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.
Please link to a majority black city that is successful.
It’s not white supremacy, it’s race realism. All races are spiritually equal, but not all are as intelligent as others. I wish it didn’t work that way but it does. To ignore the obvious solves no problems.
Please link to a majority black city that is successful.
It’s not white supremacy, it’s race realism. All races are spiritually equal, but not all are as intelligent as others. I wish it didn’t work that way but it does. To ignore the obvious solves no problems.
You've never worked with any smart people of other races? It's called EDUCATION. It really works.
Once again ... Copenhagen is a liberal city. You are admitting that highly liberal Denmark/Copenhagen produces excellent results, but you don't even seem to be aware of it.
You are giving opinion about me. That's not an answer. It's ad hominem.
How about answering the question. You are a willing participant in comparisons. So apply the same parameters to this comparison. Oh that's right. You don't care to. We get it.
Who says they don't? They are kind of ashamed and embarrassed by it from what I know. At least those in rural areas aren't imposing themselves on everyone else who lives in cities.
Anecdotally, my relatives who live in Appalachia, Arkansas, and Western New York think welfare is their just compensation. Their logic is that minorities and illegals ruined the economy and drove all the good-paying jobs away, so it's only fair that the government should pay them to balance the scales. They never use the W-word to describe their own handouts.
More broadly, you should try reading the social media posts from people who were swept up in that huge disability fraud scheme in West Virginia and Kentucky. There are numerous public comments about how unfair it is that they lost their benefits once the fraud was discovered, while people who don't want to work and aren't even here legally automatically get disability benefits. That last part is not true at all, but they continue to preach it.
If they're ashamed and embarrassed, it hasn't motivated them to do anything about it. And it doesn't stop them from trying to separate themselves from other welfare recipients whom they deem less-deserving.
I'd also take issue with your comment that people in rural areas aren't "imposing themselves on everyone else who lives in cities." They impose themselves on everyone else by using tax dollars to fund their lifestyles. It makes no difference whether you're the stereotypical "welfare queen" with the Cadillac and Obamaphone, or the stereotypical chain-smoking, junk-food-eating bumpkin who doesn't want to drive 50 miles to work. They're both drawing from the national coffers.
The rural people you describe also impose themselves on everyone else by voting for politicians who push conservative ideals on a national level, like Hal Rogers, who opposes abortion, same-sex marriage, and LGBT rights. In that regard, they're really no different from the people in the cities who vote for ultra-liberal Democrats. Ocasio-Cortez is offensive to the right-wingers on this forum, even though she doesn't represent their districts and hasn't successfully implemented any policy that would directly affect them.
So I don't really understand the distinction you're trying to draw between poor people in the country and poor people in the cities.
It's not hard to understand. The main reason why so many conservatives are so strongly opposed to government programs intended for the common good is due to their fear that many unworthy people will take advantage of everything they can. There are too many able bodied Americans out there who are too lazy and unproductive to carry their own weight.
Like those in Baltimore? They got $16,000,000,000 just this year.
Well... Successful capitalism benefits colossally from a well-educated populace, from entrepreneurs who can have a go at starting on their own without risking their family's access to healthcare and even from not having to spend resources on managing employee healthcare in the first place.
So what went wrong in Baltimore compared to Copenhagen the capital of Denmark?
That comparison breaks everyone of the fallacious comparisons being made by you guys.
You're missing Waldo's subtle point. See, Copenhagen is great because they're all white. Baltimore is bad because they have a lot of blacks.
And they say there are no white supremacists in America!
That's not my comparison and I didn't start this topic. Shame on you for saying that Blacks are unable to run a functioning city like Whites in Copenhagen. Is that why the cities are so different?
Remember, I'm asking because the OP and numerous leftists here are making the fallacious comparison. All I want is for them to answer why it doesn't apply to this comparison. Or is it a hypocritical comparison?
Anecdotally, my relatives who live in Appalachia, Arkansas, and Western New York think welfare is their just compensation. Their logic is that minorities and illegals ruined the economy and drove all the good-paying jobs away, so it's only fair that the government should pay them to balance the scales. They never use the W-word to describe their own handouts.
More broadly, you should try reading the social media posts from people who were swept up in that huge disability fraud scheme in West Virginia and Kentucky. There are numerous public comments about how unfair it is that they lost their benefits once the fraud was discovered, while people who don't want to work and aren't even here legally automatically get disability benefits. That last part is not true at all, but they continue to preach it.
If they're ashamed and embarrassed, it hasn't motivated them to do anything about it. And it doesn't stop them from trying to separate themselves from other welfare recipients whom they deem less-deserving.
I'd also take issue with your comment that people in rural areas aren't "imposing themselves on everyone else who lives in cities." They impose themselves on everyone else by using tax dollars to fund their lifestyles. It makes no difference whether you're the stereotypical "welfare queen" with the Cadillac and Obamaphone, or the stereotypical chain-smoking, junk-food-eating bumpkin who doesn't want to drive 50 miles to work. They're both drawing from the national coffers.
The rural people you describe also impose themselves on everyone else by voting for politicians who push conservative ideals on a national level, like Hal Rogers, who opposes abortion, same-sex marriage, and LGBT rights. In that regard, they're really no different from the people in the cities who vote for ultra-liberal Democrats. Ocasio-Cortez is offensive to the right-wingers on this forum, even though she doesn't represent their districts and hasn't successfully implemented any policy that would directly affect them.
So I don't really understand the distinction you're trying to draw between poor people in the country and poor people in the cities.
The distinction I'm drawing is the former are in the country and causing me no problems in the city unlike the latter.
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.
