BillRM
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 02:58 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
You might find it absurd that blacks were hired even though they were not qualified, in the hopes that they would get themselves qualified if given the opportunity and a really nice paycheck every week,


Sadly there is some true to the above statement as I had a friend who own 1/3 of a company that did a lot of business with local governments and he needed to have a certain percents of his subcontractors black own.

The results in all too many cases was that he needed to have his employees do the job of those black own subcontractors while paying them anyway.

Then there was one gentleman that was promoted to being a yard conductor for the NYLBRR that was so bad at his job that the other employees would just cover for him and let him remain at home in fact. Nothing else they could do about it as they was told that he could not be fired or even demoted from his job.
tony5732
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 03:42 am
@BillRM,
No no no. There are no laws that protect black people from racial discrimination. The law that says you can't be discriminated against based on age, sex, religion, or race is a figment of white people imagination. Black people have no opportunities in America and no positions of power at all. Our president isn't black, that's a figment of your imagination too.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 04:27 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Sadly there is some true to the above statement as I had a friend who own 1/3 of a company that did a lot of business with local governments and he needed to have a certain percents of his subcontractors black own.


That is kinda like what I am talking about, but the corporate hiring that I am talking about ended in the mid 70's, and very early in the 80's the dead weight was removed because corporate finances were under pressure.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  3  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 08:39 am
@tony5732,
tony5732 wrote:

Black people have no opportunities in America and no positions of power at all.


So why stay?
Miller
 
  0  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 08:59 am
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:

- why are African Americans disproportionately affected by poverty.


I guess you don't know that all American blacks aren't poor or living in poverty. Just look at Dr. Ben Carson, numerous song writers/performers, dancers on Broadway ( in both white and black productions), college professors, TV commentators, Emmy winners, Tony winners, Pastors, Bishops,authors, scholars, and last by not least...so many black lawyers, judges and also look at the Supreme Court.

Don't forget, Valerie Jarret, Mayor Harold Washington and of course, our leader, President Obama...all Chicago folks.

Sounds to me like you are living in a cabin in the woods these days, no running water, no TV, and an outdoor JOHN...Do you use toilet paper now, or do you still use those old corn cobs?
BillRM
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 09:15 am
@Miller,
Quote:
I guess you don't know that all American blacks aren't poor or living in poverty


Odd that you seems to have a reading problem as the post that you are replying to have the word disproportionately as in disproportionately affected by poverty not that all blacks American are poor but a disproportionately percents of them.

To aid you further see below.

Quote:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disproportionately

1.
not proportionate; out of proportion, as in size or number.
0 Replies
 
tony5732
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 10:39 am
@Miller,
LOL! Ok, sorry Miller, I am being sarcastic. I didn't mean to be taken seriously. Neither should BLM, because that is pretty much what their cardboard box campaign is about, without the sarcasm. People are actually buying into this crap for real.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 12:26 pm
@TheCobbler,
Why is this tread in the "Religion" forums? Is manufactured victimhood now a religion?
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  3  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 03:40 pm
@Miller,
That is the dopiest thing I've read here for a while. At no point did I suggest all blacks are living in poverty. I'm talking about data analysis and macro trends across large populations.

Hey! I knew someone who survived cancer. Therefore cancer won't kill you.

Jeezus H Christ get back in your box you idiot.

FML.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 05:17 pm
@hingehead,
I can take one second to ponder, and the answer is racism.

Does that somehow make you happy?

Only a fool would argue that blacks have had the same opportunities as whites for most of their history in America.

My point tends to be that as an individual you can accept the crutch provided to you by others or overcome it. Plenty of black Americans have.

There's no doubt that black Americans have had it much worse than any other identifiable group in terms of succeeding in America. I've never bought the argument: "Well the Irish and the Italians had it tough too!"

But what's the answer? Wallow in self-pity and look for others to take care of you?

Ultimately all the bullshit about society doing something to care for the "victims" is just that. Liberals are all for clamoring how society (read - someone other than them) needs to atone for its sins against blacks.

I'm not a huge fan of the Black Muslim movement for a number of reasons but I do admire their recognition that they they can no longer look to whites to take care of them.

Democrats have been playing blacks for chumps for decades.

In the end it is always you against the world.
BillRM
 
  0  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 05:39 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
There's no doubt that black Americans have had it much worse than any other identifiable group in terms of succeeding in America. I've never bought the argument: "Well the Irish and the Italians had it tough too!"


BULLSHIT and only someone that know little history would think so.

Off hand the group that come to mind is the Chinese who was imported post civil war to work on the railroads under such poor conditions that thousands of them died and they was not allowed for the most part to bring their women along.

They was also hung as must or more then black Americans during that period.

Hell Asians was not allowed to own properties on the west coast at one point and of course Japanese Americans was placed in camps during WW2.

Quote:


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

Alien land laws were a series of legislative attempts to discourage Asian and other "non-desirable" immigrants from settling permanently in U.S. states and territories by limiting their ability to own land and property. Because the Naturalization Act of 1870 had extended citizenship rights only to African Americans but not other ethnic groups, these laws relied on coded language excluding "aliens ineligible for citizenship" to prohibit primarily Chinese and Japanese immigrants from becoming landowners without explicitly naming any racial group.[1] Various alien land laws existed in over a dozen states before they were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1952. Like other discriminatory measures aimed at preventing minorities from establishing homes and businesses in certain areas, such as redlining and restrictive covenants, many alien land laws remained technically in effect, forgotten or ignored, for many years after enforcement of the laws fell out of practice.[2]



hingehead
 
  2  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 06:18 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Hey Finn

Nothing about this would make me happy. I have huge conversations with Mrs Hinge about the situation of remote indigenous Australians - who have it significantly worse that even LSES African Americans - she's worked in that space for decades - and we know there is no simple silver bullet solution. But refusing to acknowledge there is even an issue strikes me as near sociopathic.

What I'm railing against is the denialism. That BLM is somehow reverse racism.

I feel like the 'anti' posters here (and I exclude you from that list) feel like even admitting there is a problem and an imbalance will somehow take something away from them. It's like dealing with 4 year olds.

Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 06:39 pm
@BillRM,
Yes, the Chinese immigrants had it very tough back in the day of the railroad, but they didn't have it very tough for the next one hundred years; blacks did.

This is not about who had it the toughest, but if it was, blacks would win.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 06:59 pm
@hingehead,
tangent - what is LSES? I looked it up - Lebanese Solar Energy Society!
hingehead
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 07:01 pm
@ossobuco,
Sorry, common acronym in the Australian Public Service

Lower Socio-Economic Status.

i.e. poor/disadvantaged people.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 07:03 pm
@hingehead,
Thanks, I was guessing something like that but didn't figure out the words.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 07:22 pm
@TheCobbler,
TheCobbler wrote:
http://scontent-lga1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xal1/v/t1.0-9/11988429_499047840271818_5265759929323826660_n.jpg?oh=5491b3feb248b18342a49193793c3b4a&oe=565E667A

One of the best reasons for voting for Republicans is: The Left thinks that self defense is murder.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 07:58 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
I gotta ask you... In ALL of these conflicts between white police and black men, is that ALL that you see happening - black "hoodlums" attacking police officers? You NEVER see a case where the police are in the wrong?

While this wasn't directed at me, it's a highly pertinent question, so I'll answer as well.

Clearly not every single case is the result of attacks on police officers. And sometimes a police officer is in the wrong.

But it seems to me like most of the cases that BLM are up in arms about ARE cases where someone got shot for trying to kill a police officer. And it seems like most of the rest are cases where the police officers did nothing wrong.

For instance, the Rodney King case didn't involve a shooting, but it is frequently cited, and it was a case of a thug attacking police officers and them defending themselves.

It should also be noted that what happened to those poor police officers is why it is now legitimate for the police to skip over non-lethal measures and just gun down any minority who attacks them.

The Trayvon Martin case involved a neighborhood watch captain instead of a police officer, but it as well is frequently cited, and is a case of someone being gunned down while trying to murder that neighborhood watch captain.

Michael Brown was a case of someone being gunned down while trying to murder a police officer.

That guy who asphyxiated in NYC was not attacking the police, but his death was a tragic accident, and not the result of any police wrongdoing.

Those cops in Baltimore are mostly being persecuted on charges that are bogus on the face of it. For instance, Freddy Gray was standing around on a corner where drug dealers usually stand around, had a criminal history, and bolted and ran when the police appeared. That is more than enough justification for him to be taken in to answer some questions. Yet several of the officers who are being charged, are being charged for merely arresting him. And several more officers are being charged for not following new regulations on how to strap him in for transport, even though the department had done nothing to notify the cops of the new regulations.

So yes, I see the BLM movement as mostly trying to legitimate the murder of police officers.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 08:06 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Bill. We've been through this once. Let me try to get an answer from you.

Why does blacks killing blacks mean that it's ok to pretend like cops aren't killing blacks 4X as much as whites?

Those are two problems. One doesn't erase the other. Why pretend it does?

Are there really two problems?

If African Americans try to violently murder police officers four times as often, it would be perfectly reasonable for police officers to shoot them in self defense four times as often.

In order to determine if there is a problem, we first need to account for how often each race tries to murder a police officer.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2015 08:17 pm
@Lash,
Quote:
Why does blacks killing blacks mean that it's ok to pretend like cops aren't killing blacks 4X as much as whites?

Who here is pretending that it does not happen? Arguments that the reality is justified are not arguments that reality does not exist. You seem to be very confused.

This is the whole problem with the BLM message, the obvious response to pointing out the blacks get killed by cops more often is to ask for an argument that this is not justice, for an argument that we should want to change the reality. The radicals who run BLM just stare at you stupidly when they get asked for that, they cant get past the assumption in their minds that this must be a bad thing, and that there can be no debate that the reality must be changed. Oh yes there can. Every assertion is open for challenge, democracy breaks down if we cant insist upon this happening.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

2016 moving to #1 spot - Discussion by gungasnake
Is 'colored people' offensive? - Question by SMickey
Obama, a Joke - Discussion by coldjoint
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
The ECHR and muslims - Discussion by Arend
Atlanta Race Riot 1906 - Discussion by kobereal24
Quote of the Day - Discussion by Tabludama
The Confederacy was About Slavery - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Black Lives Matter
  3. » Page 20
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 07:34:11