|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 27, 2021 7:16:18 GMT -5
OK now do 1887.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 27, 2021 14:22:44 GMT -5
1) most racism occurs with the Government and not private markets. Including redlining. And this is just something you believe even though it isn't true and you don't really have any back-up for it. You post data that government programs contributed to it and pretend like the government was the totality of the problem. The inability (or let's be honest, unwillingness) to understand complex situations or nuance is why you can't actually engage on this, and would rather stick to the trite maxims libertarians try to simplify our complex world into. 12) Discriminations by the Government is far worse than private market discriminations. There is no recourse for Government discrimination. You can bring legal challenges, or change the government. But your free market just does what it will. 3) Racial discrimination that occurred 50, 100, and 150 years ago has very little to do with today. I will agree that *some* racial wealth inequality may have relevance today as it relates to housing discriminations that occurred in the 30's through the 60's - which all came from the Government. I can't even. You think there's absolutely no continuity between situations 50 years ago (within MANY people's lifetimes) and today? Or, alternatively, your position implies that there has been no racism in the last 50 years that impacts society? I just can't help but bring this back to the OP, when you and Bill Maher want white people to get a pat on the back for being less racist than they were before, but you won't even admit racism that occurs today. Bad people, bad values.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 27, 2021 14:42:05 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things.
But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools).
I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country....
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,398
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 27, 2021 15:43:29 GMT -5
12) Discriminations by the Government is far worse than private market discriminations. There is no recourse for Government discrimination. You can bring legal challenges, or change the government. But your free market just does what it will. When the legal system discriminates - there is no recourse. There is no other legal system to go to. Without equal justice under the law - there can be no equal justice. And when the Government discriminates - the people discriminating (judge, police, politician) do not bear the cost of their discrimination. When you discriminate in the private sector - the person doing the discrimination bears the cost. The person being discriminated can go somewhere else. It may not be perfect, but there is a chance for recourse that simply doesn't exist in the Government sector.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,398
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 27, 2021 15:51:34 GMT -5
1) most racism occurs with the Government and not private markets. Including redlining. And this is just something you believe even though it isn't true and you don't really have any back-up for it. You post data that government programs contributed to it and pretend like the government was the totality of the problem. The inability (or let's be honest, unwillingness) to understand complex situations or nuance is why you can't actually engage on this, and would rather stick to the trite maxims libertarians try to simplify our complex world into. Not sure how to respond here? You have claimed that redlining was the result of free markets. I provided a couple sources on redlining - showing that this was the result of the HOLC and then the FHA categorizing neighborhoods and discriminating with where black people could buy houses or get loans for houses. That the Housing Act of 1949 then continued to legalize racial discrimination in housing.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,398
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 27, 2021 15:54:44 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things. But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools). I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country.... Great - it was through the Government power that we had legalized slavery and Jim Crow. And we want to grant credit to the Government for ending this...
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,398
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 27, 2021 16:01:34 GMT -5
3) Racial discrimination that occurred 50, 100, and 150 years ago has very little to do with today. I will agree that *some* racial wealth inequality may have relevance today as it relates to housing discriminations that occurred in the 30's through the 60's - which all came from the Government. I can't even. You think there's absolutely no continuity between situations 50 years ago (within MANY people's lifetimes) and today? Or, alternatively, your position implies that there has been no racism in the last 50 years that impacts society? I just can't help but bring this back to the OP, when you and Bill Maher want white people to get a pat on the back for being less racist than they were before, but you won't even admit racism that occurs today. Bad people, bad values. The racism today doesn't remotely compare to the racism that occurred 50 years ago. To imply that it is no different is completely dishonest. I grant that there is *some* connection/implication from 50 years ago as it relates to wealth. And where it exists - it lands at the feet of the Government in not having equal protection under the law. That implying that free markets in the US are inherently racists doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Jun 27, 2021 16:12:36 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things. But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools). I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country.... Great - it was through the Government power that we had legalized slavery and Jim Crow. And we want to grant credit to the Government for ending this... Yes.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 27, 2021 16:15:20 GMT -5
You can bring legal challenges, or change the government. But your free market just does what it will. When the legal system discriminates - there is no recourse. There is no other legal system to go to. Without equal justice under the law - there can be no equal justice. And when the Government discriminates - the people discriminating (judge, police, politician) do not bear the cost of their discrimination. When you discriminate in the private sector - the person doing the discrimination bears the cost. The person being discriminated can go somewhere else. It may not be perfect, but there is a chance for recourse that simply doesn't exist in the Government sector. You're assuming that the market has provided an alternative.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 27, 2021 16:16:19 GMT -5
And this is just something you believe even though it isn't true and you don't really have any back-up for it. You post data that government programs contributed to it and pretend like the government was the totality of the problem. The inability (or let's be honest, unwillingness) to understand complex situations or nuance is why you can't actually engage on this, and would rather stick to the trite maxims libertarians try to simplify our complex world into. Not sure how to respond here? You have claimed that redlining was the result of free markets. I provided a couple sources on redlining - showing that this was the result of the HOLC and then the FHA categorizing neighborhoods and discriminating with where black people could buy houses or get loans for houses. That the Housing Act of 1949 then continued to legalize racial discrimination in housing. You provided a couple of sources that showed that the way the Housing Act was implemented had impacts on redlining. You did not provide anything to talk about redlining outside of those strictures.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 27, 2021 16:16:56 GMT -5
I can't even. You think there's absolutely no continuity between situations 50 years ago (within MANY people's lifetimes) and today? Or, alternatively, your position implies that there has been no racism in the last 50 years that impacts society? I just can't help but bring this back to the OP, when you and Bill Maher want white people to get a pat on the back for being less racist than they were before, but you won't even admit racism that occurs today. Bad people, bad values. The racism today doesn't remotely compare to the racism that occurred 50 years ago. To imply that it is no different is completely dishonest. I grant that there is *some* connection/implication from 50 years ago as it relates to wealth. And where it exists - it lands at the feet of the Government in not having equal protection under the law. That implying that free markets in the US are inherently racists doesn't make any sense. We aren't implying that it is no different. But you're asking to be lauded for being less terrible, while still being terrible, and that's a pretty %*$#ty thing. Because you completely ignore private sector racism (and lay it all at the feet of the government, when in fact the government continually HAS to regulate the private sector from being racist), you completely ignore how the free markets are having racist outcomes (and of course, the expansive definition of racism that you apply to government policies are things you refuse to recognize in private sector outcomes).
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 27, 2021 16:20:20 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things. But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools). I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country.... Great - it was through the Government power that we had legalized slavery and Jim Crow. And we want to grant credit to the Government for ending this... Are you trying to claim slavery was a government program? You're really smoking something. The problem with slavery is that it was a market the government didn't intervene in for too long (and not in the right ways).
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 27, 2021 16:21:54 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things. But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools). I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country.... Great - it was through the Government power that we had legalized slavery and Jim Crow. And we want to grant credit to the Government for ending this... Slavery existed since pre-historic times. It existed in the US for more than 100 years before there was a US. But you blame "the government" for it. Jim Crow was practiced before it was legalized, and it's been practiced since it was banned. Government didn't create it. But government did make it illegal, something that the free market never did. As I said, in a democratic system, governments tend to do what the voters want them to do. This is, of course, why voter suppression is a big deal -- something you also seek to deny the importance of.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,114
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 27, 2021 17:10:28 GMT -5
The racism today doesn't remotely compare to the racism that occurred 50 years ago. To imply that it is no different is completely dishonest. To imply that it’s not relevant to today is dishonest. Where did it come from then, and what is even the point of asserting that? II have family members who are racist, pretty much admittedly to certain extents, who were teenagers/growing up 50 years ago, where did they get those attitudes from? When you’re white, you get to hear these racist ideals expressed still in this day covertly, especially within families as they aren’t as fearful for repercussions. I also wonder where is your experience or rationale for speaking about racism? Genuinely curious as you seem to have very strong opinions about it and have drawn very decided conclusions. Do you have a lot of experience discussing with minorities, particularly Black people, and their experiences, especially over generations since you’re trying to make that point about how it’s changed so much with racism? I seriously doubt you have. When people here try to share their experiences with you, you respond with things like “I’ve never called the police on people, and idiots call the police for no reason all the time”. These attitudes show me you aren’t even open to the discussion. It’s a defensive response (i.e not me!) and attempt to devalue the actual routine harassment for daily activities that Black people face by saying some white people, or any person, can face them to.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,114
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 27, 2021 17:34:48 GMT -5
In a democracy, for the most part the government does what voters want it to do. When it does racist things, it's because voters want it to do racist things. But yeah, what we are seeing here is basically a display of libertarian faith. It's a matter of faith that all evils spring from government, and without government either they would be non-existent or else so minor as to be non-problems. This completely ignores that it was only through the application of governmental power that a) we ended slavery, b) we ended Jim Crow, c) we desegregated (to some extent) schools (mainly only government-run schools). I mean, you might think from what Blue says that we should expect private schools are the great bastions of racial equality in this country.... I guess this is what confuses me, and maybe everyone else can chime in since I don’t see much honesty from him. Shouldn’t a libertarian and highly religious person be MORE concerned with racism? Wouldn’t this make them want to be more outwardly spoken against it and not diminish any of the value of its presence in society? Wouldn’t they want to acknowledge white privilege and how, in more scenarios than not, there is a default to white and they don’t face discrimination, in the private or government sphere, at all? Then again, we’re dealing with someone who when asked about what discrimination he has faced as a white person for being white, said that he may have gotten passed over for his looks of not being as attractive. Which is ironic in itself — people who are more attractive in general get an advantage, but this is not racial. And if we go to looks, we know whose appearances and hairstyles actually face more discrimination on a racial basis. Either way, I can’t believe that was an actual attempt at trying to say white people in any way face similar disadvantages to minorities.
|
|