What are Dem prez candidates doing to fight racism?

[RB 60]

What are Dem prez candidates doing to fight racism?

Accusing everyone who disagrees with them a racist.
They are keeping the flames of racism burning bright.

 

[Truth Detector]

The trolls running for the Democrat tickets keep chanting America is racist. How long has it been since Warren said America is racist and oppressive? How long has it been since Sanders said America is racist from top to bottom? How long has it been since queer Pete called America racist (before you can answer, he'll have done it again)?

Why are none of them articulating plans to fight this nasty and pervasive racism they keep talking about? Why has no one in the media asked them if they themselves are racist?

Why has no one in the media asked them what they've done to fight racism in the past? How insane is it that they talk about racism like it's the biggest problem in America, but have no plans to do anything about it? And, have done practically nothing about it the past?

A better question would be what are the Democratic Party of the Jackass reps doing PERIOD?

 

[Bobb]

Depends on the candidate. Bernie wants to do this through more affordable healthcare. Yang wants to have UBI.

Do you think those six colored cunts in Nevada walked out on Dem Warren for lack of more affordable healthcare? You know the six who accused her Nevada office of being racist, and Warren blamed society for the racism in her office.

 

[cawacko]

More disposable income means more success in general. More people from the working-class making it into their chosen fields. For some people, that would be system of power as police, mayors, media voices, and so on.

I guess I'm still not following the concept. I mean I understand having more disposable income in your pocket allows you to do more things if you so desire (go out to eat more, go to sporting events, buy a new car etc. etc.). But if your goal is to become a police officer, Mayor, or work in the media how would more disposable income in a different field/profession benefit you getting into those roles?

 

[StoneByStone]

I guess I'm still not following the concept. I mean I understand having more disposable income in your pocket allows you to do more things if you so desire (go out to eat more, go to sporting events, buy a new car etc. etc.). But if your goal is to become a police officer, Mayor, or work in the media how would more disposable income in a different field/profession benefit you getting into those roles?

I think this explains it perfectly.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/the-wireless/373065/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate

 

[StoneByStone]

Do you think those six colored cunts in Nevada walked out on Dem Warren for lack of more affordable healthcare? You know the six who accused her Nevada office of being racist, and Warren blamed society for the racism in her office.

There are going to be people who cry racism no matter what. Those people aren't worth dealing with.

 

[Bobb]

There are going to be people who cry racism no matter what. Those people aren't worth dealing with.

I think you've just described the mainstream Democrat party.

One of the women who walked out on Warren complained about being a token. When there's at least six colored women in one office, that seems to not leave room for being a token. No matter what.

 

[StoneByStone]

I think you've just described the mainstream Democrat party.

One of the women who walked out on Warren complained about being a token. When there's at least six colored women in one office, that seems to not leave room for being a token. No matter what.

Which is why people like that shouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[cawacko]

I think this explains it perfectly.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/the-wireless/373065/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate

There are several assumptions being made here. The first is those with money are better parents which isn't always the case. Same with expectations. However I do agree and think studies show that better educated families and those with money have more books around the home and expose their children to far more words than poorer and lower educated families and that has a big effect on a child's development.

And no question connections and who you know can play a big role as well. It's why parents will do everything they can to get their children into the best schools possible. It's why people join groups and clubs etc. Those are universal things.

 

[StoneByStone]

There are several assumptions being made here. The first is those with money are better parents which isn't always the case. Same with expectations. However I do agree and think studies show that better educated families and those with money have more books around the home and expose their children to far more words than poorer and lower educated families and that has a big effect on a child's development.

And no question connections and who you know can play a big role as well. It's why parents will do everything they can to get their children into the best schools possible. It's why people join groups and clubs etc. Those are universal things.

It's not that those with money are better parents, it's that they have more resources, which means they could give their kids more. Whether they actually will or not is a different issue, but the point is they can if they want.

So yeah, this is why I think redistribution of wealth will help with racism in that we won't have as much fighting over representation. And who knows how many potential genius children we have right now who will never become the next Bill Gates because their lives are all about survival? Taxing the rich more doesn't hurt the rich, because they'll still be rich, but it does help all of society (including the rich) because we all get to benefit from the results.

 

[CFM]

I didn't say they did you failure of all things even halfway intelligent.

When you say they could fight racism, you did.

When you say something intelligent, I'll acknowledge it. Since you've received no acknowledgement, that should tell you to quit saying stupid things.

If I didn't know better, I'd say you were black.

 

[CFM]

It's not that those with money are better parents, it's that they have more resources, which means they could give their kids more. Whether they actually will or not is a different issue, but the point is they can if they want.

So yeah, this is why I think redistribution of wealth will help with racism in that we won't have as much fighting over representation. And who knows how many potential genius children we have right now who will never become the next Bill Gates because their lives are all about survival? Taxing the rich more doesn't hurt the rich, because they'll still be rich, but it does help all of society (including the rich) because we all get to benefit from the results.

There you go again showing your jealousy.

Giving some leech something they didn't earn only enables them to become an even bigger beggar.

Society does not benefit when people that didn't earn something get the same thing as those that did earn it. Society begins to crumble when the mindset of those that refuse to do for themselves is to demand the government force someone else to support them.

 

[cawacko]

It's not that those with money are better parents, it's that they have more resources, which means they could give their kids more. Whether they actually will or not is a different issue, but the point is they can if they want.

So yeah, this is why I think redistribution of wealth will help with racism in that we won't have as much fighting over representation. And who knows how many potential genius children we have right now who will never become the next Bill Gates because their lives are all about survival? Taxing the rich more doesn't hurt the rich, because they'll still be rich, but it does help all of society (including the rich) because we all get to benefit from the results.

Resources are obviously important but one can be rich and be a bad parent and one can be poor and be an amazing parent. And the government redistributing wealth is not going to stop racism or fighting how said wealth is redistributed.

Instead of focusing on redistribution how about focusing on creating more opportunities for people to better their lot in life? That can go in many directions but it would include reforming our current education system and changing current regulations and barriers to entry that benefit existing businesses and hurt those on the outside trying to break in.

 

[cawacko]

Do you think the reason a some white guy calls an African American an ugly ape made of shaped feces, possibly swine feces, is because that negger hasn't had enough oppertunity? Where do you think opportunity comes from? It comes from ending racism! How is a negger going to be happy in his quota job, that he can't do, if a white man near him could possibly be thinking the n-word? We need to end racism!

You might need to find a new hobby Bobb.

 

[StoneByStone]

Resources are obviously important but one can be rich and be a bad parent and one can be poor and be an amazing parent. And the government redistributing wealth is not going to stop racism or fighting how said wealth is redistributed.

Of course. The comic is just showing that rich people can give their kids more. They don't have to, they might choose not to because they're just shitty people, but they can if they want to. Poor parents, regardless of whether they're good or bad, can't do this.
Racism will always be around, but redistribution of wealth would at least greatly reduce racism because there would be less fighting over representation. Now there are other things we could do, such as allow for freedom of association, but we know the Democrats don't have the balls to talk about that right now.
As for how the wealth would be redistributed, people will disagree on that, but the first step is admitting that wealth should be redistributed, that people aren't always poor because they're lazy, and that we'd all be better off with a more fair society. After we all accept this, we can move on to arguing over free healthcare vs UBI.

Instead of focusing on redistribution how about focusing on creating more opportunities for people to better their lot in life? That can go in many directions but it would include reforming our current education system and changing current regulations and barriers to entry that benefit existing businesses and hurt those on the outside trying to break in.

The reason it's so hard to pull that off is because the 1% has gotten too rich and powerful. The regulations and barriers that hold small businesses down and limit opportunities are created by the rich. This is another reason why the rich should be taxed way more. When we have a tiny part of the population with this much money, that they can buy and sell politicians, we essentially have an oligarchy.

 

[cawacko]

Of course. The comic is just showing that rich people can give their kids more. They don't have to, they might choose not to because they're just shitty people, but they can if they want to. Poor parents, regardless of whether they're good or bad, can't do this.
Racism will always be around, but redistribution of wealth would at least greatly reduce racism because there would be less fighting over representation. Now there are other things we could do, such as allow for freedom of association, but we know the Democrats don't have the balls to talk about that right now.
As for how the wealth would be redistributed, people will disagree on that, but the first step is admitting that wealth should be redistributed, that people aren't always poor because they're lazy, and that we'd all be better off with a more fair society. After we all accept this, we can move on to arguing over free healthcare vs UBI.



The reason it's so hard to pull that off is because the 1% has gotten too rich and powerful. The regulations and barriers that hold small businesses down and limit opportunities are created by the rich. This is another reason why the rich should be taxed way more. When we have a tiny part of the population with this much money, that they can buy and sell politicians, we essentially have an oligarchy.

Redistributing wealth and trying to punish success isn't going to make our economy more dynamic or reduce barriers to entry in many fields. We can get into the weeds on many topics of how this occurs but from 30K feet it's a huge issue.

 

[StoneByStone]

Redistributing wealth and trying to punish success isn't going to make our economy more dynamic or reduce barriers to entry in many fields. We can get into the weeds on many topics of how this occurs but from 30K feet it's a huge issue.

It's not punishing success. The rich will still be rich, they'll just be slightly less rich. And like everyone else, they'll benefit from this.

The barriers would be reduced because more people would be educated, healthy, and have more disposable income. And the 1%, while still filthy rich, wouldn't be rich enough to control the government.

 

[cawacko]

It's not punishing success. The rich will still be rich, they'll just be slightly less rich. And like everyone else, they'll benefit from this.

The barriers would be reduced because more people would be educated, healthy, and have more disposable income. And the 1%, while still filthy rich, wouldn't be rich enough to control the government.

What would you do about the federal reserve and their easy money policies that boost asset bubbles that benefit the well to do?

 

[StoneByStone]

What would you do about the federal reserve and their easy money policies that boost asset bubbles that benefit the well to do?

Either eliminate them or at least regulate them a lot more. And by the way, this is what happens when we have "small government." The real Deep State is the collection of super rich private companies, including the federal reserve, that control the government.

 

[cawacko]

Either eliminate them or at least regulate them a lot more. And by the way, this is what happens when we have "small government." The real Deep State is the collection of super rich private companies, including the federal reserve, that control the government.

Are you on the Ron Paul End The Fed train? When you say regulate them more are you talking about the Audit The Fed bill or something else?

I'll admit, I'm still trying to wrap my head around your argument that we have the Fed because we have small government.