|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:46 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:21 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:10 JimmiC wrote:
[quote]
Clearly their are lots of measures. So i just went with the most obvious. Instead of researching a bunch up and you claim its propaganda. How about you prove your claim instead of having others disprove it
Someone help him please? You claim it's clearly obvious there are many measurable improvements, either you can show them or you're just assuming without having previously done the research. As you've demonstrated, you're pulling that assertion out of your arse. The American south has started allowing black people to vote. That’s not nothing. Have they? Last I checked voter rights were going the other direction as well. Yes, they have. Racially designed felon disenfranchisement is still a problem but they've taken steps to codify what actually causes disenfranchisement, rather than leaving it to the good old boys at the local polling station. And that codification has led to white people losing the vote too, which in turn is building support for reform. granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: ![[image loading]](http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2014/12/FT_14.12.11_wealthGap2.png) And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: Show nested quote +New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Show nested quote +Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com
You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true.
He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc.
Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot.
Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton.
|
On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:46 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:21 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Someone help him please?
You claim it's clearly obvious there are many measurable improvements, either you can show them or you're just assuming without having previously done the research. As you've demonstrated, you're pulling that assertion out of your arse. The American south has started allowing black people to vote. That’s not nothing. Have they? Last I checked voter rights were going the other direction as well. Yes, they have. Racially designed felon disenfranchisement is still a problem but they've taken steps to codify what actually causes disenfranchisement, rather than leaving it to the good old boys at the local polling station. And that codification has led to white people losing the vote too, which in turn is building support for reform. granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true.
No, you've demonstrated you didn't follow the discussion.
He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc.
The quote* he pulled from an article about how Black people were left out of progress since the 60's, was only a part of the picture. Which is why I explained how it wasn't a "measurable improvement for Black people relative to white people", which is what I asked for.
Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot.
Racial wealth inequality is not one of my usual talking points, not that it invalidates it if it was.
Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton.
This has nothing to do with the points being made.
|
Just speaking about South Africa, part of that rise in inequality is because a lot of the white middle class has packed up and left the country, leaving proportionally more rich white people. Of course, that's only part of the issue. Mismanagement on quite an epic scale post-Apartheid is also to blame. Mbeki was a bumbling fool and Zuma treated the South African taxes as his own personal trust fund. I'm sure that didn't help instill confidence in the South African economy. There was also a significant infrastructure deficit that needs to be corrected before you can actually expect much change: even if you allow black kids into white schools, there are still not enough white schools to educate all kids well. And moreover, the white kids simply move to private schools where economic barriers do the job of segregation. My niece sends her son to private school because all the public schools are now awful. She also wants to leave SA as soon as she can.
The same problem is obviously repeated in all other forms of public facilities, including healthcare and roads.
So yeah, it's not surprising inequality has gotten worse. The sheer scale of the problem coupled with mismanagement is leading to a hollowing out of the middle class. And because of history, white people in South Africa are mostly not ending up on the dirt poor side of the fence (although they obviously do exist). The neo-liberals "transformation" definitely failed to accomplish desegregation, but I think this is more a testament to the fact that there is no quick fix solution, and it takes generations to affect this kind of change. Getting rid of racist laws is just the first of many difficult steps. And things can definitely get worse on the way, especially if your institutions are as corrupt as they are in SA.
Would the ANC's initially dreamed of social revolution, with privatization of banks and mines have been better? Maybe, but the reason it died before it started is partially because international investors threatened to pull out if nationalization of private companies started happening. And without international investments, the South Africa of 1994 would probably have gone bankrupt in a very short time.
|
On July 23 2018 18:14 Acrofales wrote:
Just speaking about South Africa, part of that rise in inequality is because a lot of the white middle class has packed up and left the country, leaving proportionally more rich white people. Of course, that's only part of the issue. Mismanagement on quite an epic scale post-Apartheid is also to blame. Mbeki was a bumbling fool and Zuma treated the South African taxes as his own personal trust fund. I'm sure that didn't help instill confidence in the South African economy. There was also a significant infrastructure deficit that needs to be corrected before you can actually expect much change: even if you allow black kids into white schools, there are still not enough white schools to educate all kids well. And moreover, the white kids simply move to private schools where economic barriers do the job of segregation. My niece sends her son to private school because all the public schools are now awful. She also wants to leave SA as soon as she can.
The same problem is obviously repeated in all other forms of public facilities, including healthcare and roads.
So yeah, it's not surprising inequality has gotten worse. The sheer scale of the problem coupled with mismanagement is leading to a hollowing out of the middle class. And because of history, white people in South Africa are mostly not ending up on the dirt poor side of the fence (although they obviously do exist). The neo-liberals "transformation" definitely failed to accomplish desegregation, but I think this is more a testament to the fact that there is no quick fix solution, and it takes generations to affect this kind of change. Getting rid of racist laws is just the first of many difficult steps. And things can definitely get worse on the way, especially if your institutions are as corrupt as they are in SA.
Would the ANC's initially dreamed of social revolution, with privatization of banks and mines have been better? Maybe, but the reason it died before it started is partially because international investors threatened to pull out if nationalization of private companies started happening. And without international investments, the South Africa of 1994 would probably have gone bankrupt in a very short time.
I want to thank you for that information, but I think you misunderstood the quote. Prof. Wolff was saying that today in the US racial wealth disparity is worse than it was under Apartheid South Africa, much worse.
I don't know much about the modern inequity there, but I do know that land ownership is still primarily white and that is a core part of wealth inequity.
|
On July 23 2018 18:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:46 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:21 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The American south has started allowing black people to vote. That’s not nothing. Have they? Last I checked voter rights were going the other direction as well. Yes, they have. Racially designed felon disenfranchisement is still a problem but they've taken steps to codify what actually causes disenfranchisement, rather than leaving it to the good old boys at the local polling station. And that codification has led to white people losing the vote too, which in turn is building support for reform. granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true. No, you've demonstrated you didn't follow the discussion. Show nested quote +He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc. The quote* he pulled from an article about how Black people were left out of progress since the 60's, was only a part of the picture. Which is why I explained how it wasn't a "measurable improvement for Black people relative to white people", which is what I asked for. Show nested quote +Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot. Racial wealth inequality is not one of my usual talking points, not that it invalidates it if it was. Show nested quote +Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton. This has nothing to do with the points being made.
Is this a problem unique to black people?
These statistics highlight wealth inequality, and I'm wondering if wealth inequality is the big issue here, rather than race. That is, whether the issue of a failure to improve conditions for black people is just one aspect of a failure to improve conditions for the poor in general.
I know its a sidestep from the conversation, but its still a relevant point.
|
On July 23 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 18:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:46 KwarK wrote:On July 23 2018 09:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Have they? Last I checked voter rights were going the other direction as well.
Yes, they have. Racially designed felon disenfranchisement is still a problem but they've taken steps to codify what actually causes disenfranchisement, rather than leaving it to the good old boys at the local polling station. And that codification has led to white people losing the vote too, which in turn is building support for reform. granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true. No, you've demonstrated you didn't follow the discussion. He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc. The quote* he pulled from an article about how Black people were left out of progress since the 60's, was only a part of the picture. Which is why I explained how it wasn't a "measurable improvement for Black people relative to white people", which is what I asked for. Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot. Racial wealth inequality is not one of my usual talking points, not that it invalidates it if it was. Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton. This has nothing to do with the points being made. Is this a problem unique to black people? These statistics highlight wealth inequality, and I'm wondering if wealth inequality is the big issue here, rather than race. That is, whether the issue of a failure to improve conditions for black people is just one aspect of a failure to improve conditions for the poor in general. I know its a sidestep from the conversation, but its still a relevant point.
It's both.
But it is a distraction from the issue at hand. If that was being conceded I'd be fine moving onto in what ways we can identify that it is both reflective of Black people being oppressed relative to white people, AND a failure (though there's been significant efforts) to adequately address people in poverty in general. We could also explore their relation. But before that we have to be clear we've rid ourselves of what the NYT article described as
“a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
|
On July 23 2018 18:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2018 18:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 09:46 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Yes, they have. Racially designed felon disenfranchisement is still a problem but they've taken steps to codify what actually causes disenfranchisement, rather than leaving it to the good old boys at the local polling station. And that codification has led to white people losing the vote too, which in turn is building support for reform. granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true. No, you've demonstrated you didn't follow the discussion. He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc. The quote* he pulled from an article about how Black people were left out of progress since the 60's, was only a part of the picture. Which is why I explained how it wasn't a "measurable improvement for Black people relative to white people", which is what I asked for. Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot. Racial wealth inequality is not one of my usual talking points, not that it invalidates it if it was. Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton. This has nothing to do with the points being made. Is this a problem unique to black people? These statistics highlight wealth inequality, and I'm wondering if wealth inequality is the big issue here, rather than race. That is, whether the issue of a failure to improve conditions for black people is just one aspect of a failure to improve conditions for the poor in general. I know its a sidestep from the conversation, but its still a relevant point. It's both. But it is a distraction from the issue at hand. If that was being conceded I'd be fine moving onto in what ways we can identify that it is both reflective of Black people being oppressed relative to white people, AND a failure (though there's been significant efforts) to adequately address people in poverty in general. We could also explore their relation. But before that we have to be clear we've rid ourselves of what the NYT article described as Show nested quote +“a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
I'm not really sure to how to fix a misperception regarding racial inequality when most white people have no experience of it. You're basically relying on the media and politicians to relay the message.
Its the difficulty of making invisible things visible. On measures that I can personally see, things seem to be improving. Obviously if I was trying to make it look like racial inequality is improving I would use those measures in particular, but as is often the case with these discussions, the real life experience differs drastically from the appearance to the outside.
I guess this is why greater numbers of black politicians is helpful, because they are in a position to make the invisible visible for the rest of us. Its like a preliminary step on the road to equality.
tl;dr
I will absolutely acknowledge that my perception of racial issues in the US is likely to be completely wrong.
|
On July 23 2018 18:43 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 18:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 18:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 23 2018 18:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:On July 23 2018 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:20 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 10:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 23 2018 10:02 JimmiC wrote:On July 23 2018 09:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
granting for the moment this narrative is true. How do we measure that? Ok here are some, feel free to all them Fake news but please for once also back up your own claim. Today, far more African-Americans graduate from college – 38 percent – than they did 50 years ago. Legally, African-Americans may live in any community they want – and from Beverly Hills to the Upper East Side, they can and do. Black adults experienced a more significant income increase from 1980 to 2016 – from $28,667 to $39,490 – than any other U.S. demographic group. This, in part, is why there’s now a significant black middle class. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. By 2015, there was greater representation in some areas (44 House members were black) but little change in others (there were two black senators and one black governor). The share of blacks who have served in a presidential Cabinet, however, has been generally high – even above parity with the population – under administrations in the past two decades. Not to mention the whole lynching not being "that bad" in the 60's the Klan losing much of its power (others have risen of course but not to the overt power that the Klan once had) I mean it was a pretty low bar from the 60's to now. I bet many older black people would be super offended that you think it as bad now. surely you pulled those numbers from somewhere so a link would be appreciated and I'll take a look. I think you may want to take a closer look at some of those segregation numbers as well. Also remember, the request was for "measurable ways has the gap between white and Black people closed since the 60's". EDIT: In a bit of a rush and I didn't get to the rest. You may not be aware but representation =/= improvement by nature of shared assigned categories. There were Jewish Nazi's for example. That's not to equate Black representation to Nazi's or anything, but to say that being something doesn't mean you can't perpetuate the most horrific crimes against that group. + Show Spoiler +I'll show you mine, when you show me yours. Otherwise we just go through the same old song and dance. Show me how it has not changed. Prove your assertion.
Otherwise its:
GH 'This is how it is"
Other "No it isn't"
GH "Prove it"
Other "Ok here...."
GH " That all right wing propaganda"
OR
Other "This is how it is"
GH "Sure, Prove it"
Other " OK here....."
GH " That is all right wing propaganda"
So basically anything say everyone needs to simply trust as fact, even though you won't say where you get your news or ever back it up. But any little or big thing another says you need a multi sourced essay of doctoral level to even consider it (this is a joke, you just never consider others points at all).
I wanted to address this part too by pointing to a more traditional measure of success in a capitalistic society, wealth: And for some more historical context, In South Africa, during the atrocities of apartheid, the median black family held about 7 percent of typical white South African family net worth. Today, using Wolff’s analysis, the median African American family holds a mere 1.5 percent of median white American family wealth.Brief explanation of the difference between the two different measures of wealth inequality: New York University Professor Edward Wolff, one of the foremost economists studying wealth inequality, looks at the same Federal Reserve dataset that the Pew researchers used in a recent report he published in the National Bureau of Economic Research (paywall). Wolff points out that the Fed includes consumer durables in its net-worth estimates.
Wolff excludes these consumer durables from his net-worth figures because these assets — everything from automobiles and televisions to furniture and household appliances — cannot be readily converted to cash and their resale value typically far understates their consumption value.
According to Wolff’s calculations, the median black family is actually only worth $1,700 when you deduct these durables. In contrast, the median white family holds $116,800 of wealth using the same accounting methods. Black household wealth, Wolff adds, actually fell during the Great Recession from $6,700 to $1,700. EDIT: May seem like I'm picking on Jimmi so to be fair, this is kinda a thing. Americans, and higher-income whites in particular, vastly overestimate progress toward economic equality between blacks and whites, the psychologists reported Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Americans believe that blacks and whites are more equal today than they truly are on measures of income, wealth, wages and health benefits. And they believe more historical progress has occurred than is the case, suggesting “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality.
“It seems that we’ve convinced ourselves – and by ‘we’ I mean Americans writ large – that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” said Jennifer Richeson, who was another of the study’s authors, along with Julian Rucker, a doctoral student. “We’ve literally overcome it, so to speak, despite blatant evidence to the contrary.” www.nytimes.com You've shifted the goal posts rather than concede a point your own graphs have demonstrated to be true. No, you've demonstrated you didn't follow the discussion. He wasn't talking about wealth inequality. He said black households make more money. In other words, a measurable improvement from the 60s. The rise of a black middle class, etc. The quote* he pulled from an article about how Black people were left out of progress since the 60's, was only a part of the picture. Which is why I explained how it wasn't a "measurable improvement for Black people relative to white people", which is what I asked for. Pivoting onto your usual talking points doesn't distract from the fact you did the pivot. Racial wealth inequality is not one of my usual talking points, not that it invalidates it if it was. Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton. This has nothing to do with the points being made. Is this a problem unique to black people? These statistics highlight wealth inequality, and I'm wondering if wealth inequality is the big issue here, rather than race. That is, whether the issue of a failure to improve conditions for black people is just one aspect of a failure to improve conditions for the poor in general. I know its a sidestep from the conversation, but its still a relevant point. It's both. But it is a distraction from the issue at hand. If that was being conceded I'd be fine moving onto in what ways we can identify that it is both reflective of Black people being oppressed relative to white people, AND a failure (though there's been significant efforts) to adequately address people in poverty in general. We could also explore their relation. But before that we have to be clear we've rid ourselves of what the NYT article described as “a profound misperception of and unfounded optimism” regarding racial equality. I'm not really sure to how to fix a misperception regarding racial inequality when most white people have no experience of it. You're basically relying on the media and politicians to relay the message. Its the difficulty of making invisible things visible. On measures that I can personally see, things seem to be improving. Obviously if I was trying to make it look like racial inequality is improving I would use those measures in particular, but as is often the case with these discussions, the real life experience differs drastically from the appearance to the outside. I guess this is why greater numbers of black politicians is helpful, because they are in a position to make the invisible visible for the rest of us. Its like a preliminary step on the road to equality. tl;dr I will absolutely acknowledge that my perception of racial issues in the US is likely to be completely wrong.
Admittedly it's a bit frustrating to have foreign white(ish) people tell me what it's like, as a Black man, to be Black in the US, but I appreciate the caveat about potentially being completely wrong as a result of being relatively uninformed. Unfortunately, and with all due respect, it appears I have to be the one to tell you that you are.
The easiest way to say it would be: In what ways do you find Ben Carson's management of HUD expository or helpful for Black housing issues?
EDIT: As to fixing the misperception, there's not much we can do for the proudly and stubbornly ignorant, but for the rest, informing themselves and getting educated about how they are wrong and why they have believed the superficial bullshit for so long is a start.
|
On July 23 2018 18:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 17:57 iamthedave wrote:
Also, I'm relatively confident that African Americans benefit from access to abortion the same as anyone else, and the potential loss of it under Trump is likely to hit African Americans harder than it will whites. So there's a measurable way things would be better under Clinton. This has nothing to do with the points being made.
In a sense it has more to do with the points than you think, because that's how it works. There's a list of things that the liberals agree with you on and a list of things they disagree on. On the first list you have stuff that aligns with liberal principles, like:
- Black people can live anywhere now - if they can afford it.
- Black women can have abortions now.
- Black people can exert all professions within the system (ignoring how much it reminds us of the meme of "more women prison guards").
On the second list you have stuff like:
- Measures to redistribute wealth
- Improvement of public schools
- Free stuff! (healthcare, college, and so on...)
And those measures are illiberal in nature, so you're not getting those. They are "impractical", let's say.
So when the liberals already agree with you that something should happen, it gets to happen, and that's an improvement, so you should be grateful that the improvement happened. You should be grateful that liberals agree with liberalism. Rest of the stuff... Well.
|
On July 23 2018 11:45 funnybananaman wrote:
You know the one thing that i unfavorably compare trump to obama to in approval rating (my own personal) is trumps hyperfocus on every small event that makes the headlines of yahoo news or cnn, whether consequential or not. good to tamp down on shootings/ disputes or trader joes (?) robbery / barricade things but the president need not speak over every isolated thing involving 3-4 guys/buisnesses anywhere in the country? Obama did a better job being an eagly eye, over things, if you will, where as trumps telescope/ microscope way is a little unsettling. as americans we want some sense of standardizatron/security across the entire country so if theres a problem, trump doesnt have to handle it, local PD can handle it/talk about it. Trump should be talking about bigger picture things and amreicas future. trump compares favorably to obama on other metrics though.
which other metrics are you using to favorably compare trump to obama?
|
On July 23 2018 20:52 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 11:45 funnybananaman wrote:
You know the one thing that i unfavorably compare trump to obama to in approval rating (my own personal) is trumps hyperfocus on every small event that makes the headlines of yahoo news or cnn, whether consequential or not. good to tamp down on shootings/ disputes or trader joes (?) robbery / barricade things but the president need not speak over every isolated thing involving 3-4 guys/buisnesses anywhere in the country? Obama did a better job being an eagly eye, over things, if you will, where as trumps telescope/ microscope way is a little unsettling. as americans we want some sense of standardizatron/security across the entire country so if theres a problem, trump doesnt have to handle it, local PD can handle it/talk about it. Trump should be talking about bigger picture things and amreicas future. trump compares favorably to obama on other metrics though. which other metrics are you using to favorably compare trump to obama?
He's better at starting trade wars.
He's better at giving tax cuts to millionaires.
He's better at imprisoning children.
|
|
|
should blacks / trans / bi people be happy that they are less unequal than 60 years ago?
Is that the condensed message you're trying to send?
e: it's totally possible that I'm misreading some posts. The above is not meant to sound rude.
|
On July 23 2018 21:54 Artisreal wrote:
should blacks / trans / bi people be happy that they are less unequal than 60 years ago?
Is that the condensed message you're trying to send?
e: it's totally possible that I'm misreading some posts. The above is not meant to sound rude.
it's about some earlier posts by GH claiming that the amount of inequality had not decreased in the past ~60 years.
so it's about countering a claim.
|
On July 23 2018 21:54 Artisreal wrote:
should blacks / trans / bi people be happy that they are less unequal than 60 years ago?
Is that the condensed message you're trying to send?
e: it's totally possible that I'm misreading some posts. The above is not meant to sound rude. There is a lot of room for more improvement and we should not stop trying to improve their situation.
The point is that blowing everything up for the (very) slim chance that what comes after will be better is not productive.
|
|
|
On July 23 2018 22:02 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 21:54 Artisreal wrote:
should blacks / trans / bi people be happy that they are less unequal than 60 years ago?
Is that the condensed message you're trying to send?
e: it's totally possible that I'm misreading some posts. The above is not meant to sound rude. There is a lot of room for more improvement and we should not stop trying to improve their situation. The point is that blowing everything up for the (very) slim chance that what comes after will be better is not productive.
There is not a lot more room for improvement under liberalism. There are a few more things that we can do, like say, anonymous CVs and things like that, but other than that most of the stuff we can improve while following liberal principles has already been done.
|
On July 23 2018 22:14 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2018 22:02 Gorsameth wrote:On July 23 2018 21:54 Artisreal wrote:
should blacks / trans / bi people be happy that they are less unequal than 60 years ago?
Is that the condensed message you're trying to send?
e: it's totally possible that I'm misreading some posts. The above is not meant to sound rude. There is a lot of room for more improvement and we should not stop trying to improve their situation. The point is that blowing everything up for the (very) slim chance that what comes after will be better is not productive. There is not a lot more room for improvement under liberalism. There are a few more things that we can do, like say, anonymous CVs and things like that, but other than that most of the stuff we can improve while following liberal principles has already been done.
This seems like an odd claim to make, what's your definition of liberal?
I'd say that extremely high estate taxes, progressive income tax, financial industry regulations, single-payer healthcare, and carbon taxes (to name a few) are all liberal policies which would cause significant improvements over the status quo.
|
Well if you redefine liberalism as another type of right wing politics, then it all makes sense.
|
I've heard people define Liberal policy as socially progressive and economically conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
