

 

[Markle]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? Single parenting can increase poverty and poverty can increase rates of single parents.

Not really, as you know. Prior to President Johnson's "War on Poverty," the black family unit was very strong. The "War on Poverty" rewarded mothers to be single rather than married. Folks who live in poverty may be poor but they are not stupid. Rewarding bad behavior, as told to us by Dr. Phil only leads to more, bad behavior. That makes sense, does it not?

 

[AZrailwhale]

In Russia 1980s, violent crime rate was low. During the crisis of 1990s, violent crime rate was very high. Now, when economy has long stabilized, violent crime rate is low.


Thank G-d, we left before 1990s.

Totalitarian states tend to have very low crime rates. Recidivism isn’t much of a problem when criminals have no right to due process and prisons are very unpleasant places with high mortality rates.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Totalitarian states tend to have very low crime rates. Recidivism isn’t much of a problem when criminals have no right to due process and prisons are very unpleasant places with high mortality rates.

USSR was not Totalitarian since 1953. I lived there until 1983 (age 13).

 

[Lisa558]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? Single parenting can increase poverty and poverty can increase rates of single parents.

So the answer would be to stop having children OOW. in one generation, poverty would be substantially reduced.

How many black crime rate threads have we had? What is their focus? Race. None talk about the many other factors that go into crime rates, ONLY race. That isn’t blacks and leftists.

That’s because blacks are blaming racism for crime. So we are showing how crime results from poverty and poor educational attainment, which in turn is more prevalent among unwed mothers.

I didn’t start this thread.



You only pointed it out when pressured as to why you only focused on race, not any of the factors driving crime rates such as poverty.

No, I pointed it out when liberals falsely accused me of racism.

Not really. There are a lot of other relevant factors then simply blaming single parents for those.

Like what?

 

[IM2]

I'm not a Republican, I'm a libertarian temporarily supporting Trump due to Democratic Party cheating.

When was the last time the Republicans made a serious effort to reduce welfare?

You're are arguing a fantasy against facts. Black men do commit a hugely disproportionate number of violent street crimes. but it is true that white males commit the majority of white collar crimes. If black leaders would encourage black youth to study hard and go to college more of them would become white collar black men, so they could join white men in the white collar corruption.

But the black men and women who run Blue cities are in no way behind their white counterparts in corruption.

You've live your life as a white man. So you really lack the qualifications to argue. Whites lead in violent crime and property crime. This is what the facts show. You guys use flawed math to assert things but in 2020 2 percent of the American population were criminal offenders. Those are the only people to count as it pertains to crime. Out of that 2 percent 1.09 percent of the American population who committed crimes were white and .6 percent were black. Crime is committed blue and red cities and towns so stop lying to yourself pretending that republicans have the solution to crime.

As a white man, you have a set of beliefs about blacks that you need to drop. Dispense with telling us what we need to do. Whites have what you do because you excluded everybody else until 58 years ago. So this is not about what black leaders need to do according to some white right winger with no life experience being black who talks out of the side of their neck, ignorant of their own history. More blacks are entering post secondart training than ever, so again it's not about what you think black leaders should do. It's about what white leaders need to stop.

 

[Markle]

That isn’t as clear cut as you make it sound. Black youths are much more likely to be told to to take a plea deal than white offenders of comparable crimes. They are told they will get out of jail quicker because if they don’t take a plea and they can’t afford bail, they stay in jail until trial.

That report and opinion do not take into consideration other factors.

For example, some years back, many ballyhoos were made of blacks being approved to regular mortgages at a lower rate than whites. A deep dive proved that when race was taken out of the survey, blacks with good credit ratings were approved at the same rate as whites with good credit.

 

[Lisa558]

Not gaslighting at all. Blacks are more likely to be unable to afford bail, and then negotiate for a better plea. Blacks are also more likely to be given a worse plea deal than whites, all other factors being equal. So the white ends up with most charges dismissed and the ends up with a conviction. In both cases, it has little to with actual guilt or innocence.

And the reason blacks are more likely to be unable to afford bail is because there is more poverty among blacks because of the 72% illegitimacy rate.

So why not break the cycle? Why is being a teenage mom with two kids and no husband such an acceptable lifestyle choice? When I was in my 20s, my black co-worker (my age) told me that her kid sister was the only senior in her PG county high school who didn’t have a baby or was pregnant. (I admit it might have been an exaggeration.)

Then one day, she came in and happily announced that her sister was pregnant. Now what type of future will a 17-year-old have with no education and no way of support other than welfare? And what about her baby, who will grow up in poverty? And be more likely to commit crime, drop out of school, and remain in poverty.

The best solution is for blacks to admit that it is their own choices, and NOT racism, that holds them down - and break the cycle.

When Race Tips the Scales in Plea Bargaining

New research finds that prosecutors give white defendants better deals than black defendants.

www.themarshallproject.org

 

[IM2]

Not really, as you know. Prior to President Johnson's "War on Poverty," the black family unit was very strong. The "War on Poverty" rewarded mothers to be single rather than married. Folks who live in poverty may be poor but they are not stupid. Rewarding bad behavior, as told to us by Dr. Phil only leads to more, bad behavior. That makes sense, does it not?

You are incorrect. Why do you keep repeating this jibberish about blacks? You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Let's start with this:

The assistance to single women with children was Title IV of the Social Security Act. Title IV provided grants to states as Aid To Dependent Children. Eventually the name of the program was changed to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. This was welfare folks. Assistance for single moms with children and no daddy at home. In 1935. Blacks were excluded. Aid to Dependent Children functioned mainly to provide federal grants to help the states with mothers’ aid laws that began in 1910. The ADC plan was written by two ladies who had been former directors of what was at the time called the U.S. Children’s Bureau. The Children’s Bureau’s goal was to provide aid to all children whose mothers had no support from a husband no matter how they got into that position. From the Children’s Bureau in 1910 until 1965, no one talked about how the welfare state was wrong and created the disintegration of the white family. I read no lectures about the irresponsible white father. The program was not denigrated as something creating dependence on government; it was seen as essential assistance needed to help women without husbands who had children.

Brad Plumer, A second look at Social Security’s racist origins, Washington Post, June 3, 2013, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cond-look-at-social-securitys-racist-origins/
Linda Gordon and Felice Batlan, The Legal History of the Aid to Dependent Children Program, https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/public-welfare/aid-todependent-children-the-legal-history

So as usual, your diagnosis is wrong. And don't start quoting sellouts. Because:

In 1959, the poverty rate for all American families was 20.8 percent. For white families, it was 16.5 percent. For black families, it was 54.9 percent. During the time people declared that black families were “intact,” black family poverty was 3.33 times that of white ones.

Twenty-five years later in 1984, the poverty rate for all American families was 13.1 percent. For Black families, it was 33.3 percent, for Whites it was 10.1 percent. Black family poverty was 3.29 times that of whites twenty years after Civil Rights was signed into law.

Thirty years later in 2014, the American poverty rate was 12.7 percent. For white families, the poverty rate was 10.7 percent, and for black families, 24.6 percent. Fifty years had passed since the Civil Rights Act, and black families still had at least double the white family poverty rate. In 2014, black family poverty was 2.3 times that of white families.

In 2020, the poverty rate for all American families was 9.5 percent. Poverty for black families was 17.4 percent, and for white families it was 8.2 percent. Despite increases in educational attainment and breakthroughs at every level of American society, in 2020, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

It has not mattered whether America was practicing segregation. It has not mattered that blacks have become better educated. It has not mattered if black households were traditional two parent, two cars, a dog, two children having, good church-going members of American society. We have had two terms of a black president, and still, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2021 AnnualSocial and Economic Supplements (CPS ASEC). Table 2. Poverty Status of People by Family Relationship, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1959 to 2020, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ poverty/data/historical/people.html

You don't know what you're talking about and all you're doing is repeating racist assumptions. Once again:

“In 1965, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, attributed racial inequality as well as poverty and crime in the black community to family structure, particularly the prevalence of families headed by single mothers. Not only did research at the time cast doubt on this causality, but evidence over the last the 50 years demonstrates that rates of child poverty, educational attainment, and crime do not track rates of single parenthood. Thus, even though the share of children living with a single mother rose for all racial and ethnic groups through the mid-1990s and has remained high since then, school completion and youth arrests for violent crimes have declined significantly, while poverty rates have fluctuated according to economic conditions.

Family structure does not drive racial inequity, and racial inequity persists regardless of family structure.”
-Amy Traub, Laura Sullivan, Tatjana Meschede and Thomas Shapiro, DEMOS, “The Asset Value of Whiteness: Understanding the Racial Wealth Gap.”

Understand? Your opinion is bs. Get it?

 

[The Duke]

Amid recent uptick in violence, North Side life goes on as normally as possible

Few outward signs remained Saturday of the chaos and trauma wrought by gunmen a day prior at the Destiny of Faith Church on Pittsburgh’s North Side. Police...

www.post-gazette.com

There has been a recent surge of apparently gang or turf-related violence in the North Side of Pittsburgh. Reports of North Side shootings are almost a daily phenomenon. A week or so ago, a "white" woman was killed in the crossfire as she left a neighborhood supermarket. Other than that, everyone else involved - perpetrators, victims, uninvolved bystanders, and intended victims, are all Black.

And it's not like everyone on the North Side is Black. There are several neighborhoods that are fully integrated, and some that are quite posh, with the usual inflated real estate values, trendy eateries, fern bars, and so on. Franco Harris, NFL HOFer lives in the heart of the North Side as does my son.

A couple generations ago - say in the '50's - this overall story would have been reported on as a "Negro" problem on the North Side. Now, you can read the reports, word by word, and there is no mention of the race of anyone involved. The "white" woman victim last week was pictured - which was entirely appropriate.

So what is the benefit of the cloaking of racial information in the Media? Even the most obtuse reader/viewer knows what's going on, and what to do about it (avoid certain neighborhoods). It is not a problem of the North Side population going lawless, the violence is confined to a specific demographic. But the Media dare not mention it.

Parenthetically, the newly-elected Black mayor seems absolutely apoplectic in his intention to stop - or at least suppress - the deadly violence, but one wonders what can be done to improve the locals' skills at non-violent dispute resolution.

No one.

 

[IM2]

That report and opinion do not take into consideration other factors.

For example, some years back, many ballyhoos were made of blacks being approved to regular mortgages at a lower rate than whites. A deep dive proved that when race was taken out of the survey, blacks with good credit ratings were approved at the same rate as whites with good credit.

This is incorrect also.

“A recent study conducted by a team of researchers from the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Utah State University, Brigham Young University, Rutgers University, and Lubin Research found that banks were three times more likely to request follow-up appointments with white business owners than better-qualified Black business owners, and the Black business owners were subjected to far greater personal and financial scrutiny compared to their equal or less creditworthy white counterparts."
Study: Black Entrepreneurship in the United States, UNLV Home news/release/study-black-entrepreneurship-united-states

 

[The Duke]

You are incorrect. Why do you keep repeating this jibberish about blacks? You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Let's start with this:

The assistance to single women with children was Title IV of the Social Security Act. Title IV provided grants to states as Aid To Dependent Children. Eventually the name of the program was changed to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. This was welfare folks. Assistance for single moms with children and no daddy at home. In 1935. Blacks were excluded. Aid to Dependent Children functioned mainly to provide federal grants to help the states with mothers’ aid laws that began in 1910. The ADC plan was written by two ladies who had been former directors of what was at the time called the U.S. Children’s Bureau. The Children’s Bureau’s goal was to provide aid to all children whose mothers had no support from a husband no matter how they got into that position. From the Children’s Bureau in 1910 until 1965, no one talked about how the welfare state was wrong and created the disintegration of the white family. I read no lectures about the irresponsible white father. The program was not denigrated as something creating dependence on government; it was seen as essential assistance needed to help women without husbands who had children.

Brad Plumer, A second look at Social Security’s racist origins, Washington Post, June 3, 2013, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cond-look-at-social-securitys-racist-origins/
Linda Gordon and Felice Batlan, The Legal History of the Aid to Dependent Children Program, https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/public-welfare/aid-todependent-children-the-legal-history

So as usual, your diagnosis is wrong. And don't start quoting sellouts. Because:

In 1959, the poverty rate for all American families was 20.8 percent. For white families, it was 16.5 percent. For black families, it was 54.9 percent. During the time people declared that black families were “intact,” black family poverty was 3.33 times that of white ones.

Twenty-five years later in 1984, the poverty rate for all American families was 13.1 percent. For Black families, it was 33.3 percent, for Whites it was 10.1 percent. Black family poverty was 3.29 times that of whites twenty years after Civil Rights was signed into law.

Thirty years later in 2014, the American poverty rate was 12.7 percent. For white families, the poverty rate was 10.7 percent, and for black families, 24.6 percent. Fifty years had passed since the Civil Rights Act, and black families still had at least double the white family poverty rate. In 2014, black family poverty was 2.3 times that of white families.

In 2020, the poverty rate for all American families was 9.5 percent. Poverty for black families was 17.4 percent, and for white families it was 8.2 percent. Despite increases in educational attainment and breakthroughs at every level of American society, in 2020, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

It has not mattered whether America was practicing segregation. It has not mattered that blacks have become better educated. It has not mattered if black households were traditional two parent, two cars, a dog, two children having, good church-going members of American society. We have had two terms of a black president, and still, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2021 AnnualSocial and Economic Supplements (CPS ASEC). Table 2. Poverty Status of People by Family Relationship, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1959 to 2020, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ poverty/data/historical/people.html

You don't know what you're talking about and all you're doing is repeating racist assumptions. Once again:

“In 1965, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, attributed racial inequality as well as poverty and crime in the black community to family structure, particularly the prevalence of families headed by single mothers. Not only did research at the time cast doubt on this causality, but evidence over the last the 50 years demonstrates that rates of child poverty, educational attainment, and crime do not track rates of single parenthood. Thus, even though the share of children living with a single mother rose for all racial and ethnic groups through the mid-1990s and has remained high since then, school completion and youth arrests for violent crimes have declined significantly, while poverty rates have fluctuated according to economic conditions.

Family structure does not drive racial inequity, and racial inequity persists regardless of family structure.”
-Amy Traub, Laura Sullivan, Tatjana Meschede and Thomas Shapiro, DEMOS, “The Asset Value of Whiteness: Understanding the Racial Wealth Gap.”

Understand? Your opinion is bs. Get it?

Who did LBJ policies start giving free housing and food to, hmm?


LBJ policies initiated the rise of a welfare state in America.

Before that, either you made it in America, or you didn't.

Why feed and house people who don't want to work at all?

 

[Markle]

You are incorrect. Why do you keep repeating this jibberish about blacks? You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Let's start with this:

The assistance to single women with children was Title IV of the Social Security Act. Title IV provided grants to states as Aid To Dependent Children. Eventually the name of the program was changed to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. This was welfare folks. Assistance for single moms with children and no daddy at home. In 1935. Blacks were excluded. Aid to Dependent Children functioned mainly to provide federal grants to help the states with mothers’ aid laws that began in 1910. The ADC plan was written by two ladies who had been former directors of what was at the time called the U.S. Children’s Bureau. The Children’s Bureau’s goal was to provide aid to all children whose mothers had no support from a husband no matter how they got into that position. From the Children’s Bureau in 1910 until 1965, no one talked about how the welfare state was wrong and created the disintegration of the white family. I read no lectures about the irresponsible white father. The program was not denigrated as something creating dependence on government; it was seen as essential assistance needed to help women without husbands who had children.

Brad Plumer, A second look at Social Security’s racist origins, Washington Post, June 3, 2013, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cond-look-at-social-securitys-racist-origins/
Linda Gordon and Felice Batlan, The Legal History of the Aid to Dependent Children Program, https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/public-welfare/aid-todependent-children-the-legal-history

So as usual, your diagnosis is wrong. And don't start quoting sellouts. Because:

In 1959, the poverty rate for all American families was 20.8 percent. For white families, it was 16.5 percent. For black families, it was 54.9 percent. During the time people declared that black families were “intact,” black family poverty was 3.33 times that of white ones.

Twenty-five years later in 1984, the poverty rate for all American families was 13.1 percent. For Black families, it was 33.3 percent, for Whites it was 10.1 percent. Black family poverty was 3.29 times that of whites twenty years after Civil Rights was signed into law.

Thirty years later in 2014, the American poverty rate was 12.7 percent. For white families, the poverty rate was 10.7 percent, and for black families, 24.6 percent. Fifty years had passed since the Civil Rights Act, and black families still had at least double the white family poverty rate. In 2014, black family poverty was 2.3 times that of white families.

In 2020, the poverty rate for all American families was 9.5 percent. Poverty for black families was 17.4 percent, and for white families it was 8.2 percent. Despite increases in educational attainment and breakthroughs at every level of American society, in 2020, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

It has not mattered whether America was practicing segregation. It has not mattered that blacks have become better educated. It has not mattered if black households were traditional two parent, two cars, a dog, two children having, good church-going members of American society. We have had two terms of a black president, and still, black family poverty remained two times that of white families.

U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2021 AnnualSocial and Economic Supplements (CPS ASEC). Table 2. Poverty Status of People by Family Relationship, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1959 to 2020, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ poverty/data/historical/people.html

You don't know what you're talking about and all you're doing is repeating racist assumptions. Once again:

“In 1965, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, attributed racial inequality as well as poverty and crime in the black community to family structure, particularly the prevalence of families headed by single mothers. Not only did research at the time cast doubt on this causality, but evidence over the last the 50 years demonstrates that rates of child poverty, educational attainment, and crime do not track rates of single parenthood. Thus, even though the share of children living with a single mother rose for all racial and ethnic groups through the mid-1990s and has remained high since then, school completion and youth arrests for violent crimes have declined significantly, while poverty rates have fluctuated according to economic conditions.

Family structure does not drive racial inequity, and racial inequity persists regardless of family structure.”
-Amy Traub, Laura Sullivan, Tatjana Meschede and Thomas Shapiro, DEMOS, “The Asset Value of Whiteness: Understanding the Racial Wealth Gap.”

Understand? Your opinion is bs. Get it?

Neither does yours. Get it?

A MINORITY VIEW
BY WALTER E. WILLIAMS
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2005, AND THEREAFTER

AMMUNITION FOR POVERTY PIMPS

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina's destruction of New Orleans, President Bush gave America's poverty pimps and race hustlers new ammunition. The president said, "As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action."

The president's espousing such a vision not only supplies ammunition to poverty pimps and race hustlers, it focuses attention away from the true connection between race and poverty.

Though I grow weary of pointing it out, let's do it again. Let's examine some numbers readily available from the Census Bureau's 2004 Current Population Survey and ask some questions. There's one segment of the black population that suffers only a 9.9 percent poverty rate, and only 13.7 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. There's another segment that suffers a 39.5 percent poverty rate, and 58.1 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. Among whites, one segment suffers a 6 percent poverty rate, and only 9.9 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. The other segment suffers a 26.4 percent poverty rate, and 52 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. What do you think distinguishes the high and low poverty populations among blacks?

Would you buy an explanation that it's because white people practice discrimination against one segment of the black population and not the other or one segment had a history of slavery and not the other? You'd have to be a lunatic to buy such an explanation. The only distinction between both the black and white populations is marriage -- lower poverty in married-couple families.

In 1960, only 28 percent of black females ages 15 to 44 were never married and illegitimacy among blacks was 22 percent. Today, the never-married rate is 56 percent and illegitimacy stands at 70 percent. If today's black family structure were what it was in 1960, the overall black poverty rate would be in or near single digits. The weakening of the black family structure, and its devastating consequences, have nothing to do with the history of slavery or racial discrimination.

Dr. Charles Murray, an American Enterprise Institute scholar, argues in an article titled "Rediscovering the Underclass" in the Institute's On the Issues series (October 2005) that self-destructive behavior has become the hallmark of the underclass. He says that unemployment in the underclass is not caused by the lack of jobs but by the inability to get up every morning and go to work. In 1954, the percentage of black males, age 20 to 24, not looking for work was nine percent. In 1999, it rose to 30 percent, and that was at a time when employers were beating the bushes for employees. Murray adds that "the statistical reality is that people who get into the American job market and stay there seldom remain poor unless they do something self-destructive.

I share Murray's sentiment expressed at the beginning of his article where he says, "Watching the courage of ordinary low-income people as they deal with the aftermath of Katrina and Rita, it is hard to decide which politicians are more contemptible -- Democrats who are rediscovering poverty and blaming it on George W. Bush, or Republicans who are rediscovering poverty and claiming that the government can fix it." Since President Johnson's War on Poverty, controlling for inflation, the nation has spent $9 trillion on about 80 anti-poverty programs. To put that figure in perspective, last year's U.S. GDP was $11 trillion; $9 trillion exceeds the GDP of any nation except the U.S. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita uncovered the result of the War on Poverty -- dependency and self-destructive behavior.

Guess what the president [President George Walker Bush] and politicians from both parties are asking the American people to do? If you said, "Enact programs that will sustain and enhance dependency," go to the head of the class.

Ammunition for poverty pimps

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina’s destruction of New Orleans, President Bush gave America’s poverty pimps and race hustlers new ammunition. The president said, “As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a...

walterewilliams.com

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/05/poverty.html

 

[Seymour Flops]

You've live your life as a white man. So you really lack the qualifications to argue.

Wrong.

Whites lead in violent crime and property crime. This is what the facts show. You guys use flawed math to assert things but in 2020 2 percent of the American population were criminal offenders. Those are the only people to count as it pertains to crime. Out of that 2 percent 1.09 percent of the American population who committed crimes were white and .6 percent were black.

So it is disproportionate. Blacks are only twelve percent of the population but they committed 30% of the crime in 2020, according to your own numbers you just gave. What is your explanation for that?

Coincidence?

Crime is committed blue and red cities and towns so stop lying to yourself pretending that republicans have the solution to crime.

I never said Republicans have the solution to crime.

As a white man, you have a set of beliefs about blacks that you need to drop.

You know nothing about my beliefs other than what I have told you which is the exact truth that I'm not going to drop because you think I "need" to.

Dispense with telling us what we need to do.

Someone needs to.

Whites have what you do because you excluded everybody else until 58 years ago.

I have what I have because I earned every bit of it.

So this is not about what black leaders need to do according to some white right winger with no life experience being black who talks out of the side of their neck, ignorant of their own history.

I know the history of the Democratic Party and their treatment of American blacks.

More blacks are entering post secondart training than ever, so again it's not about what you think black leaders should do. It's about what white leaders need to stop.

What do they need to stop, exactly?

 

[monkrules]

Why do you focus on race over poverty, drugs, crappy schools and lack of infrastructure which can influence crime. It’s always race race race. You make a big point about neighborhoods becoming more dangerous when more blacks move in, yet there are affluent and middle class black majority neighborhoods in your city with crime rates no different than similar white neighborhoods.




When people consistently point out race as a primary factor (like the OP) excluding other more relevant factors, then it does sound racist.

As I've said before, I was born into a horrible area in a large city. Right in the fucking ghetto, 3 blocks from the center of the main black business and entertainment area.

I had black friends, and some black enemies. Fifty percent of the population in that area was black. Went to school k thru college. Hung out with blacks, played in bands in black clubs, including all night gigs in after hours "clubs."

In all of those experiences, it was blacks who caused 90 percent of the fights, and they committed crimes that often seeme brainless, to outside observers. In short, many blacks are major fuckups.

They stole from employers - when they bothered to work - and they made schools into shitholes.

To say that poverty is what causes blacks to commit crimes is bullshit. Sure poverty might make the problems worse. But blacks seem to go out of their way to cause problems especially engaging in thievery and violence against others.

There was a LOT of poverty in the area, but no other ethnic group in the area engaged in anywhere near as much crime as blacks. Members of other groups managed to find work and keep jobs, and paid their own way.

Imo, huge numbers of blacks embrace a prison/thug culture. They think the world owes them a living. To put it bluntly, they are they laziest, most worthless group of people you're likely to encounter on this planet.

Problems in black areas can be changed, the areas can be improved, black crimes can be decreased. But ONLY blacks can make the urgently needed changes. And it seems clear they don't have the balls or the will to make the needed changes.

Whites cannot impose those changes (most blacks seem to truly hate everything about white people), and government cannot improve black problems and crime (billions of dollars have been thrown at and wasted trying to help blacks. It simply does not work).

It's far past time for blacks to man up and improve their own situation. Shit, or get off the pot. If they're not willing to put in the effort to improve their own lives, then stop the fucking whining about "oppression," white privilege, systemic racism and all the other bullshit.

No more "victimhood" excuses. People are sick of hearing excuses and never-ending whining.

Some people will scream that this is a "racist" rant. But I don't give a shit. The truth is not racist.

And my statements are based on a lifetime of living in neighborhoods with loads blacks. NOT on statistics written by some sschoolboy who has probably never set foot in a fucking ghetto.

 

[AZrailwhale]

USSR was not Totalitarian since 1953. I lived there until 1983 (age 13).

It wasn't? Didn't your parents need permission and an internal passport to leave their town or city and travel anywhere else? Did your parents have the right to free speech and association? Did they have the right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers? Could they immigrate to any other country without the permission of the government? Wasn't at least one person in your apartment building reporting to the KGB on his or her neighbors? Weren't you encouraged to report "deviant" behavior or speech by your parents to the authorities? Stalin's death made the USSR no less of a totalitarian state than it was under his rule.