-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Actually, your assumption is dead wrong with respect to the Federal government. The Gov't is not a business. It's wrong-headed rhetoric that the Gov't should run like a business; and this hyperventilation and wrong thinking about federal deficits, I argue, is slowing our recovery. The Fed is a currency creator. It's impossible for the US to be unable to pay dollar denominated debt. There is zero risk that we will not be able to pay our Social Security obligations, for instance. States, Municipalities, Businesses and individuals can't print money and do need to be budget conscious. The Fed is not constrained this way. Thus, we shouldn't hyperventilate about deficits and balanced budget. We should worry about priorities. In this case, at this time, the priority should be jobs. Politically both parties are failing us, but I'll blame the right for hyperventilating.
Slate article puts it well: Out of money? No way
"this assertion that America is "out of money" has become an all-purpose crutch through which Reason can push an ideological agenda of skepticism about programs without actually making the case in its particulars. But it's simply not true that we're out of money. Many states and municipalities are up against hard budget constraints, but the US government has the ability to create US currency in unlimited quantities. It hasn't run out of money and won't ever run out of money. It would be nice for people to understand this point separately from controversies over whether public sector programs are wise or just. In principle, the US government could print up or borrow a ton of money, hand it to state governments, and then have all the money used to cut taxes rather than to finance programs. This would not be possible in a world where the US government faced a hard budget constraint but, fortunately, we don't face any such constraint. The possible downside to a policy of greater reliance on money-finance or debt-finance is that it might make holding dollar-denominated financial assets less attractive to foreigners. That, in turn, would make imported goods more expensive domestically and American-made goods cheaper on foreign markets. If the United States were already at full employment that would be a very bad tradeoff, amount to a decline in average American living standards. But at a time of mass unemployment, it looks like a pretty good tradeoff that should raise per capita output and average incomes."
For reasons stated above, the real 'smoke and mirrors' are the erroneous beliefs that the US has a deficit problem that supersedes the jobs problem. Printing money to solve economic problems is entirely valid and is precisely what we intentionally enabled by leaving the gold standard. I'm not saying we should print money and hand it to people to spend on TVs. We should print, or borrow at low interest (which amounts to printing money over time, cause the Gov't can't pay back dollar denominated interest without making more dollars), money and use it to buy stuff we need like infrastructure, fire and police protection, teachers, healthcare… that amount to a sound investment in the future that will ultimately promote healthy private sector growth, and in the short term save jobs.
Can you really argue that funding jobs doesn't improve the job creation figures? Jobs are jobs. When unemployment is high, it's idiotic to rabidly enact spending cuts that result in job loss and loss of infrastructure for our future. What's so hard to grasp about that?
+1 x 10,000. No wait, x 40,000.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Good Lord, you need to prove your inference, or it is nothing more than something you crapped out of your bum, and on to this page. Make a one on one comparison that each black person who voted for Obama did so because of the color of his skin. Discount that Obama team voter registration efforts did not reflect minority voter participation as opposed to his race.
Here is the reality my friend. Obama's team was just better at voter registration at all levels, and that was the major reason for a high minority voter turn out. Nobody in history has courted minorities or the young like Obama's team has. That is a fact. Ignore that reality in favor of race, then you have to provide proof that race played a major role in minority voter turn out. Otherwise, you think the black vote is monolithic, narrow minded, and ignorant.
Sure makes you wonder exactly why the 08 Obama campaign focused so heavily on reaching out to the minority populous. Though I don't see the basis of being "better at voter registration" as ANY more substantial than the manner in which you regard mine. It's not your concern though, as a 1%-er, as you have reminded us numerous times. Must be good for your ego, which seems to be the only truth you've presented thus far.
-
"In the long run we are all dead" ~ John Maynard Keynes
Before we worry too much about the debt we're leaving to our children, we & the kids need to survive 'till tomorrow. Austerity, such as we see in Greece, Spain, and the UK, is slowing those economies to a crawl. For one thing, slowing economies generate less government revenue, making it even harder to service debt. The Republican concept of deep spending cuts and no tax increases is austerity and will have the same effect in the USA.
Despite high debt, Britain, Japan, and the USA continued to enjoy low interest rates because their debts are denominated in their own currencies -- and creditors know they need never default. The Greek and Spanish situation is different and default is quite possible because their debt is in Euros, not their own sovereign currencies.
But also note that in the USA there is a statutory debt ceiling so that conceivably the USA might have to refuse to honor obligations even though it could. This law is completely ludicrous and there is practically no other country in the world that has such a law.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by texlle
Sure makes you wonder exactly why the 08 Obama campaign focused so heavily on reaching out to the minority populous. Though I don't see the basis of being "better at voter registration" as ANY more substantial than the manner in which you regard mine. It's not your concern though, as a 1%-er, as you have reminded us numerous times. Must be good for your ego, which seems to be the only truth you've presented thus far.
You are not very bright if you cannot figure this out. He focused on reaching out to minorities because he understood from his days in Chicago that most politicians dismiss this voting block as insignificant. If you didn't see the basis for Obama better at voter registration, then you are as blind as a bat. Let's look at some facts here. In 2004, there were 55 million unregistered voters - mostly minorities based on the research of the National Research Committee. 55 million that have not committed to either party. It is easy to see why Obama wanted to tap into a group that did not participate in the process.
Now let's address your claims. In a October 2008 NBC/Wallstreet poll of registered voters, 2% said race made them more likely to vote for Obama. 4% said were less likely, and 2% were not sure. Race was not a major factor for the remaining 92%
20% of AA voters and 8% of white voters considered race the single most important factor. That means 80% of AA, and 92% of whites did not think race was all that important.
17% where enthusiastic about Obama being the first AA(or mixed President, 70% did not care, and 13% had reservations about his race.
Based on this example, you race argument falls flat on its face. So your claims are as I have said, basically between your own ears. There is nothing truly factual about them.
Lastly, if you read my comments regarding the 1%, you would have kept your silly ignorant clap trap to yourself. You are a prime example of jealously of the 1%, which is pretty damn counterproductive. I paid my own way through college in cash by getting a damn job(no loans whatsoever), got my degree in a field I was passionate about, succeeded in it, spent and invested my money wisely, inherited a few dilapidated properties I fixed up(not to mention the ones I have purchased myself), open my own post production studio(which is doing VERY well), and set my kids up so they could benefit from what I built. I pay ALL of my taxes, do not seek any kind of shelter or hidden deductions, and I firmly believe(as I have stated numerous times) that I should pay more taxes to help benefit the country that has been so very good to me. So don't cowardly like throw my success in my face, I earned mine by hard work. Maybe going in the future, you should sit down(like I did) and figure out your passion, and turn it into success like I did. This would be far more beneficial to you than to try to paint me with a negative brush. I have nothing to be ashamed of, but you sure in the hell do. Not one damn thing was given to me that I did not in some way earn. Your comments wreak of being a sore loser, and a immature jealous fool.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingus
you should have quit when you weren't so far behind...
Well,when it comes to behinds I guess you're the expert. You've shown me that your ignorance knows no bounds.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Actually, your assumption is dead wrong with respect to the Federal government. The Gov't is not a business. It's wrong-headed rhetoric that the Gov't should run like a business; and this hyperventilation and wrong thinking about federal deficits, I argue, is slowing our recovery. The Fed is a currency creator. It's impossible for the US to be unable to pay dollar denominated debt. There is zero risk that we will not be able to pay our Social Security obligations, for instance. States, Municipalities, Businesses and individuals can't print money and do need to be budget conscious. The Fed is not constrained this way. Thus, we shouldn't hyperventilate about deficits and balanced budget. We should worry about priorities. In this case, at this time, the priority should be jobs. Politically both parties are failing us, but I'll blame the right for hyperventilating.
Slate article puts it well: Out of money? No way
"this assertion that America is "out of money" has become an all-purpose crutch through which Reason can push an ideological agenda of skepticism about programs without actually making the case in its particulars. But it's simply not true that we're out of money. Many states and municipalities are up against hard budget constraints, but the US government has the ability to create US currency in unlimited quantities. It hasn't run out of money and won't ever run out of money. It would be nice for people to understand this point separately from controversies over whether public sector programs are wise or just. In principle, the US government could print up or borrow a ton of money, hand it to state governments, and then have all the money used to cut taxes rather than to finance programs. This would not be possible in a world where the US government faced a hard budget constraint but, fortunately, we don't face any such constraint. The possible downside to a policy of greater reliance on money-finance or debt-finance is that it might make holding dollar-denominated financial assets less attractive to foreigners. That, in turn, would make imported goods more expensive domestically and American-made goods cheaper on foreign markets. If the United States were already at full employment that would be a very bad tradeoff, amount to a decline in average American living standards. But at a time of mass unemployment, it looks like a pretty good tradeoff that should raise per capita output and average incomes."
For reasons stated above, the real 'smoke and mirrors' are the erroneous beliefs that the US has a deficit problem that supersedes the jobs problem. Printing money to solve economic problems is entirely valid and is precisely what we intentionally enabled by leaving the gold standard. I'm not saying we should print money and hand it to people to spend on TVs. We should print, or borrow at low interest (which amounts to printing money over time, cause the Gov't can't pay back dollar denominated interest without making more dollars), money and use it to buy stuff we need like infrastructure, fire and police protection, teachers, healthcare… that amount to a sound investment in the future that will ultimately promote healthy private sector growth, and in the short term save jobs.
Can you really argue that funding jobs doesn't improve the job creation figures? Jobs are jobs. When unemployment is high, it's idiotic to rabidly enact spending cuts that result in job loss and loss of infrastructure for our future. What's so hard to grasp about that?
To put this in perspective, public sector mean the workers to be paid by taxpayer money. They are not paid by any profits generated. The more there are, the more tax money is needed.
Where does the government get this money? They don't generate profits, do they?
Unless the job market is self-sustaining, or private sector with workers paid from the profits of business, it's another form of a government subsidy. Where are these private sector jobs? I guess you are all fortunate in that nobody in your circle of friends is ready, willing, and able to find work, or is forced to work at below their potential.
And, as for that stimlus money, many foreign countries did well with it but yet I know many skilled workers who would kill for an opportunity at these jobs.
So,where are these private sector jobs.
As for "shovel ready" jobs, I don't kow about the rest of the vcountry, but here they all went to companies that are unionized and their hiring is closed. So, how is that not a payback for votes?
As for stimilus monies, why is GM, who we,the taxpayers bailed out building a new plant in mexico to employ 1,000 workers when there's many more unemployed American taxpayers that could use those jobs?
Likewise, here' another 570 jobs created in Mexico thanks to Chrysler. That's their 6th plant there.
Gee, that's some thanks for the bailout, guys. Why not take our money AND send our jobs out?
...and they come up here for free medical care!
But, if you say the labor rate is cheaper there, why are we using taxpayer dollars to keep the overpaid union workers in jobs? They had no qualms about forcibly raping the secured bondolders for pennies on the dollar when the takeover went down. Why not the workers as well? Could it be simply another payback for votes and, in effect, they are simply another taxpayer-funded job in disguise while the real profits are made (and kept) out of the country? If it's not profitable, why keep them on life support? That's against the principles of Obamacare' deat panels.
GM is already half moved to Cina and it's only a matter of time before we're inconsequential.
...all this and more by obama's hand.
I could go on but, if you've got any concern for your fellow Ameicans, you can see were this is going. The money that is suppoed to help us is helping everyone BUT us.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
You are not very bright if you cannot figure this out. He focused on reaching out to minorities because he understood from his days in Chicago that most politicians dismiss this voting block as insignificant. If you didn't see the basis for Obama better at voter registration, then you are as blind as a bat. Let's look at some facts here. In 2004, there were 55 million unregistered voters - mostly minorities based on the research of the National Research Committee. 55 million that have not committed to either party. It is easy to see why Obama wanted to tap into a group that did not participate in the process.
Now let's address your claims. In a October 2008 NBC/Wallstreet poll of registered voters, 2% said race made them more likely to vote for Obama. 4% said were less likely, and 2% were not sure. Race was not a major factor for the remaining 92%
20% of AA voters and 8% of white voters considered race the single most important factor. That means 80% of AA, and 92% of whites did not think race was all that important.
17% where enthusiastic about Obama being the first AA(or mixed President, 70% did not care, and 13% had reservations about his race.
Based on this example, you race argument falls flat on its face. So your claims are as I have said, basically between your own ears. There is nothing truly factual about them.
Lastly, if you read my comments regarding the 1%, you would have kept your silly ignorant clap trap to yourself. You are a prime example of jealously of the 1%, which is pretty damn counterproductive. I paid my own way through college in cash by getting a damn job(no loans whatsoever), got my degree in a field I was passionate about, succeeded in it, spent and invested my money wisely, inherited a few dilapidated properties I fixed up(not to mention the ones I have purchased myself), open my own post production studio(which is doing VERY well), and set my kids up so they could benefit from what I built. I pay ALL of my taxes, do not seek any kind of shelter or hidden deductions, and I firmly believe(as I have stated numerous times) that I should pay more taxes to help benefit the country that has been so very good to me. So don't cowardly like throw my success in my face, I earned mine by hard work. Maybe going in the future, you should sit down(like I did) and figure out your passion, and turn it into success like I did. This would be far more beneficial to you than to try to paint me with a negative brush. I have nothing to be ashamed of, but you sure in the hell do. Not one damn thing was given to me that I did not in some way earn. Your comments wreak of being a sore loser, and a immature jealous fool.
Terrence, I don't need to prove my accomplishments to you. I'm glad you feel that your success grants you justification to **** on anyone you don't know. It just makes your argument that you are an honest, civil individual that much more laughable. I just found it funny that you tend to refer to yourself rather than referring to the collective 1% whenever possible. I did not imply a deeper meaning, though that didn't stop you from constructing one and defending your lifelong achievements. Bravo. Markw's method of replacing civil debate with puerile belittling has influenced you well to be able to even associate with lowly morons like the rest of us non-achievers. You look just like old man Lebowski right about now, if you get the reference.
Let's begin with your YOUR source. NBC. Certainly the least biased media outlet from which one can gather data, right? Ha. I'd like to put your mention of voter percentage to use since you failed to do so by following it (though not comparing it) with a completely different ****ing statistic! And you have the nerve to relentlessly insult MY intelligence? Anyway, here are some stats from census.gov.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p20-562.pdf
There was a 5 million registered voter increase between 2004 and 2008. Of those, roughly 2 million were black. This correlates to a 4.7% increase in black votes, as shown in the data. Of blacks who voted, those aged 18-24 saw an increase of 8.3% which was unprecedented for this specific demographic in election history. As far as proving that this increase is directly resultant of this demographic's preference for a candidate's race is murky. Why were registered black voters so heavily courted? Simply because they showed a relatively low rate of involvement?
Here's an interesting study that attempts to correlate the efficacy of campaign mobilization (calls, knocking on doors, public speeches, etc) on increased black voter turnout.
https://webspace.utexas.edu/tsp228/w...%20McGowen.pdf
Though the many, many variables (group identity, interest) and themes compared in this study can be inconclusive in corroborating the scientist's hypothesis of the effect of campaign mobilization on black voter turnout, it can be argued that the presence of a black candidate can lead to an increase in black voter turnout.
Quote:
A related strand of research looks at political participation when a Black
candidate is on the ballot and largely confirms the Black empowerment literature.
For instance, a precinct-level analysis of Cook County, IL elections in
1998 demonstrated that “the African-American residual vote rate in electoral
contests with black candidates is less than half the rate in contests without
black candidates” (Herron and Sekhon 2005, 154). Similarly, Atkins, DeZee,
and Eckert (1985), who also use aggregate data, found that in a low-salience,
nonpartisan election featuring a Black candidate, turnout in Black precincts
was on average higher than it was during a comparable election with twoWhite
candidates.
Notice that these studies posit—more or less explicitly—a model of turnout.
Black candidates increase political interest among Black voters, which increases
a sense of shared racial identity and the desire to support someone from
one’s own group, which increases voting. The presence of a Black candidate
may also increase Blacks’ sense of political efficacy, which has an additional
independent and positive effect on turnout. Given this model, it is not surprising
that other research finds that racial identification and other race-relevant considerations
are significant predictors of self-reported voting (Tate 1993; Chong
and Rogers 2005).
To sum, race-relevant considerations appear to significantly influence Black
voter turnout during elections in which an African American is seeking elected
office. That’s not to say, however, that race-relevant considerations are the
only predictors of voter turnout in these circumstances. For example, membership
to Black civic and religious organizations consistently matter as well
(Gurin, Hatchett, and Jackson 1989; Tate 1993; Dawson 1994). But whether
our hypothesis is correct—that contact by political parties might also be an
important factor in boosting Black voter turnout in elections featuring Black
candidates—has yet to be examined with data from 2008.
It can be proven that ideologies and interests central to the black voting populous give rise to a cohesiveness among black voters. That their achieved greater presence in American politics since the days of civil rights pioneering correlates to a heightened interest in voting among blacks to further common interests.
Regarding your NBC poll, few people truly admit to racial bias. It's a fact. Most surveying agencies don't rely on the credibility of such reported data.
However, I do find it interesting that lately Obama has been personally appearing at Hispanic and female oriented events, but has sent Joe Biden to events largely attended by blacks, in some cases represented by the NAACP. Some might say he thinks he has the black vote in the bag, but I will continue to question the validity of that, while relying on quantifiable evidence that may merely point in that direction.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
...
Now let's address your claims. In a October 2008 NBC/Wallstreet poll of registered voters, 2% said race made them more likely to vote for Obama. 4% said were less likely, and 2% were not sure. Race was not a major factor for the remaining 92%
20% of AA voters and 8% of white voters considered race the single most important factor. That means 80% of AA, and 92% of whites did not think race was all that important.
17% where enthusiastic about Obama being the first AA(or mixed President, 70% did not care, and 13% had reservations about his race.
...
But bear in mind that what people say conditions their vote and what actually conditions their vote are two different things.
People are aware of what is presently politically correct and that is what they tend to say in polls, etc., to avoid public disapprobation. However what they actually feel and how they will act or vote when nobody is looking, is another matter. (BTW, I've been an unusually candid person all my life and it has got me into a lot of trouble.)
-
1 Attachment(s)
Personally I don't think it matters much if a segment of people vote for a politician based on race - for every black person who voted for Obama because he's black there were probably 4 people who would not vote for Obama simply because he's black.
As I said earlier in the post - people of "ultra" religious faith will vote Republican - it does not matter what the facts re or the money or job markets or whatever.
If a right wing Christian voter lost his job under a Romney presidency and Romney LAUGHED at him and TOLD him he was happy about moving the job to China the right wing voter would STILL vote for Romney...
There is no fact or number or argument or logic that will EVER sway a right wing voter to vote democrat - PERIOD.
No one of good morality or social conscience on the left could ever vote for Romney. The right wing is immoral and filled with hate evidence here - and the right wing son of a Veteran will STILL vote Romney.
-
Well Obama would have won the popular vote anyway even if he had the turnout that John Kerry did in 2004. The likelihood of and rationale behind members of an ethnic group who vote for a political candidate of the same ethnic background is a topic that I find particularly interesting. That's all.
Feanor, I was reading another study where a group tried to eliminate the untruthful answering bias in determining how important race was in a voter's decision by state by using commonly searched google keywords per region. The internet is one of the few places where one can express racist sentiments without coming under hostile criticism. The study counted the number of times certain words were searched in google (the n-word was a big one). Apparently, Southern Mississippi and upstate New York were two of the most "racist" states found.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
Where does the government get this money? They don't generate profits, do they?
I admit to struggling with the technical details but here's my take on where money comes from: The dollar stork.
Ok. no. The government gets money by printing it then loaning it out or paying for stuff with it and then collecting it back in taxes. Actually, they don't technically need to collect it back in taxes or even have to go through the effort of printing it. All they do is add a number. To paraphrase from Wiki, if the Fed wants to increase the supply of money it buys stuff (e.g. Treasury Bonds) from banks in exchange for dollars. In making this purchase, the Fed credits the banks 'reserve' account (ie. an account the bank has with the Fed). No money is transferred. It is simply a credit. A number is changed in the banks balance and BAM, PRESTO, SHAZAM money is created de novo. Hard to believe, isn't it.
Summary: Money is made by the Government from thin air to buy stuff the Gov't wants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
To put this in perspective, public sector mean the workers to be paid by taxpayer money. They are not paid by any profits generated. The more there are, the more tax money is needed.
Ok. profit is a ridiculous concept to apply to the Gov't, it's just wrong-headed to think that way for reasons I've put forth already. However, yes, we use tax money to allocate resources for things we want. It is true that if we printed new money for everything that our hearts desire, then money would be worthless. We tax and therefor there is a cost associated with our allocation decisions. That's why we want to make good ones. However, if we need it, we can buy it with magic money. My opinion is we need to buy jobs.
I value government services. I vote for people who value the services I value. I pay taxes for those services. I don't want services cut for multiple reasons. The big one currently is because cutting government services results in people getting fired and those people happen to be doing things I care about like teaching, putting out fires, building roads, running our courts, maintaining the rule of law, preserving our natural resources, etc. etc. and other Gov't stuff.
I agree more tax money is needed. I think we have had irresponsible tax breaks, primarily favoring the very well off, that should be reversed and I think trickle-down economics is a crock of sh*t. But the problem right now is jobs. Not tax revenue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
Unless the job market is self-sustaining, or private sector with workers paid from the profits of business, it's another form of a government subsidy. Where are these private sector jobs? I guess you are all fortunate in that nobody in your circle of friends is ready, willing, and able to find work, or is forced to work at below their potential.
We let go at least 10% of our group this year due to lack of funds. I count myself fortunate to still have a job. I would work below my potential, absolutely. However, our sector tends to lag a few years behind the trends so I expect that more layoffs are coming and we'll be slower to recover them.
Beyond that I can't figure out what you point is. If the Gov't builds a road, private contractors build it. If Medicare pays doctor bills, private doctors see the patient. If a retiree spends his Social Security check it's likely going to pay private sector people for services. I don't count any of that as a subsidy. I see it as taxes performing public good and providing civil services. People pay people for stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
And, as for that stimlus money, many foreign countries did well with it but yet I know many skilled workers who would kill for an opportunity at these jobs.
So,where are these private sector jobs.
As for "shovel ready" jobs, I don't kow about the rest of the vcountry, but here they all went to companies that are unionized and their hiring is closed. So, how is that not a payback for votes?
As for stimilus monies, why is GM, who we,the taxpayers bailed out building a new plant in mexico to employ 1,000 workers when there's many more unemployed American taxpayers that could use those jobs?
Likewise, here' another 570 jobs created in Mexico thanks to Chrysler. That's their 6th plant there.
Gee, that's some thanks for the bailout, guys. Why not take our money AND send our jobs out?
...and they come up here for free medical care!
But, if you say the labor rate is cheaper there, why are we using taxpayer dollars to keep the overpaid union workers in jobs? They had no qualms about forcibly raping the secured bondolders for pennies on the dollar when the takeover went down. Why not the workers as well? Could it be simply another payback for votes and, in effect, they are simply another taxpayer-funded job in disguise while the real profits are made (and kept) out of the country? If it's not profitable, why keep them on life support? That's against the principles of Obamacare' deat panels.
GM is already half moved to Cina and it's only a matter of time before we're inconsequential.
...all this and more by obama's hand.
I could go on but, if you've got any concern for your fellow Ameicans, you can see were this is going. The money that is suppoed to help us is helping everyone BUT us.
I am concerned about my fellow Americans. That's why I believe we should be spending to keep them working, educated, healthy and safe. That's why I believe in social safety nets and universal health care.
Certainly I can see why you are angry here. You seem to be both anti union and anti business. And, I don't see how Obama is responsible for GM's corporate decisions. Or how Obama is responsible for workers exercising their right to unionize. Or how Obama is responsible for people wanting to come to the US for a better life. I wasn't a fan of either the auto or the financial bailout on principle, but when compared to the collapse of a large portion of the US auto industry or the world banking system it was the right choice. With perfect hindsight it could've been done better, but that's hindsight for you.
-
LOL! Tell me something I DON'T know...
Quote:
Originally Posted by texlle
Well Obama would have won the popular vote anyway even if he had the turnout that John Kerry did in 2004. The likelihood of and rationale behind members of an ethnic group who vote for a political candidate of the same ethnic background is a topic that I find particularly interesting. That's all.
Feanor, I was reading another study where a group tried to eliminate the untruthful answering bias in determining how important race was in a voter's decision by state by using commonly searched google keywords per region. The internet is one of the few places where one can express racist sentiments without coming under hostile criticism. The study counted the number of times certain words were searched in google (the n-word was a big one). Apparently, Southern Mississippi and upstate New York were two of the most "racist" states found.
I've lived and worked in "upstate New York" most of my adult life. When I wasn't here I was in the service or working briefly in North Carolina.... I've told people for years that there are "more Confederate flags in upstate New York than most Southern States". I've worked in the north and the south, only in the Adirondack Region of NY was I openly called "ni**er", "sambo", everything but a child of god by people in passing cars. They have a deep felt and genuine hate for black people "up there" which I find all the more hilarious because there are few minorities up there! It's not like Blacks were leaving the citites in droves to come to Glens Falls, Chili or Harrisville NY and pissing people off up there. We're not particularly big fans of snow and cold.
My experiences were primarily during the 70's and early 80's when upstate NY'ers still believed that fiction that their hard earned tax dollars were supporting "welfare queens in NY City". Annually they called for NY to become its own state. It wasn't until manufacturing and agriculture left and facts began to emerge that in actuality, NY City's been supporting the impoverished rural counties of upstate forever. You don't hear this "cut em loose" rhetoric much anymore. In actuality, NY City should cut upstate off if just to teach a lesson in humility. But make no mistake about it, I could've told you about upstate without doing any exhaustive internet search. All those cold winters spent indoors, with nothing to do but watch bad T.V. (when the power wasn't out) and hate on people you never come in contact with have produced some truly twisted people up there. .
Recently there've been an influx of "survivalists" who are up there sharpening their knives and reloading their amma in anticipation of the "race war" or the "zombiepocalypse".....
Sing it everybody....
"I love New York...."
Worf
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
But bear in mind that what people say conditions their vote and what actually conditions their vote are two different things.
People are aware of what is presently politically correct and that is what they tend to say in polls, etc., to avoid public disapprobation. However what they actually feel and how they will act or vote when nobody is looking, is another matter. (BTW, I've been an unusually candid person all my life and it has got me into a lot of trouble.)
That reminds me of when Clinton got elected the first time around. Everyone looked at each other said I didn't vote for him did you? And then the second time around he got re-elected, and everyone looked at each other and said I didn't vote for him, did you?
But someone voted for him both times and I guess they then lied about actually voting for him because he was elected twice.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by texlle
Terrence, I don't need to prove my accomplishments to you. I'm glad you feel that your success grants you justification to **** on anyone you don't know. It just makes your argument that you are an honest, civil individual that much more laughable. I just found it funny that you tend to refer to yourself rather than referring to the collective 1% whenever possible. I did not imply a deeper meaning, though that didn't stop you from constructing one and defending your lifelong achievements. Bravo. Markw's method of replacing civil debate with puerile belittling has influenced you well to be able to even associate with lowly morons like the rest of us non-achievers. You look just like old man Lebowski right about now, if you get the reference.
You really needs some help, you have some real issues. No, you don't need to prove your accomplishments to me, and you don't have any damn right to negatively knock mine. What you said was stupid as hell, out of context, and nothing more than an opportunity(far outside of the discussion) to take what personal issues you have with me out into the open. Get a life bruh....you have passive/aggressive on steroids going here. This discussion had turned to voting patterns, and you twisted it into a personal attack, and some jealous tirade about my success. How pitiful is that? You sound jealous, and that is pretty sad. I cannot speak for the collective 1%, because we don't all live the same lifestyle. I can only speak for me and how I live. I started off dirt poor in college, as my parents refused to invest in an education that included a degree in Film. When I came to Los Angeles, I had enough money for one year at USC via a scholarship, and $100 dollars in cash in my pocket. I worked my freakin a$$ off, so I am not going to let some online MF criticize or pass judgement on my success.
You really need to stand back and be less personal, and stay on topic if that is not too difficult for you.
I have never used my success to do anything on this forum or any other. Nobody knows my success, I have never discussed it on this forum, or any other. My experience is far more important, and that is what I emphasize when participating here. Maybe you should do the same if you really have something to offer.
Quote:
Let's begin with your YOUR source. NBC. Certainly the least biased media outlet from which one can gather data, right? Ha. I'd like to put your mention of voter percentage to use since you failed to do so by following it (though not comparing it) with a completely different ****ing statistic! And you have the nerve to relentlessly insult MY intelligence? Anyway, here are some stats from census.gov.
Not really interested in your opinion of a network. NBC did not do the poll, they just reported what the survey revealed.
Quote:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p20-562.pdf
There was a 5 million registered voter increase between 2004 and 2008. Of those, roughly 2 million were black. This correlates to a 4.7% increase in black votes, as shown in the data. Of blacks who voted, those aged 18-24 saw an increase of 8.3% which was unprecedented for this specific demographic in election history. As far as proving that this increase is directly resultant of this demographic's preference for a candidate's race is murky. Why were registered black voters so heavily courted? Simply because they showed a relatively low rate of involvement?
Here's an interesting study that attempts to correlate the efficacy of campaign mobilization (calls, knocking on doors, public speeches, etc) on increased black voter turnout.
https://webspace.utexas.edu/tsp228/w...%20McGowen.pdf
Though the many, many variables (group identity, interest) and themes compared in this study can be inconclusive in corroborating the scientist's hypothesis of the effect of campaign mobilization on black voter turnout, it can be argued that the presence of a black candidate can lead to an increase in black voter turnout.
It can be proven that ideologies and interests central to the black voting populous give rise to a cohesiveness among black voters. That their achieved greater presence in American politics since the days of civil rights pioneering correlates to a heightened interest in voting among blacks to further common interests.
Regarding your NBC poll, few people truly admit to racial bias. It's a fact. Most surveying agencies don't rely on the credibility of such reported data.
However, I do find it interesting that lately Obama has been personally appearing at Hispanic and female oriented events, but has sent Joe Biden to events largely attended by blacks, in some cases represented by the NAACP. Some might say he thinks he has the black vote in the bag, but I will continue to question the validity of that, while relying on quantifiable evidence that may merely point in that direction.
So this is what you present to me as evidence that race ONLY drives a person to vote. This is somebody's analysis, not evidence of anything. This can be folded backwards as well. If this is what you use, then logic dictates that whites since this country started where doing exactly the same thing. For 233 years, whites have voted for white males as President, and since they are the majority, we have had white male Presidents. It wasn't the message that drove that vote, it was who was the most eloquent, good looking and most Presidential, which excluded all non whites from admission to the game. . It wasn't that some Black, Asian, or Latino male or female out there was not good looking or eloquent, it's just they weren't.....well white.
Do you think that is a fair assessment? I would say so which makes you a hypocrite for dogging blacks for something whites have been doing for two centuries plus. Upon first blush this would make your comments racist, but I am not going to put that on you. I think your comments are stupid and ignorant, not to mention short sighted and narrow minded.
Lastly, if race is the driving force behind voting patterns, why didn't Jessie Jackson(twice no less) get a huge amount of support from blacks when he ran for President? Well, I'll tell you why since I know you will have trouble figuring it out. He was not ELECTABLE! Why didn't black's galvanize behind Sharpton in 2004? NOT ELECTABLE and partially because he was not trusted as well. They did get behind Shirley Chisholm in 72, and they(and we know who I mean) tried to kill her three times. They didn't support Lenora Fulani as an independent candidate in 92. So this kind of blows a gigantic hole in your stupid comment. History shows that if a Black candidate does not have a message(or a plan) that appeals to the Blacks, they will not support them. Black folks are not sheeple, and not monolithic in thought or opinions. That is a indisputable fact. To add, that goes for Hispanics as well.
By the way hypocrite, Romney has been courting both females and Hispanics as well. If you have anymore stupid points to make, please keep them to yourself - I am bored.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
But bear in mind that what people say conditions their vote and what actually conditions their vote are two different things.
I agree. this however applies to all races that participate in the voting process.
Quote:
People are aware of what is presently politically correct and that is what they tend to say in polls, etc., to avoid public disapprobation. However what they actually feel and how they will act or vote when nobody is looking, is another matter. (BTW, I've been an unusually candid person all my life and it has got me into a lot of trouble.)
Once again I agree with you if we are talking about person Identified polls and opinions. Polls like these are conducted anonymously which is why 6% of people surveyed would have a racial preference both ways. This is why the over whelming amount of folks who did not care about race is so important.
-
Terrence, you are the epitome of a flailing idiot. Though that may be a discredit to idiots since many of them know how to read. Some can even think critically before they act. I suppose using proper grammar and spelling would be a bit much to ask of you. This has regressed exactly as I expected.
-
The poor and middle class should vote democrat if they have any sense - that is also true in Canada. Trickle down turned out to be a lie and didn't work. And basically that is the only right wing plan with different names - similar to intelligent design which is the same wrong belief with a different name.
Looking at the African American voter - most likely would lean left because most are in the poor and middle class. Let's face it this is a part of the population that was and is and will continue to be treated poorly by white America (and Canada). Barack Obama is running for president so given the history of the U.S. I would bet my bottom dollar that many African American voters who don't bother to turn out to the voting booths - decided that time to turn out and vote.
I don't think however that Obama would convert ultra religious right wing African Americans to vote for him simply because of race.
Remember all of the people who voted George W liked him because they felt they could have a beer with the guy. He's just as dumb as the average drunken hick with an IQ of 95 (maybe). While Al Gore came off as a robot.
I watched the early debates back then and I said George was going to win. (Granted Jeb arguably help fix it).
Still Gore looked like a used car dealer in the suit and used university and high school words correctly. We couldn't have that. We need a gun happy shoot first, hang em first type in charge. The state of Texas after all has a lovely track record of killing prisoners who were found guilty by dubious methods and killing prisoners that have been proven through DNA to be innocent. But that's science and science is of the devil to trick good Christians from killing as many African American prisoners as they can - there's probably a bible verse that Falwell told them is ok.
Bill Maher on The Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear - YouTube
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
We have billboards here all over the place that say "Obama supports Gay Marriage and Abortion. Do you?"
So I guess the Romney billboard would say "Romney is prejudiced, anti-Gay, and against women's rights. Are you?"
If people actually vote for a President with Gay Marriage and Abortion as the deciding factor, the country is in bigger trouble than you think.
As far as "Am I better off now than 4 years ago?"
Yes I am. The market has stabilized and come back and I am now making back my losses and also gains in my investments. My job is pretty secure. I am not sure what the Romney camp is talking about when they say all Americans are worse off then 4 years ago.
Good points!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Mark, I would like to remind you of something. When Obama took office we were losing 800,000 jobs per month, and the economy was in free fall. Obama did not make things much worse, he stemmed losses, and actually added more jobs than all of the Republican President's in the last 4 decades. The problem here is we have added jobs, but not enough to bring us back to where we were before he took office. That is not the President's fault, that is the fault of a do more with less corporate mentality. Look at the stock market, and corporate profits. If we are going to turn this around, then there needs to be a system wide restructuring of how we do business. Currently you have corporations sitting on huge piles of cash, and you have the wealth gap still widening. This is a result of policy decisions mad over a long period of time. Anyone who tells you they can fix long term structural problems in four years, they are lying through their teeth. Romney's plans(what little that has been revealed) will add to the budget deficit, and will do nothing to create jobs for middle class Americans. As long as the middle class stay weak and shrinking, the longer this country will be in financial doldrums. You cannot keep giving tax cuts to people like me, I DON'T NEED IT!!
Look at this graph on job creation since Obama has been in office.
U.S. Job Creation Nears Four-Year High
That line is going up, not down. It is just not going up fast enough for most, especially for those unemployed.
Don't know why you brought up color, a persons color does not pay bills. It does not create jobs, and I think it is insulting to think ANYONE would vote for somebody based on their color. I voted for Obama because of his policies, proposals and idea's. I still think he is on the right road with his policies, but believe he needs more time to finish what he started. I don't care who is in office right now, they cannot undo the damage that has been done in such a short time. That is not realistic at all.
One major structural issue is this idea that American workers are no longer qualified to do the jobs employers want. That is a bald face lie. The reality is they think we get paid too much, so they look to foreign worker via the H1-B program, and our politicians continue to allow this to happen. We have seen wages job drastically in the last decade, but really rapidly in the last 4 years.
The biggest problem we have is the poor and middle class keep sending rich folks to represent them in Washington DC. When they get there, they vote their own self interest instead of ours. We also have FAR FAR too much money in politics, and that is driving the decision making process. Romney thinks the middle class is those who make $200-250,000 dollars, and that is how skewed his perspective is being rich all of your life. How can he possibly understand what it means to struggle to put food on the table? He refuses to release his tax records IN FULL(what is he hiding), and refuses to provide any detail on how he we get this country back on its feet(they won't elect me he says). How can I trust him? He didn't exactly set Massachusetts on fire in the job creation category, so how do you know his plans will actually work..
You cannot just blame Obama for every bad thing happening in this country. The problem is FAR bigger than Obama, and far more complex as well. But one thing you are right about, our choices are the lesser of two evils.
Dang man...I started to post similar thoughts but I've been down these roads before with guys like him.....It seems like he is one of those angry guys who spout off about "taking our country back" and talk about "taking our freedoms back", but when you ask them back from what or whom, they don't have an answer..... Good post man!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
And, from the performance over the last four years, I'm ready to give the new guy a chance.
Unemployment is up, The Auto manufacturers were given to the unions while the secured bondholders that kept them alive for the previous years were laid down on the floor anon their stomachs and brutally taken, the big bankers got their bonus', Various (not just Solyndra) green companies (who, coincidentally, were also Obama's bundlers) were given billions of dollars between them and then went bankrupt, Holder and Napolitano have opened the floodgates to illegals and Holder want to prosecute the states who want to do for themselves for doing what the federal government is constitutionally obligated to do but refuses, has put us under martial law, instituted indefinite detention yet complained about Bush's patriot act, and the only jobs being created involve asking "Do you want fries with that", twice as many Americans died in Afghanistan in Obama's 3 1/2 years than under Bush's seven, and, from this last week, we can see how much the "real" theocratic countries countries love us.
Yeah, I think we're due for a change. We had hope but that got us nowhere.
Yeah...just as I thought.....dude, you had better stop listening to FOX news, and stay off of Sean Hannity's blog!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
I'm rational enough to know that if the car is headed for a cliff to turn the wheel, even if I'm not 100% sure where it's gonna go.
Oh yeah, your rational and at the same time having been placed on record in this thread as saying you are willing to give Romney a shot. Yeah you're a smart guy.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
I'm rational enough to know that if the car is headed for a cliff to turn the wheel, even if I'm not 100% sure where it's gonna go.
Shoulda bought a squirrel
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
I know this is going to come off as racist but I'm gonna say it anyway because I think it's true.
If you don't believe that the a large portion of the black population voted for Obama because he was black, you live under a rock.
It is absolutely no different than when they added Sarah Palin to the ticket to draw the female vote. The only problem with that move was she is an idiot and even most of the women in the US could see that.
Hyfi.....I think you know by now I am a black man. I am a middle class black man living in St. Louis, in a $300.000 house. In New Your or LA, my house would cost 1.5 Million im told. I have not always been middle class, I had to work my way up. My parents where on welfare, and got off through a lots of hard work. I was born in a loving home with both parents in the ghetto, in the projects.
And I can tell you from a black perspective, the greater majority of blacks always vote democratic party no matter what color the candidate. You want to know why? Because most black people think the republican party is about helping the rich. I will say some of the younger generation who never voted before did register and vote because Obama seemed to be a cool black man who could relate to them...but if Obama was white and still acted like he does, they still would have voted for him. Most blacks see nothing but broken promises from every President and especially republican presidents.
Its not that a lot of them don't want to work, its that they have been schit on so many times they give up. I can tell you as a black man how hard it is for a black man. Im sure you heard a lot of that stuff that's been said about blacks being lazy, don't want to work, all they want is a government hand outs? As a black man, I can tell you some of that does go on in the black community. You know why? Because after you have been schit on all your life by trying to do right, you get sick and tired. I am not saying one should give up, nor am I making excuses, but one can only take so much. I know a lot of white guys who are very very cool. But most white guys did not know what its like being a black guy in America.....until recently. I say that because a lot of poor white guys are starting to see how blacks are angry...but it has nothing to do with skin tone but the shrinking middle class. There are white guys now taking advantage of the free government benefits as well as blacks now....even more so than blacks...and they are getting tired of getting schit on by the rich as well.
I don't care what any body says, most blacks born into poverty don't have a chance. Even those who go to school and get a job like I did, have a harder time getting ahead in the work place just because we are black. I work in corporate America, and so does my wife. But we are passed over time and time again for promotions due to the color of our skin while being more qualified than our white co worker with less skills.
-
So, tell me where are the real jobs? Apparantly, nobody here knows any qualified people who are ready, willing, and able to, but can't find work. Where is this utopia? Apparantly,everyone here is comfy with their expensive toys and doesn't have contact wit those in need
As for the stock market and investments, doesn't anyone here think a lot of the middle class are now living day to day and can't afford to play the market? Any idea ow many who worked hard all these years have had to cash them in to survive?
Yeah,ienjoy your toys..
Let the illegals in and give 'evmevery thing they need while they work under the table, therby taking taxpaying jobs away and lowering the going rate for labor. I don't see the government jumping on te employeers, do you? Hoccum Obama doesn't do that but rather opens the borders and turns a blind eye to tem? Hoccum he prosecutes the states who do for temselves what the government is supposed to do but refuses?? .
Obama is leading this country, and it's handout-dependent people,to financial disaster and not only can nobody see it,they cheer him on. He'sa one percenter too, and will keep that way.
Remember, one percentere, jus tbecause you do't HAVE to pay taxes, supposedly to help others, that doesn't mean you can't give your own personal money to them. There's no law that says you have to hoard it just because you think you're not taxed enough, and then complain they don't tax you enough.
That's like the kid who killed his parents asking for lienicy because e's an orphan.
Mark be very careful!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
I don't have your survey and one was probably not taken.
Herman Cain is a corrupt moron, Obama is not. And, As far as I am concerned, Obama is not black, he is Half White.
Man....so to you what is a black man?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
Do you think the younger generation that never votes have anything to do with it? I say yes. Its a known fact that the young voters and college students turned out in record numbers for Obama.
-
Oh, Puh-leeze!
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
I don't care what any body says, most blacks born into poverty don't have a chance. Even those who go to school and get a job like I did, have a harder time getting ahead in the work place just because we are black. I work in corporate America, and so does my wife. But we are passed over time and time again for promotions due to the color of our skin while being more qualified than our white co worker with less skills.
Sorry, you're about three decades to late to play the race card. I guess you've never seen, or been aware of, affirmitive action at work. It's another name for legalized reverse discrimination
From my experience over the past 50 years, and others as well, minorities are promoted, and hired over white people nowadays. If they are on the ball, play the game, and are willing to work, trust me, they will get ahead over white people. The deck are stacked in their favor.
I have a friend who worked for ATT in the '90s. Over 20 years ago, ATT embarked on an initiative to hire and promote minorities over whites and went so far as to email about an open job interview session to only those of color. The only way this came to light is that a white friend of my buddy's got one of them by accident. Not knowing any better, he showed up at te meeting, noriced he was different than everyone else, and was asked to leave by te HR rep conducting te meeting. No reason given. When he complained to HR, they tried to dance around it, but he was let goshortly afterwards.
Wachovia passed over a part time white teller with experience (a relative) for a full time position in the branch in which e had been working for almost two years. When he first heard about the opening, he asked for the full time position. His superiors in that branch wanted him and expected him to get it. Corporate said no. Their excuse was he didn't have enough experience. So,what do tey do? They hire a black girl off the street wit no experience, That she got fired within a month for stealing is of no consequence. So,what do tey do? Do they promote my realtive who ad been doing a great job for almost two years? No. They do the exact same ting, but she goes out on maternity leave within six months and never came back. My relative had left by that time.
And, the state police are talking about lowering their standards on background cecks because somesay tat tey are unfair to blacks.. Huh??? So, crimes comitted in the past should be overlooked simply because of skin color? Heck, they've already lowered the tests and give preference to them simply to keep their numbers up..
So, no, I have no issue with color, but, please, don't try to play the victim. The most qualified, regardless of color, should get te job. Period.
But, seriously, you're a few decades to late to pull that one off. Not that I'm saying youre not qualified (as are many of many colors are), but I'm pretty sure it helped you get were you are, even if ypu don't know or are willing to admit it. That's the reality of the game today.
But, I'm sure a lot here will dispute tis. I expect nothing less from this site.
Well, I'm sure I made a lot of friends with this one
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
Frenchy, you're an idiot, and an inarticulate one at that. You chose your moniker wisely. NAmed after surrender monkeys hwo ad to be saved by a real country twice in the last century.
So, tell me where are the real jobs? Apparantly, nobody here knows any qualified people who are ready, willing, and able to, but can't find work. Where is this utopia? Apparantly,everyone here is comfy with their expensive toys and doesn't have contact wit those in need
As for the stock market and investments, doesn't anyone here think a lot of the middle class are now living day to day and can't afford to play the market? Any idea ow many who worked hard all these years have had to cash them in to survive?
Yeah,ienjoy your toys..
Let the illegals in and give 'evmevery thing they need while they work under the table, therby taking taxpaying jobs away and lowering the going rate for labor. I don't see the government jumping on te employeers, do you? Hoccum Obama doesn't do that but rather opens the borders and turns a blind eye to tem? Hoccum he prosecutes the states who do for temselves what the government is supposed to do but refuses?? .
Obama is leading this country, and it's handout-dependent people,to financial disaster and not only can nobody see it,they cheer him on. He'sa one percenter too, and will keep that way.
Remember, one percentere, jus tbecause you do't HAVE to pay taxes, supposedly to help others, that doesn't mean you can't give your own personal money to them. There's no law that says you have to hoard it just because you think you're not taxed enough, and then complain they don't tax you enough.
That's like the kid who killed his parents asking for lienicy because e's an orphan.
Hahahahaha....thats ok.. i've been called worse. But we all know you are about as smart as a rock. You're the kind that like to hide behind forums like this and spit out your garbage, but in the real world you will get your A$$ kicked. You are less than a man you A$$ hole.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
Sorry, you're about three decades to late to play the race card. I guess you've never seen, or been aware of, affirmitive action at work. It's another name for legalized reverse discrimination
From my experience over the past 50 years, and others as well, minorities are promoted, and hired over white people nowadays. If they are on the ball, play the game, and are willing to work, trust me, they will get ahead over white people. The deck are stacked in their favor.
I have a friend who worked for ATT in the '90s. Over 20 years ago, ATT embarked on an initiative to hire and promote minorities over whites and went so far as to email about an open job interview session to only those of color. The only way this came to light is that a white friend of my buddy's got one of them by accident. Not knowing any better, he showed up at te meeting, noriced he was different than everyone else, and was asked to leave by te HR rep conducting te meeting. No reason given. When he complained to HR, they tried to dance around it, but he was let goshortly afterwards.
Wachovia passed over a part time white teller with experience (a relative) for a full time position in the branch in which e had been working for almost two years. When he first heard about the opening, he asked for the full time position. His superiors in that branch wanted him and expected him to get it. Corporate said no. Their excuse was he didn't have enough experience. So,what do tey do? They hire a black girl off the street wit no experience, That she got fired within a month for stealing is of no consequence. So,what do tey do? Do they promote my realtive who ad been doing a great job for almost two years? No. They do the exact same ting, but she goes out on maternity leave within six months and never came back. My relative had left by that time.
And, the state police are talking about lowering their standards on background cecks because somesay tat tey are unfair to blacks.. Huh??? So, crimes comitted in the past should be overlooked simply because of skin color? Heck, they've already lowered the tests and give preference to them simply to keep their numbers up..
So, no, I have no issue with color, but, please, don't try to play the victim. The most qualified, regardless of color, should get te job. Period.
But, seriously, you're a few decades to late to pull that one off. Not that I'm saying youre not qualified (as are many of many colors are), but I'm pretty sure it helped you get were you are, even if ypu don't know or are willing to admit it. That's the reality of the game today.
But, I'm sure a lot here will dispute tis. I expect nothing less from this site.
Well, I'm sure I made a lot of friends with this one
Just as I thought...you missed the point of that posting entirely.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Just as I thought...you missed the point of that posting entirely.
No, I didn't. I just responded to your whining.
FWIW, I was born in Newark (ever hear of that city?), live ten minutes away, married a woman of color from there, and still have family there. They know me and we've discussed this at length. They see my point and agree. Odds are they woud consider your post whining as well. They know the opportunities available.
You want better? for "your people"?, Get that buffon in the WH go create real jobs for these people, not just give 'em food stamps and keep 'em dependent on the system.
So, what WAS your point? Educate me...
-
Frenchmon,
I won't quote everything one by one but here are some responses.
I am not prejudice and know that all black people are not lazy. There are plenty of white, hispanic, and others that are also lazy and always looking for handouts too.
The reason that the turnout was what it is is because it was a HISTORIC election year and a BLACK (half white) MAN was running. This extra turnout would not have happened if it was McCain vs Biden, they would not have cared. Obama gave them something to believe in, similar to when the masses backed Hitler out of desperation. ( know that is not the best comparison but when people get in that way, they latch on to whatever starts sounding good and a way out)
The younger generation did step it up, nobody is saying that ALL black voted for Obama, we are saying that there is a really good percentage that came out of the woodworks because they had a chance to vote for a Black President.
More Women are voting now because they can get to vote for Women. Believe me, if the Lesbian population has a Lesbian Woman to vote for, they surely will. They try to give all their business to other Lesbians as much as possible where it actually becomes reverse discrimination.
As far as jobs go, my company has been trying to hire for many positions and with all the people out of work, we have a real hard time finding qualified people of any race. We will go thru a hundred resumes to interview 5 people and out of those five, we will be lucky if two of them can pass the technical interview that is given by myself and 2 other senior analysts.
We cannot chance hiring someone who will not be able to train up and start working within 2 months, or those with attitudes or other HR issues in the past.
This is what I think of Cain
"Herman Cain accused by two women of inappropriate behavior"
That and the rest of the scandal.
That does not mean that ALL are bad. Just like ALL white people are not rich.
I am the youngest of 5 kids. My parents had nothing. They borrowed money from my dad's parents to buy us meager xmas presents and paid it back over the year. I looked around at what was going on and decided not to follow in others footsteps, but to make my own. I chose to go to a Tech High School half way into the ghetto as opposed to the the regular high school in my own area. I learned a trade, worked full time in January of senior year on co-op program. Started in Tool Design, became a Journeyman Toolmaker, then a Machine Designer. At 42, I went to college for the first time and graduated with a 3.975 GPA and now work for a Global Pharma Software company.
Nobody gave me anything either and I'm tired of that same old poor me crap from everyone. If you want something, you can find ways to do it.
-
That's it , frenchy. Bring on those ad hominims when hit with truths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Hahahahaha....thats ok.. i've been called worse. But we all know you are about as smart as a rock. You're the kind that like to hide behind forums like this and spit out your garbage, but in the real world you will get your A$$ kicked. You are less than a man you A$$ hole.
And you really think you made it all on your own. ...right.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
Frenchmon,
I won't quote everything one by one but here are some responses.
I am not prejudice and know that all black people are not lazy. There are plenty of white, hispanic, and others that are also lazy and always looking for handouts too.
Hyfi...I know you are not prejudice...hope I didn't give you that impression.
Quote:
The reason that the turnout was what it is is because it was a HISTORIC election year and a BLACK (half white) MAN was running.
I agree it was historic, but why the half white remark? It just seems odd that you include that remark.
Quote:
This extra turnout would not have happened if it was McCain vs Biden, they would not have cared. Obama gave them something to believe in, similar to when the masses backed Hitler out of desperation. ( know that is not the best comparison but when people get in that way, they latch on to whatever starts sounding good and a way out)
The younger generation did step it up, nobody is saying that ALL black voted for Obama, we are saying that there is a really good percentage that came out of the woodworks because they had a chance to vote for a Black President.
It was not only a black man, but a black man who was smart, had a great family with a black smart wife and smart black kids. Cain would not have got such support. Obama seemed like a great black story. The Black community saw this as their real shot at putting a respectable black in the white house and people came out in groves to vote for him....but Blacks couldn't do it alone, many whites saw that same things as blacks did and also came out in groves. I see nothing wrong with that. There was a certain attraction there.
Quote:
More Women are voting now because they can get to vote for Women. Believe me, if the Lesbian population has a Lesbian Woman to vote for, they surely will. They try to give all their business to other Lesbians as much as possible where it actually becomes reverse discrimination.
Agreed.
Quote:
As far as jobs go, my company has been trying to hire for many positions and with all the people out of work, we have a real hard time finding qualified people of any race. We will go thru a hundred resumes to interview 5 people and out of those five, we will be lucky if two of them can pass the technical interview that is given by myself and 2 other senior analysts.
We cannot chance hiring someone who will not be able to train up and start working within 2 months, or those with attitudes or other HR issues in the past.
I don't doubt those things are happening...and most people in today's world may not be seeking such tech skills... but my story is true as well. Some of those who really want to work, simply can't find jobs for whatever reasons. And some just don't get a fair chance.
Quote:
This is what I think of Cain
"Herman Cain accused by two women of inappropriate behavior"
That and the rest of the scandal.
That does not mean that ALL are bad. Just like ALL white people are not rich.
I see Cain as an idiot! I have no respect for him or his buddy Neal Bartz
Quote:
I am the youngest of 5 kids. My parents had nothing. They borrowed money from my dad's parents to buy us meager xmas presents and paid it back over the year. I looked around at what was going on and decided not to follow in others footsteps, but to make my own. I chose to go to a Tech High School half way into the ghetto as opposed to the the regular high school in my own area. I learned a trade, worked full time in January of senior year on co-op program. Started in Tool Design, became a Journeyman Toolmaker, then a Machine Designer. At 42, I went to college for the first time and graduated with a 3.975 GPA and now work for a Global Pharma Software company.
Nobody gave me anything either and I'm tired of that same old poor me crap from everyone. If you want something, you can find ways to do it.
Its a good thing you and I where successful Hyfi. But tell me....do you really think every body who has tried honestly to get ahead....has gotten ahead??? I mean, do you honestly think every body who has went to school, graduated with good grades and tried to get a job has gotten a job? Do you think there are people who deserve to say "poor me"? Please answer me that last question. Because with your last statement, you kinda seem to be in agreement with those republicans who say if you can't pull yourself up by your boot straps, you are nothing but a lazy bumb....but I don't think you really believe that.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
No, I didn't. I just responded to your whining.
FWIW, I was born in Newark (ever hear of that city?), live ten minutes away, married a woman of color from there, and still have family there. They know me and we've discussed this at length. They see my point and agree. Odds are they woud consider your post whining as well. They know the opportunities available.
You want better? for "your people"?, Get that buffon in the WH go create real jobs for these people, not just give 'em food stamps and keep 'em dependent on the system.
So, what WAS your point? Educate me...
Your are an idiot....I don't give a rats behind about who thinks im whinning......there are more whites on government aid than blacks. Tell me genius...whats your solution to the jobs problem?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
And you really think you made it all on your own. ...right.
Oh and btw....I've only seen you spout stuff the extremist on the right spout out. Are you really a Romney supporter? I honestly think you should stick to audio.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
I agree it was historic, but why the half white remark? It just seems odd that you include that remark.
Sorry, but I don't agree with how it is determined and I do not see him as a Black Man, I see him as Half Black and Half White because that is the reality.
Answer me this, why is it that if a White person has 1 ounce of Black blood in him is considered a Black man AND if a Black man has an ounce of White blood in him, why is he still a Black man?
You see, it makes no sense, he is what he is, Half White and Half Black.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
It was not only a black man, but a black man who was smart, had a great family with a black smart wife and smart black kids. Cain would not have got such support. Obama seemed like a great black story. The Black community saw this as their real shot at putting a respectable black in the white house and people came out in groves to vote for him....but Blacks couldn't do it alone, many whites saw that same things as blacks did and also came out in groves. I see nothing wrong with that. There was a certain attraction there.
You just confirmed my original statement that the Black population came out like never before to try and elect the first Black President. Now if sir T can only admit the same thing.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
I don't doubt those things are happening...and most people in today's world may not be seeking such tech skills... but my story is true as well. Some of those who really want to work, simply can't find jobs for whatever reasons. And some just don't get a fair chance.
The ones who are not getting the good chances are those with their pants falling down, hat on sideways, tattoos all over their face-neck-head, facial piercings all over and so on.
The ones not getting a chance are those who just take the first no and claim they didn't get a chance.
When I got out of school a few years back and applied for the job I have now, I was interviewed with 6 other people at the same time. I blew them all away but because of the stupid spot on applications as to what you made at your last job, I did not get hired even though I expected to take a pay cut. They hired someone less qualified because he was cheaper. So what did I do about it? I emailed or called or both every week until they hired me. It's called persistence, which is lacking in today's society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Its a good thing you and I where successful Hyfi. But tell me....do you really think every body who has tried honestly to get ahead....has gotten ahead??? I mean, do you honestly think every body who has went to school, graduated with good grades and tried to get a job has gotten a job? Do you think there are people who deserve to say "poor me"? Please answer me that last question. Because with your last statement, you kinda seem to be in agreement with those republicans who say if you can't pull yourself up by your boot straps, you are nothing but a lazy bumb....but I don't think you really believe that.
Unfortunately, not everyone is always 100% successful. But not everyone gives up either.
There is no reason people cannot get together and clean up their own street and neighborhood. No reason they cannot dress and speak properly in coherent complete sentences. No reason they cannot take initiative and learn something new on their own. With computers, knowledge is endless. Before you say not everyone has one, they are at the Free Library for use.
I am not saying they are all lazy but you are appearing to make excuses for some. Just because you don't get the dream job is no reason to become a criminal. Have you watched the local news lately, 20 minutes of murders every morning here in Philly. When they show the pics of the suspects, well thats where the stereotypes come from.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Your are an idiot....I don't give a rats behind about who thinks im whinning......there are more whites on government aid than blacks. Tell me genius...whats your solution to the jobs problem?
Well, perhaps not whining. More like hubris. Think about this: You may not have done it by yourself: Affirmative Action may have done it for you. Sound familiar? I just pointed out a hars reality that you might not want to hear, but that doesn't alter the fact that it exists.
As for that bolded statement, you can't be serious, can you? And you say you made it all by yourself?
Let's look at that statement, shall we?
As for your statement, you're100% correct ...if we just look at the raw numbers.
Welfare consists of 37% whites and only 35% blacks. There, you win.
But, when we look at the overall population of the US where it's 72% white and 12% black, that sort of makes those raw numbers somewhat meaningless, doesn't it?
Do I really have to do the math for you to show you the fallacy of your misleading comment? You really didn't expect to be called on it?
Remember, frenchy, you're the one that made race/welfare the big issue here, not me, so don't give me shiite about this.
BTW, this place is a already threshing floor for conservatives and Christians. It's nice of you to throw race into that morass.
FWIW, as for the 2008 elections, of the blacks who voted, 96% voted for Obama. What would your statistics professor make of that?
As for jobs, dunno offhand, but giving stimulus money only to have it used to create factories and jobs overseas (or to companies who go belly up shortly afterwards) by the recipients sure doesn't seem to be a great idea. Maybe give it to proven companies with a real chance of expansion that would be legally obligated to expand here and employ more Americans (as opposed to shaky green startups that just happened to be owned by Democratic bundlers)?
A lot of new companies nee dtrained technical (not necessarially degreed) people to operate the new generation of manufacturing machines. How about giving that stimlilus money to these companies to partner with local schools to train the next generation of their workers instead of simply looking overseas for an H1B solution. Here's a good place to start. "
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi
Sorry, but I don't agree with how it is determined and I do not see him as a Black Man, I see him as Half Black and Half White because that is the reality.
Answer me this, why is it that if a White person has 1 ounce of Black blood in him is considered a Black man AND if a Black man has an ounce of White blood in him, why is he still a Black man?
I have often wondered that myself Hyfi....but you know what? maybe its because there are lots of people who look white or who look black but they are really a mix of the two. During slavery there was a lot of black slave owners having sex with the slave females. So today you really dont know who is who, so its called either black or white.
Quote:
You see, it makes no sense, he is what he is, Half White and Half Black.
He's another one for you...why are blacks called African Americans? And why not call whites European Americans?
Quote:
You just confirmed my original statement that the Black population came out like never before to try and elect the first Black President. Now if sir T can only admit the same thing.....
Its because you see only the reason of blackness and nothing else....Sir T and I don't only that as being the most important factor as you seem to be.
Quote:
The ones who are not getting the good chances are those with their pants falling down, hat on sideways, tattoos all over their face-neck-head, facial piercings all over and so on.
The ones not getting a chance are those who just take the first no and claim they didn't get a chance.
You see.... typical and closed minded.....You have just changed my perception of you. You generalized all people into that one group.
Quote:
When I got out of school a few years back and applied for the job I have now, I was interviewed with 6 other people at the same time. I blew them all away but because of the stupid spot on applications as to what you made at your last job, I did not get hired even though I expected to take a pay cut. They hired someone less qualified because he was cheaper. So what did I do about it? I emailed or called or both every week until they hired me. It's called persistence, which is lacking in today's society.
Yeah....your experience is every body's experience, yeah I gotcha now. I know good hard working mothers out there who got laid off during the recession and looked for what seemed like forever to find decent work but was reduced to nothing and having to settle for Burger King and White Castle jobs just to keep the car from repo and the lites on. I guess you never saw the 60minutes program about the professional people out of work and now taking jobs mowing grass. Hyfi, I really see ya now.
Quote:
Unfortunately, not everyone is always 100% successful. But not everyone gives up either.
And if that same person whom you say gives up after a while take govnment aide, you call them lazy...is that it hyfi?
Quote:
There is no reason people cannot get together and clean up their own street and neighborhood. No reason they cannot dress and speak properly in coherent complete sentences. No reason they cannot take initiative and learn something new on their own. With computers, knowledge is endless. Before you say not everyone has one, they are at the Free Library for use.
So you think all people who cant find work are like this? If you do, your problem is bigger than I thought .
Quote:
I am not saying they are all lazy but you are appearing to make excuses for some. Just because you don't get the dream job is no reason to become a criminal. Have you watched the local news lately, 20 minutes of murders every morning here in Philly. When they show the pics of the suspects, well thats where the stereotypes come from.
Who said anything about hoodlums? Is that where your mind goes in a subject like this? You start generalizing people Hyfi? Listen, there are good honest people out here who are out of work and can't get a break. I'm not talking about criminals. I live in St. Louis and I see the stuff daily on the news...black guys as well as white guys...they don't want to do anything but rob steal cheat and kill....im not even speaking about that BS....im talking about good honest people who want to work but cant get ahead...and now have to catch a bus to go to work in the morning.
-
French,
I know things are tough all over. I actually consider myself VERY lucky right now that I made my way into a niche environment after being forced to change my career due to needing 4 different surgeries from work related repetitive stress injuries.
Maybe I did generalize a little too much, maybe more because of the media than personal experience. I admittedly live in a mostly white area but there are plenty of successful blacks here also.
Over the years, I have also been laid off 5 times and it was hard to get another job. Today's situation is indeed worse than ever and I know plenty of white people in the same boat.
I also never said using what has been earned over the years of working if one gets laid off is wrong or lazy, you are putting words in my mouth. The problem is those that are born into it and just perpetuate it. I don't know how many times I see on the news single mothers crying the blues but pregnant with a 4th or 5th child, no husband and so on. It's not a white or black issue, it's an issue of stupidity. Don't pump out babies you can't afford to take care of.
Now as far as job creation goes, how can any job be created out of thin air? Who pays for that job to be created? You and I from our taxes right. The real trouble is that businesses need to feel more secure and profitable so they add jobs on their own. You can't just pull a job and bennies out of your ass, it has to be paid for.
My wife also exhausted her unemployment benefits after losing her 2 part time jobs in the same week a few years ago. She cannot physically do what she was trained to do anymore as a full time job and there were no part time jobs to be had for all the same reasons we are talking about. The difference is that she worked for 25 years straight and never used the handouts that she paid into until then. How many people white or black do it this way? She earned it, not everyone does but they expect it anyway.
Accept for the Health Care crap Obama is forcing on us, I am a whole lot more for him and the Dems than I am for Romney and the Repubs, even though I am a HAVE. I do want the gap to be lessened and I am willing to be part of that.
You can have any opinion of me you like. Nothing ever comes across right on these forums or in chat boxes. I do generalize sometimes but I guess I am as brainwashed about that as the next guy is always claiming to be the victim, white or black.
The only thing I tried to say is that if the person running for president was just another career Whitey, you would have never seen the historical increase in black voters. I will bet you anything that they would not have bothered if they thought it would turn out to be the same ole same ole. I don't understand why it is so hard for a black person to just admit that. They certainly did not all register to vote republican now did they or the result would have been a little different.
-
Hyfi....it's a known fact that corporate America will not release money for job creation because they don't trust the economy right know. I know that's BS. They are looking after their own greed....as soon as the office of President is back under the republican banner they will hire. That's why it's hard to get jobs...and Intellegent people who are in the know understand this...it just not fair. That's not what this country should be about, but it is.
As an adult professional I've been back to the heart of the slums and ghettos here and in Durahm NC. It's sad to see unresponsiible adults who have never ever known anything....nothing in their heads whatsoever except the art of the con game, selfishness and the skill of being a hoodlum. In St. Louis its not only blacks its also whites....and in Carolina you can add Mexicans to that list. I don't feel sorry for them, it's their way of life. But don't think that's all that live there in the slums...they are also full of good decent people who work jobs that only pay minimum wages. There are people with master degrees living in some of Americas slums and can't get a job other than a janitor job. I know a guy who has a masters degree and has to work for close to minimum wages. If you ride down to the ghettos you will see people getting up in 30 digress cold in the winter months to catch a bus to work and after they leave after 8 hours pay go to a second job. I know people like that. I just hate it when we start generalizing. also you mentioned those with tattoos....I work in IT....those guys get hired in those types of jobs...lol! I have a few working with me. yes their jeans are hanging low....hat side ways but they are IT techs. Go figure.
Let's admit that some blacks did vote for President Obama only because he was black. But at the same time, would you say many whites want him out for those same reasons? Because I know for a fact that many whites hate the fact that this country is ran by a black man and want him out.
|