Trump has talked a lot about bringing jobs back...let's see if he does it.

freeman3 wrote:Trump has talked a lot about bringing jobs back...let's see if he does it.

To some extent, as Tom Friedman has noted, it's impossible. Automation will (or has) eliminate(d) some jobs.

However, Trump will help in some areas, like coal. I actually think this is where the election was decided. Hillary, representing the "establishment," promised to kill coal jobs. That wasn't just a metaphor, but it also contained a larger message: we're going to continue removing jobs from the economy while we tell you what is good for you.

Her message, such as it was, was this: Elites know better than you. Shut up and take it.

Trump's message, such as it was, was this: I may not look like you, but I'm on your side.

Clinton countered with "Trump is a horrible human being."

Trump countered with "Hillary is a crook."

Trump won on the margins.

Now, can he succeed? Yes.

Will he?

Maybe.

Freeman:

Black fathers in general do not have the resources to support families so they don't stick around

This is just stupid. Do you know any black people Freeman? How about you put this question to them and see what responses you get? Better, share this nonsense with some black women and see what kind of responses you get.

Freeman:

Trying to get at all the causal roots at this point is impossible

Says who? You? No it isn't. It's complex but not impossible.

Freeman:

Stop pointing fingers at black character

Black character? I will point fingers at anyone who leaves his children to fend for themselves. If a pink man with poka dots chooses such a coarse, no matter his reason, he is a coward. A lazy, selfish, self absorbed, self centered coward. There is no excuse for it so stop making them up. No one gets a pass on this one.

Freeman:

When black men have the steady job and resources to support black families...they will

Are you serious? I'm currently playing in a world variant whereby some player posed as not one but two countries. Is someone posing as you Freeman? Where are you getting this stuff? You sound like someone who escaped the home and is now wondering around talking to himself.

So it's impossible to get at all the casual roots of this issue but somehow, you magically are able to conger up a one sentence solution to the problem?

Freeman:

Scolding black men as to why they aren't supporting their families accomplishes nothing

Scolding?

How about we at least name what is going on? I think that accomplishes a starting point that does lead toward making lasting, positive change. And I know a lot of black men and women who would agree with me. We can start by placing a spotlight on the lack of responsibility of these so called men.

Never mind scolding, why don't you stop making excuses for them? We've got enough real victims out there. We don't need to create more phony victims.

There are plenty of very poor men throughout the world who remain devoted to their families and who choose not to abandon their partners and children. These men make the best of the cards they've been dealt. Bosnian refugees who live in my city, for example, are more often than not, poor. They live in tough neighborhoods. Their men are devoted to their families. They take on low paying jobs that no one else wants. They make do.

Your reductionism here is naive.

I don't need to read and will not bother to respond to such ridiculousness.

Coal jobs. Have you ever watched someone die from emphysema?

tom

Ricky, using your own numbers
You say only 28% of black children are born to married parents.
That means (using your own numbers) that 72% of black men are in prison

A product of US schooling are you?
If 28% of black children are born in wedlock then (100-28) are out of wed lock. Thats 72%. Which is what started this thread of conversation...

In the USA, One in every three black males born today can expect to go to prison at some point in their life, compared with one in every six Latino males, and one in every 17 white males, if current incarceration trends continue

The sentencing project.

bbauska

Should we give the poor, black children free healthcare, free food, free housing, free college, free cell phones, free everything and see what happens?

There are nations where healthcare and education ARE free. For all children. (well, paid out of general taxation.)
Crime is far lower than in the US.
Rates of poverty are lower.
Child poverty is a tenth.
The middle class and working class are far more established and more stable. (Gini co-efficient)
Employment rates are higher.
Hours worked are lower.
Taxes are higher.
Government debt is far lower. Overall debt is far lower.
Productivity is higher...
Venture capital per GDP is higher....

So based on that, shouldn't the answer to your rhetorical question be yes? And white kids too?
http://www.demos.org/blog/10/20/15/unit ... -17-charts

bbauska

Crime is a personal choice. That includes doing illegal drugs

.

Society chooses what to criminalize.
Society also chooses to prosecute the laws in a discriminatory fashion.

The problem begins with police activity. According to Justice Department data cited in the report, police arrested black youth for drug crimes at more than twice the rate of white youth between 1980 and 2010, nationwide. Yet a 2012 study from the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that white high-school students were slightly more likely to have abused illegal drugs within the past month than black students of the same age

.


1) Why should the use of drugs be illegal? (And why not alcohol or nicotine which have far more health costs than many drugs)? Colorado shows that legalizing marijuana raised all kinds of taxes and has lead to the end of civilization in that state.
2) How effective has the war on drug been on eliminating drug use? And what are the cost to society in collateral damage? (Cost of enforcement and prison. Cost to society in family breakdown. Failure to deliver on crime rate reduction.)

You are correct that society criminalizes what it wants. It has. that is why drugs called "illegal" are just that. Illegal. People then have the choice to follow that law or not.

We have a different view of what to do. You say don't worry about illegal drugs because of a disparate treatment regarding prosecution. I say make the punishment standardized, regardless of race.

In your view/opinion is the use of illegal drugs a crime?

I wish I were able to "thumbs up" Dag's last post.

Ricky, go ahead and put down my education all you like, it changes nothing, you are the one reading what you want to read. How about you actually read what someone said for a change and not read what you want to see.
I (clearly) stated 72% of black children were born out of wedlock (to single mothers)
yet your "statistics" stated the reason for this was because black men were in prison for silly drug laws. Now try to follow, let's go over this s l o w l y so you don't get lost...
72% of these births are to single mothers,
You claim it's due to the men being in prison
that means you are saying 72% of young black men are in prison (otherwise they would "man-up" and marry their baby mamma). That is of course terribly wrong, but that's YOUR claim.

bbauska

You say don't worry about illegal drugs because of a disparate treatment regarding prosecution.

I did not say that.
I said drug use should not be illegal. At least not criminal. I've said that in jurisdictions where drug use is legal and regulated there are fewer ill effects than in societies that attempt to stop drug use with criminalization and strong enforcement.
I point to: Switerland. Portugal. Colorado. for evidence.

In the US the criminalization of drugs has lead to enormous societal costs: Organized crime that markets drug use. Violent crime by the organized criminals. Property crime by addicts requiring money. Enormous enforcement costs. Enormous legal costs. Enormous prison costs. Continuing use at high rates of the illegal drugs. The prison socialization of young men who pay the price for being caught with drugs. The tearing at the fabric of families through high incarceration rates.

What benefits do you see from the current stance on criminalizing drug use?

bbauska

. I say make the punishment standardized, regardless of race.

At yet its not. If whites were being incarcerated at the same rate as blacks there would be no room in prisons.

White people are more likely to deal drugs, but black people are more likely to get arrested for it

the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that 6.6 percent of white adolescents and young adults (aged 12 to 25) sold drugs, compared to just 5.0 percent of blacks (a 32 percent difference).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... b155376857

You think this systemic bias doesn't negatively affect blacks?

bbauska

In your view/opinion is the use of illegal drugs a crime?

Its a fact that it is a crime in most of the US. (except colorado for marijuana).
Its my opinion that it shouldn't be, because the negative effects of the fact that it is illegal greatly outweigh any good that has come out of it....
And the negative effects of criminalizing drugs fall much more greatly on blacks then whites.
(Among those effects is the tearing of the fabric of family life. )

Bbauska, Freeman has noted that there is a attitude represented here of scolding a group of people because they are failing to succeed. In your view failing to take personal responsibility for their circumstance leads to their poor life out comes..

I'd ask you to consider two things.
1) -children do not choose in which circumstance they are born. By failing to ensure children have the same opportunities to succeed, you penalize those born into poverty who's parents aren't coping with their disadvantages. Should these children be punished by the lottery of life? Or could society raise them up by ensuring they do not suffer too unequal a start. (see the performance in Denmark i offered you...)

2) - asking someone to pull themselves up by their boot straps is all well and good. As long as you aren't standing on their feet while you ask the question.

Drug laws, the unequal prosecution of drug laws, the effects of criminalizing drugs have all fallen on black populations more than white.... This is the standing on the feet allegory I make....
Of course drug laws and the criminal justice system are only one way, that society stands on their feet, while demanding they pull themselves up by the bootstraps...

You are saying what then? It shouldn't be a crime because you say so?

Face it... IT IS A CRIME TO DO ILLEGAL DRUGS!

As to your other point, yes, there is a different treatment of blacks. It is not enough of a reason to not exact justice on criminals. That is a similar analogy to stock trade fraud is a crime where most of the people charged are upper and upper-middle class citizens. We cannot punish the crime because of disparate judicial statistics. I say that is total bunk.

If it is a crime, then punish it. Regardless of race, class or gender. If a person commits a crime, then the person should be treated equally under the law.

I would hope you wanted equal treatment under the law and not scrap that concept because it is not equal in all ways. The treatment needs to be equal in all facets.

danivon wrote:Coal jobs. Have you ever watched someone die from emphysema?

I watched someone die from cancer of the esophagus. He also happened to have emphysema.

So, it's better to have them on the permanent dole and leave the coal in the ground?

That's a perspective. Research and development might provide a solution.

https://arlweb.msha.gov/REGS/Comments/2 ... OMM-56.pdf

rickyp wrote:
There are nations where healthcare and education ARE free. For all children. (well, paid out of general taxation.)
Crime is far lower than in the US.
Rates of poverty are lower.
Child poverty is a tenth.
The middle class and working class are far more established and more stable. (Gini co-efficient)
Employment rates are higher.
Hours worked are lower.
Taxes are higher.
Government debt is far lower. Overall debt is far lower.
Productivity is higher...
Venture capital per GDP is higher....

So based on that, shouldn't the answer to your rhetorical question be yes? And white kids too?
http://www.demos.org/blog/10/20/15/unit ... -17-charts

Right then, let's hear from another socialist:

"Imagine"

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today... Aha-ah...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace... You...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world... You...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

rickyp wrote:bbauska

You say don't worry about illegal drugs because of a disparate treatment regarding prosecution.

I did not say that.
I said drug use should not be illegal. At least not criminal. I've said that in jurisdictions where drug use is legal and regulated there are fewer ill effects than in societies that attempt to stop drug use with criminalization and strong enforcement.
I point to: Switerland. Portugal. Colorado. for evidence.

A few questions:

1. What sort of gang problems do Switerland (sic) and Portugal have?

2. What sort of improvement has there been in Colorado--other than more losers moving in? Well, and besides drug cartels moving in? http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/lo ... juana-laws

3. Do you really mean to propose legalizing heroin, cocaine, PCP, meth, and whatever new drugs roll down the pike? Please do tell us how having more zombies on welfare will help.

In the US the criminalization of drugs has lead to enormous societal costs: Organized crime that markets drug use. Violent crime by the organized criminals. Property crime by addicts requiring money. Enormous enforcement costs. Enormous legal costs. Enormous prison costs. Continuing use at high rates of the illegal drugs. The prison socialization of young men who pay the price for being caught with drugs. The tearing at the fabric of families through high incarceration rates.

Even though people know they risk prison, they do drugs. What happens when the disincentives are removed?

Do you propose giving people drugs? If not, how will they get them without crime?

What benefits do you see from the current stance on criminalizing drug use?

Lives are saved.

Behavior deleterious to society is reduced.

bbauska

. I say make the punishment standardized, regardless of race.

At yet its not. If whites were being incarcerated at the same rate as blacks there would be no room in prisons.

Sorry, but most of this is crap.

Don't do drugs and don't go to jail.

Have there been disparate sentence ranges depending on the form of drugs? Yes, but I think that has been reduced.

White people are more likely to deal drugs, but black people are more likely to get arrested for it

the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that 6.6 percent of white adolescents and young adults (aged 12 to 25) sold drugs, compared to just 5.0 percent of blacks (a 32 percent difference).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... b155376857

You think this systemic bias doesn't negatively affect blacks?

This is sophisticated dishonesty. One has to consider the context in which the drugs are sold. If you are standing on a street corner, in a high-crime area selling dope, you're more likely to get arrested. That's not systemic bias. That's probability.

bbauska

You are saying what then? It shouldn't be a crime because you say so

?
NO. Not just because I say so...
I offered you reasons....
If you didn't notice ...here.

I've said that in jurisdictions where drug use is legal and regulated there are fewer ill effects than in societies that attempt to stop drug use with criminalization and strong enforcement.
I point to: Switzerland. Portugal. Colorado. for evidence.
In the US the criminalization of drugs has lead to enormous societal costs: Organized crime that markets drug use. Violent crime by the organized criminals. Property crime by addicts requiring money. Enormous enforcement costs. Enormous legal costs. Enormous prison costs. Continuing use at high rates of the illegal drugs. The prison socialization of young men who pay the price for being caught with drugs. The tearing at the fabric of families through high incarceration rates

.

Then I asked you this question:
What benefits do you see from the current stance on criminalizing drug use?
Try and answer this please?
Or if you can't then try and address the reasons I gave you point by point.

Fate

Right then, let's hear from another socialist

Lennons song may have been latched onto by The Socialist Party of GB and others, but John wasn't really a socialist.
And the song wasn't a socialist manifesto, it was about imagining a world where things that divided people were deconstructed.

And Denmark isn't really socialist either. It is a thoroughly modern market economy, which features high-tech agriculture, up-to-date small-scale and corporate industry, extensive government welfare measures, comfortable living standards, and high dependence on foreign trade. Denmark is a net exporter of food. And it has a higher rate of entrepreneurial capital to GDP than the US.
Its currently ranked as the happiest country right now.

http://www.sciencealert.com/the-world-h ... s-on-earth