48,000 Murdered since 911

[Chicopee John]

It's sort of hysterical how I list a bunch of programs that exist, at least in part, to help ensure opportunities for people who are economically disadvantaged, or kids who, by no fault of their own, grow up in high crime area, or areas with shitty schools, or can't afford college, ......................

 

But, in many - if not most instances - the juice ain't worth the squeeze.

 

Anybody ever do a CBO on these programs?

[Kosar_For_President]

Yea you're about as funny as Cal. Kosar

 

That was a compliment.

[heckofajobbrownie]

But, in many - if not most instances - the juice ain't worth the squeeze.

 

Anybody ever do a CBO on these programs?

 

What are you basing this on? Pell Grants don't help people afford college? Student loans? What are you talking about? Crime prevention programs don't work? Gang task forces don't work? Of course there are programs that don't give you any bang for the buck - D.A.R.E is a great example. But to sit from where you are and say, "Most of this stuff doesn't work" is just lazy. It'd be more accurate to say that you don't like the idea of them. But you really don't know whether all those things I listed work well enough to justify their expenditure, do you, John? That would require a lot of study, rather than a blanket ideological statement.

 

You'd have to do work like this. And this work doesn't suggest that none of these programs work. In fact, it's exactly the kind of approach you're asking for. For instance, according to most of the research, the most successful programs for kids are well-designed early education and intervention programs, because they've found that once a kid is behind in elementary school, it's really, really hard to get them to catch up. That's where you get the most bang for your buck.

 

Why make college loans more affordable, and Pell Grants more available? Because a college education means roughly a million dollars more in earnings over a lifetime than a typical high school grad. If you're looking to improve wealth and lower inequality, you want people who should go to college and want to go to college be able to afford to go to college. You shouldn't be stuck simply because you were born into a poor family, or because your parent(s) was/were laid off and the market tanked right when you were supposed to enroll.

 

These are the real issues government deals with. This is what is actually discussed in policy circles - getting your bang for your buck. What works, what doesn't. How do you address the problems of structural inequality? How do you address the problems of the urban poor?

 

Or we can reduce them to stupid "racist handouts for lazy people to buy votes" arguments like the ones Steve likes to push, which are just arguments born out of political and cultural resentments. They're not really relevant, unless we're running a talk radio show.

 

And the CBO scores the costs of every bill that affects the budget. They don't tell you whether or not they think it's worth it because those are value judgments. And Congress and the people who vote for them make those.

[Westside Steve]

It's sort of hysterical how I list a bunch of programs that exist, at least in part, to help ensure opportunities for people who are economically disadvantaged, or kids who, by no fault of their own, grow up in high crime area, or areas with shitty schools, or can't afford college, and you instantly go back to the "bribe" nonsense, and how this is all racist, and us vs. them, because it's targeting people of a certain color. Even though I didn't mention targeting people of a certain color, and those programs have nothing to do with color.

 

 

Actually (and you must be too enraged to read clearly) we were talikng about why a minority member might want to be a Democrat.

I asked what the Democrats specifically offered to minorities that the Republicans didn't.

That was the list you gave me.

 

But you wanna cry because I point out the fact that some specific groups have more problems than others who have also had tough histories, I can't help you.

Or if I make fun of Ebonics which is a habit deserving of ridicule IMO.

 

 

(and spare me the "every or all" gag)

 

WSS

[Westside Steve]

And then you try and pretend that you don't view people differently because of their race, also laughable. You've written far too many things to try to pass that one off now, my friend.

 

 

And what did I say that is based on race itself and not culture?

Think hard.

Here's a tip.

Irish people choose to get drunk on St Patrick's day.

It is not bred into them by race.

 

WSS

[Chicopee John]

Heck, maybe the 'payback' curve is longer than I believe it should be.

 

I hear what you say, but I see what I see - more teenage pregnancy, a higher level of crime, increasing drop out rates, spiraling fatherless families, etc.

 

Sometimes, it seems like some like to measure the score in the first or secord quarter rather than waiting for the game to end.

 

I believe there are cultural problems in certain demographics that money, alone, can't mitigate. There is SOMETHING wrong somewhere and somehow - I don't claim to know.

 

However, to turn a blind eye to reality - as you like to say - and throwing money at a problem with other root causes doesn't make a lot of sense. I am not saying that we should not treat some of the symptoms but, the true cure lies with treating the 'disease'.

[heckofajobbrownie]

And what did I say that is based on race itself and not culture?

Think hard.

Here's a tip.

Irish people choose to get drunk on St Patrick's day.

It is not bred into them by race.

 

WSS

 

You don't have to understand why what you've said in the past is racist. It's fine with me. But these types of rationalizations are lovely high school arguments. They don't explain why you repeatedly referred to urban blacks as illiterate welfare criminals. It certainly doesn't strike me as accurate or brilliant cultural commentary, no.

 

It's a crass, racist generalization born out of your overall animosity toward what you consider their "culture", which you obviously have no clue about, other than what you saw on COPS and MTV, back when they played NWA videos.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Heck, maybe the 'payback' curve is longer than I believe it should be.

 

I hear what you say, but I see what I see - more teenage pregnancy, a higher level of crime, increasing drop out rates, spiraling fatherless families, etc.

 

Sometimes, it seems like some like to measure the score in the first or secord quarter rather than waiting for the game to end.

 

I believe there are cultural problems in certain demographics that money, alone, can't mitigate. There is SOMETHING wrong somewhere and somehow - I don't claim to know.

 

However, to turn a blind eye to reality - as you like to say - and throwing money at a problem with other root causes doesn't make a lot of sense. I am not saying that we should not treat some of the symptoms but, the true cure lies with treating the 'disease'.

 

The "throwing money at the problem" is another lazy way out. Nobody wants to "throw money at a problem." They want to address the problem, and sometimes that requires money.

 

Fixing your car requires money. But you wouldn't call getting a new set of tires and a new clutch "throwing money at the problem."

 

Fixing schools costs money too. Policing streets costs money. College costs a lot of money. Health care costs a lot of money.

 

I don't think chalking it up to "cultural problems" is a very good idea either. It's just an excuse not to do anything for the other, when the other is just your fellow American.

 

And if you have any belief in actual meritocracy, rather than the skewed system we have now, you would believe fervently in the idea of equality of opportunity, and to always strive to provide those who have less with the same shot, the same access, as those who have more.

[Chicopee John]

>>The "throwing money at the problem" is another lazy way out. Nobody wants to "throw money at a problem." They want to address the problem, and sometimes that requires money. Fixing your car requires money. But you wouldn't call getting a new set of tires and a new clutch "throwing money at the problem.">>

 

 

Yes, but there comes a point where I stop 'throwing money at it' and take another trail. It could be going to another mechanic, buying a new car, etc.

 

If it is cold in your house, do you recommend turning up the heat? What if the windows are open? How much heat/money do you want to throw at the problem when you haven't addressed the root cause?

 

Same analogy, although I do recognize we are talking about human beings and our collective futures.

 

 

>>Fixing schools costs money too. Policing streets costs money. College costs a lot of money. Health care costs a lot of money. >>

 

So does paying for programs that don't work, Heck.

 

The end result is what we see: more teenage pregnancies, more fatherless families, more crime, less moral character, etc.

 

Why is all this spiraling out of control???? Because we don't spend more money at them? I think not.

 

 

>>I don't think chalking it up to "cultural problems" is a very good idea either. It's just an excuse not to do anything for the other, when the other is just your fellow American. And if you have any belief in actual meritocracy, rather than the skewed system we have now, you would believe fervently in the idea of equality of opportunity, and to always strive to provide those who have less with the same shot, the same access, as those who have more.>>

 

I do but all parties have to be pulling on the same end of the rope and there needs to be accountability and - yes - very tough love.

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Sure, sometimes. And of course, you don't want to waste money where it's not working. This is why we study things like effectiveness and outcome. But again, you're working from the assumption that all of these problems you list are caused by programs like ...what? Pell Grants? Early education programs and Head Start cause ...teenage pregnancy? Fatherlessness? What?

 

I think the brush you're using is too ideological and too broad.

 

Plus, it's sort of a bogus argument. On one hand you're saying these are cultural problems that can't be addressed by government. On the other hand you're saying these problems are caused by government programs.

 

And there's a pretty thin line between tough love and neglect.

[Chicopee John]

>>Plus, it's sort of a bogus argument. On one hand you're saying these are cultural problems that can't be addressed by government. On the other hand you're saying these problems are caused by government programs.>>

 

 

I didn't say the problems were caused by government programs - at least I don't believe I did.

 

I did say, however - either implicitly or explicitly - that 'throwing' money at these problems isn't improving the serious and sad situation.

 

You can laugh if you like, but I do believe that local and faith-based organizations are a good place to start. You might say that they need money too, and that is true. However, making the problem personal with peer group pressure if probably more effective than Washington sending money for oblique, less focused and direct programs.

 

 

>>And there's a pretty thin line between tough love and neglect.>>

 

I thought that was pleasure and pain.

 

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Hey, I'm with you, man. You know who is one of the best responders in natural disasters? The Salvation Army. They get there before anyone else does, and they're super organized and ready to go. Local is almost always better. Churches provide innumerable services to the poor, and to relief efforts.

 

But when you're talking about federal programs, just because you have federal funding it doesn't mean you don't have local control.

 

What I'm talking about primarily is education and public safety, and those are usually going to be local and state efforts, often backed by federal money or oversight. (You're almost always going to have some federal oversight when you take federal money.)

 

Medicaid is another example. Unemployment insurance is another. That's federal and state money, with federal and state administration. It's not just Washington says, you do.

[calfoxwc]

I think what John is saying, is that some government programs were

 

spending money on superficial symptoms, rather than treating the origin, the

 

"disease" that was causing the symptoms.

 

As in, if you treat the symptoms of a cancer, but not the disease,

 

you inadvertently allow the disease to grow.

 

That is called "throwing money at a problem" ...

 

And what is wrong, with certain groups of people, is that they develop

 

certain bad "cultural" traits... that with a ton of government spending to help those same people,

 

surely creates a dependency, and doesn't resolve to consider in any way, the reasons for the need of

 

those people for help.

 

Well, that's how I took it.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I'm sure it is.

 

 

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I'm sure it is.

 

Heck: nose in air, superior grin, vacant stare imagining superiority. LMAO.

[VaporTrail]

Cal, the real fix to the problem would be fixing the Mexican economy. I don't know if people want US tax dollars going to that.

[Kosar_For_President]

Cal, the real fix to the problem would be fixing the Mexican economy. I don't know if people want US tax dollars going to that.

 

No the real issue is us Americans doing too many drugs, lol, jk. I could believe the Mexican government said that. It's our fault they are producing drugs and killing each other. Dumbest statement I have ever read.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Well, it is partly our fault. You can't have supply without demand. We also supply them with loads of guns that make the violence worse. (Go read the story today about the shipment of US weapons that was intercepted on its way to Mexico.)

 

Also, drug production used to be mainly based in Columbia. Then we divined this idea called "Plan Columbia" and threw a few billion dollars at it.

 

And to no one's surprise, drug production just moved elsewhere, including Mexico, which anyone with a basic understanding of economics could have told you would have happened. And yes, that's because we demand lots of drugs.

 

Just like we demand lots of cheap immigrant labor, then turn around and blame the supply of people who show up to do it.

 

Very similar problems, actually. And denying that we play a part in them doesn't help solve them any.

[Westside Steve]

You don't have to understand why what you've said in the past is racist. It's fine with me. But these types of rationalizations are lovely high school arguments.

 

Above your pay grade huh?

 

 

They don't explain why you repeatedly referred to urban blacks as illiterate welfare criminals. It certainly doesn't strike me as accurate or brilliant cultural commentary, no.

 

So just tell me why whites Arabs Asians and Jews seem to be doing better in those areas even in the same poor neighborhoods.

There must be a reason.

 

It's a crass, racist generalization born out of your overall animosity toward what you consider their "culture", which you obviously have no clue about, other than what you saw on COPS and MTV, back when they played NWA videos.

 

Or BET today.

Hard core rap is a big seller to this day.

A big slice of the entertainment world pie.

Is there a white equivalent?

Ironically Michael Moore is a good friend of the COPS creator and has convinced him to highlight more white crime in recent years.

 

Is that racist?\

 

(but of course we both know it's balck on white and black on black crime rates we're talking aboput)

WSS

[VaporTrail]

So just tell me why whites Arabs Asians and Jews seem to be doing better in those areas even in the same poor neighborhoods.

There must be a reason.

 

Steve, whether you mean it or not, that is a racially prejudiced statement.

 

 

Or BET today.

Hard core rap is a big seller to this day.

 

Not really. See 50 Cent vs. Kanye. The biggest song on BET over the past few months was Rude Boy. The last thing that Jay-Z released that made it huge was New York State of Mind. The closest thing we have to hardcore rap on the top 100 is Eminem who has really tamed down and isn't really pissing anyone off. Lady Gaga and Train (Hey, Soul Sister) are doing much better. Hardcore rap is dead (and it's a damn shame because 90's gangsta rap was the only kind worth listening to). It's rare that a rap song comes out today.

 

A big slice of the entertainment world pie.

Is there a white equivalent?

 

Country. Let me write a song about my girlfriend and/or beer.

[Westside Steve]

So just tell me why whites Arabs Asians and Jews seem to be doing better in those areas even in the same poor neighborhoods.

There must be a reason.

 

Steve, whether you mean it or not, that is a racially prejudiced statement.

 

Culturally actually, but it's just a fact.

I merely ask why.

What's wrong with that?

Asians Jews and Arabs also do better than whites in the same poor schools on average.

 

Why do you think it happens that way?

 

 

Or BET today.

Hard core rap is a big seller to this day.

 

Not really. See 50 Cent vs. Kanye. The biggest song on BET over the past few months was Rude Boy. The last thing that Jay-Z released that made it huge was New York State of Mind. The closest thing we have to hardcore rap on the top 100 is Eminem who has really tamed down and isn't really pissing anyone off. Lady Gaga and Train (Hey, Soul Sister) are doing much better. Hardcore rap is dead (and it's a damn shame because 90's gangsta rap was the only kind worth listening to). It's rare that a rap song comes out today.

 

Of course there are other gentres represented.

Gangsta rap is only one BUT as I say there's no equivalent.

There's no big Country sub group like it.

Not Metal, not thrash grunge punk none.

The skinheads don't have a big portion of the music market.

Rap accounts for about 10% of the market.

 

 

 

Country. Let me write a song about my girlfriend and/or beer.

 

Girlfriends and beer are hard core to you?

 

WSS

[Chicopee John]

>>Steve, whether you mean it or not, that is a racially prejudiced statement. >>

 

I won't speak for my good friend, Steve, but I believe he meant what he said. Why wouldn't he be serious?

 

Heck will probably mention 'studies' - like those he cited but never produced RE: crime rates for Illegals - that say this is not true.

 

My wife teaches and doesn't have a racist bone in her body - she says that I'm racist, though - but her record cites that the parents of one of her students claimed she was racist in the way she treated and graded their son. In fact, I believe every teacher the kid's had has been cited for the same. Just a point of interest, the father is a former bodyguard for Fiddy Cent.

 

The point about my wife is that she says she is delighted any time an 'Indian" or "Oriental - my term, not hers - joins her classroom. She knows that the vast, vast majority of them will prove to be kind and thoughtful students, not to mention top achievers.

 

I believe this has to do with the work ethic subscribed to by the parents and the strong emphasis placed on education and achievement.

 

For one reason or another - we touched on this early - certain demographics lack the same qualities.

 

Steve's question is both valid and rhetorical. We can ignore the facts or recognize and deal with them.

 

 

 

[Westside Steve]

True John.

 

And I didn't even mention Indians.

They're usually near the top of the educational ladder in the same poor schools.

 

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

Just like we demand lots of cheap immigrant labor, then turn around and blame the supply of people who show up to do it.

 

 

Um.. "we"??? speak for yourself.

[VaporTrail]

Um.. "we"??? speak for yourself.

 

Unless you're buying produce that was locally grown and you know for a fact that everyone that works on the farm it's from is a legal worker, you're speaking with us.

 

I believe this has to do with the work ethic subscribed to by the parents and the strong emphasis placed on education and achievement.

 

For one reason or another - we touched on this early - certain demographics lack the same qualities.

 

Steve's question is both valid and rhetorical. We can ignore the facts or recognize and deal with them.

 

I never said it wasn't a valid problem, and I would agree with you. It still, however, is a blanket statement of an entire racial group.

[Chicopee John]

Well, it is partly our fault. You can't have supply without demand. We also supply them with loads of guns that make the violence worse. (Go read the story today about the shipment of US weapons that was intercepted on its way to Mexico.)

 

Also, drug production used to be mainly based in Columbia. Then we divined this idea called "Plan Columbia" and threw a few billion dollars at it.

 

And to no one's surprise, drug production just moved elsewhere, including Mexico, which anyone with a basic understanding of economics could have told you would have happened. And yes, that's because we demand lots of drugs.

 

Just like we demand lots of cheap immigrant labor, then turn around and blame the supply of people who show up to do it.

 

Very similar problems, actually. And denying that we play a part in them doesn't help solve them any.

 

 

Heck, is there anything about this country that you don't despise or find fault with???

 

Jeepers Creepers.

 

[Pumpkin Eater]

Unless you're buying produce that was locally grown and you know for a fact that everyone that works on the farm it's from is a legal worker, you're speaking with us.

 

 

not hardly. what I don't grow, I do buy, but really it's not as if I have a choice. I go to fsrmer's markets when I can. I would gladly pay 1.5x-2X more for produce. I don't think the increase in price would be much more than 1.5X. if the labor for picking produce was half the final cost, and that doubled, you're only seeing an increase of 50% of the original price with the final price being 150% of the original. Without illegals the reduction in health care expenses would make up for it 5 fold.

[calfoxwc]

PE - that's great, a LOT of folks are coming out to the farmer's markets -

 

you want to check out if they are local or not... GGG

 

We had a few "growers" who simply went to a big Amish wholesale produce auction, where trucks come

 

in from all sorts of other southern states... and they load

 

up tons into their trucks, and they branched out to farmer's markets and said it was theirs.

 

They are gone this year. Some local organizers of the farmers markets took my advice, and they

 

go out and inspect. GGG It worked.

 

People want to eat healthier, and tomatoes in the stores,for the most part, are just not great tasting,..

 

they are hybrids for marketing/shelf life.

[Pumpkin Eater]

I just (literally this afternoon) picked about 3 gallons of blackberries in the Florida heat (all wild vines). Hard work but it will be worth it when i take that first bite of blackberry pie. I saw a land turtle and an alligator.

[calfoxwc]

We have to order big long nets for our berries...

 

and one for our neighbors, they have a bunch of blackberries.. but the birds get them every year...

 

I need an electric fence around the garden.

 

Maybe, I'll have to patrol it with my 9 shooter, and one bullet in my pocket,

 

Barney Fife style. GGG