Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No banker has ever been FORCED to give anyone a loan.Encouraged,yes,but ultimately it`s the banker`s call.
But ok, government encouraged to give risky loans, in the past the tax payer is "forced" to bail the banks out. Taxpayer money going to bail banks out after the government "encourages" banks to lower qualifiers is not "fair" to the taxpayer.
I hope you can figure out how to buy a home and just as important be able to afford it and keep it.
My question is not about what the law is right now, if you think corporations should be allowed to have a "no blacks allowed" hiring policy and for banks to be allowed not to give home loans to blacks? Meaning no government intervention and letting the free market decide where/if blacks get a job or if blacks can get home (or business) loans?
Is there anything stopping them now? I've seen Asian-owned businesses that never have any visible non-Asian employees, and if you seek to apply for a job, they never have any job openings.
But ok, government encouraged to give risky loans, in the past the tax payer is "forced" to bail the banks out. Taxpayer money going to bail banks out after the government "encourages" banks to lower qualifiers is not "fair" to the taxpayer.
I hope you can figure out how to buy a home and just as important be able to afford it and keep it.
Government does not allow the sale of homes I can afford. Where's the free market when I need it?
Ya, it's much more complex.....employers in the past (and now) showed racism in their hiring....they had to be forced to hire women, blacks and other minorities... complain to THEM. THEY were the ones who made mandatory hiring laws neccessary.
....don't complain about those who need a job and are discriminated against...
If you look at employment records from the late 1800s and early 1900s you will find that white employers in the north hired blacks quicker than white folk. White employees didn't like this so they formed unions to keep blacks from taking "white jobs".
Unions are the ones that made these laws necessary, not employers. Not all unions did this but the vast majority excluded blacks and other minorities. Then they turn around and claim credit for creating "equality" in hiring. lols. Biggest lie in American history.
And we are always told employers will seek any measure to cut labor costs. Then we're told the same employer will hire a white person instead of a black person. Then we're told blacks don't make as much. If the Liberal lie about employers were true then wouldn't black unemployment numbers be lower? If a company is cutting labor costs why hire a white guy when a black guy will do the same work for less money? You can't blame it on racism because these same "racist" employers hire Latinos and move to Asia to hire people.
I think we need to take a step back and take a glance at history. When the "moors" africans came to europe they saw europeans divoid of culture among other things. europeans were living in shacks with farm animals they did not bathe nor did they seperate from their animals until the moors taught them that those practices were filthy, remember the black plague only hit europe they lived side by side with rats etc. the Moors taught europeans how to be self sufficient, they gave them archutecture,language,astrology,math,science,medic ine,hygiene,culture,fashion, and also showed them to clothe themselves lol. So when you say whites need to protect blacks i see it quite differently.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.