Black unemployment: Highest in 27 years

Caine · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Is it really that complicated? Some people are more motivated than others. Some have better support. Some had a better upbringing. Some people climb mountains on one leg while others can't with two legs? That doesn't mean that having one leg isn't a handicap.

AdamT said:
No, the part that affects blacks more than whites is racism. It's an analogy thing.

I find it interesting that for those who fail to try hard, they are allowed to blame their failure on racism.

Yet for whites who do not try as hard.... they do not have an excuse?

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

Caine said:
I find it interesting that for those who fail to try hard, they are allowed to blame their failure on racism.

Yet for whites who do not try as hard.... they do not have an excuse?

White people can say that the Tea Party hates the middle class.

Mr. Invisible · Sep 7, 2011

apdst said:
That's bull****. Racism didn't effect me. I didn't let anyone have that kind of power over me.

Totally man, because institutionalized racism is so easy to tell. (Racism in Schools: Unintentional But No Less Damaging - Miller-McCune) (http://www.naswdc.org/diversity/InstitutionalRacism.pdf) (Institutional Racism in US Health Care)

Also, I find it interesting that you are a black man who seems to not know his own history.

apdst said:
So, fugitive slaves laws were passed to harm black people?

I love when Libbos equate slavery to racism. :roll:

I have some books you should read: http://www.debatepolitics.com/book-nook/26529-you-reading-right-now-139.html#post1059779077

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

ric27 said:
You can only go so far when you attempt to correct past acts that are now considered wrong. How far back do you go? Who do you make responsible? If the original "perpetrators" are dead, is it just to impose a burden on their descendants for something they never did?

Huh? I didn't say anything about reparations. That's a completely separate issue from repairing the long-lasting effects of 200 years of institutional racism, which is what I'm talking about.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

apdst said:
Please, point out ric's, "blatantly racist", comments. And you already know it...thanks in advance.

If you've followed the forum you'll notice that he doesn't even deny it. Do I understand that you're black? Well, your buddy ric says that blacks are less successful than other races because you have a lower IQ, i.e., you're dumb. Ric has said on many occasions that multiculturalism is a really bad thing, i.e., segregation is the way to go. You support that? Ric claims to have collected over 2000 studies which support his conclusion that blacks are an inferior race. I can see why you leap to his defense.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Caine said:
Strange. From your own post I fail to see where the racism comes in.

If some blacks are more motivated than others, and that leads them to success.
If some whites are more motivated than others, and that leads them to success.
Then I fail to see where the racism plays into effect...
If the media keeps telling blacks that racism is still keeping them down, and certain blacks take that to heart and don't try, they will never see that it effects them less than they think, if at all in most cases.

Let me see if I can make myself clearer. I'll lay it out in syllogistic format:

1. For almost 200 years, this country enslaved blacks or practiced legalized racism against blacks;
2. Nearly 200 years of institutionalized racism robbed the black community of wealth, status, and opportunity;
3. Wealth and status tend to pass from generation to generation;
4. Wealth and status contribute to opportunity;
5. A nearly two-century-long impingement of wealth, status, and opportunity cannot be erased with the stroke of a pen. It can't even be erased in a generation or two generations. The effects are long lasting;
6. Even today, studies show that blacks who are *identically* qualified as whites are discriminated against in a myriad of ways, including bank loans and employment;
7. Some blacks have been able to overcome these obstacles, however;
8. The fact that some have overcome these obstacles does not excuse the existence of obstacles based on race rather than individual merit.

Hope that's clear now.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Cold Highway said:
Oh blow it out of your ****ing ass, racism only affects someone if you let it. Im hispanic and have had my share of spic, taco nigger, wetback, illegal, etc so did my father when he was in the military and my grandfather and so on. It's called taking it on the chin and being the bigger ****ing man. I'm so ****ing tired of the race baiting bull**** from Sharpton, Jackson on the left and Buchanan and his pond scum supports on the right. All these losers focus on is race because thats all these Cold War throwbacks having left they're pathetic losers who do nothing but to turn people on each other. **** them and **** those who support their bull****.

Your support of racism is commendable. I guess.... :shock:

RiverDad · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
If you've followed the forum you'll notice that he doesn't even deny it. Do I understand that you're black? Well, your buddy ric says that blacks are less successful than other races because you have a lower IQ, i.e., you're dumb.

Do I understand that you pretend to be a lawyer as part of your persona on this forum? If so, you must be one of the densest lawyers in existence. Let's break out all of the errors in this short little comment of yours.

First off you're directing at ric27 all of your irrational blowhardery that you should be directing at me, for you're using your misinterpretations of my comments and tagging ric27 with them.

Men commit more rapes against women than women commit against men, therefore because you're a man, your a rapist.

The fact that no researcher in the social sciences any longer disputes the mountains of evidence on IQ should tell you that the science is, now how does that phrase go, of yes, "the science is settled" and "there is scientific consensus on the IQ disparity." None of this though tells us anything about any individual person. That's why we can't say that you're a rapist despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of rapists are men.

Ric has said on many occasions that multiculturalism is a really bad thing, i.e.,

Again, that's me who says that and the facts are very clear on this. I have facts on my side you have myths.

segregation is the way to go.

I've argued that freedom of association is the way to go, not that segregation is the way to go. Segregation usually results from people exercising their freedom of choice on the issue of association, so it's a byproduct, not a goal.

Ric claims to have collected over 2000 studies which support his conclusion that blacks are an inferior race.

You again slant things so that they fit your paranoid delusions. I've plenty of studies which clearly validate the hereditarian hypothesis and which invalidate the liberal creationist model of the world. Genes matter. They matter in a number of ways.

I can see why you leap to his defense.

People should leap to the defense of valid argumentation. I can understand why you're so frantic about screaming "Witch" when your entire fictitious world view is threatened by science.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
If you've followed the forum you'll notice that he doesn't even deny it. Do I understand that you're black? Well, your buddy ric says that blacks are less successful than other races because you have a lower IQ, i.e., you're dumb. Ric has said on many occasions that multiculturalism is a really bad thing, i.e., segregation is the way to go. You support that? Ric claims to have collected over 2000 studies which support his conclusion that blacks are an inferior race. I can see why you leap to his defense.

Libbos call me stupid all the time. Hatuey once said that I'm an insult to black with an IQ above 75, plus he called me Uncle Tom and a racist and, that I'm a white dude pretending to be black. Very early in this thread, I was told that I'm not black; that assumption was made because I, "don't think like a black dude", I'm sure. I've been called a racist, repeatedly because I oppose Obama's policies. Alllllllllll done by Libbos.

So, I'll take ric over the Libbos, any day.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Your support of racism is commendable. I guess.... :shock:

You just proved my point.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

apdst said:
You just proved my point.

You don't seem to have a point, except to defend racism.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Let me see if I can make myself clearer. I'll lay it out in syllogistic format:

1. For almost 200 years, this country enslaved blacks or practiced legalized racism against blacks;
2. Nearly 200 years of institutionalized racism robbed the black community of wealth, status, and opportunity;
3. Wealth and status tend to pass from generation to generation;
4. Wealth and status contribute to opportunity;
5. A nearly two-century-long impingement of wealth, status, and opportunity cannot be erased with the stroke of a pen. It can't even be erased in a generation or two generations. The effects are long lasting;
6. Even today, studies show that blacks who are *identically* qualified as whites are discriminated against in a myriad of ways, including bank loans and employment;
7. Some blacks have been able to overcome these obstacles, however;
8. The fact that some have overcome these obstacles does not excuse the existence of obstacles based on race rather than individual merit.

Hope that's clear now.

No, it's not clear, because you start out your list with not only a historical error, but a flat out lie.

Numbers 3, 4 & 5 have nothing, whatsoever, to do with race.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

RiverDad said:
Do I understand that you pretend to be a lawyer as part of your persona on this forum?

I've dealt with four different lawyers on four different cases in the past 11 years. The thing I noticed the most, is that law school and the bar exam can't be very hard, because these clowns were even close to being brilliant minds.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

RiverDad said:
The fact that no researcher in the social sciences any longer disputes the mountains of evidence on IQ should tell you that the science is, now how does that phrase go, of yes, "the science is settled" and "there is scientific consensus on the IQ disparity." None of this though tells us anything about any individual person. That's why we can't say that you're a rapist despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of rapists are men.

Not only does it tell us nothing about the individual person, it also tells us nothing about a genetic disparity versus social/developmental disparity. Do you agree that there is nothing close to a consensus on IQ being genetically determined?

I've argued that freedom of association is the way to go, not that segregation is the way to go. Segregation usually results from people exercising their freedom of choice on the issue of association, so it's a byproduct, not a goal.

But you do think that an ideal would would be a segregated world, correct? Yes or no?

I've plenty of studies which clearly validate the hereditarian hypothesis and which invalidate the liberal creationist model of the world. Genes matter. They matter in a number of ways.

Yes, you have lots of those studies. What you fail to mention are the multitudes of studies that find no significant hereditary effect. You cherry pick the science to find the conclusion you're after, just as racists have always done.

I notice that you still haven't denied that you're a racist.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

apdst said:
No, it's not clear, because you start out your list with not only a historical error, but a flat out lie.

You REALLY need to study some history. We had slavery in this country from its inception in 1776 until the 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865. That's 89 years for the arithmatically challenged.

We had Jim Crow laws, i.e., institutional racism from 1876 until 1965, which is another 89 years, for the arithmatically challenged.

89 + 89 = 178 years, for the arithmatically challenged. Or close to 200 years of institutional racism.

Apology accepted.

Caine · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
Let me see if I can make myself clearer. I'll lay it out in syllogistic format:

1. For almost 200 years, this country enslaved blacks or practiced legalized racism against blacks;
2. Nearly 200 years of institutionalized racism robbed the black community of wealth, status, and opportunity;
3. Wealth and status tend to pass from generation to generation;
4. Wealth and status contribute to opportunity;
5. A nearly two-century-long impingement of wealth, status, and opportunity cannot be erased with the stroke of a pen. It can't even be erased in a generation or two generations. The effects are long lasting;
6. Even today, studies show that blacks who are *identically* qualified as whites are discriminated against in a myriad of ways, including bank loans and employment;
7. Some blacks have been able to overcome these obstacles, however;
8. The fact that some have overcome these obstacles does not excuse the existence of obstacles based on race rather than individual merit.

Hope that's clear now.

Hundreds of thousands of blacks AND whites overcome not being born into a wealthy family.

Is that all you have... the "Family Wealth" argument coupled with the famous yet not provable "racial obstacles" argument?

Hate to break it to you. There are well over a million whites not born into families that have accumulated any wealth. There are millions of whites that have not been able to get a bank loan. There are millions of whites who have been unable to get a job.

Stating there are obstacles is easy. Anyone can STATE such a thing. Proving that these obstacles exist, rather than taking data and saying "See!! Racism!!!" is a different story. One cannot make a LEAP of assumption to blame racism on the problem just because of statistical data... Ive seen it time and time again, and it takes a leap of faith to claim racism is the prevailing factor.

AdamT · Sep 7, 2011

Caine said:
Hundreds of thousands of blacks AND whites overcome not being born into a wealthy family.

Is that all you have... the "Family Wealth" argument coupled with the famous yet not provable "racial obstacles" argument?

Hate to break it to you. There are well over a million whites not born into families that have accumulated any wealth. There are millions of whites that have not been able to get a bank loan. There are millions of whites who have been unable to get a job.

Stating there are obstacles is easy. Anyone can STATE such a thing. Proving that these obstacles exist, rather than taking data and saying "See!! Racism!!!" is a different story. One cannot make a LEAP of assumption to blame racism on the problem just because of statistical data... Ive seen it time and time again, and it takes a leap of faith to claim racism is the prevailing factor.

You can't seem to grasp the concept that overcoming an obstacle does not negate the existence of the obstacle. I don't see how I can make it any clearer.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
You don't seem to have a point, except to defend racism.

Right! That's what I'm doing. :lamo

Libbos are so confused.

apdst · Sep 7, 2011

AdamT said:
You REALLY need to study some history. We had slavery in this country from its inception in 1776 until the 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865. That's 89 years for the arithmatically challenged.

We had Jim Crow laws, i.e., institutional racism from 1876 until 1965, which is another 89 years, for the arithmatically challenged.

89 + 89 = 178 years, for the arithmatically challenged. Or close to 200 years of institutional racism.

Apology accepted.

And, you need to check your math, because that's not 200 years. I rest my case.

Caine · Sep 8, 2011

AdamT said:
You can't seem to grasp the concept that overcoming an obstacle does not negate the existence of the obstacle. I don't see how I can make it any clearer.

You can't seem to grasp the concept that, "No Proof of Obstacle = No Obstacle"

apdst · Sep 8, 2011

Caine said:
You can't seem to grasp the concept that, "No Proof of Obstacle = No Obstacle"

I think the point you're missing, is that when the Libbos tell us how things are, we're supposed to sit back and accept it. Because they're smarter than us, or...something. The same guy that claims the United States legalized slavery for 200 years.

AdamT · Sep 8, 2011

Caine said:
You can't seem to grasp the concept that, "No Proof of Obstacle = No Obstacle"

There is endless proof that there is an obstacle, if you open your eyes. There are countless scientific studies showing it, e.g.,:

"Racial discrimination is still prevalent in many companies' hiring practices, according to a new study released by professors from the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business (GSB) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

The study found that job applicants with typically white first names have substantially more success than applicants with typically black first names. With all résumé qualifications being equal, one out of ten applicants in the study who had white-sounding first names was invited for a job interview, whereas only one out of fifteen applicants with black-sounding names received a similar invitation.

"The results are having a big impact because people recognize that they're true," said Carolyn Nordstrom, president of Chicago United, a racially diverse corporate membership organization. "This study highlights the need for personal responsibility in getting rid of discrimination."

Study shows racial discrimination - The Chicago Maroon

And then there is common sense, which in terribly short supply here.

apdst · Sep 8, 2011

AdamT said:
There is endless proof that there is an obstacle, if you open your eyes. There are countless scientific studies showing it, e.g.,:

"Racial discrimination is still prevalent in many companies' hiring practices, according to a new study released by professors from the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business (GSB) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

The study found that job applicants with typically white first names have substantially more success than applicants with typically black first names. With all résumé qualifications being equal, one out of ten applicants in the study who had white-sounding first names was invited for a job interview, whereas only one out of fifteen applicants with black-sounding names received a similar invitation.

"The results are having a big impact because people recognize that they're true," said Carolyn Nordstrom, president of Chicago United, a racially diverse corporate membership organization. "This study highlights the need for personal responsibility in getting rid of discrimination."

Study shows racial*discrimination - The Chicago Maroon

And then there is common sense, which in terribly short supply here.

Another study? really? I'm sure it is of the utmost credibility and hasn't been skewed to present the appropriate outcome. Kinda like an MSNBC poll on Obama's job approval. :lamo

AdamT · Sep 8, 2011

apdst said:
Another study? really? I'm sure it is of the utmost credibility and hasn't been skewed to present the appropriate outcome. Kinda like an MSNBC poll on Obama's job approval. :lamo

If you're so sure, how about some proof. Or do you think that making completely unsupported accusations counts as argument?

Caine · Sep 8, 2011

AdamT said:
There is endless proof that there is an obstacle, if you open your eyes. There are countless scientific studies showing it, e.g.,:

"Racial discrimination is still prevalent in many companies' hiring practices, according to a new study released by professors from the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business (GSB) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

The study found that job applicants with typically white first names have substantially more success than applicants with typically black first names. With all résumé qualifications being equal, one out of ten applicants in the study who had white-sounding first names was invited for a job interview, whereas only one out of fifteen applicants with black-sounding names received a similar invitation.

"The results are having a big impact because people recognize that they're true," said Carolyn Nordstrom, president of Chicago United, a racially diverse corporate membership organization. "This study highlights the need for personal responsibility in getting rid of discrimination."

Study shows racial*discrimination - The Chicago Maroon

And then there is common sense, which in terribly short supply here.

And that is proof of what exactly?
You spotted a trend.... but then it takes the leap of assumption to believe that the cause is racism. If one has to ASSUME, then it is not evidence of racism.

Black unemployment: Highest in 27 years

A Man Without A Country