Americans Are Mistaken About Who Gets Welfare

TTQ64 said:
wow so you do believe it.

Do you realize how stupid that sounds?

And you wonder why I call you a racist. Only a racist would believe such nonsense. You are saying that Black women didn't want to get married so they could collect welfare..........smh.
Click to expand...

Yes TTQ64, I'm racist because of the way the government set up their welfare program before I was born.

However in your defense you don't understand how numbers or markets work so it shouldn't be expected you would understand this.
 
cawacko said:
Yes TTQ64, I'm racist because of the way the government set up their welfare program before I was born.

However in your defense you don't understand how numbers or markets work so it shouldn't be expected you would understand this.
Click to expand...

You weren't born but you sure know that Black women divorced or refuse to get marred to collect welfare.......how did you know that?
 
TTQ64 said:
You weren't born but you sure know that Black women divorced or refuse to get marred to collect welfare.......how did you know that?
Click to expand...

How about re-read post 239. I didn't know black people were the only people in America. I'll be damned. Learn something new on this board everyday.
 
evince said:
fox news told him that
Click to expand...

foxnews_lies.jpg
 
Timshel said:
I don't hear many of them arguing for the elimination of welfare. They just use it to demean minorities. Currently, they are using it to convince us to close our borders, then they'll pick another target.
Click to expand...

yes its what the libertarians want

it what all the right wants

stop helping the poor so the CEOs can have slavelike workers


the WHOLE right worships CEOs like they are the designated kings
 
Timshel said:
Okay, single motherhood and children outside of marriage are up too across the board (well not lately, but relative to the 70s and before.... nope welfare is not the biggest factor, maybe not even a factor).



I am not making any excuses.

I have read Walter on this topic plenty of times. He's not quite right. Yes, INDIVIDUALS can do better. SOME are strong enough to overcome no matter what we throw at them. But why should we throw things at them, like you wish to do? Why is it necessary for you to demean them as a group or as individuals? Do you think that helps them in some way? Or is it just about you claiming unearned credit for the achievements of other in your tribe? What's your end goal?

When discussing the group, as those like you pushing identity politics are doing, you have stopped talking about an individual tree and started talking about a forest. In that context those past wrongs WILL skew the numbers. It's not even up for debate and it is not an excuse. It's a fact/phenomenon that has been observed and measured repeatedly.
Click to expand...



Welfare is a big result of more and more bastard children being born being the cause.

Walter Williams is absolutely spot on.

I don't want to throw things at them. I simply expect them to provide for themselves and stop demanding the rest of us provide for them. For those that demand someone else provide support for them, they demean themselves. I don't give a fuck if it helps as long as they start supporting themselves. That's my end goal. For those that are forced to provide for someone unwilling to provide for him/herself, we should get the credit. We're doing for them what they won't do.

I talk about the individual trees as part of the forest.

When you bring up the past, it's called an excuse.
 
evince said:
yes its what the libertarians want
Click to expand...

The "them" I was talking about are not libertarians. Crypto fascists masquerading as libertarians, maybe. It seems most have dropped the mask now and are identifying as alt-right Republicans and Trump loving Nationalists.

Many libertarians are promoting UBI. For instance, Gary Johnson...

http://basicincome.org/news/2016/08/us-johnson-supports-basic-income-libertarian-principles/

Milton Friedman proposed a similar idea many years ago.

Few if any real libertarians would single out benefits for the poor without also mentioning other entitlements or even corporate/farmer welfare.
 
CFM said:
Welfare is a big result of more and more bastard children being born being the cause.

Walter Williams is absolutely spot on.

I don't want to throw things at them. I simply expect them to provide for themselves and stop demanding the rest of us provide for them. For those that demand someone else provide support for them, they demean themselves. I don't give a fuck if it helps as long as they start supporting themselves. That's my end goal. For those that are forced to provide for someone unwilling to provide for him/herself, we should get the credit. We're doing for them what they won't do.

I talk about the individual trees as part of the forest.

When you bring up the past, it's called an excuse.
Click to expand...

No, the past is not an excuse. What's past is prologue. You wish to bury the past and ignore present discrimination by the state (I have not heard you speak against that... so yeah you still want to throw things), because you don't want to take responsibility for the damage done by your perspective of hate and white supremacy.
 
Timshel said:
No, the past is not an excuse. What's past is prologue. You wish to bury the past and ignore present discrimination by the state (I have not heard you speak against that... so yeah you still want to throw things), because you don't want to take responsibility for the damage done by your perspective of hate and white supremacy.
Click to expand...

Yet you use it as excuse.

Present discrimination? You mean like affirmative action? Seems you ignore that the state uses characteristics to benefit certain groups that you have claimed would be wrong if used to deny them. why is it OK to use it to benefit if it's wrong to use it to deny?
 
Timshel said:
Nope




Care to explain? There are protected classes but that does not benefit a specific group (except maybe those over 40).
Click to expand...

Affirmative action is a program created by the state and it uses characteristics to benefit certain groups (i.e. - women, minorities) that if they were used to deny would be wrong. Why are using them wrong if used to deny but OK with you if they're used to benefit? Wait, you've already said and it involved bringing up the past. That's called an excuse.
 
Timshel said:
Care to explain? There are protected classes but that does not benefit a specific group (except maybe those over 40).
Click to expand...

College admissions certainly benefits those groups which are targeted for increased enrollment by allowing lower test scores and GPAs.
 
CFM said:
Affirmative action is a program created by the state and it uses characteristics to benefit certain groups (i.e. - women, minorities) that if they were used to deny would be wrong. Why are using them wrong if used to deny but OK with you if they're used to benefit? Wait, you've already said and it involved bringing up the past. That's called an excuse.
Click to expand...

Wrong.
 
Flash said:
College admissions certainly benefits those groups which are targeted for increased enrollment by allowing lower test scores and GPAs.
Click to expand...

Not the state/government and the CRA protects all groups under a protected class, which is how and why those programs have been limited by the courts.
 
Timshel said:
Not the state/government and the CRA protects all groups under a protected class, which is how and why those programs have been limited by the courts.
Click to expand...

They have not been limited very much. The only limitation is that an admissions plan cannot exclude any group such as giving points for being a minority; but, colleges can still have programs to achieve diversity including allowing students scoring lower, overcoming "adversity," showing sensitivity, etc. These plans usually punish Asian and white students and benefit blacks, Hispanics, and Indians.
 
Timshel said:
Wrong.
Click to expand...

Are you claiming AA doesn't use race, gender to benefit certain groups or that it's OK to use those things to benefit as long as they aren't used to deny?

Anyone that gets hired, admitted, or otherwise benefits from such a program isn't worth hiring. If they were, they'd use their qualifications. Wait, you leftwingers believe being a certain race or gender automatically makes one qualified. You proved that in 2008 and 2012 by picking an unqualified BLACK for President and tried it in 2016 thinking having a vagina meant the person could do the job.
 
Flash said:
College admissions certainly benefits those groups which are targeted for increased enrollment by allowing lower test scores and GPAs.
Click to expand...

They have a standard for those that can actually qualify and a lower standard for those that can't meet that true standard.
 
Timshel said:
Not the state/government and the CRA protects all groups under a protected class, which is how and why those programs have been limited by the courts.
Click to expand...

Whites aren't a protected class, boy. We have to earn what we get. The protected classes have to be handed favors because those supporting such programs know they can't earn it.
 
CFM said:
Whites aren't a protected class, boy. We have to earn what we get. The protected classes have to be handed favors because those supporting such programs know they can't earn it.
Click to expand...

Are you one of grind's socks? Hard to believe youre really this ignorant and I have been over this a few times on these boards.

Race is a protected class which means no discrimination on the basis of race, whether the target is white, black or other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top