Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2010, 08:32 PM
 
42 posts, read 116,542 times
Reputation: 38

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by goonzy View Post
RON PAUL baby
2012 now that's change brother!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-24-2010, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Central Coast
2,014 posts, read 5,525,335 times
Reputation: 836
Quote:
I have to maintain my own water well, my own sewage disposal system, I don't have public utilities of any kind. I maintain my own road and washes etc.

And, I love it. I'm not running anywhere.
Fairly silly, the well doesn't need any maintenance, unless the motor quits, or it silts in, and I seriously doubt you will fix it, unless it is pretty darned shallow. Your septic? You pump it? again, I doubt it, and what will you do if you don't hire someone to pump it every few years, and the "grease" gets into the leach field, you going to dig that up and replace it, yourself?

Quote:
I don't have public utilities of any kind. I maintain my own road and washes etc.
You maintain your own washes? Say what? You maintain your own road. How many miles was that? And you don't have public utilities of any kind. So all your juice comes from your generator, and you drive on the public roads to fill your fuel cans? and you cook on gas, Propane, the state regulated guy comes out in the state regulated truck with the state regulated valves and fills your state regulated tank, right?

Nothing public about that, except the public parts..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 09:38 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,286,148 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarks View Post
Fairly silly, the well doesn't need any maintenance, unless the motor quits, or it silts in, and I seriously doubt you will fix it, unless it is pretty darned shallow. Your septic? You pump it? again, I doubt it, and what will you do if you don't hire someone to pump it every few years, and the "grease" gets into the leach field, you going to dig that up and replace it, yourself?


You maintain your own washes? Say what? You maintain your own road. How many miles was that? And you don't have public utilities of any kind. So all your juice comes from your generator, and you drive on the public roads to fill your fuel cans? and you cook on gas, Propane, the state regulated guy comes out in the state regulated truck with the state regulated valves and fills your state regulated tank, right?

Nothing public about that, except the public parts..
Over a mile of roadway coming to the house - and after this past week, lots of repair needed.

No propane - except for the outside fire. And that I take the tanks in to be filled. No one delivers

I have no fire service available. And the Sheriff tells me that if I call for help - they are 30 minutes out minimum.

So, I'm pretty much responsible for taking care of our home - and our persons.

And love it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 10:17 PM
 
241 posts, read 252,105 times
Reputation: 60
Overall, the typical white family enjoys a net worth that is more than seven times that of its black counterpart.

Why is this the case? Because white people in America have been receiving race-based Affirmative Action from the government for around 400 years.

This wealth has been passed down for generations of white citizens, in the form of education, job opportunity, housing opportunity, property ownership, and inherited wealth.

If you are a white person in the United States, almost without exception you receive at least some (if not most) of the benefits of White Affirmative Action: in the composition + wealth of the town you live in (built by racial segregation), in your schools (received more government funds for 100 years that schools of color), your job opportunities (from social networks of other white professionals who received similar benefits over generations), etc. White people still tend to get easier credit terms, better schools, shorter prison sentences, and more generous government benefits than people of color.

I'm not saying this to make you feel guilty - in fact I don't think any of us are to blame at all. We can't be responsible for what happened in the past - but we can take responsibility for the inequality and injustice that is happening right now.

Here are a few ways in which government programs and practices have channeled wealth and opportunities to white people at the expense of people of color.

1. White Americans were given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private white ownership under Homestead Act provisions.

2. The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and even hold property. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

3. Slavery.

4. Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th century and not overturned in many states until the 1960s, reserved the best jobs, neighborhoods, schools and hospitals for white people.

5. The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the Social Security act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement. They couldn't pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their children had to support them.

6. Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s. In 1972, for example, every single one of the 3,000 members of Los Angeles Steam Fitters Local #250 was still white.

7. But it was another racialized New Deal program, the GI Bill and the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Non-white communities were deemed a "financial risk" and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites. (!!!)

In Conclusion:

What you're looking at is over 400 years of government-backed transfer of wealth away from people of color and towards white people. Fundamentally, this is White Affirmative Action, in the fields of civil rights, property, job opportunities, home ownership, healthcare, social security, etc.

How can this not have huge consequences for every aspect of American life and opportunity?

http://img.waffleimages.com/caad2b69e33f6d3396766418c59eed992493458b/racerelations.jpg (broken link)

CONSEQUENCES: THE RACIAL WEALTH GAP

1. The typical white family today has on average seven times the assets, or net worth, of a typical African American family. Much of that wealth difference can be attributed to the value of one's home, and how much one inherited from parents.

2. But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line, it's also the starting point for the next generation. Those with wealth pass their assets on to their children - by financing a college education, lending a hand during hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home. Some economists estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime wealth accumulation depends on these intergenerational transfers. White advantage is passed down, from parent to child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap - and the head start enjoyed by whites - appears to have grown since the civil rights days.

3. In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising that African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States. But by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, Black Americans still possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth.

4. The racial wealth gap is even worse thanks to the sub-prime mortage crisis, during which predatory lenders specifically targetted poor people-of-color for exploitation (Wells Fargo even circulated a memo calling them "ghetto loans" to "mud people"). This crisis moved 90 billion dollars out of the black community and into the hands of white bankers, the largest racial transfer of wealth in America since slavery.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?(Reparations!)

1. One indication that attacks on affirmative action are part of a white backlash against equality is that affirmative action (in the form of preferences that primarily benefit white people) are not being questioned.

2. I humbly propose that, to counter 300+ years of intensely racist affirmative action in favor of white people, that we strive to equalize the wealth gap by instituting affirmative action for all people of color.

3. This can include job opportunities, preferential hiring, grants and scholarships, etc. But more importantly, I think it should be based around a re-investment in communities of color: building good schools, health-care centers and hospitals, providing well-paying jobs, post-prison rehabilitation programs, etc.

4. I know that sounds complicated, but I'm not here to talk about how to make a perfect Reparations for People of Color plan. I'm just here to explain why I think it's necessary.

5. Here is an elegant summary and defense of Affirmative Action: Affirmative Action Works! by Paul Kivel / In Defense of Affirmative Action / In Motion Magazine

FAQ:

1. Wasn't this stuff all in the past?

I mean, it's just one or two generations back. When we're talking about inherited wealth and economic opportunity, what happened to your great-grandparents is very relevant, as the statistics of family wealth, job opportunity, education, health, etc. all show.

2. This doesn't apply to me, I'm [jewish, an immigrant, poor, etc.]

There are many white people who this does not apply to specifically - you may be one of them. But it's natural to feel defensive - we like to believe what we have is the result of hard work. And it is. It is also, however, the result of a significant amount of government assistance for generations and generations in our families. Even white immigrants like my family only made it to this country because we have immigration policies that favored white immigrants from Europe over others.

3. What about colorblind policies that treat everyone the same?

Colorblindness today treates everyone equally, but white americans already have an unfair advantage, so colorblind policies just keep that advantage in place and it gets worse and worse over time.

4. What about class-based policies instead of race-based policies?

Looking at class-based policies in the past, like the New Deal programs, you can see that without an explicit race-based component the administration and application of those policies tends to re-create racist dynamics and benefit only white people. In almost every single circumstance, class-based policies are manipulated to benefit white people over people of color because they don't address the racial problems inherent in the system so of course they fail because of those problems.

5. What about [some innacuracy or an argument over the statistics or whatever].

While this list is factually solid, I'm sure there is a mistake here and there. The point isn't whether each individual point is completely right, but rather that together they paint a clear picture of hundreds of years of affirmative action in favor of white people that needs to be reversed.

6. Shouldn't we just focus on changing people's attitudes?

There does need to be a shift in people's attitudes. But that alone won't make a single person's life better.

Besides, the point of this is that it isn't attitudes that creates this system - it's economic policy. So for the inequality to change, we need to change the policies that create + perpetuate it.


7. What exactly are you trying to do here?

I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad. I just think that those of us who are white people should know our history, and take responsibility for the benefits we have received by supporting equality and justice in our country.

8. Okay, you win. What can I do to help?

Ideally, I want everyone to become active in a reparations struggle (not necessarily in name) in your community. That means supporting funding and quality schools for students of color. It means supporting rehabilitation and ending the racist prison industry. Volunteer your time with a group that gives supplies or help to folks dealing with the consequences of this system. All around you there are people of color fighting for what they are owed by this country, and they would be glad to have your help.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
2,901 posts, read 12,732,606 times
Reputation: 1843
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Please actually read what I stated, to quote myself:

"Show some research that shows talking on a cell phone is more disruptive while driving than eating while driving. "

I did not ask for information on whether driving cell-phones is disruptive, rather information that shows its more disruptive than the countless other things people do in their cars (e.g., eating).


Oh yeah? Sort of odd considering I have not given such an argument. I'm not against laws against disruptive acts while driving, but isolating using a hand-held cell-phone device makes no sense at all. I would not be surprised if the law in California was created for the sole purpose of forcing everyone to purchase a blue-tooth headset, it makes no sense at all otherwise.


As I asked previously show some research that demonstrates that its more disruptive than eating in your car. Pretty hard to imagine how that could be the case.

Also, to say it again. The law in California does not outlaw talking on your cell-phone while driving just using your cell-phone without a headset.

Care to tell me how talking to someone in the car is any different than talking to someone via some device connected to your ear/head?
I'm not going to do research for you.
I've read about it (off line) and i have seen a couple of pieces on television that clearly show how and why talking on a cell phone is roughly equivalent to driving with an illegal blood alcohol level (i can't recall the number --- .08? --- i don't know these measurements for alcohol) and how when texting a person is twice as impaired.
It involves the workings of the brain and how, despite what people think they are capable of, the information that you process while not on the phone is quite diminished when you are on that phone.
Simulations with people who think they're doing just fine show that they are obviously impaired even though they had no idea that they were impaired and to what degree.
Talking to a person in the seat next to you is a different scenario regarding the brain and the way it deals with all of the information that one needs to be taking in while driving.
And yes, i'm aware that in California we can talk on the cell phone if the hands are free and yes, this does present a discrepancy because if talking on the phone is dangerous and interferes with information intake, the fact that the hands are free would make little difference although one does need ones hands to drive and it's generally a good idea to have, if not both hands on the wheel at all times, the opportunity to do so.
Now, how anyone in their right mind can defend texting while driving is just beyond me.
Someone ... i don't know if it was you ... thought that all activity in the car should be banned if cell phone use is banned.
I don't understand that desire since the complaint is about restriction of freedom and it also makes no sense to put something like texting in the same danger while driving category as eating a banana.
If women are putting on makeup when they're in the car and on the move ... what can i say ... duh!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,411 posts, read 10,401,171 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranchosantafesmostwanted View Post
1. Very restrictive gun laws even for recreation!. If you want to go to a shooting range to rent a gun you cant be alone unless you have a permit.

2. Pro-wealth distribution, and affirmitive action at state universities

3. No cell phone use while driving. This includes texting or calling.

4. High taxes (just raised witholding state income tax by another 10%, and sales tax is near 10% in many parts of CA)

5. Big government in big debt... issuing IOU's to state contractors

6. Free speech "zones" have been enacted by some cities like Santa Cruz and others

7. Huntington Beach is passing a law banning beer games in bars

8. Irvine has restrictive paint and roofing laws for beige colors and HOAS.

9. Don't even think about trying to build a home on the ocean.

10. In state tuition for anchor babies

11. Plastic bottle tax (deposits)

12. Traffic (very limiting to FREEDOM!)

13. Crime and gangs

14. Antonio Villargiosa, Mayor of LA, stated it was his mission to spend tax money for one million trees" to beautify LA"... an assualt our wallet when we have bigger problems.. We know that when LA property owners are prosperous- they will beautify themselves by investing in their own property!

15. $800 minimum business tax for all LLC's even if they posted a "net loss". That's even worse than if they were to impose an $800 minimum administrative tax on welfare receipients.
Since you live in Rancho Santa Fe why are you hating on mayor Villaraigosa of Los Angeles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 10:37 PM
 
Location: In The Outland
6,023 posts, read 14,079,515 times
Reputation: 3535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sassberto View Post
Libertarianism is the phoniest of all the pseudo-political doctrines. They are really just cheap conservatives. Give a Libertarian the freedom to pave and plow their own roads, maintain their own water, power, and sewer infrastructure... watch them run for the hills.
I left California quite a while ago but I have to say that your definition of Libertarianism is quite different than it seems to be to a lot of folks I know here in Montana. In my humble personal opinion I have to respectfully say that your statement seems to be a bit ignorant, sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 11:22 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,461,661 times
Reputation: 6465
Quote:
Originally Posted by clongirl View Post
I'm not even going to bother arguing with all of the whining/complaints...the great thing about our country is that you're welcome to leave at any time- there are other states.

I LOVE this state--warts and all. I just choose to live life and not obsess with frickin' plastic bottle taxes and bans on "beer games" in bars.. I couldn't care less about shooting off a gun in a range with a required license..boo hoo. Oh, and so what if you can't build a house on the ocean...I can tell it certainly doesn't affect someone like yourself anyway.

Really, life's too short to get tangled up in silly issues that on a day to day basis don't really matter if you're happy with life in general. Fact is..nobody cares about your stupid complaints.. it's your life and you're welcome to find happiness elsewhere if it pleases you...Iowa for instance, (gay marriage allowed there now!). Good luck.

Thank you, well said, i could not have said it better myself. Don't like living here, leave when ever and where ever you want. My realitives live in so many different States, they ----- about the same stuff going on in there States, no State is Perfect, there are rules and laws to follow in every state, WEIRDOS, in every State, hard workers in every State, and the wackos, in every State, don't like one State move to another one. I happen to love living out here, our weather except for the past week, is great. Housing right now is at a all time low, you can get quite a nice house right now for a decent price. Not happy, find a State your happy being in. And what fool will text while driving, whoops i see these fools doing it all the time. Guess what my cousins say they even text in the East and the South, Wow. And wow talk about whining complaints now!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2010, 11:56 PM
 
406 posts, read 1,361,016 times
Reputation: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranchosantafesmostwanted View Post
1 in 15 blacks are in jail because they choose to commit a crime. Sure, maybe 10% maybe wrongfully jailed and thats a shame. 1 in 20 blacks is still a lot.

Poverty certainly is the main cause of crime. Where we disagree is the solution.

- I believe poverty is due to unemployment.

-You believe poverty is due to lack of affirmative action.

Responsible law abiding hunters with guns in West Texas have nothing to do with causing poverty amongst blacks.
I don't know where you got this last comment. I never said anything like that. This is why I don't argue with Libertarians in real life. I have family down in southern Utah, all over Wyoming, and places like that, and they always make some crazy accusations like you just did. We just usually stick to talking about the weather. Libertarian ideology works fine in the country, but it doesn't work in urban areas at all. I have lived all over the country, and each place has their own way of governing it's people. The Libertarian way would not work over the vast majority of the country. But this is straying too far from the subject...


Sir, these are the facts from studies done in the name of science. According to them, minorities, namely blacks, are committing crimes because of poverty. There are most likely dozens of studies showing how blacks were, and still are in some places of the US, discriminated against in both schools and at work. How can you say that a black man in the US, right now is still on a level playing field as a white man from the same cross-section of society? This begs the question as to how many black people and families you know?


This country has history of killing and enslaving people in the name of freedom, which is why most educated people get pissed off when people talk about 'patriotism' and 'freedom', like it's something us 'liberals' don't understand. I actually think labeling yourself one political party or another is pretty annoying also, like they are something different. I have never really seen a Libertarian ever do anything. I think there has only ever been one mayor in the US who was a Libertarian, and he was mayor of a town of a few hundred people in Utah. Cable news has made me hate both political parties, and the charade that is going on in every state government and in the White House.


But hey, if you want to rally around some political party instead of talking about real issues, then go for it. I don't care about a tax on plastic bottles. I'm glad they are trying to make people recycle them because they were becoming a nuisance when they were laying all over the side of the road in the 80's. I'm glad there is affirmative action, because even though my ancestors had nothing to do with slavery, I feel like someone other than a white man should be given a break. I am for gun control mostly because Americans are too stupid nowadays to own guns. There should really be some sort of IQ test given to prospective gun owners. Not only do I think they should ban talking on cellphones in cars, but I think they should actively pursue these people, and take their licenses away after 3 infractions. They could set all the potheads free and fill the jails with these cell phone addicts instead. I'm also glad they are making people paint their roof a certain color, and I am also for them demanding homes to be made more efficiently. The reason our building and real estate industries collapsed, is that realtors and builders decided to make the home a commodity to be traded, rather than a place to live. They built houses as cheaply as possible, and sold for an inflated price. I'm amazed that no one except me and my old timer saw it coming. Amazed, yet I can't say surprised at how easily fooled Americans are. And I'm also very glad the mayor of LA is planning on spending tax payers money to create jobs while beautifying the city by planting trees. I've been to LA, and trust me it's ugly, so the more trees, the better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 03:39 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,460 posts, read 20,103,598 times
Reputation: 4365
Quote:
Originally Posted by coyoteskye View Post
I'm not going to do research for you.
I've read about it (off line) and i have seen a couple of pieces on television that clearly show how and why talking on a cell phone is roughly equivalent to driving with an illegal blood alcohol level (i can't recall the number --- .08? --- i don't know these measurements for alcohol) and how when texting a person is twice as impaired.
And to say it again, I'm asking for research that shows that driving while on the phone is worse than a number of other distractions. Why have a cell-phone law instead of a general law against driving while distracted?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coyoteskye View Post
Talking to a person in the seat next to you is a different scenario regarding the brain and the way it deals with all of the information that one needs to be taking in while driving.
You are pulling this from your rear. Talking is talking. It does not matter whether you are talking via the phone or talking to the person next to you. Even the California law acknowledges this, hence why its a law that only requires hands free devices.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coyoteskye View Post
I don't understand that desire since the complaint is about restriction of freedom and it also makes no sense to put something like texting in the same danger while driving category as eating a banana.
It makes plenty of sense, eating a banana requires you to take one hand off the wheel and creates a number of other distractions.

Laws should be consistent, when you allow inconsistent laws you are asking for special interests to implement laws to their advantage. How much revenue was generated by requiring hands free devices in California?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top