In 2015 326 black men were killed by cops (most of which were justified). Meanwhile in Chicago alone that many blacks die by the hands of other blacks in a single month. So what exactly is invalidating about using these facts?
What does his sexual orientation have to do with the facts that he says?
So how exactly does him not being an American citizen diminish the facts that he says? Can you not argue the facts so you have to attack the person stating them? If he were a black straight female stating those facts, would they suddenly carry more weight?
Thank you for a thorough and well-thought reply! Before I get into responding at a detailed level I just want to say that my positions are not necessarily adversarial to your own. For example, while I do find that there is an abundance of things to fault the Bush administration for I don’t think there was anything particularly wrong with his macro-economic strategy.
Anyway- you are correct that the revisions to CRA were very poorly thought out (i.e. were a load of shit) with regard to the greater context of the housing market situation. However, the majority of sub-prime loans issued leading up to the crisis were issued by lenders not subject to CRA regulation, and therefor it is extremely likely that had CRA restrictions had never been eased those same bad loans would simply have been issued by different lenders instead. We would have the same pool of bad loans being bundled up into the same toxic Mortgage Backed Securities, and the only difference is that the big financial institutions doing that bundling would have been purchasing the loans from non-CRA lenders (which again were more than half of the market even with CRA as it was).
FIRREA was a huge move to change financial institution regulation in response to the S&L crisis. Many of these changes were reasonable and pretty decent overall. The BIG problem for our purposes here is that one of those changes involved whether and how mortgage lenders obtained insurance on home loans. These changes were seemingly well meaning to encourage lending to low income borrowers, coincidentally among them was a clause to pressure lenders to issue more loans under the CRA (just thought you would find that interesting). The main issue being that the oversight requirements on the quality of the loan were much too lax and took on faith the word of the lenders as to how good the loan was, basically no auditing.
Who’s at fault for what? Are you certain every deficit is a fault? And what flip-flopping?
The strong majority of the responsibility is Congress’s by law, as they have the final authority in the budgeting process- which yes does involve the President but at the end of the day he’s got nothing if Congress doesn’t want to play ball because the Constitution gives them the authority here.
The exception where one can reasonably claim the President is more at fault or deserves more credit would be the odd years a President goes to extraordinary lengths to get Congress to enact his specific platform, like Bush 2001 and 2003, or FDR with the New Deal.
Never said Presidents have no say, just that they at best can only take some portion of the fault or credit for a process they don’t have ultimate control over. Who was responsible for the first for years of deficit under Obama? Whoever caused the housing crisis, and those who made the collective decision that taking steps to recover from the recession was better than wallowing in it indefinitely. Congress would have been passing comparable budgets those years even if Bush had remained president, or had McCain won the election.
You’re a smart guy so I’m going to guess you were just spit-balling here and went a little off target with it. If the President is free to ignore the budget we wouldn’t have government shut-downs when Congress fails to pass one on time.
Broadly- my point was simply that Bush’s economic policy was to deliberately drive us into deficit. Reducing taxes and deficit spending both encourage growth of the economy, which is what he was deliberately aiming for. Yes, he did not cause a net $1.3 trillion tax reduction in a single year. I guess I could have stated that differently, but was that something I really needed to hold people’s hands over? I was illustrating that he wanted to deliberately negate the surplus, which he successfully did as his very first goal as President by selling Congress on the idea of the tax reforms that were part of his election campaign platform.
I applaud the degree of citation in your response though, very few here would go to that level of detail!
Because its a bullshit counter argument to police brutality and discrimination against people of color in the United States.
Nobody is denying that blacks kill more blacks. Whites kill more whites. Hispanics kill more hispanics. Police have killed more white people than black people. This is all common knowledge.
When you discuss police brutality dont invalidate those facts by bring up the crime rate in Detroit or Chicago. Or act like the effects of jim crow, generations of neighborhood devaluing and systematic racism didnt create the perfect conditions to incubate black on black crime in inner cities. We are discussing the UNJUSTIFIED killing of blacks by authorities, not the just and unjust killing of blacks by other blacks in low income, low education, high drug traffic neighborhoods.
When white people skip over that stuff and right into “well blacks kill more blacks ya know” its just a convenient way to blame the victim for being a victim. And people like Milo who have no concept of the history of the civil rights movement need to stay out of things like that. Gays for Trump are perverted self hating weirdos.
But you bring up Jesse Jackson as if to say the black community has no mouthpiece with the ability to cause action.
Jesse Jackson hasnt been relevant in black issues in the United States in 20 years. And thats questionable. Black people dont even take Jesse Jackson serious. And you would know this if you concerned yourself with black issues, but if JJ is the first name you throw out, unfortunately I dont think you do.
Marc Lamont Hill, Michael Eric Dyson, Beverly Bond, Jesse Williams, Franchesca Ramsey, Cornel West, Shaun King, Janet Mock, Michelle Alexander, Michaela Angela Davis. These are relevant people, with credentials and platforms to spread knowledge and raise awareness. Theres plenty info out there, just because the only person you may know isnt credible that doesnt really speak against what I originally said.
BUT ARENT MORE WHITE PEOPLE KILLED BY POLCE?
EVERY ARGUMENT AGAINST BLACK LIVES MATTER BROKEN DOWN TO ITS MOLECULAR BULLSHIT
It isn’t a bullshit counter argument because it addresses the hypocrisy of the BLM movement. IE when they ignore the main cause of violent deaths of blacks.
But no one else besides blacks are crying over it.They realize that this is a very minor problem and there are larger problems to deal with. Very often, blacks dying at the hands of cops is the result of a lifetime of crime. It was bound to happen sooner or later.
Is that why almost every case that BLM comes up to defend ends up being a criminal and/or felon with 20 priors? Often illegally armed or makes attempts to steal the gun off the officer?
If BLM was truly about discussing the UNJUSTIFIED killings of blacks by authorities then they wouldn’t be defending and making martyrs of felons.
Pray tell why bring up neighborhoods devaluing? Crime rates soar, blacks loot locally owned businesses by fellow blacks. When they riot they tend the vandalize those same local businesses and property. The devaluing of their properties is their own damn fault.
Though if you are against the devaluing of properties then why are so many against gentrification? Why are you against people buying property in these neighborhoods and giving the locals a chance to get a job. To earn an honest living. Even if it isn’t whites buying property, and it was blacks or some other minority, buying property, creating jobs. Why are so many against that?
Why do they fail to realize the neighborhoods devaluing has nothing to do with systematic racism and everything to do with black culture in those neighborhoods. That they themselves are the reasons people don’t want to open up businesses there. They are the cause of their neighborhoods devaluing.
We already went over the fact that the so called victims aren’t victims at all.
Milo has a great concept of the history of civil rights, it is clear as day for anyone to read and understand.
Exactly how are “gays for trump” perverted self hating weirdos? Is it because they don’t subscribe to the “standard” stance for gays? Is it because he recognizes that Muslims worldwide are against gays? And that he is backing the only candidate that has the life of gays at heart? Or are you fooled because Muslims in the USA are generally non-practicing and don’t adhere to the rules established in the Quran as closely as the rest of them do across the world. Which has given you a false sense of what Muslims are like world wide?
There’s a difference between supporting civil rights and supporting Black Lives Matter. BLM is basically the new feminism, with people shouting it instead of saying anything. Around the time it really blew up following the Michael Brown incident, you had a lot of people protesting, making intelligent points, and focusing on enacting positive change for the black community. As time went on, a lot of those guys have seemingly left, and BLM’s recent endeavors include justifying/supporting police killings, bullying other minority groups into backing them, and generally antagonizing people for no reason.
As a metric of how far BLM has fallen, think about recent headlines. When a black therapist was shot while assisting his autistic patient, where was BLM? When routine traffic stops lead to black men being shot, where is BLM? When a black woman was arrested after asking for police protection, where was BLM? Even though I despise the way police have been acting and will call that out every time it comes up, I simply can’t side with BLM now.
Well, I suppose youre making valid points but I think youre taking a few bad apples from BLM and making it the entire BLM movement.
I can hold a rally at the governors office under the banner of “black lives matter” you cant stop me. And the media will solidify my presence as an organized meeting of BLM. There are of course radicals within all groups. You cant stop that, and the few questionable moves made on behalf of random people in support of a good cause with poor execution doesnt (or shouldnt) speak for the entire organization.
Black Lives Matter is also a more social movement than than traditional civil rights movements, and so the momentum of the causes they champion for are also very social media posts/tweet/vlog based. Take from that what you will.
I am btw in no way in support of the actual organization, but I do think at the very top their ideals line up with most peoples dreams of equality and harmony across all socioeconomic groups.
the black community has no unified mouthpiece, and has no ability to cause action that is worth anything or will lead to meaningful change. And of course I don’t occupy myself with black issues, I have more important issues to deal with. And that sentence right there (and yours remarking my knowledge of black issues )is the thesis on why america doens’t give a shit about blm. (I’m also serious about the black issues thing)
this failure is why i have to question the validity of higher education for non stem majors, and the intelligence of the people who come up with the strategies made by these so called “black activists” , and the people who push these arguments and or rationalizations because its obvious you and other mouthpieces don’t understand basic communication or ways to construct logical arguments outside your comfort zone.
Jesse Jackson still gets air time, that fucker al sharpton still gets massive airtime and is at the forefront of a lot of shit, and a bunch of other randoms that claim to be “leaders” and they are making dumbass demands, and or saying stupid shit. White people and non blacks still think these people are relevant becuase they still get time on mainstream media.
And where are these other “activist”, they aren’t definitely making time to push the issues on the mainstream in a much more intelligent and relatable manner than all the fucking retards that do make it to mainstream news. Colonel West definetly knows how to make a good argument, but he isn’t at the forefront. The people you need in the mainstream aren’t in the mainstream, and that makes the entire black movement today a fucking joke not only in my eyes (for not the reasons other non blacks laugh at it), and in the eyes of non blacks
Next time you watch the news, pay attention to the type of people talking and the arguments used for, shit pay attention to your arguments and rationalizations. those arguments are extremely hostile to people because they exclude. Black people can sit there and bitch about how much they are excluded from other shit, but whites, hispanics, and other non blacks don’t give a fuck about your problems. Other minorities have been excluded as well they dont’ care becasue they have their issues. Why should they. All they see (and this is especially true of whites, who you need to convice there is a problem) is that black people have a crime problem, and black people need to address that problem before they bitch about “police brutality”. And then they are bombarded with this crap about police brutality when all white people see is “thugs” being taken care off, and the recent actions of blm, they aren’t gonna care.
why is “black people kill more black people than cops” argument a valid one?
because you people haven’t been able to relate police brutality to non blacks. You make it an issue about you, and other people don’t give a fuck. By making it an issue about you, and then pushing this safe space shit on the mainstream, you alienate people. And people are going to use that argument, and its valid whether you like it or not. Because it is true, a more pressing problem in the minds of other non blacks is that you people kill each other and do a lot of crime. Maybe if you stopped doing crimes and killing each other, police wouldn’t treat you the way you do. By being selfish you only cement their position, because why would any rational person agree to new rules in which a problem minority has to be given the benifit of doubt, if that doubt can lead to the death of somebody doing his job. That’s not how it works, spillover violence and actions against non participants s a major issue in the american zeitgiest.
Imagine if MLK used the same bullshit tactics, and elementary arguments BLM uses today. Dude would have been beaten and or outright snubbed. Instead he constructed an argument that consited of, its not just about blacks. The oppression of blacks damages and hurts whites to
You and BLM don’t use the same style of arguments. Instead you bitch abut me, me, me
where this comic makes a good point, it fails to account for how people operate. You have to relate the argument, otherwise they do this kind of shit. MLK and Malcolm X (even in his early days as a Islamist) understood this. Just the other day I heard this
some of the arguments for, are why people don’t take them seriously
“you don’t know our pain”
“you can’t relate”
“you need to learn to live on our shoes at an appropriate time when we dictate that you should, and you should also listen and believe what we have to say”
all these arguments have been used by liberals, feminists, and gays, and they’ve all met severe ridicule and criticism.
YOu can’t get mad at non blacks for rolling their eyes, when you fail to understand that these people aren’t educated or concerned with black issues becuase they have more important things to worry about. Your resulting roll of the eyes for not knowing better, and your complete and absoulte failure to relate your issues to non blacks to make it seem like they have skin in the game too.
I can’t count the time i’ve heard blacks cry about police brutality, and whites cite how they get killed more than blacks. And what’s the standard response?
you can get way more milage by relating the argument to whites by saying, you guys do get killed, and that’s an issue. Lets fucking fix it. But nope, you want to make it about blacks, black struggle, black suffering, black, black, black. Never realizing that your bullshit identity politics ideology has not only failed you, its the force which makes it harder to accomplish your goals.
So, until you start phrasing your arguments better, blacks killing more blacks than cops is a valid argument. Until you learn to communicate and account for how people react, all those “bullshit” arguments are valid, because you can’t educate and or expect people to understand from a position of not knowing. And you can’t expect them to care enough to know in the first place. that’s what separates true black orators and leaders from the 60’s, and all this riff raff 2nd grade tier crap that is at the forefront of mainstream media.
BLM supporters, and leaders need to get educated in communication and proper debate, because they can’t do neither for shit. ANd that leads to the massive disconnect that exists today. The burden of proof is entirely on black people to prove (as unfair as it is, but nobody said it would be easy, nothing ever is), and the arguments and responses to non black criticizim to BLM don’t ever really rebute the issues non blacks are trying to make or implying in their arguments and or criticism.
Okay, so I reply to your complaint about the devaluing of neighborhoods. Citing that they largely create their own problem.
And you reply with “ut most top 1%'s are white…”
What does that have to do with devaluing black neighborhoods? Absolutely nothing.
Do you even have a basic concept of logic? Following logic points? Listen Englewood in Chicago used to be a white neighborhood. Maybe not the richest, but it wasn’t the crime invested shit hole it is now.
Over the years the whites either died off or moved to areas without blacks (no doubt at the time many whites were prejudiced against blacks). But this is a shit hole that they caused themselves starting from the 1950’s on. Despite multiple efforts by local government and foundations to solve the problems plaguing Englewood.
Now how about replying in a manner that makes sense and not try to change the subject to something irrelevant.
