Doc Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 i heard a number the other day that astounded me. every black kid born tomorrow has a 1/3 chance of future incarceration. ya think the number for white babies approaches half that? regardless of the causes, it points to inequality. and i think jabaar makes a valid point. what are the odds of a poor baby's incarceration versus those of a rich one? additionally, the power of lobbying and buying influence that is so pervasive in american gov't is exclusively in the realm of the wealthy with the poor powerless to fight against it. citzens united made matters much worse. usury laws are a great example. who do the current ones benefit? who would benefit from strengthening them? minimum wage - same thing. voter registration laws. redistricting. the list goes on... http://www.naacp.org...tice-fact-sheet Another astounding fact is that almost 3/4 of black kids born are to single mothers, most of whom are teenagers and/or poor. Who is to blame for that?
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 That's the quote that stood out to me. Are the "millionaires and billionaires" trying to keep the poor down through food stamps and gov't welfare, or trying to take it away? Which is it? I'd be surprised if you could find one lobbyist who's working to get Food Stamps reduced. really? are you that pathetic or was this supposed to be funny? http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/05/opinion/stoehr-farm-bill-food-stamps/index.html. some of you dolts really don't have a clue do you?
GG Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 i do my own homework. one would expect someone that works in finance would have some facility with numbers. how do those numbers advance your argument? 82.8% of arrests were for possession. if everyone of the 16.7% of the drug arrests for dealing was exclusively on blacks, that still doesn't come close to explaining the discrepancy in overall arrests. Ya know what's most disturbing here? that these numbers exists for any reason and that anyone doesn't conclude that there is something fundamentally and intrinsically wrong with a system that results in virtual certain failure for a large percentage of a particular segment of the population. not to acknowledge a problem can only be due to ignorance, willful or not. Because the data you selected cannot be used in the case you're trying to paint because it selectively uses the raw data to promote a viewpoint. As 3rd correctly points out, the data is incomplete because it omits other contributory data leading up to the arrest. But you knew that, because if 80% of people die in beds, we should really focus on making the beds safer.
Security Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Poor people are always taken advantage of. I lean more to the right, somewhat Libertarian/Republican, but the price gauging is just plain wrong. Young people are poor people get way higher interest rates on things. I understand there is more risk, but the concept of credit scoring kills poor people. Gas prices are crazy higher, I mean 40 cents higher in poor neighborhoods. I can drive 6 miles from my house and be in a really poor and run down area, I doubt one white person lives there, and they charge 40 cents more per a gallon of gas. These buy your title back and cash checking places really do more harm then good. Some people just are not that smart, and like Kareem stated, some are just money desperate, and it is brutal that they are taken advantage. I understand that personal responsibility is what I would preach in most everything, and people often put themselves, and their children in these positions, but there can be some systematic changes to help people.
/dev/null Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Dammit people, you were supposed to feel all guilty and ashamed of being white. Yinz need to check your privilege and re-read the article the way the OP wants you to read it
Azalin Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 really? are you that pathetic or was this supposed to be funny? http://www.cnn.com/2...amps/index.html. some of you dolts really don't have a clue do you? you link to an opinion piece in which the author describes Obama as 'pragmatic'?
IDBillzFan Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 One would figure a doctor would know the difference between a cause and a symptom. One would also figure that this story would probably fit well in the existing Ferguson thread.
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 Dammit people, you were supposed to feel all guilty and ashamed of being white. Yinz need to check your privilege and re-read the article the way the OP wants you to read it no. i hoped for reasoned rebuttals from those that disagree. it was a very small hope.
Rob's House Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 i heard a number the other day that astounded me. every black kid born tomorrow has a 1/3 chance of future incarceration. ya think the number for white babies approaches half that? regardless of the causes, it points to inequality. and i think jabaar makes a valid point. what are the odds of a poor baby's incarceration versus those of a rich one? additionally, the power of lobbying and buying influence that is so pervasive in american gov't is exclusively in the realm of the wealthy with the poor powerless to fight against it. citzens united made matters much worse. usury laws are a great example. who do the current ones benefit? who would benefit from strengthening them? minimum wage - same thing. voter registration laws. redistricting. the list goes on... http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet This is lazy analysis. You've started with your conclusion, found some statistics that do nothing to inform us on causation, then declare your flawed argument is now supported. BTW, the over policing excuse is one of the weakest in the guilty white liberal's arsenal. It fails to explain the disparity in murder rates between the predominantly black projects and its evil white counterpart. If white liberals knew dick **** about the issue they'd understand that the problem, regardless of how it came to be that way, is primarily cultural, and all the feel good "solutions" the white guilt and black apologists throw out there will do less than nothing to help the next generation of black children, unless you first change the culture that produces that outcome. And only a starry eyed dreamer or a fool thinks you can fix the problem by creating an opportunity for someone who doesn't care to take advantage of it.
IDBillzFan Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 And only a starry eyed dreamer or a fool thinks you can fix the problem by creating an opportunity for someone who doesn't care to take advantage of it. I thought this article breaks it down pretty simply: "Who Lost The Cities?" The Reverend Jesse Jackson is, to the surprise of all thinking people, right about something: “A spark has exploded,” he said, referring to the protests and violence in Ferguson, Mo. “When you look at what sparked riots in the Sixties, it has always been some combination of poverty, which was the fuel, and then some oppressive police tactic. It was the same in Newark, in Chicago, in Detroit, in Los Angeles. It’s symptomatic of a national crisis of urban abandonment and repression, seen in Chicago.” A question for the Reverend Jackson: Who has been running the show in Newark, in Chicago, in Detroit, and in Los Angeles for a great long while now? The answer is: People who see the world in much the same way as does the Reverend Jackson, who take the same view of government, who support the same policies, and who suffer from the same biases.
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) This is lazy analysis. You've started with your conclusion, found some statistics that do nothing to inform us on causation, then declare your flawed argument is now supported. BTW, the over policing excuse is one of the weakest in the guilty white liberal's arsenal. It fails to explain the disparity in murder rates between the predominantly black projects and its evil white counterpart. If white liberals knew dick **** about the issue they'd understand that the problem, regardless of how it came to be that way, is primarily cultural, and all the feel good "solutions" the white guilt and black apologists throw out there will do less than nothing to help the next generation of black children, unless you first change the culture that produces that outcome. And only a starry eyed dreamer or a fool thinks you can fix the problem by creating an opportunity for someone who doesn't care to take advantage of it. perhaps you missed the part of the argument that starts "regardless of the causes, it points to inequality". i've given several further solid examples that make that point. hell, the food stamps one was teed up so high that 5 year old could've hit a 9 degree driver off it. your anger is showing. i'm wondering if that's at "white liberals", "black apologists" or something else that you're so resentful of. Edited August 18, 2014 by birdog1960
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 Because the data you selected cannot be used in the case you're trying to paint because it selectively uses the raw data to promote a viewpoint. As 3rd correctly points out, the data is incomplete because it omits other contributory data leading up to the arrest. But you knew that, because if 80% of people die in beds, we should really focus on making the beds safer. yes, the data points to a very strong correlation between a higher likelihood of being arrested for drug possession if one is black than if one is white. it absolutely does not speak to causation. the question was inequality under the law. the correlation supports that premise. so what was the point ypou made about most blacks being arrested for dealing and not possession about? care to defend that? and how does it relate to the question of inequality under the law?
GG Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 yes, the data points to a very strong correlation between a higher likelihood of being arrested for drug possession if one is black than if one is white. it absolutely does not speak to causation. the question was inequality under the law. the correlation supports that premise. so what was the point ypou made about most blacks being arrested for dealing and not possession about? care to defend that? and how does it relate to the question of inequality under the law? So while you cannot establish the causation or other contributing factors, you still clamor about inequality. Do me a favor and show me where I was talking about arrests for possession.
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) The arrests are made for dealing instead of using. The numbers are more swayed on that side. But, yet again, you conflate cause & symptom. what/s your point, again? doesn't require causality to document inequality. the numbers show inequality, plain and simple. Edited August 18, 2014 by birdog1960
GG Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 what/s your point, again? Where do I discuss possession?
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 Where do I discuss possession? using implies possession, no? this is desperation on your part. argue straight up you pu$$
GG Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 using implies possession, no? this is desperation on your part. argue straight up you pu$$ Implies? You've learned a lot from your leader, didn't you.
Nanker Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 So being poor is a virtue. It is a greater station in life than earning a living and working hard trying to prosper. That's true evidently, because we "owe" them something... money, housing, food, cell phones, birth control, health care Insurance. If we owe them these things we must be in their debt. We are in their debt because we are not as virtuous as they are, because being poor is virtuous.
birdog1960 Posted August 18, 2014 Author Posted August 18, 2014 Implies? You've learned a lot from your leader, didn't you. tell me, do people get arrested for using? does a positive drug screen land someone(excluding those on probation) in jail in any state? i was being generous in interpretation of your statement re using versus dealing. i assumed you understood that point and just inadvertantly replaced possession with usage. silly me. never anticipated such a weasel defense. and we're still left to wonder what your comment about dealing had to do with any of this. So being poor is a virtue. It is a greater station in life than earning a living and working hard trying to prosper. That's true evidently, because we "owe" them something... money, housing, food, cell phones, birth control, health care Insurance. If we owe them these things we must be in their debt. We are in their debt because we are not as virtuous as they are, because being poor is virtuous. no, a virtuous society results in less poverty. poverty is in no way virtuous.
GG Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 tell me, do people get arrested for using? does a positive drug screen land someone(excluding those on probation) in jail in any state? i was being generous in interpretation of your statement re using versus dealing. i assumed you understood that point and just inadvertantly replaced possession with usage. silly me. never anticipated such a weasel defense. and we're still left to wonder what your comment about dealing had to do with any of this. no, a virtuous society results in less poverty. poverty is in no way virtuous. So you jump to a conclusion based on what you inferred, but it's my language that's at fault? OK. The reason there's a huge difference between usage statistics and arrests for possession is that one usually occurs in a private setting with little danger to others, while the other usually occurs in a situation where there's a contributing factor to the arrest. See the difference?
Recommended Posts