For god's sake people. She was homely. Get over it. What difference does it make? It's not like Lincoln or Franklin were good looking guys.
For god's sake people. She was homely. Get over it. What difference does it make? It's not like Lincoln or Franklin were good looking guys.
;) wrote:
For god's sake people. She was homely. Get over it. What difference does it make? It's not like Lincoln or Franklin were good looking guys.
You have a good attitude but there are many people not like you. They would use this picture as a vehicle to ridicule blacks.
Its not like there are other pictures of blacks on money to balance the image. Why give them ammo?
minority opinion wrote:
Can't they find a BETTER picture of Harriet Tubman. Maybe they could draw a portrait and make her look better.
As a minority member, I REALLY REALLY hate that picture. They are not doing us any favors with it.
The design won't be released until 2020. But, as the person mentioned, it's not as if the other portraits on the bills are very handsome.
You replace a devil incarnate with an Angel,that is a good thing.
Well,on Mt Rushmore there is Thomas Jefferson the original rapist and pedophile.
By all accounts Harriet Tubman was a courageous woman but her overall impact on U.S. history was miniscule in comparison to Andrew Jackson.
But if Old Hickory were around today I'm sure he'd have no qualms about his image being removed from America's fiat currency. In light of our 19+ trillion national debt and booming stock market, Jackson's views on the national bank (today's Federal Reserve) seem prescient.
I envision a day in the not-too-distant future when Americans will be carting around wheelbarrows full of Harriet Tubman $20 bills to buy a loaf of bread.
And her negative impact on U.S. history was infinitesimal compared to Andrew Jackson.
An interesting tidbit is that a republican congressman from Wisconsin authored a bill to pay Tubman $2,000 for her service during the civil war, but the bill was defeated by democrats.
An interesting tidbit is that a republican congressman from Wisconsin authored a bill to pay Tubman $2,000 for her service during the civil war, but the bill was defeated by democrats.
DiscoGary wrote:
Jeff Wigand wrote:...
Do you think that slaves in the United States were victims of oppression?
At what point do you think the social and economic consequences of slavery on persons of African American descent ceased to be an impediment on their ability to advance en masse in the United States?
...
The Civil Rights Act 1964 is probably the point I would pick, but the case could be made that the turning point resulted in a 360 degree turn.
During segregation from around the 1930s to the early 1960s blacks were kept from many businesses like restaurants etc, so many blacks started their own businesses. This was the beginning of a black middle class. The Civil Rights Act ended segregation but put a lot of competition on those black businesses and forced them out. The policies of the early 60s did a lot more damage than that though.
The early 60s saw the introduction of the Welfare state, where people were paid to avoid working and women were paid to have kids as single mothers. If you pay people to do something, you get a lot more of it.
In ~1960 the percentage of black kids born to single mothers was 24%. It's over 75% now. But the same forces were working on the white population as their single mother births rose from 4% to ~25% during that same period. It hurt blacks more because their culture was weaker but getting stronger when the Welfare state came in and destroyed it.
Did you know that when Welfare was passed, blacks refused to use because of the stigma attached to taking handouts? The government created the Legal Services Corp to send lawyers out to teach people that they deserved the handouts and to help them sew local government officials who refused to give out free money to those who they thought could work. So the government INTENTIONALLY undermined the moral fabric of the black community to make them dependent on handouts.
Blacks don't suffer because of historical slavery, segregation, or discrimination. They suffer because of government policies which keep them dependent while suppressing their opportunities in life. The same forces are undermining whites as well, but it's taking longer since whites had a stronger cultural foundation at the beginning.
If you want to help blacks and everyone else for that matter, then stop paying people to avoid work and have babies as single mothers.
As a black person I tend to partially agree with that assessment, but I would also add the War on Drugs and globalization as a MAJOR contributors to the current situation of black people. I characterize the War on Drugs in this way because black people and white people use drugs at the same rate PER CAPITA yet blacks are arrested at a 4x higher rate. Additionally just as blacks were able to achieve stable Union jobs in factories a majority of those inner-city factories moved overseas causing them to have very little capital to be able to re-invest in further education or in migration to where jobs may have been prevalent.
toolittle wrote:
Losin money wrote:Great, now the 20 dollar bill is only gonna be worth $12
My compliments, an intelligent and witty comment.
I don't understand this joke
More PC nonsense from the left.
jacksonme? wrote:
toolittle wrote:My compliments, an intelligent and witty comment.
I don't understand this joke
...Still racist. I am not sure it is a joke. This dude is referencing the historical fact that slaves and ex-salves (like Tubman) were considered back in the day to be 3/5 of a person...so the math on this is 3/5 = .6 x 20 = 12...get it now?
Bobby1 wrote:
More PC nonsense from the left.
So according to you at no point ever should any bill have anyone but a white male on it?
Why bother. We are going to get rid of cash soon enough. Here, sign the petition.
Suburban black person wrote:
...
As a black person I tend to partially agree with that assessment, but I would also add the War on Drugs and globalization as a MAJOR contributors to the current situation of black people. I characterize the War on Drugs in this way because black people and white people use drugs at the same rate PER CAPITA yet blacks are arrested at a 4x higher rate. Additionally just as blacks were able to achieve stable Union jobs in factories a majority of those inner-city factories moved overseas causing them to have very little capital to be able to re-invest in further education or in migration to where jobs may have been prevalent.
No doubt. The war on drugs has definitely hurt the black population disproportionately, not to mention the corrupting influence it has on the rest of society and the Cartel wars in Mexico which have killed around 100,000 people. I would legalize all drugs if I were elected benevolent dictator tomorrow. But that comes with a price. It wasn't too long ago that black activists were accusing the CIA of funneling drugs into black neighborhoods to keep them drugged up or some other nefarious purpose. Legalizing drugs is a nasty double-edged sword.
Unfortunately global competition can not be avoided (yes, Trump is wrong). I lived in England for a while where they have high tariffs to protect their major industries from competition and the result is that everyone's standard of living falls because 55 million people have to pay more for a product when the tariff is only protecting 100,000 jobs. The lesson is that you can't hide. You either compete or you lose by default.
Oh, and I was right about celebrating the victims of the US. More changes are coming with defenders of US victims being put on the currency. I wonder which Muslim will be chosen. Which Hispanic?
I used to wonder how the great civilizations fell. Now I know.
"It is the curse men that they forget." - Merlin
If you really want to know about the looser presently on the $20... check out a history book and really read about him, I think you might be surprised how much of a true chump he was. Yes, take him off all currency and give him the same treatment as Christopher Columbus.
There is a simple solution to this problem. Who says what is the front and the back of the bill?
Jackson is still going to be on the bill. Harriet on the other. I'll use Jackson's side as the front of the bill and hand cash with that side up.
Brilliant!
The Silent Majorty wrote:
There is a simple solution to this problem. Who says what is the front and the back of the bill?
Jackson is still going to be on the bill. Harriet on the other. I'll use Jackson's side as the front of the bill and hand cash with that side up.
Brilliant!
Lol you know you're a freaking (sexist or racist) loser when you have to think about how you would hand your cash over. Like this is a as clear as day example of what being pathetic is.
That said, I think a double person 20$ wouldn't be a bad idea!
Parker Valby post 5k interview... Worst of all time? Are Parker Valby interviews always cringe?
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
MSU men > NAU by 1 point even though Nico Young and Colin Sahlman tripled!!
Start Lists for the Men's and Women's Mile/1500 at Pre are up
Do Australians consider their culture closer to Britain's or America's?
What is the worst insult anyone gave you about your running ability and how did you respond?