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.
They just need to remove policies that encourage single parent households. I only became aware of these policies once by watching Judge Judy. Had a black couple on. The man was suing the woman for something.I forget what. But JJ got out of them that he had a good job, she 'stayed home to raise the kids'. Somehow JJ asked them why they weren't married and the lady admitted they got more welfare because if they were married, they would be showing his income, which was adequate. So there you have it.
Tell that to the Hollywood.
It's the WHITES that initiated the "sexual revolution" in the US, "women's rights' and the rest.
It were the WHITES that encouraged birth out of wedlock, to show to men that women can do without them just fine, that they are strong enough, and the old institution of "Christian marriage" needs to be destroyed and redefined.
The idea of "tough, assertive husband" and "sweet and docile wife" as it was typical for White America, turned out to be wrong.
Now those women wanted to become "tough and assertive," and men were supposed to lay at their feet, smitten by their inner strength and sexual appeal (or else.)
Those welfare policies that you are complaining about, came in place to support this new idea.
Blacks are only a by-product of it.
So how do you see it possible to reverse it now - to give White women the green light with their emancipation ideas since they have money, while enforcing ideas of "Christian marriages" on Blacks, who are mostly poor?
Don't you think it was supposed to work the OTHER WAY around?
As in White docile women teaching *heathens* the tenets of Christianity, like "solid marriages, no premarital sex and children born out of wedlock," no matter how bad marriage can be or how abusive husband might turn out?
Start classifying dark skinned South Asians as "Black" base on skin color alone to increase the stats of Black test scores, STEM professionals, and average income: after all, it's all about COLOR, right? This accounting trick should reduce the achievement and economic gap.
Start classifying dark skinned South Asians as "Black" base on skin color alone to increase the stats of Black test scores, STEM professionals, and average income: after all, it's all about COLOR, right? This accounting trick should reduce the achievement and economic gap.
"People of color" and AAs are still not one and the same thing - sorry, no matter what agenda convenient for you you are trying to push here.
Schools and public places were desegregated starting in the 1950s. Jim Crow laws were gradually done away with. The Civil Right Act was passed in 1964. Affirmative action in college admissions and employment has existed since the 1970s. Nearly 100% of school children regardless of race or background have access to a free public education until the age of 16.
What more can be done to reduce racial inequality?
Read The Warmth of Other Suns. You'll see a whole helluva lot needs to be done. It's not as straightforward as you think.
As long as there are people making money by poisoning the minds of young black people, making them believe they are oppressed, we'll still have people carrying on as if that is the case.
You can take physical chains off of people, but you can't take mental chains off.
Yep, you have to stop believing all the victim hucksters and realize that you can advance as far as your belief and talents allow regardless of color or race.
George Washington Carver had the best advice for blacks that I've heard....so the victim hucksters have to take his statues down to I guess.
Let me re-post for the "right wingers" same thing as I already responded to the "left."
Here is what you need to do
Raze all American cities, the way they are designed, and rebuild them in European manner.
And that means - no "downtowns" and suburban sprawls American way, but cities built block by block. ( And not the car ride blocks miles and miles in length, lol - no, but blocks that are meant for walking.)
Then place offices/businesses/daycares/grocery stores in every small district, and connect them ALL by the system of FUNCTIONAL public transportation.
This way you immediately destroy the "underclass" of people hurdled in the pockets where they are trying to survive without car ownership. ( Read people of color first of all, and read "inner cities.")
Because car ownership is the first wall, first *demarcation line* that separates functional ( or as they are referred to *productive*) members of the society from "unproductive" ones.
And unless you can remove this first *demarcation line,* all these "affirmative actions* and "equal opportunities" rhetorics are nothing but lip service.
Because as I've said earlier, the troubles of the Black ghetto kid begin much earlier, than anyone can offer him/her any "financial aid."
However America (with its original design) wouldn't be ready ( or fit) for such changes, would it?
I think we all know why.
Lol, is this a serious post? You do realize that much of the urban sprawl occurs in cities that largely grew after the automobile was invented? We are not going to raze the cities to make you happy. Jeez!
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.
but blocks that are meant for walking.)
