lawgator1
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 74,994
- Likes
- 44,351
Huh?
There is a difference between being lazy and giving up.
This isn't a problem that I dreamed up. This has been lamented by black leaders from across the spectrum.Wow, you find one lady from 15 years ago who had a daughter who had this issue and you generalize that the problem is black culture, itself?
You are definitely one of the ones in the hard right that is pure racist.
I see, so are 30 million whites in poverty more or less of a burden on the rest of us (from a taxpayers perspective) than 30 million from other ethnicities? It's a serious question.
This isn't a problem that I dreamed up. This has been lamented by black leaders from across the spectrum.
You are completely and totally ignorant of and detached from reality. I am racist because I want the best for everyone regardless of their color? I am racist because I am honest about one of the facets that hold talented young black people back? I am racist because I love people and do not want to see them continue obviously self destructive behaviors? I am racist because I oppose programs that have demonstrably hurt a VERY large segment of the black community?
If so... then call me what you want. I sleep well at night harboring no ill will toward anyone because of their race.
there is? giving up is the very definition of being lazy.
Definition of LAZY
1a : disinclined to activity or exertion : not energetic or vigorous b : encouraging inactivity or indolence <a lazy summer day>
2: moving slowly : sluggish
3: droopy, lax <a rabbit with lazy ears>
4: placed on its side <lazy E livestock brand>
Well, in the context of this thread and subject matter being discussed, it doesn't matter. We're discussing the divide between caucasians and minorities. I'm framing my response in that context.
My personal opinion is that poor folks are poor folks. However, there are distinct cultural differences between whites and blacks, and a black child is much more likely to born into poverty than a white child. Mind you, I don't blame whites for this. I just want to work towards a solution that reduces the entitlement burden on this country which we can all agree is something that is needed.
I agree that we have no choice but to reduce entitlement spending. What I cannot agree to, however, is doing it in such a manner as places the burden on a part of society that you simply set backwards another few decades whilst simultaneously leaving in tact the wealth of those who benefited (or suffered far less, anyway) during the downturn.
The poor do not have advocates like the wealthy do. And despite the fact that the wealthy are far fewer in number, they get their way far more frequently, because they have the wherewithal to control things.
you mean like a whole race "giving up?"
Just throwing this out there: If you don't believe demographics, proportions, and ratios don't matter, I encourage you to study up on how Congressional representation is calculated.
Demographics matter.
Also, think of it this way (this is a hypothetical because it's bad everywhere right now): If California has 1 million people unemployed people vs Oregon's 500,000 unemployed, which state is in worse shape? California has approx 37 million in total pop, Oregon 3.8 million.
Now replace California with "whites" and Oregon with "minorities".
Ratios matter.
I have a question for you, sir. This might be ignorance, but I don't know ANYONE that has come out and said, "Welfare helped me get out of poverty." More often than not I hear, "I need more welfare."
Am I wrong here, or does welfare increase dependence on government assistance? If there are isolated success stories, good for them. However, where are the statistics that illustrate that welfare and other entitlement programs are helping people break the cycle of poverty?
This is the biggest question I want answered by the Left.
Why is that? Is it because of businesses and the dirty "rich" whose companies are STARVING for intelligent and motivated people? Or could it be because those with an interest in keeping blacks dependent on them politically are reinforcing something that isn't true?There is a lack of interest in it in part I think because of the perception that there is no opportunity, even for the better educated.
Plus as has been pointed out there is surely less parental involvement in some families more so than others. That's a function of a lot of things, chief among them being poverty and distrust, skepticism, single parent situations, etc.
I don't know that welfare "causes" anything. I just find it hard to believe that there are tens of millions of people who would choose to remain in poverty and live on public assistance if there was a meaningful opportunity instead.
We can debate what a "meaningful opportunity" is. But if someone makes the choice to live in poverty -- which is what your comment implies -- then I think you need to ask yourself why and also ask why is it that you think they actually have a choice.
I don't know that welfare "causes" anything. I just find it hard to believe that there are tens of millions of people who would choose to remain in poverty and live on public assistance if there was a meaningful opportunity instead.
We can debate what a "meaningful opportunity" is. But if someone makes the choice to live in poverty -- which is what your comment implies -- then I think you need to ask yourself why and also ask why is it that you think they actually have a choice.
You may not harbor ill will towards them because of their race, but you assume a lot of inherent qualities or characteristics based on it.
I don't know that welfare "causes" anything. I just find it hard to believe that there are tens of millions of people who would choose to remain in poverty and live on public assistance if there was a meaningful opportunity instead.
We can debate what a "meaningful opportunity" is. But if someone makes the choice to live in poverty -- which is what your comment implies -- then I think you need to ask yourself why and also ask why is it that you think they actually have a choice.
because it's the easy route to sit and collect welfare. going to college, working hard, that's not easy. don't tell me you wouldn't think about retiring if someone offered you a paycheck to do nothing. and yes there is an attitude for a lot of poor people (not just black) that the man will keep you down and that they are owed something.
Spend about three days in Eastern KY and you will understand. It is filled with 3 generations of the same family living completely off of entitlements.I don't know that welfare "causes" anything. I just find it hard to believe that there are tens of millions of people who would choose to remain in poverty and live on public assistance if there was a meaningful opportunity instead.
We can debate what a "meaningful opportunity" is. But if someone makes the choice to live in poverty -- which is what your comment implies -- then I think you need to ask yourself why and also ask why is it that you think they actually have a choice.
because it's the easy route to sit and collect welfare. going to college, working hard, that's not easy. don't tell me you wouldn't think about retiring if someone offered you a paycheck to do nothing. and yes there is an attitude for a lot of poor people (not just black) that the man will keep you down and that they are owed something.
Wow, you find one lady from 15 years ago who had a daughter who had this issue and you generalize that the problem is black culture, itself?
You are definitely one of the ones in the hard right that is pure racist.
I want everyone to have more wealth, too, but if you think that the far right supports tax reform because their interest is in helping out the poor by taxing the poor more and themselves less, you are either so naive as to truly be mentally retarded or totally insane.