sad to say it, but I'm slowly coming around on reparations

24% vs 65% wrote:

Your ability to think appears to be close to nil.

Percentages are all that matter. Providing incentives to get married and stay married for folks with children would have a far larger impact on the black community than on the white community because of the massive difference in percentage today. And that was the point that the individual who proposed such incentives was making.

Try to think. Even if just a little. It will help the conversation. And I promise, it won't be too painful.

Oh, I get the point. You just suck at math.

Outside of lecturing the Black community on what would be good for them, the argument that it would have some sort of positive impact specifically on the Black community is fully negated by the fact that there are more white children in single-parent homes than Black ones. Any measures aimed at that specific population would therefore impact more white people than Black, and do nothing to address the imbalance that exists today.

But since you're in the learning mode, why don't you go research the average age of birth mothers by race, average incarceration periods by race, home ownership by race, average inheritance by race, etc, and get yourself educated on what actually keeps Black people down on the economic scale.

I don’t know about reparations, but we do have a problem in that we never had a reckoning in this country for slavery, Jim Crow, black codes, etc etc. Not to mention treatment of Native Americans.

You are falling behind. Any payment that the Government makes comes from taxpayers. Creating an incentive for people not to have children out of wedlock benefits the black community because it is funded by the millions of wealthy married white people. It shifts some of their money to porr whites and poor blacks.

Are you really that stupid? Or is this just some kind of act?

Here, let's do the math. Let's suppose that increasing incentives for marriage resulted in a 50% reduction in single parent homes across the board - same result for all races. Then white children in single parent homes would stand at 12% (from 24%) while for blacks the number would drop all the way down to 32.5% (from 65%).

So, in your mind a 41 percentage point gap (today) is just the same as a 20.5 percentage gap in the hypothetical future?

Honest question - do you have any brain at all?

math wizner wrote:

You are falling behind. Any payment that the Government makes comes from taxpayers. Creating an incentive for people not to have children out of wedlock benefits the black community because it is funded by the millions of wealthy married white people. It shifts some of their money to porr whites and poor blacks.

The point of the conversation is addressing the imbalance between the Black and white communities. any program that equally benefits both Blacks and whites not only does not address that imbalance; it pushes aside the litany of historical impediments that have made it impossible for the Black community to get on an even ground.

If you want to pay people to get married, go ahead. It has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about.

24% vs 65% wrote:

Are you really that stupid? Or is this just some kind of act?

Here, let's do the math. Let's suppose that increasing incentives for marriage resulted in a 50% reduction in single parent homes across the board - same result for all races. Then white children in single parent homes would stand at 12% (from 24%) while for blacks the number would drop all the way down to 32.5% (from 65%).

So, in your mind a 41 percentage point gap (today) is just the same as a 20.5 percentage gap in the hypothetical future?

Honest question - do you have any brain at all?

Sure, let's do math. We'll even use your numbers.

2018 children in single-parent households

Black: 6,166,000

White: 8.526,000

Benefit by 50% reduction:

Black: 3,083,000

White: 4,263,000

# of white children who benefited MORE from the incentive:

1,180,000

This is how old white male politicians perpetuate the cycle. They use stupid fake math like percentages to make it look like they're doing something for the Black community, while they're actually making the imbalance even worse.

But you go ahead and hold on to your 5th-grade "I know how to divide percentages" math.

90% of black homicides are committed by other blacks.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

Single mother households- 5X higher rate in black families, are the biggest factor in criminals & lower income. In any race, no father around makes it 3X more likely the child goes to prison by 30. And 1 parent income is hard to approach 2 parents. There's your "racism".

You answered it yourself by stating wealthy black individuals and poor white individuals. It's clear the system is not holding the black community down. If there was some systematic thing at play to keep black communities down, how could any black individual become successful? And how could poor white families exist? The fact that there are millions of successful black families and millions of poverty stricken white families proves that reparations are not needed.

Black families have equal opportunities to be successful. If you go to school and get good grades you will go to a good college. If you keep working hard in college you will get a good job and succeed. It's really that simple. The poverty stricken white and black families have the same thing in common. They drop out of school and take up crime as their means of income.

It's not a race issue. We want to make it a race issue because everyone wants to be a hero. But it's not true. Blacks have the same opportunities whites have.

see...... wrote:

Single mother households- 5X higher rate in black families, are the biggest factor in criminals & lower income. In any race, no father around makes it 3X more likely the child goes to prison by 30. And 1 parent income is hard to approach 2 parents. There's your "racism".

Good job. now figure out why the rates are higher in black families.

This might be the stupidest thing ever written on this site. That includes Jamin and Bad Wigins.

Reparations- Like millions $$ in added scholarships?

547,948 black violent crimes on whites, vs only 59,778 white violent crimes on blacks. How about those reparations? How about the thousands of whites who never owned slaves, but died in the Civil War for the North? They don't count? And there were many black slave owners.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Black-Slaveowners-Masters-Carolina-1790-1860/dp/0786469315&ved=2ahUKEwj0wovQqevpAhWHPM0KHcJWAecQFjACegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2KEZDzrXmDTSS3tBmBgPwm

see...... wrote:

Single mother households- 5X higher rate in black families, are the biggest factor in criminals & lower income. In any race, no father around makes it 3X more likely the child goes to prison by 30. And 1 parent income is hard to approach 2 parents. There's your "racism".

So it's the sole fault of women for not raising their kids properly without a man around. Jeez, only the third time in three days I've pointed out racists are also misogynists.

appleswan wrote:

So it's the sole fault of women for not raising their kids properly without a man around. Jeez, only the third time in three days I've pointed out racists are also misogynists.

There's an indelible vision among people who insist they're not racist, that Black girls are running around getting pregnant so they can get that sweet baby welfare check, while every Black boy is just biding time until he can hit the corner to sell drugs. They'll never be convinced otherwise.

appleswan wrote:

So it's the sole fault of women for not raising their kids properly without a man around. Jeez, only the third time in three days I've pointed out racists are also misogynists.

Why would it always be the sole fault of women if a kid's father is not around?

JjisaB wrote:

appleswan wrote:

So it's the sole fault of women for not raising their kids properly without a man around. Jeez, only the third time in three days I've pointed out racists are also misogynists.

Why would it always be the sole fault of women if a kid's father is not around?

That's not the way their argument is framed.

Their criticism is not aimed a men who've abandoned their families. Most single mothers receive full and willing support from their ex partners.

They're angry women have not made "better choices" in life, angry they claim welfare, angry that actually single mothers can do a good job without a man.

appleswan wrote:

That's not the way their argument is framed.

Their criticism is not aimed a men who've abandoned their families. Most single mothers receive full and willing support from their ex partners.

They're angry women have not made "better choices" in life, angry they claim welfare, angry that actually single mothers can do a good job without a man.

exactly. If they wanted to address absent fathers, they would.

Basic living income , no race or gender qualifications. Immediately delete, and/or begin phasing out other programs as reasonable. The effect would be better than reparations for slavery and at some point it is going to be necessary anyway, if it isn't already.

Tax the *(%# out of the rich to do it.

Do you mean impediments like those that descendants of Chinese American workers that built the transcontinental railroad, Japanese Americans that were interned in concentration camps in the US and refugees from Vietnam and Cambodia were able to somehow overcome to become the highest per capita income group of any ethnic group in this country? You know what those groups all have in common? The lowest infidelity rate among the ethnic groups in this country. It's not rocket science.