Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I can hear it now...............

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I can hear it now...............

    Sugarloafer's a racist !!!


    Actually, a good article in today's Journal......$20 trillion dollars and the results are worse. Pretty clear throwing money at this problem over the past 50 years hasn't worked and there's no indication it will work over the next 50.

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-n...ans-1402961070


    How Not to Help Black Americans

    Failed poverty programs have tried to do what blacks can only do for themselves.


    By JASON L. RILEY


    June 16, 2014 7:24 p.m. ET
    'The concept of historic reparation grows out of man's need to impose a degree of justice on the world that simply does not exist," writes Shelby Steele in "The Content of Our Character." "Blacks cannot be repaid for the injustice done to the race, but we can be corrupted by society's guilt gestures of repayment."

    Mr. Steele's words come to mind after reading a much-discussed argument for slavery reparations in the June issue of the Atlantic magazine. "The consequences of 250 years of enslavement, of war upon black families and black people, were profound," says the essay's author, Ta-Nehisi Coates. No disagreement there. But the enslavers and the enslaved are long gone, and Mr. Coates presents no evidence that what currently ails the black poor will be addressed by allowing them to cash in on the exploitation of dead ancestors.

    Ironically, Mr. Coates spends most of the article detailing how previous government efforts to narrow black-white social and economic disparities—from Reconstruction to the New Deal to the Great Society—have largely failed. Yet he concludes that what's needed is more of the same—namely, another grand wealth-redistribution scheme in the guise of slavery reparations.

    This year we are marking the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and next year we will do the same for the Voting Rights Act. These landmark pieces of legislation, signed by President Lyndon Johnson, outlawed racial discrimination and ensured the ability of blacks to register and vote. But Johnson wasn't satisfied with these victories. He was convinced that government could and should do more.

    "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair," Johnson said in 1965 at the start of his Great Society. The "next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights" was "not just freedom but opportunity" and "not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result."

    Like Johnson, liberals today remain convinced that government has the ability to produce equal outcomes, though history repeatedly shows that intergroup differences are the norm rather than the exception. The reality is that social policy, however well intentioned, has its limits, and when those limits aren't acknowledged the results can be counterproductive.

    Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute reports that since 1964 "the U.S. welfare state has devoted considerable resources to assuring or improving the public's living standards—something like $20 trillion in inflation-adjusted dollars through antipoverty programs alone." Notwithstanding this government largess, the official poverty rate in 2012 was higher than it was in 1966, and the black-white poverty gap has widened over the past decade. The racial disparity in incarceration rates is also larger today than it was in 1960. Black unemployment, on average, has been twice as high as white unemployment for five decades.

    One reason that Uncle Sam's altruism has not been successful is because the government is attempting to do for blacks what blacks can only do for themselves. Until those in the black underclass develop the work habits, behaviors and attitudes that proved necessary for other groups to rise, they will continue to struggle. And to the extent that a social program, however well-meaning, interferes with a group's self-development, it does more harm than good.

    Upward mobility depends on work and family. Government policies that undermine the work ethic—open-ended welfare benefits, for example—help keep poor people poor. Why study hard in school if you will be held to a lower academic standard? Why change antisocial behavior when people are willing to reward it, make excuses for it, or even change the law to accommodate it, as in the Justice Department's current push for shorter sentences for convicted drug dealers?

    The Obama presidency is evidence that blacks have progressed politically. But if the rise of other racial and ethnic groups is any indication, black social and economic problems are less about politics than about culture. The persistently high black jobless rate is more a consequence of unemployability than of discrimination in hiring. The black-white learning gap stems from a dearth of education choices for ghetto children, not biased tests or a shortage of education funding. And although black civil rights leaders cite a supposedly racist criminal justice system to explain why our prisons house so many black men, it has been obvious for decades that the real culprit is errant black behavior too often celebrated in black culture.

    Black leaders today are convinced that they are helping blacks by helping the party of bigger government, Democrats. But a previous generation of black elites understood the perils of such reasoning.

    "Everybody has asked the question, and they learned to ask it early of the abolitionists, 'What should we do with the Negro ?' " said Frederick Douglass in 1865. "I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall. . . . And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs!"

    Douglass was stressing the primacy of black self-development, a not uncommon sentiment among prominent blacks in the decades following the Civil War. Booker T. Washington, who like Douglass was born a slave, said that "It is important and right that all privileges of the law be ours, but it is vastly more important that we be prepared for the exercise of these privileges."

    Douglass and Washington didn't play down the need for the government to secure equal rights for blacks, and both were optimistic that they would get equal rights eventually. But both men also understood the limits of government benevolence. Blacks would have to ready themselves to meet the far bigger challenge of being in a position to take advantage of opportunities, once equal rights had been secured. The history of 1960s liberal social policies is largely a history of ignoring this wisdom.

    Mr. Riley is a member of The Wall Street Journal editorial board and author of "Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed," just released by Encounter.

    WSJ In-Depth
    Last edited by Dostie; 18 June 2014, 10:54 AM. Reason: readability
    "I'm totally talking out my ass"………….riser3

  • #2
    Post something that isn't behind a pay wall.
    "Nobody ever got my name right." - Me

    Comment


    • #3
      Evidently it's expensive to be that racist.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by riser3 View Post
        Post something that isn't behind a pay wall.

        You're all set now fatso.
        "I'm totally talking out my ass"………….riser3

        Comment


        • #5
          That's a good article, I don't think it's racist. I think you mostly likely are racist. You probably only solicit white prostitutes, huh?

          Comment


          • #6
            Nice topic 'loafer. Agree, it's a good article. Particularly like the contrast of historical quotes from Fredrick Douglas and LBJ.

            Originally posted by Jason L Riley - Wall St. Journal
            "Everybody has asked the question, and they learned to ask it early of the abolitionists, 'What should we do with the Negro ?' " said Frederick Douglass in 1865. "I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall. . . . And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs!"
            Contrast that with LBJ's remarks which, to my mind, expose the fallacy of liberal thinking.
            Originally posted by Lyndon Baines Johnson, from Jason L Riley - Wall St. Journal
            "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair," Johnson said in 1965 at the start of his Great Society. The "next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights" was "not just freedom but opportunity" and "not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result."
            Our founding fathers seceded from King George for several reasons, but a key part was to allow equal opportunity, NOT equal results. That is faulty reasoning because history shows the only way to have equal results is to lower the standards, not raise the bar. Equal opportunity will inevitably result in UNequal results because some people are more motivated, or better equipped (for whatever reason) and thus the results will be different. I want better results, not lower standards and equal results.

            ain't no turn like tele!

            Comment


            • #7
              "Equal results", in the context, sticks in my craw too. On the other hand "black culture" in the USA is not monolithic. There are nearly proportional graduates into the professions, including a steady rise in the financial area.

              I should say the "doing it for themselves" is in progress and as such, disagree with that point that LBJ went too far.

              Repartions? It may have been said on the the comedy channel, but a mulligan on some of the historic ill treatment may be in order. Have the 40 odd years of progress answered the need for some sort of redress? I don't know. As a species, we still have the "otherness problem" and there is no "cure" for that.

              So, in answer, no, not, imo, a racist on this matter. It's a tough discussion, how it goes depends on a lot of variables...I wonder if human-kind can manage it.
              Go for adventure, take pix, but make certain to bring'em back alive!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sugarloafer View Post
                You're all set now fatso.
                Wow. That's so original.

                And I am very glad I didn't have to pay to read that.
                "Nobody ever got my name right." - Me

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by riser3 View Post
                  And I am very glad I didn't have to pay to read that.
                  Why? Because it runs directly counter to the steady diet of swill that you've so eagerly lapped up from the trough of American Liberalism? Does it bother you that it was written by a black man? Are you going to call him an Uncle Tom as your ilk is so prone to do?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dostie View Post
                    Contrast that with LBJ's remarks which, to my mind, expose the fallacy of liberal thinking.
                    Generally when I read almost anything from LBJ or FDR I cringe. The thing I try to remember is I have no clue what the the world or our country was like during those administrations. Politics tend to swing like a pendulum to the extremes. I am just a bit younger then you but wonder how anyone posting here has any idea what the motivation was behind what almost any politician said 40 plus year ago.

                    Also being a white middle age male I try to avoid having strong opinions on the matters of race or birth control.
                    Last edited by James; 18 June 2014, 07:58 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by James View Post
                      ...being a white middle age male I try to avoid having strong opinions on the matters of race or birth control.
                      Why are you adding birth control to the discussion? Was that part of the original article?

                      Now, to add further fuel to the fire on this subject, another man with skin color similar to Fredrick Douglass, Walter Williams had this to say regarding modern reparations for past racial injustices...
                      Originally posted by Walter Williams
                      Punishing perpetrators and compensating victims is not what reparations advocates want. They want government to compensate today’s blacks for the bondage suffered by our ancestors. But there’s a problem. Government has no resources of its very own. The only way for government to give one American a dollar is to first — through intimidation, threats and coercion — confiscate that dollar from some other American. Therefore, if anybody cares, a moral question arises. What moral principle justifies punishing a white of today to compensate a black of today for what a white of yesterday did to a black of yesterday?
                      The full article here...Slavery Reparations

                      ain't no turn like tele!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Reparations? Really? Where the hell does that get anybody..and for good measure, even if all humanity suddenly accepted the guilt of their ancestors and desired nothing more than to make reparations going all the way back, would not only madness result from the attempt...or at least utter chaos?

                        Shall we not do better by learning to accept each other as fellow beings, by praying for the dead and to start working like hell for the living?
                        Last edited by RobRoyMeans; 18 June 2014, 08:48 PM.
                        Go for adventure, take pix, but make certain to bring'em back alive!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Dostie View Post
                          Why are you adding birth control to the discussion? Was that part of the original article?
                          No and it is not relevant. It just popped in to my head as one of the other politically charged topics I tend to avoid.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by freeheelwilly View Post
                            Why? Because it runs directly counter to the steady diet of swill that you've so eagerly lapped up from the trough of American Liberalism? Does it bother you that it was written by a black man? Are you going to call him an Uncle Tom as your ilk is so prone to do?
                            Poorly written political hackery regarding a subject where there could be serious debate and meaningful improvement by listening to all "sides" instead of blanket repudiation of entire political and economic schools of thought based on false conflations. I did not consider the skin tone of the author. Only after reading your comment and re-reading the rant do I see there is one simple indirect reference to skin tone. I do not consider the rant to be racist however it starts a slippery slope and it hands gasoline and lit matches to anyone who is racist.
                            "Nobody ever got my name right." - Me

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by riser3 View Post
                              Poorly written political hackery regarding a subject where there could be serious debate and meaningful improvement by listening to all "sides" instead of blanket repudiation of entire political and economic schools of thought based on false conflations.
                              He didn't do any of that but I think it's hilarious that one of the biggest cheerleaders for exactly that type of thing (you) oddly find religion when you encounter a position that you're not prepared to refute. Why is it "poorly written political hackery"? Be specific.


                              Originally posted by riser3 View Post
                              I did not consider the skin tone of the author. Only after reading your comment and re-reading the rant do I see there is one simple indirect reference to skin tone. I do not consider the rant to be racist however it starts a slippery slope and it hands gasoline and lit matches to anyone who is racist.
                              Oh please. A "rant"? How so? I guess it's a "rant" because it makes you uncomfortable and leaves you flat-footed. Why don't you refute it? Make the counterargument. I'll wait here. And the way you end is just classic liberal hysteria. "We can't even talk about this! It's too dangerous! By broaching the subject perhaps you're not actually racist but you're certainly a racist enabler!!!!!! Just be quiet or the racists will win."

                              When was the last time you questioned or examined one of your sacred cows? You're just lazy - as are most ideologues. Knee jerk is so much easier than deliberation. And easier on the ego.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X