True to our Native Land

[DragonStryk72]

gosh, I guess because Shaquille ONeal is seven feet tall, that must mean that ALL black folks have the ability to be seven feet tall.

Improper analogy, MFM. height is a simple matter of genetics, there's nothing more than that to it. For the analogy to work, you would have to be saying that, genetically, blacks and women are not on the same level.

Now, Shaq is a pro ball player, does that mean that all blacks and women have the ability to become pro ball players? Yes they do, in fact, but not all of them are going to succeed at it, or want to.

I agreed with Affirmative Action, when it was needed, back when whites would *refuse* to bunk with blacks, when they were disallowed paths in the military based on race or gender. It was necessary when white schools refused to allow black students, or when restaurants refused them service. What we're talking about now, is a small gap in pay in some areas, gaps that would disappear if the people involved would a) assert their rights, or b) stop settling for the positions that are paying them less based on gender. If they have the aptitude, and they meet the requirements, then there is more than one place that they can work.

This is not something the government needs to be involved in anymore. Now, were we to alter Affirmative Action to help those who need it, without race as a factor (say, instead, going by need), then yes, I would continue to support it, but as of now, it is only weakening the ones it seeks to help. the same can be said for this denomination. It is not Christian to help the black child who is starving, only to turn a blind eye to the white kid who is starving.

[retiredman]

Improper analogy, MFM. height is a simple matter of genetics, there's nothing more than that to it. For the analogy to work, you would have to be saying that, genetically, blacks and women are not on the same level.

Now, Shaq is a pro ball player, does that mean that all blacks and women have the ability to become pro ball players? Yes they do, in fact, but not all of them are going to succeed at it, or want to.

I agreed with Affirmative Action, when it was needed, back when whites would *refuse* to bunk with blacks, when they were disallowed paths in the military based on race or gender. It was necessary when white schools refused to allow black students, or when restaurants refused them service. What we're talking about now, is a small gap in pay in some areas, gaps that would disappear if the people involved would a) assert their rights, or b) stop settling for the positions that are paying them less based on gender. If they have the aptitude, and they meet the requirements, then there is more than one place that they can work.

This is not something the government needs to be involved in anymore. Now, were we to alter Affirmative Action to help those who need it, without race as a factor (say, instead, going by need), then yes, I would continue to support it, but as of now, it is only weakening the ones it seeks to help. the same can be said for this denomination. It is not Christian to help the black child who is starving, only to turn a blind eye to the white kid who is starving.

I have never suggested turning a blind eye to anyone's hunger.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/...th/002484.html

Income

Overview

Real median income for the nation remained unchanged between 2002 and 2003 for all types of family and nonfamily households.
Race and Hispanic Origin

Real median income did not change between 2002 and 2003 for non-Hispanic white households (about $48,000), black households (about $30,000) or Asian households (about $55,500).

Households with Hispanic householders (who can be of any race) experienced a real decline in median income of 2.6 percent between 2002 and 2003.

Comparison of two-year moving averages (2001-2002 and 2002-2003) showed that the real median income for households with householders who reported American Indian and Alaska native, regardless of whether they reported any other races, increased by 4.0 percent to $35,441. There was no change for those who chose the single race of American Indian and Alaska native ($32,866).

[Dilloduck]

People have different attitudes, skills and motivations toward finances. There are hundreds of categories that you could divide our population into and you would ALWAYS find that one group makes more money than another group.

[retiredman]

There are hundreds of categories that you could divide our population into

no doubt. the link provided, however, divides them by race. and the data supports my assertion.

next?

[Dilloduck]

no doubt. the link provided, however, divides them by race. and the data supports my assertion.

next?

Your assertion is that blacks are downtrodden because their median income is lower than others? Is having a low income a direct correllary to how many opportunities have been denied ?

[retiredman]

Your assertion is that blacks are downtrodden because their median income is lower than others? Is having a low income a direct correllary to how many opportunities have been denied ?

you suggest that I have implied causation. That is inaccurate and sloppy reasoning.

[glockmail]

They can never be "fairly" compensated. It's history that cannot be undone. From here on out your handouts and uplifts are an insult.

Especially insulting to me, who's ancestry was in Europe when all this shit was going down. I should therefore be exempt from paying any costs of AA programs and welfare for blacks.

[Dilloduck]

you suggest that I have implied causation. That is inaccurate and sloppy reasoning.

Then why do blacks have a lower median income than whites?

[Yurt]

Then why do blacks have a lower median income than whites?

he meant exactly what you said. i told him a few posts above to stop using big words, i guess the same applies to complex reasoning.

[glockmail]

Then why do blacks have a lower median income than whites?

When you compare married blacks to married whites, they don't.

[retiredman]

Then why do blacks have a lower median income than whites?

your statement was that blacks are downtrodden because they have lower median incomes. Not vise versa.

YOur question should be, if lower median incomes are NOT the cause, they why are blacks downtrodden?

you need to understand the difference between causation and correlation.

Let me know when you do, then formulate a question that makes sense.

[Dilloduck]

When you compare married blacks to married whites, they don't.

Well hell---it's a simple fix then. Make em all get married !!!

[glockmail]

Well hell---it's a simple fix then. Make em all get married !!!

The decadence of the liberal culture has caused an epidemic of unwed mothers, especially among blacks. That is the root cause of poverty.

[Yurt]

your statement was that blacks are downtrodden because they have lower median incomes. Not vise versa.

YOur question should be, if lower median incomes are NOT the cause, they why are blacks downtrodden?

you need to understand the difference between causation and correlation.

Let me know when you do, then formulate a question that makes sense.

dumdum, it wasn't HIS statement, it was what he presumed and ask if that is what you are saying.

i told you to stop using big words and trying to think too hard

oh, don't forget "context" appears you still can't grasp it

[DragonStryk72]

I have never suggested turning a blind eye to anyone's hunger.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/...th/002484.html

Income

Overview

Real median income for the nation remained unchanged between 2002 and 2003 for all types of family and nonfamily households.
Race and Hispanic Origin

Real median income did not change between 2002 and 2003 for non-Hispanic white households (about $48,000), black households (about $30,000) or Asian households (about $55,500).

Households with Hispanic householders (who can be of any race) experienced a real decline in median income of 2.6 percent between 2002 and 2003.

Comparison of two-year moving averages (2001-2002 and 2002-2003) showed that the real median income for households with householders who reported American Indian and Alaska native, regardless of whether they reported any other races, increased by 4.0 percent to $35,441. There was no change for those who chose the single race of American Indian and Alaska native ($32,866).

Again, this is not proof of prejudice, or a necessity to specifically uplift one group over another. This only says that median income (the average income, or basically, fair to middling), hasn't really moved much of the past few years (though apparently whites and blacks are being discriminated against and should be given benefits until we catch up to the Asians ), and some of that is, yes, cultural and economic in nature. Over crowded schools, a lack of higher education, and high crime are more a factor these days than race.