ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Careful - statistics about blacks can cause you to be banned
Why are parents stupid?
- Thread starter Hilltrot
- Start date
OZOS
Well-known member
Will I win an award if I post statistics about whites?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
You know what the rate of single parent homes in Nigeria is, from that same Pew Research article?
4%
In fact, all of of Pew's statistical map of Africa for which they have data shows numbers lower than the U.S.
Some differences between Nigeria and the U.S.:
Systemic racism in the U.S., the U.S. prison industrial complex, inequality in the U.S. in the ways accused black people are/were represented at trial and the severity of their convictions, and the way the U.S. waged the war on drugs. And in case you don't believe that:
John Ehrlichman, counsel and Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs under Nixon:
The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.
Last edited:
OZOS
Well-known member
Go Nigeria!
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Didn't take long to find out, as usual, you're full of crap
Was Nixon's war on drugs a racially motivated crusade? It's a bit more complicated.
A former Nixon administration official claimed the drug war was meant to criminalize black people and hippies. But history offers a more complicated story.
www.vox.com
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Whenever there's an instance that explodes across the media, social and otherwise, such as George Floyd or this new murder in London the question I ask is why didn't his church recognize that he needed help?
And of course the answer always is - they were a product of modern secularist society and did not belong to a church.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Didn't take long to find out, as usual, you're full of crap
Was Nixon's war on drugs a racially motivated crusade? It's a bit more complicated.
A former Nixon administration official claimed the drug war was meant to criminalize black people and hippies. But history offers a more complicated story.
Nope. You found something you liked and then posted it without reading it through.
From your link:
Still, it's possible that Nixon also saw the kind of political benefit Ehrlichman claimed: A focus on law enforcement could disproportionately hurt black Americans, a voting bloc that had generally opposed Nixon. And it's certainly true that the war on drugs has hit black Americans the hardest.
Regardless of Nixon's motives, the war on drugs has hurt black people the most
Regardless of Nixon's motives, the war on drugs has hurt black people the most
The statistics bear out Ehrlichman's claim: Although black Americans aren't significantly more likely to use or sell drugs, they're much more likely to be arrested for them. And when black people are convicted of drug charges, they generally face longer prison sentences for the same crimes, according to a 2012 report from the US Sentencing Commission.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Just in case the leftists here want to stop being morons.
“If we wanted to be serious about evidence, we might compare where blacks stood a hundred years after the end of slavery with where they stood after 30 years of the liberal welfare state. In other words, we could compare hard evidence on “the legacy of slavery” with hard evidence on the legacy of liberals.
Despite the grand myth that black economic progress began or accelerated with the passage of the civil rights laws and “war on poverty” programs of the 1960s, the cold fact is that the poverty rate among blacks fell from 87 percent in 1940 to 47 percent by 1960. This was before any of those programs began.
Over the next 20 years, the poverty rate among blacks fell another 18 percentage points, compared to the 40-point drop in the previous 20 years. This was the continuation of a previous economic trend, at a slower rate of progress, not the economic grand deliverance proclaimed by liberals and self-serving black “leaders.”
Nearly a hundred years of the supposed “legacy of slavery” found most black children [78%] being raised in two-parent families in 1960. But thirty years after the liberal welfare state found the great majority of black children being raised by a single parent [66%]. Public housing projects in the first half of the 20th century were clean, safe places, where people slept outside on hot summer nights, when they were too poor to afford air conditioning. That was before admissions standards for public housing projects were lowered or abandoned, in the euphoria of liberal non-judgmental notions. And it was before the toxic message of victimhood was spread by liberals. We all know what hell holes public housing has become in our times. The same toxic message produced similar social results among lower-income people in England, despite an absence of a “legacy of slavery” there.
If we are to go by evidence of social retrogression, liberals have wreaked more havoc on blacks than the supposed “legacy of slavery” they talk about.”
― Thomas Sowell
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Sowell's a brilliant man
As usual your assumptions are dead wrong. I knew just as much about their grades as the formal teacher of that class.
I helped teach the class. I knew how bad their English skills were. I helped them every day for 3 months. I saw their work and helped them as much as I could other than writing their papers for that I would not do. I saw their scores because they handed me their papers to look at and help them understand their mistakes. And I know how many of them were passed on and not made to retake the class. The entire school system there failed those kids. From kindergarten on they had been passed from grade to grade for they were in the same age range as their peers.
These kids were so far behind in their skills that a 3 month class couldn't even begin to help them catch up.
Edit: The community college didn't even place them in a bonehead English class. The class I'm speaking of was a creating writing class. Think about a college, of any type, putting a person who didn't know the difference between a noun and verb, adjective or adverb, or even simple punctuation in a writing class. How were those kids supposed to pass a creative writing class when they knew nothing about the language?
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not going to answer this entire post.
So, among your other fantasies you think everyone works full time jobs. Did you know that during the Obama administration more than 90% of the jobs created were part time jobs? And it took time for Trump to turn around the trend. Do you know that, unlike in the 70s and 80s and earlier, a person is considered "fully employed" even if they only work part time? Another one of the lies the government tells us.
Where I live the vast majority of private jobs are part time employment. The largest employer here is Walmart. And they hire very few full time employees outside of management position. Small businesses also hire a lot of part time employees. Did you know that overall in the US 60% of women work part time and 35% of men work part time? That's BoL statistics.
The rest of your post is assuming things I did not say nor do i think.
Have you ever studied what happens to abused women? They end up suffering from something very like Stockholm syndrome. We did everything we could to help my stepdaughter to make better choices. However, from a young age, 8 or 9, she would sit and cry because she didn't think she would ever have a boyfriend or husband. She came out of a home where her biological father was extremely abusive. She married, as most women do, someone just like her father. And yes, he was/is very abusive. Yes, she made bad choices, but the abuse she went through and the dysfunctional relationships on both sides of her biological family set her terrible examples. What was "normal" to her was very abnormal. It was multi-generational abuse on both sides of her parent's families.
You make it sound so simple. Unfortunately it isn't. When a person is taught by example that they cannot trust people it's not easy to overcome that. I know. I was taught by my family that no one was to be trusted. That fair play was a myth and justice something never seen. The only way I ever learned different was through a couple of caring teachers and God inserting Himself in my life. I don't hate teachers. During my growing up years a couple of them actually did a lot to try to help me. I look back on those teachers with great affection.
As to your earlier assertion that I'm just trying to make teachers look bad, that's bunk. If you had actually read what I said you would realize that I said the entire educational system had failed this kid. That teachers don't make sure parents are involved and notified when their kids are failing school isn't their failure entirely. The school system itself doesn't make sure it happens. Look at that Baltimore school system. The kid had a 0.13 gpa and he was in the top half of his class. Really? There's that many 80 IQs in Baltimore? That's a failure of the entire school system. Nobody in that school system cares if those kids learn anything. The kid missed 272 school days and wasn't suspended many times for that miserable attendance record? There is no mention of any suspensions in that article. That's the school system's fault, not the failure of any teacher for it is the school's administration that is supposed to suspend the kid and report it to the parent. I'm sure glad I never had to attend a school system like that. That's the Democrat plantation system at work to keep blacks from knowing enough to succeed. It's blatant racism on their part.
Baltimore says they have had a low unemployment rate. However, what the employment department count's as being "employed" is have done even an hour's worth of work in a week. What do you think the real unemployment rate is? My guess is it is 4 or 5 times the official numbers: probably an average of 6-7% before the coronavirus madness. That means employers have been/are taking advantage of employees. They are working them few enough hours a week to not have to pay for benefits which means many more part time jobs than full-time jobs. A 4 hour shift is a natural break point in the work day. Which points to a 20 hour work week for most low-skilled employees and even moderately skilled employees in this madness of the government's response to the coronavirus. This happens all over our nation. It's a norm not an exception but it's been that way for years.
Have you ever researched how many times the unemployment numbers have been manipulated? How about the inflation numbers? These things have a very direct effect on what it takes to survive from day to day.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
I worked 2 full time jobs for a year and a 1/2 back when my little guys were real little and my ex was back in school for her nursing degree. Both jobs had enough flexibility that I could make them work. Half the pay from one went toward daycare. They were professional level jobs that I could do on a 40 hour schedule, each. It was an easier workload than I was expecting a few years before that when I was pre-med.
Lon
Well-known member
Struck me: Didn't you attend school in England? (such likely affects perhaps a stark difference in conversation here)
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
That might be your idea of the "best solution" but it isn't for many women who are responsible mothers and do a good job of raising their children.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Are you vision-impaired, or do you just like large font?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Were you a TA?