• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why shouldn't capitalism be better regulated?

weaver2 said:
I can't think of any examples.
Click to expand...

Real estate agents aren't allowed to even talk about neighborhoods, schools, and crime. This is clear violation of free speech, but I can assure you, anyone who argues against any regulation derived from the so-called Fair Housing Act will immediately be labeled a racist.
 
weaver2 said:
I can't think of any examples.
Click to expand...

It will not happen if we talk about financial regulations. If we talk about laws meant to fight presumed discrimination, it's another issue.

However, it is in a sense a problematic claim. It's true that the accusation that conservatives are racists is common, but it's more often linked to debates over welfare programs than over regulations. In recent years, regulations have often meant regulations on financial transactions for obvious reasons and the slurs usually are different in that context.
 
aociswundumho said:
Real estate agents aren't allowed to even talk about neighborhoods, schools, and crime. This is clear violation of free speech, but I can assure you, anyone who argues against any regulation derived from the so-called Fair Housing Act will immediately be labeled a racist.
Click to expand...

On the radical left, "racist" is not an abject accusation, but a means of verbal preemption and of acclaiming the superior wisdom and virtue of oneself. They throw this insult and many others without paying attention to the internal consistency of their own claims, which is precisely how you know that they are not thinking when they call others "racist." Of course, I am not accusing all people on the left. I am only accusing the crowd of identitarian leftists.

Examples abound of their intellectual incongruence. Some of my favorites include calling Ben Shapiro and Denis Prager, two very religious Jews, antisemites and fascists or saying in the same sentence that Jordan Peterson is a Nazi and a Jewish shrill. There is also the obvious procedural irony of Antifa. If I scratch off a few giveaways from Mussolini's "Doctrine of Fascism" to make it sound like it's a plan for America, most members of Antifa would heil the work as a masterpiece. Mussolini was a life-long socialist who was considered a socialist by other socialists of his day. His positions on economic policies inspired FDR and his political movement received the praises of Lenin. And not only do they agree with Mussolini about economic policies and much of his political ideas, but they also emulate black shirts. You dress all in black from head to toe, issue threats, intimidate and sometimes even assault people who have a dissenting opinion... That's fascism all the way down to the core, but they point fingers and call others fascists.
 
aociswundumho said:
Real estate agents aren't allowed to even talk about neighborhoods, schools, and crime. This is clear violation of free speech, but I can assure you, anyone who argues against any regulation derived from the so-called Fair Housing Act will immediately be labeled a racist.
Click to expand...

Did it not occur to you that the act was a reaction to real estate agents telling prospective buyers that the neighborhood was black or turning black? Looking at laws like this from a viewpoint of 50 years away is misleading and unfair. Does the act need updating to cover some of the issues we face today? Probably but never forget that prior to acts like these, racial discrimination in housing was legal and pervasive. That is how we got black ghettos in almost every city in the nation.
 
Vadinho said:
Does the act need updating to cover some of the issues we face today? Probably...
Click to expand...

Ok, do you support removing those free speech restrictions?


That is how we got black ghettos in almost every city in the nation.
Click to expand...

What's your excuse as to why we still have them today, after 50 years of the so-called Fair Housing Act?

Why are the most racially segregated cities in America the most "progressive"?

And isn't this strong evidence that the so-called FHA is a complete failure?
 
Vadinho said:
Did it not occur to you that the act was a reaction to real estate agents telling prospective buyers that the neighborhood was black or turning black? Looking at laws like this from a viewpoint of 50 years away is misleading and unfair. Does the act need updating to cover some of the issues we face today? Probably but never forget that prior to acts like these, racial discrimination in housing was legal and pervasive. That is how we got black ghettos in almost every city in the nation.
Click to expand...

Those that claim business decisions are always motivated by profit and never by racism always focus on the immediate present and are conveniently naive about the rampant racism of the past and the banking regulations that legalized the taking of land and money from minorities. It's a useful talent, this ignoring of the past. It soothes one consciousness and justifies inequality.
 
weaver2 said:
It soothes one consciousness and justifies inequality.
Click to expand...

1) only duty liberals have a problem with their conscious owing to their deadly programs which did more damage than slavery and Jim Crow
2) God justifies inequality and making us inequal
 
aociswundumho said:
Why are the most racially segregated cities in America the most "progressive"?
Click to expand...

simple, liberal progressivism destroyed love and family in the black community, created the school to prison pipeline, and largely arrested the rapid progress blacks had been making in the 1950's.
 
Vadinho said:
That is how we got black ghettos in almost every city in the nation.
Click to expand...

How can we have black ghettos when they have been the most solidly liberal neighborhoods in America 60 years? Maybe there has not been enough progressivism yet? Maybe we should ban love and family altogether for black people??
 
aociswundumho said:
Ok, do you support removing those free speech restrictions?




What's your excuse as to why we still have them today, after 50 years of the so-called Fair Housing Act?

Why are the most racially segregated cities in America the most "progressive"?

And isn't this strong evidence that the so-called FHA is a complete failure?
Click to expand...

If you want to fully grasp the inherited legacy of racism in America, you must open your eyes and heart to it. Try reading a book for starters "Warmth of Other Sons" is a great place to start. Then try the "new jim crow". Come back after you have tried even slightly to walk a mile in another mans shoes.
 
James972 said:
How can we have black ghettos when they have been the most solidly liberal neighborhoods in America 60 years? Maybe there has not been enough progressivism yet? Maybe we should ban love and family altogether for black people??
Click to expand...

How can red states be filled with so many poor white trash if conservatism works so well? You need better material to deal with me.
 
Vadinho said:
If you want to fully grasp the inherited legacy of racism in America, you must open your eyes and heart to it. Try reading a book for starters "Warmth of Other Sons" is a great place to start. Then try the "new jim crow". Come back after you have tried even slightly to walk a mile in another mans shoes.
Click to expand...

Naturally you don't answer even one of my questions. What's wrong, will the answers reveal some inconvenient truths?
 
Vadinho said:
How can red states be filled with so many poor white trash if conservatism works so well?
Click to expand...

insanity of course. The liberal programs are aimed at all Americans, black and white and are dragging all Americans down. Blacks lead the way with Hispanics and Whites following shortly behind. Do you understand now?
 
Vadinho said:
Then try the "new jim crow". Come back after you have tried even slightly to walk a mile in another mans shoes.
Click to expand...

What we learn from " The New Jim Crow" is that liberal programs attacked the black community and created the school to prison pipeline and the street corner to prison pipeline. Do you understand?
 
Vadinho said:
How can red states be filled with so many poor white trash if conservatism works so well?
Click to expand...

where do you see conservatism?? Poor areas of red states are as liberal as liberal ghettos in blue states and you see the same result. Time to put your thinking cap on dear.
 
James972 said:
What we learn from " The New Jim Crow" is that liberal programs attacked the black community and created the school to prison pipeline and the street corner to prison pipeline. Do you understand?
Click to expand...

I suggest you try using a brush to wipe the record, check your needle, maybe take that bit of crust off that record and hopefully what appears to be nothing but a broken record can be fixed using common sense. Given your post, I may be asking too much of you.
 
James972 said:
where do you see conservatism?? Poor areas of red states are as liberal as liberal ghettos in blue states and you see the same result. Time to put your thinking cap on dear.
Click to expand...

O brother where art thou? There is no more blind a man who can see but closes his eyes. I can't reason with you because you are incapable of seeing the world outside of your blinders. I suggest turning off all right wing media. Take a hike, exercise, read some literature, meditate, do something good for a stranger, embrace a loved one, get your life together. Be like water my friend.
 
Vadinho said:
O brother where art thou? There is no more blind a man who can see but closes his eyes. I can't reason with you because you are incapable of seeing the world outside of your blinders. I suggest turning off all right wing media. Take a hike, exercise, read some literature, meditate, do something good for a stranger, embrace a loved one, get your life together. Be like water my friend.
Click to expand...

translation: as typical liberal I lost debate yet again so will try to distract with personal attack. Ever see a conservative or libertarian who has to run from a debate? What does that teach you??
 
Vadinho said:
I suggest you try using a brush to wipe the record, check your needle, maybe take that bit of crust off that record and hopefully what appears to be nothing but a broken record can be fixed using common sense. Given your post, I may be asking too much of you.
Click to expand...

What we learn from " The New Jim Crow" is that liberal programs attacked the black community and created the school to prison pipeline and the street corner to prison pipeline. Do you understand? What did you learn fro the new Jim Crow?? Afraid to tell us??
 
James972 said:
What we learn from " The New Jim Crow" is that liberal programs attacked the black community and created the school to prison pipeline and the street corner to prison pipeline. Do you understand? What did you learn fro the new Jim Crow?? Afraid to tell us??
Click to expand...

My lord, that record of yours is stuck ain't it? The New Jim Crow laws were a vast set of federal and state/local laws that were supported by one and all at the time. All that is but for the minorities they targeted. Joe Biden is feeling the heat about it right now as he should. I can think of many leftees in government who did not support the war on drugs or the prison pipeline, no conservative comes to mind. This all started with Nixon. Read more, talk less James.
 
Vadinho said:
The New Jim Crow laws were a vast set of federal and state/local laws that were supported by one and all at the time.
Click to expand...

Yes, a reaction to the deadly liberal programs that turned many, especially blacks, into criminals. THe choice was eliminate the deadly liberal programs or incarcerate its victims. Still the best choice is to eliminate the deadly liberal programs but liberals instead want more of them like a junkie wants more heroine. Now do you understand?
 
Vadinho said:
Did it not occur to you that the act was a reaction to real estate agents telling prospective buyers that the neighborhood was black or turning black? Looking at laws like this from a viewpoint of 50 years away is misleading and unfair. Does the act need updating to cover some of the issues we face today? Probably but never forget that prior to acts like these, racial discrimination in housing was legal and pervasive. That is how we got black ghettos in almost every city in the nation.
Click to expand...

In the early 1900s, Harlem was a pristine, affluent and white neighborhood. Landlords and real estate promoters tried to organize a movement to bar black people from renting apartments or buying real estates. Do I need to say that it failed miserably? That is in spite of a considerably more racist culture and a complete absence of governmental intervention. The reason is obvious: it doesn't matter who pays rent or buys a building, it only matters that the money gets in your pocket. On the other hand, building regulations and urban committees in large cities did manage to turn a few cities from a black majority to a white majority. That's what happened in San Francisco in the 1970s and 1980s. The government limited development in the Bay Area in the name of a plethora of "laudable" causes, eventually pricing the poorer black majority out of the city. Everyone who owned property early enough got enriched massively, they create a homelessness crisis and some of the world's biggest traffic jam problems... It sounds like 100% the opposite of the promise every single Democrat made in California since the early 1980s. It's ironic because loosening laws would let the supply of housing expand and many of those problems would decrease in severity.

Some of the worst private intentions fail because hateful people tend to like their wallet more than they hate you. Some of the best intentions of public officials lead to catastrophes because policies that sound helpful can have very bad unintended consequences. It doesn't mean racism doesn't exist and never played a role anywhere. It means you have to be careful not to assume markets don't tend to work against racism (they tend to do it) and not to assume governments work against it (they sometimes work for it). It's harder to fight racism than it seems.
 
Vadinho said:
My lord, that record of yours is stuck ain't it? The New Jim Crow laws were a vast set of federal and state/local laws that were supported by one and all at the time. All that is but for the minorities they targeted. Joe Biden is feeling the heat about it right now as he should. I can think of many leftees in government who did not support the war on drugs or the prison pipeline, no conservative comes to mind. This all started with Nixon. Read more, talk less James.
Click to expand...

Republicans have been singing to roughly the same tune for over 150 years. Protect individual liberties, promote individual responsibility, enforce laws and punish criminals.

If you read speeches by Lincoln, they sound like Republicans today. The same sorts of ideas were used to abolish slavery, fight segregation laws and pass civil rights laws. All of this was done with people who believed in small governments and free markets and the opposition on the other side always believed using governmental powers to enforce their vision. Democrats earned the black vote in the 1930s by buying up the support of the very people they despised the most with the New Deal. A majority of Democrats voted against civil rights in the 1960s and, save for one Democrat, all those racists died as blue and as bigotted as they were in the heyday of the rampant racism they instituted. Once Democrats figured out they could bundle up voters in minorities by convincing them of their victimhood and pledging to pour taxpayer money in their pockets, they started to look like what they look like today.

Do you know the irony? Courts started to expand the ability of criminals to evade punishment in the 1950s through the 1970s and the Johnson administration launched the federal government on a path to massively expand welfare programs. Expenditures exploded in a matter of 5 years. It sounds like what people have in mind when they think about helping out the poor and fighting crime in black neighborhoods today... The poverty rate did not budge, even if the programs were initially sold as a means to save government expenditures later, and crime rates skyrocketed (no exaggeration). To understand the enormity, you have to understand crime rates were trending downwards for the past 15 or so years, and so were teenage pregnancies, and many positive trends were established prior to the 1960s. Now, fathers are disproportionately more often missing in black communities and single motherhood much more prevalent. It's one of the nice trends that reversed in the 1960s.


Yeah... I'm sure Republicans have been racist since the 1970s. Though you probably forgot that the racist Democrats of the 1960s were still Democrats in the 1970s and that it's not the Republican views on crime, welfare or regulations which prevailed in the 1960s and 1970s. It's also the case that Republicans have always been complaining about those views, that the proponents of those programs predicted exactly the opposite of what happened and that Republicans predicted exactly what happened. Even if you tried to say it's just a coincidence, it's a big pill to swallow, but to put that on the back of Republicans. No. Democrats did this -- racist Democrats, must I add.

I don't think the war on drug was fine. It probably was stupid and still is stupid, but I don't hold the silly view that because a law has a disproportionate impact on black people that it's racist.
 
TheEconomist said:
Republicans have been singing to roughly the same tune for over 150 years. Protect individual liberties, promote individual responsibility, enforce laws and punish criminals.

If you read speeches by Lincoln, they sound like Republicans today. The same sorts of ideas were used to abolish slavery, fight segregation laws and pass civil rights laws. All of this was done with people who believed in small governments and free markets and the opposition on the other side always believed using governmental powers to enforce their vision. Democrats earned the black vote in the 1930s by buying up the support of the very people they despised the most with the New Deal. A majority of Democrats voted against civil rights in the 1960s and, save for one Democrat, all those racists died as blue and as bigotted as they were in the heyday of the rampant racism they instituted. Once Democrats figured out they could bundle up voters in minorities by convincing them of their victimhood and pledging to pour taxpayer money in their pockets, they started to look like what they look like today.

Do you know the irony? Courts started to expand the ability of criminals to evade punishment in the 1950s through the 1970s and the Johnson administration launched the federal government on a path to massively expand welfare programs. Expenditures exploded in a matter of 5 years. It sounds like what people have in mind when they think about helping out the poor and fighting crime in black neighborhoods today... The poverty rate did not budge, even if the programs were initially sold as a means to save government expenditures later, and crime rates skyrocketed (no exaggeration). To understand the enormity, you have to understand crime rates were trending downwards for the past 15 or so years, and so were teenage pregnancies, and many positive trends were established prior to the 1960s. Now, fathers are disproportionately more often missing in black communities and single motherhood much more prevalent. It's one of the nice trends that reversed in the 1960s.


Yeah... I'm sure Republicans have been racist since the 1970s. Though you probably forgot that the racist Democrats of the 1960s were still Democrats in the 1970s and that it's not the Republican views on crime, welfare or regulations which prevailed in the 1960s and 1970s. It's also the case that Republicans have always been complaining about those views, that the proponents of those programs predicted exactly the opposite of what happened and that Republicans predicted exactly what happened. Even if you tried to say it's just a coincidence, it's a big pill to swallow, but to put that on the back of Republicans. No. Democrats did this -- racist Democrats, must I add.

I don't think the war on drug was fine. It probably was stupid and still is stupid, but I don't hold the silly view that because a law has a disproportionate impact on black people that it's racist.
Click to expand...

There was nothing silly about creating laws that targeted black drug users and ignored white drug users. In the 80s when this stuff was passed, every single frat house in the country was filled with coke, pot, LSD and who knows what else. Ever hear of a SWAT team invading a frat house at Kansas U? No. Those laws were racist in origin, end of story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom