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.
They are highly relevant to the Democrats given the voting %'s and in some places that really matters.
The bigger issue is how little cache blacks get in terms of a seat at the political table due to the fact that they're not going to vote for the other party....free milk and all that.
Maybe after helping the democrats so much they will have some of their concerns about policing, profiling, incarceration etc. addressed? I mean, the worst places for that are places like LA, Chicago etc. which being democratic bastions should make it easy for the favor to be returned.
Right?
IMO that is the fault of the people/activist in those areas.
If they want their issues addressed via legislation, then they need to force their representatives to take on that issue via lobbying and peaceful protesting.
This is a totally separate issue IMO, however it was one I recently alluded to an another of the "black" threads. I do not 100% agree with BLM but I do feel they are highly ineffective considering the fact that they have been around for a few years and have yet to have any legislator sponsor any bills that I am aware of that highlight the major issues that BLM is seeking to remedy.
People ignore that this is what happened during the entire course of the CRM from the 1880s (when the lobbying/social activism began in black America regarding Civil Rights and anti-lynching in particular) all the way through the 1970s. It came to a climax in the 1960s which was when legislation was finally passed as a result of that activism. There were other legislative victories as well before that in regards to anti-lynching and "affirmative action" (which was first referenced by FDR) in regards to including black Americans in New Deal Programs and government contracting opportunities during WW2.
If the people involved in social protest make this an issue and press upon specific elected officials to pass local, state, and federal laws, it will happen eventually. Same as it did in the past. People ignore that blacks started heavily voting Democratic due to FDR and the information cited above along with other social and economic issues of that era.
How would federal regulations impact my ability to open a gastropub in the Bronx?
No one can seem to answer this when I ask it about my local area lol.
Only if they are speaking about an industry that is federally regulated can they speak on it. Most small businesses are not federally regulated industries, they are state regulated.
IMO that is the fault of the people/activist in those areas.
If they want their issues addressed via legislation, then they need to force their representatives to take on that issue via lobbying and peaceful protesting.
This is a totally separate issue IMO, however it was one I recently alluded to an another of the "black" threads. I do not 100% agree with BLM but I do feel they are highly ineffective considering the fact that they have been around for a few years and have yet to have any legislator sponsor any bills that I am aware of that highlight the major issues that BLM is seeking to remedy.
People ignore that this is what happened during the entire course of the CRM from the 1880s (when the lobbying/social activism began in black America regarding Civil Rights and anti-lynching in particular) all the way through the 1970s. It came to a climax in the 1960s which was when legislation was finally passed as a result of that activism. There were other legislative victories as well before that in regards to anti-lynching and "affirmative action" (which was first referenced by FDR) in regards to including black Americans in New Deal Programs and government contracting opportunities during WW2.
If the people involved in social protest make this an issue and press upon specific elected officials to pass local, state, and federal laws, it will happen eventually. Same as it did in the past. People ignore that blacks started heavily voting Democratic due to FDR and the information cited above along with other social and economic issues of that era.
Hey look, it's the person that referred to me as "you and other racists" that when I objected claimed they hadn't said "you".
Now you want to have a discussion? No thanks, I don't have time for you and other racists.
On the bold, I invest primarily in index funds modeled after the S&P 500, not Dow Jones, so I am invested in more than 30 companies.
On the regulations portion, I agree that starting a business can be regulation burdensome, but that is not due to federal government. It is due to state and local government. I live in a Democratic city and county with a governor who is a Republican. My spouse opened a business here and had to go through a lot of bureaucracy with the state, county, and city. However, he was going to open a similar business when we lived in Georgia and they had MUCH more regulation there than we have here in Ohio.
So IMO Obama and the federal regulators really don't have all that much of an effect on business creation. The state especially has the most regulations and in Democratic areas I do think that they usually have many more layers of regulation crap. My spouse is from Chicago and felt it as similar to Atlanta in regards to his desire to open a business. I know a lot of people who moved to this area from Michigan as well due to that state placing more regulations, fees, and all sorts of licensing requirements on various businesses versus Ohio. In Atlanta, the city itself and county had the most burdensome license requirements.
So IMO people who talk about regulations and "business creation" in regards to Obama and the federal government overlook the fact that state and local governments are usually the primary areas where these regulations will come into play. Obama has actually done a lot to increase funding to the SBA and state and local governments to assist people to open businesses with loan opportunities. I know because at a previous position of which I worked, part of my job was referring entrepreneurs to these organizations to assist them in establishing small businesses.
And on black people being opposed to HRC and Democrats, IMO that is nothing new. As stated, I'm black. Black people b**tch all the time about Democrats lol. I think many of you just don't pay attention to that fact. However, even when we b**tch we rarely see any viable options on the right side of the political sphere and due to us feeling it is a duty of ours to vote, we will vote for the Democrat even with we don't like them all that much. I honestly don't particularly like HRC but I'm voting for her based on the factor above - the markets will remain stable, and honestly she is just smarter and more knowledgeable about actual government, policy, and how the government works versus Donald Trump. I also see him as more corrupt than she is because I worked in housing and know a lot about his past in regards to housing discrimination. His cases were used as case studies in trainings I had to participate in. I also don't buy into the idea that he is all that much of a successful businessman. IMO he is a poor little rich kid who inherited millions of dollars and who just continuously invested it to make his billions along with selling his image and licensing his name. He IMO does not know how to run a typical business and would not have been successful at anything if it weren't for his rich father, who actually was a self made man.
You don't have to keep restating that you are black. We are both black... and even though we are not total in alignment, I like how you lay out your points for discussion.
With regards to state/fed regulations... there are instances where the fed dictates how the state regulates through how funds are dispersed... not all regulations, but some.
I am aware that blacks complain about Dems - but in the end usually vote for Dems. This time seems a little different to me. Even Farrakhan has been very public about HRC being evil. Again - not expecting a huge move away from HRC - but some movement.
Yes - there is very little coming from the right side of the aisle with regards to blacks... but I think even if they make a move in our direction it would be received with skepticism. To me - you can't worry about that. I look at it from a practical standpoint about what works for society (not just myself) and what doesn't.
Trump - I still don't know if I am voting for him because I don't know what to expect. And I have always thought he would not be in it to win it - but was only there to facilitate an HRC victory - which was the case in 1992, 1996 with Perot helping Clinton get elected. I have another week or so before early voting is over.
In a recent poll, 29% of blacks in PA are voting for Trump.
Maybe because back in 2008 Hillary and her supporters (even Bill) were labeled as racists. I'd be surprised to see 29% though.
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.
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.
