Biden Revives Republican Party

Only an idiot disagrees.

America was explicitly systemically racist in the past (red lining laws, black GIs could not use federally backed loans, govt. enforced segregation). Today, the laws have been changed but one only has to look at data to see that America is still systemically racist:
- Inability to get home loans (and higher cost) for black buyers. A troubling tale of a Black man trying to refinance his mortgage
- Black kids disciplined more for same misconduct. Racial disparities in school-based disciplinary actions are associated with county-level rates of racial bias
- Criminals who are black receive longer sentences than if they are white. https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-differences-sentencing
- Job applicants with "white names" get more interviews than applicants with black names. Minorities Who 'Whiten' Job Resumes Get More Interviews
- There are more Fortune 500 white CEOs named Dave than black CEOs.

The system is still biased.

Please find that on their web site or mission statement. There are communists/socialists in the BLM movement, just like their are Nazis and white supremacists at Trump rallies. That does not make the Trump campaign a neo-Nazi movement. Both are just an example of ridiculous hyperbole that destroys political discourse in this country.

Only an idiot disagrees, and that means by either side.

It was reckless homocide at best.

As for the minimum wage, the question is not purely economic. Our government/laws are bought by the wealthy. In the 1950's and 60's (arguably when America was MAGA?), Unions wielded greater power. That has grossly shifted and large corporations control wealth (and consequently lawmaking) in this country. It is factually undeniable that we have the greatest wealth inequality in this country since the great depression (due to bias tax laws, tax avoidance, dysfunctional government programs that keep people in poverty, and vast changes to labor due to technology that is only growing). This is a social question - saying "capitalism will solve it" puts religious faith in unfettered capitalism as governance, much like idiot communists put faith in an economic structure as governance. Neither is governance - they are economic models, both at extremes and both necessarily subjected to regulation and control by our lawmakers, judiciary, and ultimately voters, to keep power from accruing to heavily in one area.

 

https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/

Like the Soviets, Black Lives Matter Purges Its History

To Destroy America | City Journal

With respect to the studies you shared every single one makes one of the following false assumptions:

1. It falsely assumes racism where there may be a wide variety of reasons behind behavior.

2. It assumes that the reason for disparities between races is racism. For example, more men than women are in prison, that doesn't mean the criminal justice system is sexist against men.

3. It ignores the fact that there are literally disparities everywhere. There are disparities between White sounding names and there are disparities between income of twins despite having the same look, the same upbringing, the same schools, the same standard of living growing up, etc.

Doesn't mean there aren't racists out there or that racism doesn't exist anymore. Of course it does, problem is it always will. And I just don't believe these studies prove systemic racism.

I don't necessarily find all of the following arguments compelling, but Larry Elder addresses most of these points:



I particularly did not like his argument regarding discipline disparities in Black students. He sort of just said that it's ridiculous to accuse predominantly Democrat teachers of systemic racism and moved on. I'd have preferred if he attacked it more head on, but overall solid arguments and solid video.

And if you don't believe me, and strongly believe I am wrong, I strongly encourage you to open a bank or a school, or start a business. If racism is so rampant as many seem to believe it is, that would mean that there is a tremendous hole in the market with so much wasted opportunity and potential. I encourage you to take advantage of that. I don't like seeing people poor. If I'm wrong, I'd love for you to take advantage of that and exploit that hole in the market.

 

One of 3 co-founders (Cullers) of a tiny movement (circa 2013) said she was a marxist. BLM protests have included between 15-26 million people and, if you take the time to actually read their mission, is a movement for social justice and racial equality. Do you have any idea how BLM is organized? Is it a top down organization? Does Cullers have a title? BLM is driven by local chapters and not by a national group and cullers has no title. It is not any more marxist than Trump is a white nationalist for hiring Stephen Miller at the white house - oh wait, Trump actually is the leader and hired a white nationalist? Hmmm, you label tens of millions who have been at BLM marches marxists, or belonging to a marxist organization, even though that is not what the organization was marching for because 1 founder with no current power is a marxist. You must label Trump and his whole administration white supremacists then.... No, I would not either as it is insipid, just like your contention.

Funny, you look at data from all different areas of life - schools, work, sentencing, housing - and say "well, there could be other explanations", of course offering none. These studies also often seek out other explanations, but find none.

But then Larry Elder says "yes blacks get longer sentences" and explains it away by saying "Judges make sentencing decisions... based on considerations...that are not or can not be measured." Period. He digs no further and neither do you. So every black person has "some consideration" that is different and "cannot be measured', but it is not race. If you actually read the study instead of looked for a video supporting your bias, you would see that the commission was saying "the discrepancy was not all on biased judges" as prosecutors could be biased too (https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-differences-sentencing). But all of that you waive away, if you ever even got to it, b/c you found a guy who explained away the difference with no facts, just a "shit happens", and that was good enough for you.

It is so absurdly incomplete that Elder should be ashamed for offering it as a form of explanation for such a pernicious issue. That you buy it without question while hard data points the other direction, and you reject it out of hand, is really telling about your preformed opinions.

 

Well Black Lives Matter has a website. Read the articles that I sent you. They have revised their website due to controversial messaging repeatedly in the past. So considering they have a website, they have a national/universal message. But now you're committing the logical fallacy that everyone who supports BLM or protests in the name of BLM is a Marxist. I never said that, I don't believe that. I said and believe that the organization is a Neo-Marxist organization, which it is, which was originally organized by self-proclaimed "trained Marxists," and people who support BLM or protest in it's name are supporting a Neo-Marxist organization, even if they don't know it.

A big problem with BLM is the messaging. I truly believe most people support it because they believe it's their way of opposing racism. Yet most people oppose it not to support racism, but to oppose the other controversial messaging that the organization is based upon, such as abolishing the nuclear family for example, or the notion that all of these police shootings are cases of racism, or that America is systemically racist.

Okay, if no other explanation is offered we should just default with racism? That's pretty stupid. Should we say the same about more men being in prison than women? Does that make the prison system sexist against men? Or college admissions, the fact that Asians as a demographic are more successful in college admissions than White men? Are college admissions racist against White men? At the end of the day, these disparities are everywhere, and people choose to draw the narrative that they want from these disparities. If there's a study that shows that the first twin born makes more money fairly consistently, we don't assume that people are prejudiced in favor of the first twin. But because of the history with Black folks in this country, we assume because the systems were racist then, the mere fact that there are disparities today, proves that the systems remain racist today. That is incorrect.

What I think Elder was saying is that every case has their own unique background. Different judge, different interpretation of law, different lawyers, different fact patterns, different juries, different criminal history. There are such a variety of factors, that controlling for race alone is incredibly messy. And the sentencing structure isn't an exact science. But you need more than broad disparities in outcomes to prove systemic racism. You might say that they controlled for everything else, to which I say I highly doubt that.

White cops are no likelier to shoot dead African-Americans than black ones are

Do you accept that? Or do you have your own studies that you accept while rejecting this one because they reinforce a narrative you choose to believe in? Skepticism in these studies is a healthy thing because they are messy, and at the end of the day, are driven by people, including people with agendas.

Pair that with the fact that you go to almost any university research department and you'll be lucky to find one conservative working there. If you think that's because the left favors data and conservatives don't, there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

 

What do you mean when you say that an organization is neo-Marxist?

 

First off, yes, employers don’t pay a working wage because they don’t have to and they don’t care. To suggest otherwise is an insult to the conversation.

To the question, there are zero real trade-offs. Oh, business owners and executives say there are, but only because they don’t want to lower their obscenely out-of-proportion salaries.

If your claim is that small business owners can’t afford it, as you insinuate in your question, that’s a problem created by republicans, too. They’ve designed everything to favor big business and cripple small businesses.

Easily remedied.

Create financial balances for businesses that prove they can’t afford a higher minimum wage, and pay for them by taking ALL the breaks away from the giant corporations that don’t need the billions in corporate welfare they receive year in and year out.

Problem solved. Issue done. Next issue. There are no economic issues in America that are difficult to solve...only difficult to swallow by the wealthy, and difficult to find politicians with the will to turn away those wealthy people’s payoffs (aka “campaign contributions”) to do the right thing for the 98% of America.

 

He means he can recite Fox News talking points.

 

I mean a group devoted to pitting social classes against each other and ultimately advocating for a redistribution of wealth. In this case, the (racist) bourgeoisie to the (marginalized minority) proletariat.

Though they are not always direct with this objective, the logical conclusion to calling the systems racist and the institutions racist and the culture racist, is a redistribution of wealth into those marginalized communities.

But if disparities are everywhere and have always been everywhere and will likely always be everywhere. There is no line. There will always be calls for more redistribution of wealth until there is complete equality for regardless of input, circumstance, or context.

This is a slow process, it doesn’t happen overnight. But it surely happens.

 

If you’re going to treat me like a child, at least have the decency of understanding basic economics.

Take a basic economics class then get back to me on the effects of minimum wage on equilibrium.

Until then, have fun at the kids table.

EDIT: Also, yeah... Perhaps this is an over-simplistic way of explaining the dynamic between the two parties and how they handle business owners, but:

Democrats: you can start a business if

1. You pay all employees $15 per hour
2. If you have more than 50 employees, you have to provide them with health insurance.
3. If you make too much money, you have to pay more in taxes.
4. legally mandated paid family leave

Republicans: You can start a business if

1. You have a marketable product that people are willing to buy for your price and employees are willing to work for you at a wage with benefits that you both agreed to.

It's not close to which is easier.

Your solution seems to be the Bernie Sanders plan of taking money from the rich people and the corporations and giving it to the poor people and even the middle class and small business owners.

That wouldn't work. Try dividing ever penny that Bill Gates and Elon Musk has among the entire country and see how much money people get.

I'm saying for Democrats to get out of the small business owner's way. Get rid of regulation, get rid of the healthcare mandates, have a low minimum wage, and have low taxes because all of those things directly make life easier for the small business owner.

 

That is an interesting conclusion. So when they call for an end of criminalizing, incarcerating, and killing black people, it is really a call for redistributing wealth?

 

That's not their only goal or the only institution they are claiming is racist.

Socio-economic status has an incredibly large role in this discussion and you know it.

 

We have the lowest percentage of our population owning or working at small businesses of the entire OECD. They all do the opposite of what you are suggesting and all have more small businesses (as a percentage of employment) than we do. Maybe we should be going the other way on those things if we want to encourage more small businesses?

 

It does. The important question is why does socio-economic status have such a large role in the discussion of race? What is there about race that should have anything to do with socio-economic status?

 

Explain how high minimum wage, lots of regulation (and thus barriers to entry), health insurance mandates, and paid leave mandates helps small businesses.

 

Socio-Economic status partially explains disparate incarceration rates for one. Democrats love referencing this cycle of poverty where basically people are poor, have access to poor resources, resort to poor, bad, or criminal behavior, and thus remain poor.

There's also access to better attorneys and things of that nature.

 

I didn't say it made sense I'm guessing the health insurance thing makes the biggest difference, employees aren't afraid to try working for themselves because it won't change their healthcare situation. When our son had cancer, pre-ACA, all the social workers kept reminding us that we needed to steer him towards working for a major corporation because small businesses would be able to afford the hit with their little risk pools.

 

Uncle Sam always knows what's better for small businesses than small businesses.

Hope your son had a healthy recovery.

 

I read this among other books that seriously would have you taking a second look at your statement. How about you pick a book for me to read on how there is no systemic racism and you read this one?

 

You might be treated like a child if you ignore facts and treat complex problems as simple. The fact is that as Warren Buffett says "There is a class war going on, and my class is winning." I paid 18% income tax last year on multiples of income (all investments) that I used to make when I worked, was salaried and paid 36%. These types of laws have created the greatest wealth imbalance in this country since the Great Depression! You whine about "wealth redistribution" but ignore that this is exactly what has happened in this country over the last decades - to the historic benefit of the wealthiest.

You completely ignore my previous post showing that unfettered capitalism is no more a governing policy than communism. We have allocation of powers because if we do not, then the winners will keep using their wealth leverage, changing the laws to benefit themselves, which is what has happened over the last 4 decades. As of 2021, 70% of our nations wealth is in the hands only of millionaires and billionaires. The top 20% own 80% of the nation's wealth while the bottom 80% of our population own 14% of the nations wealth. Does this historic imbalance mean nothing to you?

You are right in some ways. Yes, government regulations are a HUGE problem (and a bigger problem is that large companies support many regulations that hamper smaller competitors more than them). One example - identifying all components/content of restaurant food. McDonalds does this one time and sells hundreds of millions of dollars of the same crap. An independent restaurant that has specials trying to do this every night goes out of business. Democrats would do well to get out of the way of small businesses AND force large businesses to carry the weight of their social, health, and economic impacts (be it pollution, food production, wages) on our country. We do need to support and free up small businesses! And we need to support workers in negotiating with large businesses, help people not go bankrupt from healthcare costs, etc.

Trump is a symptom of this wealth inequality and the frustration of middle America. So is the BLM movement. Democracy depends on people having a stake in the process and we have been moving away from that thru a combination of crony capitalism and government incompetence for which both Dems and Reps are to blame. Simple solutions such as "let the market decide" are an abdication of the balance of power that underpins democracy and any commitment to a just society with opportunities for all.

 

Discrimination and Disparities by Thomas Sowell.