Everyone is so offended.

[Goaty Bill 2]

The Scapegoat for Strife in the Black Community - Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell wiki

Thomas Sowell on Firing Line with William F. Buckley (1983)

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Tuesday 28th November 07:28

[XM5ER]

Colonial said:

For the same socio-economic reasons.

But, because of generations of inequity and poor access to education in particular in the US the situation is generally worse in predominantly black neighbourhoods.

Saying "you can go to white schools now" in the 1960s doesn't magically remove the preceding years of discrimination. The flow on effects are still there.

Maybe generations of politicians using them for their own ends by telling them that it's "not their fault" and there is "nothing they can do because of history" doesn't help either.

[irocfan]

The Spruce goose said:

The key point is black people have a higher percentage of fatherless families.

And just why is this due to 300 years of racism? Sounds to me just massively irresponsible and bugger all to do with any sort of 'ism'

[hairyben]

irocfan said:

The Spruce goose said:

The key point is black people have a higher percentage of fatherless families.

And just why is this due to 300 years of racism? Sounds to me just massively irresponsible and bugger all to do with any sort of 'ism'

Most wealth is inherited, directly or indirectly through better schooling and opportunity etc, so coming from slavery would set you back in such a generational sense. But there's probably too much emphasis on that alone, generally the way benefits work is to favour the single parent over family unit with a poor/low skilled father figure, thus father is encouraged to neglect his duties, kids then have no father figure except for local gangs etc. Add in low ambition, then you have higher probability of getting into crime, regardless of black or white, but as blacks are generationally poorer they are over represented. Feed in to that, that the cultural trend-setters of today - most media, hollywood etc seem desperate to convey/exploit a picture of black people being rightly justified to have a chip on their shoulder against whitey (The soft bigotry of low expectations) and what do you think you'll get.

[anonymous-user]

irocfan said:

And just why is this due to 300 years of racism? Sounds to me just massively irresponsible and bugger all to do with any sort of 'ism'

Only only pH can such complicated matters be distilled into such a response. I'm sure there are more details explanations in this, but poverty trap is one.

Also racism is still rife and not just against the poor.

"Affluent and Black, and Still Trapped by Segregation"

"The choices that black families make today are inevitably constrained by a legacy of racism that prevented their ancestors from buying quality housing and then passing down wealth that might have allowed today’s generation to move into more stable communities. "

So you have 2 things that could lead to why there are so many single parent families, maybe the fathers turn to gangs, maybe in jail, maybe murdered, maybe irresponsibility. But the crux is why are they more black fatherless famailies?

Edit good response above as well to it.

[Mr2Mike]

hairyben said:

Most wealth is inherited, directly or indirectly through better schooling and opportunity etc, so coming from slavery would set you back in such a generational sense. But there's probably too much emphasis on that alone, generally the way benefits work is to favour the single parent over family unit with a poor/low skilled father figure, thus father is encouraged to neglect his duties,

So it's actually social care policies that are the primary cause of this rather than some kind of imaginary link to slavery. Why aren't people wringing their hands to death over single parent white working class families?

[irocfan]

The Spruce goose said:

irocfan said:

And just why is this due to 300 years of racism? Sounds to me just massively irresponsible and bugger all to do with any sort of 'ism'

Only only pH can such complicated matters be distilled into such a response. I'm sure there are more details explanations in this, but poverty trap is one.

Also racism is still rife and not just against the poor.

"Affluent and Black, and Still Trapped by Segregation"

"The choices that black families make today are inevitably constrained by a legacy of racism that prevented their ancestors from buying quality housing and then passing down wealth that might have allowed today’s generation to move into more stable communities. "

So you have 2 things that could lead to why there are so many single parent families, maybe the fathers turn to gangs, maybe in jail, maybe murdered, maybe irresponsibility. But the crux is why are they more black fatherless famailies?

Edit good response above as well to it.

oh do wind your neck in. I am in no way even suggesting that there is not a problem with racism - of course there is an issue with racism. It's not as bad as it used to be, nowhere near - however it is worse than it should be. It was however you who mentioned the fact that there was a higher proportion of fatherless black families, I merely questioned why that should be unless of course you feel that this is also a throwback to slave times when family units were broken up?

[anonymous-user]

irocfan said:

oh do wind your neck in. I am in no way even suggesting that there is not a problem with racism - of course there is an issue with racism. It's not as bad as it used to be, nowhere near - however it is worse than it should be. It was however you who mentioned the fact that there was a higher proportion of fatherless black families, I merely questioned why that should be unless of course you feel that this is also a throwback to slave times when family units were broken up?

wind my neck in, are you overly sensitive, there was nothing obtuse in the response, you just seems het up on 'isms.

i honestly don't get your connection from single parent families to slavery...

i'm not going to say i have all the answers but i pointed out there are indicators that point to problems.

[Colonial]

Also (talking US here) local funding models exacerbate existing inequality.

A school in a poor school district may get substantially less funding than one in a middle class district.

It can slow down social mobility as a result.

[anonymous-user]

it is interesting that posters fall into the trap of thinking that racism is waning, on the face of it maybe, people are more tolerate. But the problem is racism has deep roots into institutions, such as the healthcare system. This probably explains the rise of the Alt right, the perceived lack of attention whites get, when in reality any changes to policies are just scratching the surface.

'' A Harvard Professor of Social Epidemiology contended that much modern research supported the assumptions needed to justify racism. Racism she writes underlies unexplained inequities in health care, including treatment for heart disease,[244] renal failure,[245] bladder cancer,[246] and pneumonia.[247] Bhopal writes that these inequalities have been documented in various studies and that there are consistent findings that black Americans receive less health care than white Americans—particularly where this involves expensive new technology.''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United...

Edited by The Spruce goose on Wednesday 29th November 22:26

[BlackLabel]

The person who runs the twitter feed for virgin trains is in a spot of bother.

A passenger made a complaint but doesn’t quite get the response she expected.




http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42542640


[url]

Edited by BlackLabel on Tuesday 2nd January 20:04

[mybrainhurts]

Poor Emily, she must have gone through absolute hell...

[Russian Troll Bot]

#prayforemily

[Biker's Nemesis]

I would have said "sugar tits" or "sweet cheeks".

[richie99]

Colonial said:

Also (talking US here) local funding models exacerbate existing inequality.

A school in a poor school district may get substantially less funding than one in a middle class district.

It can slow down social mobility as a result.

For information the opposite is true in the UK. Money is taken away from middle class schools and given to those with more poor pupils. In some pretty substantial amounts.

[ChemicalChaos]

A new entry in the list of things that are apparently racist - now it's farmer's markets

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25250/farmers-marke...

[2xChevrons]

ChemicalChaos said:

A new entry in the list of things that are apparently racist - now it's farmer's markets

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25250/farmers-marke...

This is good example of right-leaning media taking a perfectly appropriate bit of social research and making it into something it isn't.

I have not read the anthology (although it sounds interesting) but nowhere in any of the synopsis or the press reports have the authors said that farmer's markets are racist or that they should not be allowed. All it is in an example of a recognised problem of gentrification in urban areas. When young, educated, well-paid professionals (who are often predominantly white and of the majority culture) move into a central urban district because of its cheaper housing, more centralised nature and 'vibrant cultural scene' this can cause unintended but very real difficulties for the people who were living there already (who are often ethnic minorites with a distinctive culture).

As well as problems such as rising property prices and a tendency to replace useful local businesses with vinyl record shops and artisinal gin bars, the authors have identified another issue, which is the new incomers having different food demands. They may have wanted to move to the area because there's an open street market every Saturday but they probably want very different produce on sale. And businesses will follow the money - the newcomers have much more of it and will support higher prices. So not only do you get new businesses catering to the new demographic but a lot of the existing traders will change their products to serve the more profitable market. Those that don't (those that serve, and are often run by, the local minority community) get squeezed out. They can no longer easily or affordably get the food they want so they either have to pay higher prices for 'white' food and forgo their familiar (and perhaps culturally significant) meals or travel elsewhere to get them, which many may not be able to do and which kinda defeats the point of farmers' markets in the first place.

So often people applying any sort of social or political analysis to something, or identifying an issue, get conflated with criticism or prohibition.

[cherryowen]

ChemicalChaos said:

A new entry in the list of things that are apparently racist - now it's farmer's markets

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25250/farmers-marke...

article said:

....gender fluidity

Maybe for 2018, I'll bark at those who use the terms "male" and "he" and "his" when directed at me. I'll "identify" as a large Jameson's with a colour-neutral whiskey stone that neither dilutes the ethnic character nor alters its unique flavour characteristics.

[Smiler.]

2xChevrons said:

This is good example of right-leaning media taking a perfectly appropriate bit of social research and making it into something it isn't.

I have not read the anthology (although it sounds interesting) but nowhere in any of the synopsis or the press reports have the authors said that farmer's markets are racist or that they should not be allowed. All it is in an example of a recognised problem of gentrification in urban areas. When young, educated, well-paid professionals (who are often predominantly white and of the majority culture) move into a central urban district because of its cheaper housing, more centralised nature and 'vibrant cultural scene' this can cause unintended but very real difficulties for the people who were living there already (who are often ethnic minorites with a distinctive culture).

As well as problems such as rising property prices and a tendency to replace useful local businesses with vinyl record shops and artisinal gin bars, the authors have identified another issue, which is the new incomers having different food demands. They may have wanted to move to the area because there's an open street market every Saturday but they probably want very different produce on sale. And businesses will follow the money - the newcomers have much more of it and will support higher prices. So not only do you get new businesses catering to the new demographic but a lot of the existing traders will change their products to serve the more profitable market. Those that don't (those that serve, and are often run by, the local minority community) get squeezed out. They can no longer easily or affordably get the food they want so they either have to pay higher prices for 'white' food and forgo their familiar (and perhaps culturally significant) meals or travel elsewhere to get them, which many may not be able to do and which kinda defeats the point of farmers' markets in the first place.

So often people applying any sort of social or political analysis to something, or identifying an issue, get conflated with criticism or prohibition.

Just a Minute!

[Colonial]

ChemicalChaos said:

A new entry in the list of things that are apparently racist - now it's farmer's markets

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25250/farmers-marke...

Stop reading right wing propaganda.

As detailed above they have taken a widely accepted policy on the potential impacts of gentrification and put a spin on it to get tge easily offended worked up.