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.
No. It's not just the crime statistics. But poor people, black and Hispanic people are much quicker to throw adult tantrums that result in "peaceful protests" turning quickly into physical actions that result in riots of fisticuffs, rock throwing and damage to innocent people's cars and storefronts. It's not just a few criminals amongst them taking advantage of these situations and using them as cover for looting and pillaging. Basically, the poor feel that they have nothing, so it's okay to break someone else's possession. And it's why poor neighborhoods look so broken and rundown and with trash everywhere on the streets. They just don't care.
And it's why it's a bad idea to try to integrate poor families into richer ones with Section 8 programs. The chronically poor people's low values and morals just bring everyone around them down into the gutter with them.
Poor neighborhoods do not care about appearances, further harming themselves. I have to transfer trains in one each day. Thankfully just a one block walk, and its an area that rioted in the 60s, and looks no better today, with a absurdly low Labor Force Participation rate, as evidenced by the quantity of beggars I encounter daily there.
Yes, it is true, many black neighborhoods have problems with crimes, drugs, etc. But after establishing that fact, we must look at why this is? Notice during the 20's 30's 40's black people didn't have these problems. There were successful well off black only communities all over the country (Black Wall Street in Tulsa)
But like clockwork, savage white people decided they couldn't stand to see a successful black person, so they to destroy what they could (they are great at destroying things aren't they?) Things like the crack epidemic and Jim Crow laws have led to the downfall of black communities.
There were successful black communities...and yes they were destroyed by white people. But you dont want to talk about that. And regarding Tulsa, I dont think it represents the average black community in the rural south during the time.
Crack cocaine was not around during the 1920s. Nor was crystal meth and many of the drugs. And I'm sure access to guns and drugs were not as widespread during that time. So that's your answer.
Poor cities, no matter what color the people there are, supposedly have higher numbers of violent crimes than more affluent cities, but not a higher percentage of violent crimes than poor rural areas that generally have more white people. So I understand that point of view.
We discussed something similar in my sociology class way back in 1992. That's all I remember, but it made sense.
I cannot agree to this statement. Bnei Brak in Israel is a very poor city, families with 8-10 kids, only one parent is working, usually for minimum wage. Very dependent on welfare.
Almost zero crime, almost no violence.
And why? The people who live there are orthodox Jews with very clear and defined values.
So the issue is not the money it's VALUES.
Right now, the United States is failing these violent African American communities by continuing to allow them to exist. Anyone that doesn't believe that there is not an invisible hand that creates the elements for this type of violence to occur in the first world is kidding themselves.
I agree....but that convoluted statement took some reading to comprehend.
What you seem to be saying is that ALL Americans are complicit - which is EXACTLY what BLM and many educated Americans (right and/or left) are saying.
And so - it's obvious that we need more reparations because, after all, how else does a first world country fix poverty and the attendant violence?
I cannot agree to this statement. Bnei Brak in Israel is a very poor city, families with 8-10 kids, only one parent is working, usually for minimum wage. Very dependent on welfare.
Almost zero crime, almost no violence.
And why? The people who live there are orthodox Jews with very clear and defined values.
So the issue is not the money it's VALUES.
Summary - if we give vast amounts of more welfare and encourage poor people to have more babies, things might be better?
It's hard for me to wrap my head around examples of people who are 100% reliant on government welfare for their religion. They also get away with not fighting in the military too, right?
I'd rather feed and educate kids in poverty than pay for the entire lifestyles and broods of those who sway back and forth to the Talmud each day and want others to pay the bills (and I am Jewish, so don't ask).
I cannot agree to this statement. Bnei Brak in Israel is a very poor city, families with 8-10 kids, only one parent is working, usually for minimum wage. Very dependent on welfare.
Almost zero crime, almost no violence.
And why? The people who live there are orthodox Jews with very clear and defined values.
So the issue is not the money it's VALUES.
Crime is related to not only poverty, but lack of opportunity, guns, drugs, etc.
Show me the access to guns and drugs in these communites you speak of. And your only using Orthodox Jews as an example of a racial social heirarchy that says black and brown people are inferiors.
El Salvador, Colombia, Mexico, Brasil, Honduras have some of the most dangerous cities on Earth, and the highest homicide rates on the planet. You used crime as an example. So what do poor black American neighborhoods that these neighborhoods don't. Explain that.
Summary - if we give vast amounts of more welfare and encourage poor people to have more babies, things might be better?
It's hard for me to wrap my head around examples of people who are 100% reliant on government welfare for their religion. They also get away with not fighting in the military too, right?
I'd rather feed and educate kids in poverty than pay for the entire lifestyles and broods of those who sway back and forth to the Talmud each day and want others to pay the bills (and I am Jewish, so don't ask).
It's a very complicated issue, and I'm not sure that it's the place to deeply discuss it. I don't want to hijack the thread. I just showed that poverty is not automatically = crime.
I don't think that giving welfare is the solution. It will only prevent hunger riots and will contain the violence mainly into the AA communities.
The solution for me is injecting values in those people.
There were successful black communities...and yes they were destroyed by white people. But you dont want to talk about that. And regarding Tulsa, I dont think it represents the average black community in the rural south during the time.
Crack cocaine was not around during the 1920s. Nor was crystal meth and many of the drugs. And I'm sure access to guns and drugs were not as widespread during that time. So that's your answer.
Its crazy how many whites back then were so wicked. And then people wonder why blacks couldn't accumulate wealth? There were whites who would actually go and burn down what black families built. Let's not even talk about the schools and churches that were burnt.
Quote:
In 2001, the Associated Press published a three-part investigation into the theft of black-owned land stretching back to the antebellum period. The series documented some 406 victims and 24,000 acres of land valued at tens of millions of dollars. The land was taken through means ranging from legal chicanery to terrorism. “Some of the land taken from black families has become a country club in Virginia,” the AP reported, as well as “oil fields in Mississippi” and “a baseball spring training facility in Florida.”
It's so sad. In my parents' country, after slavery (Africans) and indentured labor (South Asians), our people didn't really have to worry about whites destroying or taking what we had. Of course, indentured labor made it harder for Africans to retain land but after that...you could have your house and land.
African-Americans, on the other hand, had to fight just to keep the little they had. And if they were too successful, they could lose their lives.
Crime is related to not only poverty, but lack of opportunity, guns, drugs, etc.
Show me the access to guns and drugs in these communites you speak of. And your only using Orthodox Jews as an example of a racial social heirarchy that says black and brown people are inferiors.
El Salvador, Colombia, Mexico, Brasil, Honduras have some of the most dangerous cities on Earth, and the highest homicide rates on the planet. You used crime as an example. So what do poor black American neighborhoods that these neighborhoods don't. Explain that.
They have no reason to get guns and drugs because their religion forbids them to use it (except guns for self defence).
What do I suggest: Injection of conservative family values. Maybe stronger religion. Marry as a virgin and forever kind of thing. leaving your kids fatherless will be a terrible shame.
There were successful black communities...and yes they were destroyed by white people. But you dont want to talk about that. And regarding Tulsa, I dont think it represents the average black community in the rural south during the time.
Crack cocaine was not around during the 1920s. Nor was crystal meth and many of the drugs. And I'm sure access to guns and drugs were not as widespread during that time. So that's your answer.
Assuming that some people are interested in basic history - it goes somewhat like this.
Black folks left the south for JOBS and for the relative safety (lack of lynchings and more opportunity) of the big Northeast Cities. At the time of these mass movements, there were plenty of jobs.
Black folks ALL had jobs during WWII, and go paid well also. Of course, vast numbers (as always) were in the military.
AFTER the millions of white folks came back from the war....both women and blacks had to give up their jobs to the white folks. No one of sound mind is going to argue that white folks don't have a better shot at 98% of jobs (all other things being even) in 1950 America.
Eventually, the 1960's rolled around...as the families disintegrated due to lack of jobs and opportunity and were left to fend for themselves in the now decrepit urban jungles.
Obviously it's a big country and there were different experiences at various locales. But, in a general sense, the "bullies" owned the jobs and the opportunities. In the case of modern times, that was largely various ethnic groups associated with unions, big city politics, construction, etc.
It would be foolish to think that an Italian Union boss would give a job to a "brother" ahead of one of the 100's of his relatives, business associates, etc. - never has been and never will be.
In a sense things are often better today...especially since many foreign (European) companies have opened factories. They hire based on merit and on ambition and work ethic. But there still are not enough jobs....these day not enough for white folks, let alone others. Oh, you can pick lettuce or work for min or very low wages - I'm talking about "keep a household together" jobs.
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.
