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.
Muhammad Ali in a biography I saw last night on ESPN classic said you could put blacks in a new area tomorrow and they would turn it into a ghetto in a week.
I thought that was a shocking statement.
Interesting, and I'd like to hear the context. I don't regard it as a black issue, there are plenty of whites and hispanics that can accomplish the same thing. Several generations of welfare and dependency have generated a culture of irresponsiblity, lack of respect for property, non-existent parenting skills and crime.
If our government didn't have this insane Drug War that gives it infinite power, the ghettos wouldn't be nearly as bad as they are today. Funny how the drugs the upper and middle class uses are available from doctors (although even legitimate use is harassed by government and causes untold harm), but those used by the lower classes are illegal. It is not a health issue, tobacco kills half a million people a year, yet deaths from all illegal drugs combined killed under 45,000 from 1979 to 1998. truth: the Anti-drugwar The Real Story on Drug Induced Deaths
The Drug War destroyed the entire family structure in the ghetto, creating a huge need for welfare: "The drug war is nitro to the ghetto's glycerin...Punitive drug policy (and its sibling, the war on crime) has outlawed large tracts of everyday life. By 2008 one in nine black men younger than 35 was in prison or jail. Among black male dropouts in their mid-30s, an astonishing 60 percent have served time in state or federal prison." The drug war on the poor: America doesn't have a drug problem, it has a poverty problem
Many have addressed this well-known problem: "McWhorter sees prohibition as the saboteur of black families. "It has become a norm for black children to grow up in single-parent homes, their fathers away in prison for long spells and barely knowing them. In poor and working-class black America, a man and a woman raising their children together is, of all things, an unusual sight. The War on Drugs plays a large part in this." He also blames the black market created by prohibition for diverting young black men from the normal workforce. "Because the illegality of drugs keeps the prices high," he says, "there are high salaries to be made in selling them. This makes selling drugs a standing tempting alternative to seeking lower-paying legal employment." End the Drug War, Save Black America - Reason Magazine
As usual, instead of solving social problems, our oversized government is creating them. Too bad it cares about nothing but increasing its own size and power, since we are all doomed unless the majority of us realize it and take the steps needed to fix our nation.
There is an interesting thread right now in the General U.S. forum that is comparing U.S. ghettos to third world ghettos, with the general consensus that third world ghettos make U.S. ghettos look like the middle class. But what if, as many conservatives desire, we eliminated or at least drastically reduced welfare programs and public housing, would our ghettos turn into third world slums? Would you be willing to live in a country like that for the sake of reducing spending?
People don't want to be receiving food stamps etc. Most of the time, they aren't even receiving them because they are unemployed but because they can not find a job that provides for them.
I think what minorities often hurts is the kids. You shouldn't have 3-4 children when you can't find a job that provides for you and them. I think Oprah's mom gave her sister up for adoption so she wouldn't have to be on welfare. Family planning would be a good idea. Have kids once/if you can afford it.
But again, it has nothing to do with them wanting or be on welfare, nor do "don't know any better", or whatever some people want to imply here.
The number of TANF recipients has decreased steadily since the passage of the 1996 welfare reforms.
For those that say the less welfare = more crime, look at the quote above and the chart below. Do you see what I see?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallbanger
People don't want to be receiving food stamps etc. Most of the time, they aren't even receiving them because they are unemployed but because they can not find a job that provides for them.
I think what minorities often hurts is the kids. You shouldn't have 3-4 children when you can't find a job that provides for you and them. I think Oprah's mom gave her sister up for adoption so she wouldn't have to be on welfare. Family planning would be a good idea. Have kids once/if you can afford it.
But again, it has nothing to do with them wanting or be on welfare, nor do "don't know any better", or whatever some people want to imply here.
I call BS on this. Yes, some people don't want to be on welfare, but for a big percentage of them, it is a way of life. I personally know too many people that are perfectly able, but unwilling to work. I have relatives for which getting their pregnant 15 year old daughter their first welfare card is seen as a rite of passage.
Also, here in PA, a family of four gets over $600 a month in food stamps. We feed our family of five, home cooked meals, for half of that amount. That, and the fact that they can use that money for chips, soda, and junk food may explain why there is so much obesity between welfare recipients.
The CRA has made Detroit one of the greatest cities in the world.
In a free market, there would be no CRA and there wouldn't be a reason for a CRA.
Currently, minimum lot sizes effectively keep millions of Americans out of the market to buy homes.
Allowing smaller homes on smaller lots would make it possible for burger flippers to buy homes (without CRA or any government subsidies of mandates) as long as they had decent credit and didn't have kids.
Owning a tiny house would also provide an incentive not to have kids you can't support.
Detroit would be a GREAT place to try out my idea to allow tiny houses and tiny lots, as there is plenty of vacant, CHEAP land available. Knowing that a burger flipper job would allow you to own your home (as modest as it is) would provide a valuable incentive to encourage work.
The worst welfare is the 750 billion given to banks......not welfare. Its not even comparable.....hate poor welfare all you want but rich welfare is worse.
The poor control and own NOTHING and make no decisions that control this country.
I call BS on this. Yes, some people don't want to be on welfare, but for a big percentage of them, it is a way of life. I personally know too many people that are perfectly able, but unwilling to work. I have relatives for which getting their pregnant 15 year old daughter their first welfare card is seen as a rite of passage.
Also, here in PA, a family of four gets over $600 a month in food stamps. We feed our family of five, home cooked meals, for half of that amount. That, and the fact that they can use that money for chips, soda, and junk food may explain why there is so much obesity between welfare recipients.
I know people like this too. It is more people than you would think. Add to this the people getting unemployment that don't even look for a job until it runs out. I don't understand why there are people on here that don't want to admit that there are way too many leeches making it harder for those that really do need and should receive the help.
In a free market, there would be no CRA and there wouldn't be a reason for a CRA.
Currently, minimum lot sizes effectively keep millions of Americans out of the market to buy homes.
Allowing smaller homes on smaller lots would make it possible for burger flippers to buy homes (without CRA or any government subsidies of mandates) as long as they had decent credit and didn't have kids.
Owning a tiny house would also provide an incentive not to have kids you can't support.
Detroit would be a GREAT place to try out my idea to allow tiny houses and tiny lots, as there is plenty of vacant, CHEAP land available. Knowing that a burger flipper job would allow you to own your home (as modest as it is) would provide a valuable incentive to encourage work.
boy do you live in a dream world. If you think having a small housse would stop people from have too many kids, explain why so many, in small apartments have large families? As for cheap land, who is going to buy this cheap land? If the government expected to buy it so everyone can own a home. What makes you think people have a right to own a home? Home ownership is earned in is a privilege and not a right.
There is an interesting thread right now in the General U.S. forum that is comparing U.S. ghettos to third world ghettos, with the general consensus that third world ghettos make U.S. ghettos look like the middle class. But what if, as many conservatives desire, we eliminated or at least drastically reduced welfare programs and public housing, would our ghettos turn into third world slums? Would you be willing to live in a country like that for the sake of reducing spending?
No.. it would force people to get jobs and with jobs, you get economic development. The slums would disappear.
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.
