U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-27-2017, 11:43 PM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 10 days ago)
 
48,065 posts, read 45,465,557 times
Reputation: 15325

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post


I see, so you try to draw a line of false equivalency between the plight of poor minorities and discrimination?

I think the poster you were responding to was just pointing out how minorities worked along side with whites back in the day, without all the grievances claimed today.
Since you mentioned black people, isn't it strange how black culture was healthier back in the 1950's (when society was supposedly more racist) than it is today.

How do you fit that square peg in a round hole?
Actually, Blacks were leading the USA in out of wedlock births and fatherless homes back then. Blacks were living in ghettos are large number back then too, probably alot more so than now. Thanks to integration/civil rights, it gave Blacks who could do good for themselves more options, more freedoms, more ways to get out of the ghetto. Those who could got out, and never returned. Those who couldn't get out, well, it got bad, especially when drugs flooded the neighborhoods. More Blacks have become middle class post-1960s. More Blacks are doing better. Those that aren't doing well, they get the most attention.

 
Old 11-27-2017, 11:50 PM
 
Location: My House
34,592 posts, read 28,962,017 times
Reputation: 25581
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888 View Post
In my area, there has ALWAYS been lots "Diversity". But they didn't care about that, back in the old days. It was a meaningless term to them. Even just fifty-sixty years ago.
All that DID matter was working hard and making money, whatever your ethnic background (and church, for most of them). When that's all you're focused on, then people get along great. And everybody prospers, oddly enogh.

Today, this phony push for "Diversity" has pushed all of that aside.


You're kidding, right?

If you go on "church" alone, you've just told us that people tended to be Christians, so I don't know how diverse a place could be if everyone was of the same faith.

I won't even get into how rough things were 50-60 years ago for black folks. Whew.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
 
Old 11-28-2017, 12:16 AM
 
Location: Los Awesome, CA
8,520 posts, read 5,003,946 times
Reputation: 3304
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888 View Post
Shabazz! Yes!! ALWAYS quick to go with the "White Supremacist" card!!
Knew I could count on you!
Yes, we all know that the "don't tread on me people" are patriotic Americans without a ounce of hate in their minds... If you people don't like diversity please be honest about the reason why...
 
Old 11-28-2017, 12:23 AM
 
7,340 posts, read 4,444,574 times
Reputation: 8986
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888 View Post
I don't have any idea what you are talking about, when you talk about "ethic enclaves". And neither would the people of my area, 75 or 100 years ago. They would have said, "that guy is talking gobbydegook."

As I said, they were too busy working together to make money to have any time for your nonsense.
Wow, how old are you if you were around 100 years ago?

Last edited by RosieSD; 11-28-2017 at 12:36 AM..
 
Old 11-28-2017, 01:23 AM
 
9,300 posts, read 4,276,082 times
Reputation: 11032
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
Actually, Blacks were leading the USA in out of wedlock births and fatherless homes back then. Blacks were living in ghettos are large number back then too, probably alot more so than now. Thanks to integration/civil rights, it gave Blacks who could do good for themselves more options, more freedoms, more ways to get out of the ghetto. Those who could got out, and never returned. Those who couldn't get out, well, it got bad, especially when drugs flooded the neighborhoods. More Blacks have become middle class post-1960s. More Blacks are doing better. Those that aren't doing well, they get the most attention.
Two problems with your post.

First, though out of wedlock births were higher among blacks than whites (by a substantial percentage), it was about 1/4 in the 1950's. Today it is close to 3/4 in the black community.

Second, if your statement is true that blacks (and by extension black culture) are doing better, why all the grievance merchants with chips on their shoulders compared to the black folks of previous generations?

I have a theory about the second part, but would like to get your opinion first.
 
Old 11-28-2017, 01:30 AM
 
9,300 posts, read 4,276,082 times
Reputation: 11032
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHABAZZ310 View Post
Yes, we all know that the "don't tread on me people" are patriotic Americans without a ounce of hate in their minds... If you people don't like diversity please be honest about the reason why...
I know you were speaking to a different poster, but let me make an observation.

For starters you use sweeping generalizations about the "don't tread on me" type people. Second, you incorrectly assume they are all white. In reality many people who support constitutional rights including the 2nd Amendment are in fact minorities. Whites do not corner the market on such things.

I'd also point out that there is a big difference between not minding diversity, vs. it being promoted as a virtue with social engineering in an attempt to achieve some idealistic percentage from a liberal persons perspective.
 
Old 11-28-2017, 07:26 AM
 
36,765 posts, read 16,356,564 times
Reputation: 9894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
I know you were speaking to a different poster, but let me make an observation.

For starters you use sweeping generalizations about the "don't tread on me" type people. Second, you incorrectly assume they are all white. In reality many people who support constitutional rights including the 2nd Amendment are in fact minorities. Whites do not corner the market on such things.

I'd also point out that there is a big difference between not minding diversity, vs. it being promoted as a virtue with social engineering in an attempt to achieve some idealistic percentage from a liberal persons perspective.

Agreed, especially your last paragraph.
 
Old 11-28-2017, 07:51 AM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
4,009 posts, read 5,510,360 times
Reputation: 4545
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
Two problems with your post.

First, though out of wedlock births were higher among blacks than whites (by a substantial percentage), it was about 1/4 in the 1950's. Today it is close to 3/4 in the black community.
.
There was a thread not that long ago that discussed why this could be - but I can't locate it, so I'll rehash what I mentioned in it.

The rise of the single parent black family, could possibly be in response to old social welfare laws. In a documentary about the notorious St. Louis public housing complex, Pruitt Igoe, it was mentioned that families with able-bodied husbands/fathers, could not get public assistance or public housing when the complex was built, and for years afterwards, even if they lived below the poverty line and in squalor.

Apparently it was common to pretend the husband/father had abandoned them, so that they could qualify for public housing and assistance. Then of course, the dad came back once they got the apartment. It wasn't uncommon for social workers to search apartments or spy on residents, attempting to catch out families who had violated the 'no able men' rule.

Social welfare rules like this, are probably at least partly responsible for some African Americans turning their back on marriage- if having a child out of wedlock meant assistance, it may have been a more attractive prospect to the poor than marrying and receiving none.

I'm not sure when the rules were changed, and if these were local regulations or common on a federal level half a century ago. I'm guessing the latter.
 
Old 11-28-2017, 08:03 AM
 
3,576 posts, read 1,235,384 times
Reputation: 3732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
Agreed, especially your last paragraph.
So, the guy who thinks everyone should have to speak English is against social engineering?
 
Old 11-28-2017, 08:19 AM
 
Location: *
8,094 posts, read 2,413,946 times
Reputation: 2215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
So, diversity has always been around, and you had no issues with it, but now you are mad because people call it for what it is?
Apparently social engineering & the quota system has always been around as well.

Apparently it was alright when the social engineering resulted in the quota system requiring 100% white men as government representatives.
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.


Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top