Why are blacks the defacto Symbol of Poverty in the US? (drugs, Hispanic)

[ck9]

Originally Posted by backfist

Britain has a similar problem. The majority of British Blacks are either middle or upper class, while a small but persistent percentage of Blacks (often Caribbean) are poor and predisposed to crime, violence, welfare dependence, etc.

And the latter are the ones who gain the most attention.

yeah we have that problem in toronto with the carribeans and somalians .

[macmeal]

A lot of it is simply "Soft Bigotry",(no, I refuse to believe George Bush coined this phrase--it's too 'clever'). Soft Bigotry is the "nice" sort of racism which gives special consideration to racial (and other) minorities, while holding Whites more strictly accountable. It states, in essence, that blacks in poverty are there because "we"--or "our society"---or other outside influences-"put them there". Poor whites, on the other hand, are poor because they're "lazy"--or "stubborn"---or somehow "missed the boat".

It's a very subtle, very 'sneaky', outwardly "nice" racism, but it's racism nonetheless. It makes helping blacks somehow more 'satisfying' than helping whites-- because blacks 'can't help it'. Whites, on the other hand 'ought to know better'---and therefore, don't really deserve "our" help. They're white, after all, and if they'd just 'get off their backsides' they could easily 'make it'.....

I think this is at least a good part of what the OP alluded to-- just my own opinion, though....

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by ck9

no easy answers here but has anyone considered that other western countries like brittain have sizeable black populations and dont have the same problems?

Wow, that' funny you should mention that. I had to do a school project on the differences between american blacks and brisith blacks and you call less than 3% of 60 million total people sizeable?

US 10%
UK 2-3% of pop and like a previous person mentioned they have a lot of similar problems.

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by LM1

No, the issue is of proportion, not of "raw numbers".

If we were to examine Japan, there's a pretty good chance that near 100% of their impoverished citizens would be Japanese. This doesn't bespeak of anything inherent to the Japanese, but rather to the demographics of that particular country... You'd have to be a complete retard to infer otherwise.

The fact that blacks exhibit a higher degree of poverty in relation to their population in the United States (or, basically, anywhere else they occur) is a serious issue and the one that causes the most discussion.

Pointing out that the majority of impoverished citizens in a majority-white country just so happen to be white is like saying that you're more likely to find fish in a lake rather than a desert. Gosh, go figure.

The issue is that any given black person is far more likely to be in poverty (or a rapist, robber, murder, arsonist, etc) than any given white person- which very, very much makes it a "black issue". To maintain that the issue has do to with "raw numbers" - thus removing the onus from social behavior and placing it on raw demographics- is incredibly intellectually dishonest and MOD CUT.

MOD CUT discuss the topic and leave the cheap shots out of it.

I was in know way being dishonest in posting data that is factual. This is no difference if i posted the affluence of the white community and said in raw numbers there's more affluent whites than are affluent blacks by either raw numbers or percentages of population. Posting raw numbers has nothing to do with the problem of the 6 questions i asked.

What I simply was saying is it is ridcioulous, that we hold 8 million blacks up as the symboy of pvoverty in a country where 33 million people are poor. Whites makes up55% or 18 million poor people. The news media and everyone on this board knows that based on population size blacks are disproportionately poor. Hell, people in Japan know this, so that was clearly not the point of the questios. You know what when i pay taxes to support people raw numbers do matter. Does it make any difference if i'm paying taxes based on each race's proportion in greater society? My point is simply if we want to eliminate poverty we need to be honest with the face of poverty and it does not just encompasss blacks, which is the widely held belief.

Why aren't whites going out of there way to help their own?

You know something else if you go back to 1959 the same number of total blacks have been poor in this country for the last 50 years 8 million. The number has not changed the only thing that has changed is the increase in total number of blacks in this country(12 million to 34 million). I just think its silly that there are alsmost as many poor peopl ein this countryas there are black people in total. Blacks have had the greatest decrease in poverty amongst each group over the last 50 years.
In 1959 60% of the black population lived in poverty now only 24%. my point here is that if this continues the onlly people that will be left as poor will be the "forgotten poor whites"

Why are blacks poorer than whites
1. Less education or access to great schools (if black closed the gap here everything else would take care of itself)
2. Jobs
3. Marriage
4. Age ( the black population is significnatly younger)


Whites have gone from more than 30 million to 18 million in the last 50 years. However, most of these families like there black counter parts have yet to experience a middle class life styles and are uniformly low or working class.

Here are the rates over a 50 year period

Whites 30 to 18 (30/18 = 66% decrease in poverty over a 50 year period) (population has grown a lot slower than the black)
Blacks 59 to 24% of pop (cannot use total number because it hasn't changed) 59/24 = 145% decrease

What the poor populaiton will be in 50 years from now if this continues

White 6.2 Million people (18*.66) - 18
Black 0.0 Million poeple (8*1.45) - 8 = a negative number don't you get this?

It is far easier to eradicate the poverty of 8 milion people than it is of 18 million agree?

[Hawkeye48]

I think the media also has major role in this. For some reason the media loves to put the spotlight on adversity in the minority communities. With black people it's frequently poverty and discrimination. With Hispanics it's frequently the disadvantaged illegal struggling to make ends meet trying to feed his family while his wife is being deported.

The point is, poverty stricken black people are in the media constantly because the media chooses to put them there.

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by jtur88

The statistics in the opening remarks have carefully excluded the fact that 70% of the people in the US are white, so whites are under-represented in any class in which whites comprise less than 70%. Which makes it a very deceptive and disingenuous and dishonest representation, and therefore not worthy of any other comment. It's like saying there is more poverty in America than Somalia, because there are 30-million poor people in the US and only 7-million poor people in Somalia.

Jtur, whether you agree with me or not the fact remains, blacks tend to move out of poverty faster than whites and have higher birth rates, so if this trend continues as i've previously stated the "forgetten whites" will be the one's left in poverty when blacks get out.

Facts
White population is not increasing at a fast rate
White population lags the black population in the rates at which it eliminates intra-racial poverty
The poor black populatioion has historically moved into the middle class at double the rate of the poor white population
There's only 8 million of them and 18 million of you who do you think is going to be out of poverty first?

Example

If i gave you a dollar and told you to invest it

Would invest in the bigger more established company, that is growing at a slower rate say 66% over 50 years. How long would it take for you to double your money?

or

The faster higher growing company that is moving up rapidly and growing at a rate of 145% over 50 years. How long would it take you to double your money?

I think you should quit attempting to ignore the pink elephant in the room and address the problem and not make silly attempts as to why it is not correct. I deal in facts nothing more nothing less.

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by truthhurts

Why are blacks poorer than whites
1. Less education or access to great schools (if black closed the gap here everything else would take care of itself)
2. Jobs
3. Marriage
4. Age ( the black population is significnatly younger)

You left out dozens of other reasons.
5. Forced to grow up a household where the adults were adversely affected by 1.
6. Forced to grow up in a neighborhoodl where everybody was adversely affected by 1.
7. Influenced by peers that were affected by 1.
8. Mainstreamed into a track that is likely to lead to 2.
9. Disgruntled by discriminatory social and hiring practices.
10. Disillusioned by unrealistic expectations.
11. Peer pressure to comform with dead-end cultural attributes.
12. Limited access to health care, which leads to 4.
13. Media targeting that leads to 3.
14. Discrimination in judicial process against people affected by 3.
15. Inertia. People already poor are likely to stay poor.

I don't know how blacks stay younger than whites. I wish I could figure out how they do that.

[truthhurts]

Originally Posted by jtur88

You left out dozens of other reasons.
5. Forced to grow up a household where the adults were adversely affected by 1.
6. Forced to grow up in a neighborhoodl where everybody was adversely affected by 1.
7. Influenced by peers that were affected by 1.
8. Mainstreamed into a track that is likely to lead to 2.
9. Disgruntled by discriminatory social and hiring practices.
10. Disillusioned by unrealistic expectations.
11. Peer pressure to comform with dead-end cultural attributes.
12. Limited access to health care, which leads to 4.
13. Media targeting that leads to 3.
14. Discrimination in judicial process against people affected by 3.
15. Inertia. People already poor are likely to stay poor.

I don't know how blacks stay younger than whites. I wish I could figure out how they do that.

And none of this was present 50 years ago when blacks went from 59% poor to 24% poor?

I guess 5-15 happend in the last 20 years right?

BTW your 15 was the silliest thing i've heard in a number of years. IF this was teh case most Americans would still be poor. Hello we went from a total population where more than 50% of the country regardless of race was poor. Now we have less than 10% of the population that is poor, so could you elaborate on a lot of your list?

I agree with a lot on your list in regards to the poor, but that list also applies to the white poor does it not?

[Wild Style]

Originally Posted by truthhurts

Why are blacks used as the stereotypical symbol of poverty in the US? This is a touchy subject, but something i've always wanted to know and hear reasons as to why. I also have six additional questions? The reason i quesiton the use is the following.

1. Why do liberals champion poor black over poor whites?
2. How do poor whites feel as a forgotten group?
3. Is this done to maintain some sort of imaginary status quo?
4. Is anyone informed of this information?
5. If this is true why are blacks defacto scapegoats for welfare?
6. Is this the reason the news perfers to use percentages of pop as opposed to total raw numbers?

All total Families Below Poverty Level
1.Whites 53%
2. Blacks 26%
3. Other 22%

Even when you combine 2+3 whites are still the majority of poor people

Individuals Below Poverty Level
1.Whites 55%
2. Blacks 24%
3. Other 21%

Even when you combine 2+3 whites are still the majority of poor people

United States
Families below poverty level 6,620,945
Individuals below poverty level 33,899,812
Work Force Population 138,820,935

Blacks (alone -non hispanic)
Families below poverty level 1,777,105 26% of poor families
Individuals below poverty level 8,146,146 24% of poor individuals
Labor Force Population 14,905,895 10% of labor force
Total Pop 34,658,190


Whites (alone -non hispanic)
Families below poverty level 3,548,532 53% of poor families
Individuals below poverty level 18,847,674 55% of poor individuals
Work Force 108,079,326 77% of labor force
Total Pop 211,460,626


Link
United States - Select a Race, Ethnic, or Ancestry Group - American FactFinder=

Black people in America are portrayed a certain way. Rap doesn't help much in that department either. Being that the average American is pretty foolish, in that they don't research, no less do they even know what is going on outside of their surrounding. So with that in mind, its a understandable stereotype.

[purplecow1]

Originally Posted by LM1

No, the issue is of proportion, not of "raw numbers".

If we were to examine Japan, there's a pretty good chance that near 100% of their impoverished citizens would be Japanese. This doesn't bespeak of anything inherent to the Japanese, but rather to the demographics of that particular country... You'd have to be a complete retard to infer otherwise.

The fact that blacks exhibit a higher degree of poverty in relation to their population in the United States (or, basically, anywhere else they occur) is a serious issue and the one that causes the most discussion.

Pointing out that the majority of impoverished citizens in a majority-white country just so happen to be white is like saying that you're more likely to find fish in a lake rather than a desert. Gosh, go figure.

The issue is that any given black person is far more likely to be in poverty (or a rapist, robber, murder, arsonist, etc) than any given white person- which very, very much makes it a "black issue". To maintain that the issue has do to with "raw numbers" - thus removing the onus from social behavior and placing it on raw demographics- is incredibly intellectually dishonest and MOD CUT.

THANK YOU