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.
He isn't bringing up anything new. This is the same rehashed argument that White supremacists have always used, except coming from a Black guy. That doesn't add validity, and that didn't make it more credible than when it was coming out of David Duke's mouth. There's nothing close minded about ignoring debunked arguments presented by a new speaker.
He isn’t really saying anything controversial. I didn’t even see comments where he denied that impacts from racism don’t effect aspects of society today. It’s just further examining where these disparate outcomes come into existence and what is the reasoning for them instead of the blanket “systemic racism” term. I have seen convincing evidence of it in some arenas of our society, but a lot of the left treats it as a ubiquitous thing.
Is the stat about out of wedlock birthrates incorrect? And are you honestly suggesting that in most of those cases - men ARE active in their children's lives the way they would be if they had been married, gotten divorced, and were only responsible for two kids that one woman had?
You can go into any poor black community and find some 20-something who already has several kids by multiple women. Are you honestly denying that? Or suggesting they're able to financially support - and support with their time - all of these children?
Here's a link to an article about a show where a black woman is interviewing six black men who have 87 children between them with 50 different mothers of those children:
Instead of just saying you disliked the ONE POINT you struggle with in the entire article though, you're dismissing the whole thing. And the point you're upset with is a factual point.
Truth hurts I guess - but unless you're willing to face the truth, you cannot fix the problem.
Next! Thriftylefty? Sungrins? What is your beef with what the professor said?
I literally gave you an entire breakdown of how that stat didn't correlate to outcomes and all you can do is try to make it about whether the stat exists.
Address that point or take your trash argument to some white power forum where you can create a circle jerk over it.
Also you asked for one thing I had a disagreement with and I gave you that. And now you're moving the goal posts. I have other things I can talk about but that's all you're getting.
There it is again and I always have to bring up Springfield MO. One of the most dangerous cities in America with only a black population of 4%.
I would love to compare Springfield MO to Friendly MD and show a mostly African American community with a violent crime rate at 17% the national average to a mostly white community with violent crime at 240% the national average. Springfield's over all crime is 220% the national average while the mostly black community's crime is 8% below the national average. But that would be racist math and not fair. Location and wealth are more important than race.
How come your race statistics don't play out in wealthy black communities? Is it because the color of people's skin has little to do with how they behave?
I could also show how all black towns in Oklahoma which are not wealthy have crime statistics well below national averages (by over 100%) and an embarrassment to small all white towns in Appalachia. Location location location.
Friendly, MD is a higher income black neighborhood, it’s not really a town. That is a nice area, but it borders some higher crime areas like Oxon Hill, MD. It does highlight that a lot of the problems are economics related. Don’t know much about Missouri though, just figured I’d weigh on the DC bit coming from a long line of DC natives.
I literally gave you an entire breakdown of how that stat didn't correlate to outcomes and all you can do is try to make it about whether the stat exists.
Address that point or take your trash argument to some white power forum where you can create a circle jerk over it.
Also you asked for one thing I had a disagreement with and I gave you that. And now you're moving the goal posts. I have other things I can talk about but that's all you're getting.
This is what you posted:
Quote:
How about rehashing the stat about out of wedlock birthrates? This is junk science.
Oow does not mean the father isn't in the picture or not cohabitating with the mother.
Then there's the flip side of divorce rates. A child born in marriage then having to split time between parents is effectively the same living arrangement as a child born out of wedlock, yet there's no shaming the White parents got this trend is there?
The stats correlating oow birth with negative outcomes rates DO NOT EXIST. As Black Americans have increased OoW birth rates since the 60s, every conceivable measure of success has shown improvement.
White people have SHOT UP for OoW birthrates for the last 30 years... Where's the correlation in ANY of the stats that he's saying is the real reason behind Black attainment faking behind?
Fact is that anyone bringing up OoW births in relation to Black attainment gap is a *******.
Where are your sources stating OoW births do not impact the success of these children? What it does is guarantee they will remain in deeper poverty which DOES lead to negative outcomes and therefore, impact success.
Impoverished parents of any race who have multiple children by multiple fathers have the same negative impact on those children.
Divorced parents of any race who are not impoverished and have both parents financially supporting their children and giving them a lot of time do not have negative impacts on those children.
This is about the culture of poverty and he's talking about black poverty because the issue being asked about is systemic racism.
The measures of improvement since the '60's you're talking about has nothing to do with the poorest among the black community - but of others within the black community. I'd argue that your success rate would be even higher if the numbers weren't pulled down by the poorest.
Last edited by MPowering1; 08-01-2020 at 11:41 AM..
He isn’t really saying anything controversial. I didn’t even see comments where he denied that impacts from racism don’t effect aspects of society today. It’s just further examining where these disparate outcomes come into existence and what is the reasoning for them instead of the blanket “systemic racism” term. I have seen convincing evidence of it in some arenas of our society, but a lot of the left treats it as a ubiquitous thing.
There's a lot of systemic racism in systems set up in the past that have never been fixed which allowed the original outcomes to continue to playout.
The war on drugs was launched bc of systemic racism, and the outcomes have never been fixed and allowed to fester.
The suburban divide and gap in household wealth was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and outcome has been allowed to fester.
The modern racial targeting of subprime mortgages to qualified Black applicants was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and those outcomes are being allowed to fester.
People have been talking about systemic racism and the outcomes it created for decades and a lot of that was never addressed. So if those people are STILL talking about those same outcomes from systemic racism, you can't logically make the case that SR doesn't exist.
There's a lot of systemic racism in systems set up in the past that have never been fixed which allowed the original outcomes to continue to playout.
The war on drugs was launched bc of systemic racism, and the outcomes have never been fixed and allowed to fester.
The suburban divide and gap in household wealth was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and outcome has been allowed to fester.
The modern racial targeting of subprime mortgages to qualified Black applicants was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and those outcomes are being allowed to fester.
People have been talking about systemic racism and the outcomes it created for decades and a lot of that was never addressed. So if those people are STILL talking about those same outcomes from systemic racism, you can't logically make the case that SR doesn't exist.
I agree with these points, except the subprime mortgages. The lack of financial education can be explained by the differences in opportunities to gain wealth and the lack of financial education in the black community, but that stat in of itself doesn’t mean that was all that was available to the black buyers or they shouldn’t have been approved for mortgages to begin with like their white counterparts. It has to do with a lack of financial education and not knowing that you’re getting stiffed. A lot of people got bamboozled and didn’t do their due diligence in researching their mortgages.
I won’t deny that systemic racism pervaded a lot of parts of society and we are still seeing some effects from that today.
There is system racism that exists but he's saying it's not as large of a problem as people make it out to be. And he's right that society has contributed to the problems.
Systemic racism exists in the judicial system. Studies show that black males face harsher, longer sentences for first time offenses than white counterparts committing the same first time offense. That can't be argued with.
And the tougher crime bill that Joe Biden wrote and Bill Clinton passed, sent millions of black males to prison. That was systemic racism.
Between this and the programs started by President Johnson, the black community was set up to fail - and I think that's what he means when he says society is partly responsible.
There's a lot of systemic racism in systems set up in the past that have never been fixed which allowed the original outcomes to continue to playout.
The war on drugs was launched bc of systemic racism, and the outcomes have never been fixed and allowed to fester.
The suburban divide and gap in household wealth was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and outcome has been allowed to fester.
The modern racial targeting of subprime mortgages to qualified Black applicants was created by systemic racism and never fixed, and those outcomes are being allowed to fester.
People have been talking about systemic racism and the outcomes it created for decades and a lot of that was never addressed. So if those people are STILL talking about those same outcomes from systemic racism, you can't logically make the case that SR doesn't exist.
I would agree with the above. I would add that the war on drugs conveniently began after drugs were purposely brought into the black community.
Where are your sources stating OoW births do not impact the success of these children? What it does is guarantee they will remain in deeper poverty which DOES lead to negative outcomes and therefore, impact success.
Impoverished parents of any race who have multiple children by multiple fathers have the same negative impact on those children.
Divorced parents of any race who are not impoverished and have both parents financially supporting their children and giving them a lot of time do not have negative impacts on those children.
This is about the culture of poverty and he's happening to talk about black poverty because the issue being asked about is systemic racism.
The measures of improvement since the '60's you're talking about has nothing to do with the poorest among the black community - but of others within the black community. I'd argue that your success rate would be even higher if the numbers weren't pulled down by the poorest.
Again... OoW rates do not correlate with ANY negative outcomes stats, not even poverty rates. The real issue is education and jobs, both of which correlate to negative outcomes people like to attribute to OoW rates.
OoW rates have climbed across EVERY economic and education level for the last 40 years, and yet there's no uptick across any stats that people use OoW rates to say is responsible for the Black attainment gap.
OoW rates stat is a trash stat that started as a tool to avoid having to deal with long tail effects of systemic racism. It was something Conservatives would trot out to defend not addressing the jobs issues and education issues Black people would present.
I agree with these points, except the subprime mortgages. The lack of financial education can be explained by the differences in opportunities to gain wealth and the lack of financial education in the black community, but that stat in of itself doesn’t mean that was all that was available to the black buyers or they shouldn’t have been approved for mortgages to begin with like their white counterparts. It has to do with a lack of financial education and not knowing that you’re getting stiffed. A lot of people got bamboozled and didn’t do their due diligence in researching their mortgages.
I won’t deny that systemic racism pervaded a lot of parts of society and we are still seeing some effects from that today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1
I would agree with the above. I would add that the war on drugs conveniently began after drugs were purposely brought into the black community.
And that's why I don't agree with the OP or the link they provided.
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.
