This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It's true; if you subtract federal aid and programs, state aid and programs, representative government, the policies enacted under that representative government, social and intellectual leanings, and everything else relevant out of the equation, you too can come to the conclusion that somehow the right's policies have hurt Baltimore.
That might incite more violence. Best to make everyone stay in their homes. That's the fair thing to do.
Only if we have to be lazy and not wanting the truth by taking policies and forcing them in to exclusively right and left,buckets. I realize for many the world is only in black and white so grays let alone colors are too much to handle.
I understand your point, but I don't think it's at all lazy to take a policy and generalize whether that policy comes from the left or right of the spectrum. How else would we hold certain ideas and policies accountable for the destruction or success that we've wrought? We do that all the time. Especially with Baltimore, a city that receives massive federal aid, has implemented one of the largest welfare states in the country, has had corrupt one-party rule for fifty years, has one of the highest tax rates in the country, has had some of the highest spending rates on education without results, etc...
Did you vacation in lovely east Baltimore?
This was actually said on MSNBC's morning show today, in front of Melissa Harris-Perry and a panel of black talking heads, and the only word I can think of to describe how it was received was giddiness.
For the sake of argument, let's say that one wanted to convince you "that racism doesn't exist". What proof would you deem acceptable?
Perhaps, but if they were white, it would be used as proof that it does exist. It's hard to maneuver between those goalposts.
Wow. But I can't say I am surprised.
Honestly in today's society you could not convince me. We would have to be living in a completely different place or time.
Its not good enough to erase decades or systemic racism. Its a start though. But look at Baltimore. That alone wont help. Fixing the violent practices in the PD alone aren't enough. But it would also be a start. If you ask me, i dont think it can be fixed short term. It will come when we do a better job at desegregating these cities and people get to interact more from different races, socio econimic status, religions, etc. But this will take decades to occur.
By not choosing to emphasize it; by treating it as the irrelevant issue that it is, and by trying to stay focused on the real issues at hand, which remain the economic and social plight of inner city black youths.
Of course it isn't good enough.
Thos is a good point. It doesn't negate the argument, but it does suggest some inconsistencies and perhaps outright hypocrisy among those who make it.
Doesn't this argument work in reverse too? Whenever a liberal politician gets into office, the proposed solution is not to spend the money more efficiently, but to simply increase spending. If my choices are between highly inefficient spending and additional highly inefficient spending, I'll opt for the former.
Ok,rockaction said:
You are absolutely correct. But note that your preference is for status quo, not for reduced spending either.
I just don't know whether this is true or false. If you live there, then you would have a better sense of it.
This would be solved with a BIG.
Courtjester said:
This might be the second time I have seen this response at least.Apple Jack said:
In the early 1970s, liberals sought to correct that problem by busing. The idea was that if you took black kids from poor and inner city neighborhoods, and then spread them around to white suburb schools, the better education combined with being around kids and parents who valued education would "rub off" on them. We don't know what the ultimate results of that experiment would have been, because, frankly, certain whites fought it so much that it was basically dropped by the time Reagan got into office.
I do. I'm 53 and have spent the majority of my life there.
There are two types of protests: the ones planned and set into motion by community organizers, and the ones that just appear out of nowhere, with the community organizers as surprised as anyone else, and they rush off to take advantage of it. The latter are far more common than the former, and this has been one of those.
I don't have any data, but my gut feeling is that it doesn't have a huge effect.
No, I haven't heard that expression.
It's going on where I live. See Sheff v. O'Neill.
Honestly, my city has been through the hoops on this, and no we haven't had protests like were seen in Boston. It just failed.
I think you might be right. Thats why i dont think we would truly see results until not only are they going to school together, they live in the same neighborhoods, hang out together, work together, etc.
I'm not suggesting we give up on them, but should be in a separate school if they are hurting the education of others.
Bit of a tangent, but we can't. Not as long as politicians continue to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Politicians do this because it works. Of course, limiting voting to only the informed doesn't really work, as there's not really a good way to identify "the informed". Also, people go into a tizzy about this, for some reason.
Unfortunately, while I agree with the premise, I still think there would be a need for yet another safety net after many of these folks fritter away their BIG and reach out for more assistance. There would be many, many politicians who would take up this banner as free stuff = votes.
