Yet Another Keep People In Their Home Plan

[quote name='davo1224']While convential racism is almost dead in mainstream America, exploiting the poor (of which minorities are a disproportionately large part of) is alive and well[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately I don't think conventional racism is almost dead in all corners of the US, but I think you've hit upon an important point here.

All too often I think the racism angle gets in the way of what's really going on, the exploitation of the poor and the middle class by the uber-rich.
 
[quote name='camoor']Unfortunately I don't think conventional racism is almost dead in all corners of the US, but I think you've hit upon an important point here.

All too often I think the racism angle gets in the way of what's really going on, the exploitation of the poor and the middle class by the uber-rich.[/QUOTE]

And if you decide to argue for that (class based as opposed to race based) then you may as well burn a cross in the eyes of some.

RE: One case of bad luck before you're out on your ass
This is the real problem. Living so close to the end of one's means has become a cultural point of your average american. Letting the credit card ride for a couple of months, keeping Comcast, magazine subscriptions to further keep up with the Kardashians, etc... Credit got way too easy and now 98% of the country is paying the price. Why bother saying President Obama is trying to turn us into socialists when we always have been?
 
[quote name='davo1224']While convential racism is almost dead in mainstream America, exploiting the poor (of which minorities are a disproportionately large part of) is alive and well, and sometimes only encouraged by the fact that there is a large percentage of minorities. People engaging in the exploitation don't think they're inferior from a baseline racial/ethnic level. They think they're inferior because they think of them as dumb, and they're dumb because they're black/hispanic/non-English speaking. Having worked in sales for a decade, I can't tell you the amount of times I've seen lower income people get unbelievably screwed just because the salesperson thinks they can put one over. The thought process is, "You don't understand what I'm talking about but you need what I have? Well that means I can get the benefits without any objections."[/QUOTE]

Why do you think there are pawn shops and buy here, pay here exist in areas that are heavily populated with minorities or poor people? They certainly don't exist in affluent neighborhoods. That's America for you. The bigger problem is that they are not dumb, just uneducated on how money and finances work. This is why they are the in position they are in. If they were dumb, they wouldn't be breathing and talking. They don't have the necessary skills socially to make the difference between being ripped off and a true money saving bargain. It is all about their environment and type of culture they live in.

Back on the topic of mortgages, I don't agree with another bailout. They need to let the market dictate what happens. Isn't the lending the reason why the housing market went like it did. I see another double dip foreclosure process coming on.
The biggest travesty is the reverse mortgage plans. Targeting the elderly on the phone wasn't good enough?

Someone making $24K a year has no business buying a $300k house. Sorry...
 
[quote name='nasum']And if you decide to argue for that (class based as opposed to race based) then you may as well burn a cross in the eyes of some.[/QUOTE]
All colorblind programs disproportionately help more whites than people of color respective of their percentage of the population. People of color simply have poorer outcomes with all things economic being equal. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[quote name='xmbri']Why do you think there are pawn shops and buy here, pay here exist in areas that are heavily populated with minorities or poor people? They certainly don't exist in affluent neighborhoods. That's America for you. The bigger problem is that they are not dumb, just uneducated on how money and finances work. This is why they are the in position they are in. If they were dumb, they wouldn't be breathing and talking. They don't have the necessary skills socially to make the difference between being ripped off and a true money saving bargain. It is all about their environment and type of culture they live in.

Back on the topic of mortgages, I don't agree with another bailout. They need to let the market dictate what happens. Isn't the lending the reason why the housing market went like it did. I see another double dip foreclosure process coming on.
The biggest travesty is the reverse mortgage plans. Targeting the elderly on the phone wasn't good enough?

Someone making $24K a year has no business buying a $300k house. Sorry...[/QUOTE]
You are a mess.
 
[quote name='dohdough']All colorblind programs disproportionately help more whites than people of color respective of their percentage of the population. People of color simply have poorer outcomes with all things economic being equal. Why is that so hard for you to understand[/QUOTE]

Yeah I wasn't saying that it's not harder for minorities to make it in America. I just think that the bigger problem is exploitation of the poor and middle class by the rich. Frankly, I think the rich love the racism debate because it keeps the focus off of them and on petty squabbling about something that really shouldn't be an issue in the 21st century. Progressives are winning the culture wars but not making any headway on the fight for fair capital markets and a social democracy.

This article explains it well:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ead-half-alive/2011/06/29/AG0934tH_story.html
 
I'd agree with that Camoor.

Minorities definitely still face more obstacles. But I think the majority of them are related to exploitation of the poor, and they just get hit the hardest since they are more concentrated in the lower classes due to generations of discrimination and alienation that's stuck many families in multi-generational poverty.

We still need lots of programs to help minority families specifically, as dohdough notes. But the bigger issue is the larger economic problems you mention that keep the lower and middle classes down. Things are never going to get better while that gap between the rich and the rest continues to widen.
 
And why should it ever narrow when the people helping to widen it have a interest in keeping it that way? I mean lets be honest, people typically (not always) do what is in their best interest, and for the rich that means doing whatever is necessary to keep themselves rich. Unfortunately they have more influence (ie money) than the rest of us so their voice tends to be heard more than ours. This is why it's important for the rest of us to band together rather than fighting amongst ourselves as usual, because only together do we have a chance of being heard. But then that's startlingly close to a union for some, so we get what we usually have.
 
The problem with down-playing race is that US society, from it's foundation, is based on classism and racism being intertwined.

I'm not saying that classism/class warfare from the top isn't a huge problem; it is. I just don't agree that you can separate it from racism.
 
[quote name='dohdough']The problem with down-playing race is that US society, from it's foundation, is based on classism and racism being intertwined.

I'm not saying that classism/class warfare from the top isn't a huge problem; it is. I just don't agree that you can separate it from racism.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you can separate them either. I just don't think you can deal with only one or the other.

Classism is the larger battle that needs fought overall, but efforts to fight it must also acknowledge the race issue and that it has hit minorities hardest for generations and still have elements aimed specifically at race-related problems.

It's ignorant to ignore the race issues. But it's also ignorant to only focus on them as rural white poor have been living shitty, impoverished lives for generations as well and have also got hammered by the decline of blue collar jobs.

It's a race and class issue and both elements must be targeted to try to remedy things.
 
I always play both sides and feel like a hypocrite for doing so. I agree that racism and classism play a huge part in today's society but often find myself arguing against that very point when talking to the same people that it effects.

My problem is that many young minorities are using that as a crutch to not excel in life. When you talk to them they seem to be stuck in a cycle of parents who "didnt make it" planting the seed in their children that reason they didnt is solely do to racism. Thus the children learn that its an acceptable reason to all their hardships. This also provides a small hatred for people who do make it using "white ways."

I came from the hood and when I was making it through college and really starting to come up...most of the people I knew at the time viewed me a sell out to the black race..deeming me spending too much time in the "white mans world."
 
I'm pretty sure me, you, clak, and camoor are all in agreement with that. We need targeted programs to help with the unique issues experienced by the differing types and levels of oppression and marginalization.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']I always play both sides and feel like a hypocrite for doing so. I agree that racism and classism play a huge part in today's society but often find myself arguing against that very point when talking to the same people that it effects.[/QUOTE]
Why do you think you do that?

My problem is that many young minorities are using that as a crutch to not excel in life. When you talk to them they seem to be stuck in a cycle of parents who "didnt make it" planting the seed in their children that reason they didnt is solely do to racism. Thus the children learn that its an acceptable reason to all their hardships. This also provides a small hatred for people who do make it using "white ways."
Click to expand...
I don't see how you can agree that structural racism and classism plays a huge, as in almost 99% of all outcomes, yet argue against it to the peope it most effects.

"Overt" discrimination was "outlawed" in "officially" 1964. That's 47 years ago. The effects of over 300 years of systematic and mandated racism doesn't magically go away because of that.

I came from the hood and when I was making it through college and really starting to come up...most of the people I knew at the time viewed me a sell out to the black race..deeming me spending too much time in the "white mans world."
Click to expand...
The problem with "acting white" is that it further perpetuates that system of racism and oppression and/or gives the impression of that. Unless you're giving back to the community that birthed you, you're just taking your ball, never coming back, and not helping others in poor situations get their own balls or to go back to their community to improve the conditions. And even then, you'll still probably face resistance, but that's because there's been a long history of outsiders coming in to "help," when in reality, they just further extract resources from said communities. Their scepticism isn't unfounded.
 
Well, their's no denying that there is a subcultural problem that adds obstacles to minority.

Be it Anderson's "code of the streets" promoting a culture of honor defended with violence, or the subculture Soodmeg is referring to that leads to the "crabs in a barrell" problem of people trying to pull those trying to better themselves back down.

It's not the root of the problem---the root of the problem is all the structural racism and classism you talk about. But the subculture will also have to be dealt with as well as it's another barrier to success. When big swaths of the poor, urban environment shun education and middle class lifestyles as turning your back on your own people, that's another significant obstacle that makes it that much harder for people born inot that environment to break free and achieve success.

There's already far too many barriers to achieving the American dream in impoverished, inner city, minority neighborhoods. Having a subculture that rejects the American dream as being a traitor to your own people is an unneeded internal obstacle that needs eliminated so less people get sucked into that and drop out of school etc.
 
I remember back when Bill Cosby got a lot of shit for some of the things he said about black fathers needing to be responsible and not run away from responsibility etc. He got a lot of flak for that, and much of it from other black people who saw him similarity as some sort of traitor it seemed. But he had a point, and granted it isn't concentrated solely in the black population, but he was speaking of his own people specifically. We have to work to eliminated social and economic barriers to success in this country, but you also can't use those barriers as an excuse. if you've tried and been beaten down repeatedly, ok, you've earned the right to complain, but not if you never try.

I mean of all the people I knew growing up I'm probably the only one to make anyhting of themselves, and I came from a pretty poor, what most people would call white trash area. Most people who come from that never make much of themselves, and although I obviously didn't have all the same obstacles to deal with, I tried at least. Of course, economic barriers are a little easier to deal with, money pretty much solves that. And thankfully there are plenty of ways to get money for college these days.

But the idea that making something of one's self means selling out needs to be dealt with. It isn't "acting white" to have a good education, good career, nice home etc. I think that's how some people saw Cosby, as someone who had sold out.
 
[quote name='Clak']I remember back when Bill Cosby got a lot of shit for some of the things he said about black fathers needing to be responsible and not run away from responsibility etc. He got a lot of flak for that, and much of it from other black people who saw him similarity as some sort of traitor it seemed. But he had a point, and granted it isn't concentrated solely in the black population, but he was speaking of his own people specifically. We have to work to eliminated social and economic barriers to success in this country, but you also can't use those barriers as an excuse. if you've tried and been beaten down repeatedly, ok, you've earned the right to complain, but not if you never try.[/QUOTE]
The reason why Cosby was derided is because he has seen and lived through those problems and should understand the 1 in 45,000,000 shot he got to get where he is. The same goes for Morgan Freeman. Agency, or the ability to act, is restricted by the agency of others. Discrimination on a societal basis would mean that there are many actors that limit one's agency whether its because of class, race, sex, and/or sexuality. And different combinations of those things dictate the amount of agency you have. Which goes to my next point...

I mean of all the people I knew growing up I'm probably the only one to make anyhting of themselves, and I came from a pretty poor, what most people would call white trash area. Most people who come from that never make much of themselves, and although I obviously didn't have all the same obstacles to deal with, I tried at least. Of course, economic barriers are a little easier to deal with, money pretty much solves that. And thankfully there are plenty of ways to get money for college these days.
Click to expand...
One of the problems is that the system is purposely set up to allow a limited number of individuals to "succeed." And only those that are deemed appropriate according to certain membership into certain groups like class, race, sex, age, etc. Schools that are intended to do well, will do well because they are structured and designed to be that way. Drop-out factories will churn out drop-outs because they are also structured and designed to be that way.

Now I'm not saying it's impossible for someone to work their way out of poverty, but the deck is heavy stacked against them and requires quite a bit of luck along with a healthy sprinkling of hard work.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think members of your community don't try to get themselves out of their situations? Call me an optimist, but I refuse to believe that it's due to sheer laziness.

But the idea that making something of one's self means selling out needs to be dealt with. It isn't "acting white" to have a good education, good career, nice home etc. I think that's how some people saw Cosby, as someone who had sold out.
Click to expand...
Part of the "acting white" thing is like taking on the identity of the oppressor. Which leads to the problem that it promotes white supremacy. If being/acting "white" is the benchmark of the ideal condition, then anything not "white" is considered inferior. So it's not so much selling out, but taking a stance of superiority as well as being able to become an oppressor.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']So how does one succeed from humble beginnings and not become white in the process?[/QUOTE]

Remember that I am strictly talking about the black point of view since after all, I am black. I am sure every race has their own version.


You do it by pre approved "black" professions. Rap star, athlete, comic, actor, working in factories, working has maintenance men. Pretty much anything that keeps you blue collar.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Part of the "acting white" thing is like taking on the identity of the oppressor. Which leads to the problem that it promotes white supremacy. If being/acting "white" is the benchmark of the ideal condition, then anything not "white" is considered inferior. So it's not so much selling out, but taking a stance of superiority as well as being able to become an oppressor.[/QUOTE]

But again, getting an education and a well paying job etc. isn't "acting white."

It's simply trying to better ones self and provide a better life for yourself and your family. It has nothing to do with race. And the morons who think it does and try to drag down those trying to better themselves by breaking out of the cycle of poverty are needlessly providing another barrier to success in impoverished areas. It's hard enough for people in those areas to succeed without people around them trying to pull them down and telling them they shouldn't succeed as they're selling out etc.

Being educated and successful isn't acting white. It's acting middle class I suppose. But that's something everyone should strive for at a minimum, and no one should deride those who try to better themselves.

This subcultural phenomenon isn't race exclusive either, it's also a class thing. There's a lot of derision toward educated, white collar workers (especially intellectuals like doctors, lawyers, professors etc.) in poor, white rural areas as well. The inner city areas just have both the class and race hatred going on leading them to resent those around them who do manage to better themselves.

So that's just a subcultural issue that needs remedied so that people are supportive of those who try to better themselves and break out of poverty, rather than trying to prevent people from wanting to achieve those goals by making them feel like traitors etc. Again, there's already enough inequality and unfair obstacles people in the lower classes (and minorities in particular) have to overcome to achieve success without their own people trying to make them feel guilty about any success they do have.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dmaul1114']But again, getting an education and a well paying job etc. isn't "acting white."[/QUOTE]
This is where we hit your blind spot. If you came from a poor white background, then people saying that you're "acting white" pretty much doesn't exist. Since race isn't exactly an issue, class comes into play and takes on different connotations about your socio-economic place relative to that environment.

It's simply trying to better ones self and provide a better life for yourself and your family. It has nothing to do with race. And the morons who think it does and try to drag down those trying to better themselves by breaking out of the cycle of poverty are needlessly providing another barrier to success in impoverished areas. It's hard enough for people in those areas to succeed without people around them trying to pull them down and telling them they shouldn't succeed as they're selling out etc.
Click to expand...
But it DOES have to do with race. If there are more barriers to people of color, then obviously, race is a bigger factor than economics when it's easier for poor whites to get ahead than poor people of color.

Being educated and successful isn't acting white. It's acting middle class I suppose. But that's something everyone should strive for at a minimum, and no one should deride those who try to better themselves.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that people of color were literally barred from entering the middle-class up until 1964. Like I said, with race out of the way, you can then focus on class. Funny how that works.;)

This subcultural phenomenon isn't race exclusive either, it's also a class thing. There's a lot of derision toward educated, white collar workers (especially intellectuals like doctors, lawyers, professors etc.) in poor, white rural areas as well. The inner city areas just have both the class and race hatred going on leading them to resent those around them who do manage to better themselves.

So that's just a subcultural issue that needs remedied so that people are supportive of those who try to better themselves and break out of poverty, rather than trying to prevent people from wanting to achieve those goals by making them feel like traitors etc. Again, there's already enough inequality and unfair obstacles people in the lower classes (and minorities in particular) have to overcome to achieve success without their own people trying to make them feel guilty about any success they do have.
Click to expand...
Sure, but until the petite bourgeosie start having the class consciousness to build coalitions with the proletariat, the bourgeosie will just perpetuate the class war started by the power elite.

In other words, all the neo-liberal individualism and conservative bootstraping, which is really the same thing, doesn't change the fact that succeeding in the system means that you are perpetuating that system that creates those environments to begin with. Working harder is not a solution when we both know that it's not the main factor when determining outcomes.

"Crabs in a barrel" syndrome could also be interpreted as trying to get out of the barrel with the person that is making progress. The problem is that one crab can't support too many other crabs, so it gets dragged back down, not because no one wants to escape, but there aren't enough crabs that are organized and making it out to help others scale the walls of the barrel. Didn't think of that did ya!;)
 
All true.

But doesn't change the fact that we need to get rid of the culture where going after middle class or above success is viewed as selling out. Be it labels of "acting white" in the ghetto or becoming a "liberal intellectual" in the rural white trash areas.

Everyone should strive to better themselves, and all in society should be proud and happy to see those around them do better--or at the least not actively try to hinder people from bettering themselves.

But it DOES have to do with race. If there are more barriers to people of color, then obviously, race is a bigger factor than economics when it's easier for poor whites to get ahead than poor people of color.
Click to expand...

And I wasn't saying race didn't have anything to do with barriers--it 100% does as I've said through out the thread. I was just saying it's silly for some blacks to belittle those who achieve success as "acting white." Middle class success doesn't equal acting white--even if it was limited mostly white people generations ago. A black person can become a doctor or lawyer etc. without "acting white"--whatever that means. Becoming educated and successful doesn't automatically mean changing who you are culturally or turning your back on your friends and family etc. The view that it does mean that in some subcultures needs to be changed.

So that's just a subcultural issue that needs remedied so that people are supportive of those who try to better themselves and break out of poverty, rather than trying to prevent people from wanting to achieve those goals by making them feel like traitors etc. Again, there's already enough inequality and unfair obstacles people in the lower classes (and minorities in particular) have to overcome to achieve success without their own people trying to make them feel guilty about any success they do have.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm more of an every crab for himself kind of person. It's up to each individual to do everything they can to better themselves. But you're right that at the same time the crabs need to band together and try to change things so the crabs that come after them have fewer obstacles on their way out of the barrel. But the onus should always be on each individual crab to give their best effort to get out of the barrel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dohdough']The reason why Cosby was derided is because he has seen and lived through those problems and should understand the 1 in 45,000,000 shot he got to get where he is. The same goes for Morgan Freeman. Agency, or the ability to act, is restricted by the agency of others. Discrimination on a societal basis would mean that there are many actors that limit one's agency whether its because of class, race, sex, and/or sexuality. And different combinations of those things dictate the amount of agency you have. Which goes to my next point...


One of the problems is that the system is purposely set up to allow a limited number of individuals to "succeed." And only those that are deemed appropriate according to certain membership into certain groups like class, race, sex, age, etc. Schools that are intended to do well, will do well because they are structured and designed to be that way. Drop-out factories will churn out drop-outs because they are also structured and designed to be that way.

Now I'm not saying it's impossible for someone to work their way out of poverty, but the deck is heavy stacked against them and requires quite a bit of luck along with a healthy sprinkling of hard work.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think members of your community don't try to get themselves out of their situations? Call me an optimist, but I refuse to believe that it's due to sheer laziness.


Part of the "acting white" thing is like taking on the identity of the oppressor. Which leads to the problem that it promotes white supremacy. If being/acting "white" is the benchmark of the ideal condition, then anything not "white" is considered inferior. So it's not so much selling out, but taking a stance of superiority as well as being able to become an oppressor.[/QUOTE]
Eh, at least in the folks I've known I'd say laziness was certainly one factor, that and somehow it's cool in some areas to be a high school dropout, go figure. Some of it's economic too of course, but then they had the same opportunities I had too. Frankly I think a lot of it is a social thing, start hanging around the wrong people and you pick up their bad habits, I was smart enough not to hang around the dropouts and potheads. Shame too, one of the guys I knew was really smart, I looked up to him a lot as kids until he decided that dropping out of school and getting high was a better idea. Unless something was going on I don't know about at home we were basically the same he just went a different path for whatever reason.
 
[quote name='dohdough']All colorblind programs disproportionately help more whites than people of color respective of their percentage of the population. People of color simply have poorer outcomes with all things economic being equal. Why is that so hard for you to understand?


You are a mess.[/QUOTE]

Thanks!:applause:
 
I don't agree that Cosby should've realized that he was a one in a million shot and just kept quiet. We need more black leaders to step up and tell people how it is.

Being black doesn't give you a "Get out of fatherhood free" pass. Institutional racism and years of discrimination have nothing to do with making the conscious decision to have nothing to do with your children.

At the same time, it's not just a black phenomenon. Poor white fathers tend to disappear when the baby is born too.

I think it's time to go beyond finger pointing and look for real solutions that don't start with the defeatist attitude that the system is rigged so effort is futile.
 
Problem is that it's basically viral. If the parents felt that way it's passed down to their kids and so on. Changing that attitude isn't easy though, not when it's so ingrained. A lot of young people in poorer areas have next to no role models either, I mean kids need positive examples in their lives and if they don't have that it isn't helping any.
 
Britney Spears?

I've always been fascinated at the illegitimate rates, combined with # of kids, and then put against class. Seems there's a certain correlation there doesn't it?
 
[quote name='depascal22']I don't agree that Cosby should've realized that he was a one in a million shot and just kept quiet. We need more black leaders to step up and tell people how it is.[/quote]
1 in 45 million shot actually and I don't expect him to shut up while enjoying his millions. Nothing even close to that. But being right in the mix of things gives him a unique perspective on how the little cogs interact with eachother to create such an unequal system. And what does he do with that perspective? He doesn't touch it with a ten foot pole because he's bought into his own hype. The same with Morgan Freeman, who literally plays "magic negro" roles.

And we have plenty of black leaders that tell people how it really is. Do you know what happens to them? They're called race-baiting racists that always pull out the race card and never "get over it." Or they get minstreled like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson.

Being black doesn't give you a "Get out of fatherhood free" pass. Institutional racism and years of discrimination have nothing to do with making the conscious decision to have nothing to do with your children.
Click to expand...
No, being black doesn't make you exempt from those responsibilities, all thing being equal, but of course, they aren't. The fact that 1 in 4 black males have been or are currently being incarcerated Does have a huge impact on this. Having a criminal record as a black man literally destroys almost every single avenue of gaining steady employment with a living wage income. The same is not true for white males.

At the same time, it's not just a black phenomenon. Poor white fathers tend to disappear when the baby is born too.
Click to expand...
This is true. The argument that poor people are lazy and unsophisticated is thousands of years old.

I think it's time to go beyond finger pointing and look for real solutions that don't start with the defeatist attitude that the system is rigged so effort is futile.
Click to expand...
I don't think bootstrapping is a valid argument. When racism has been eliminated, we can talk til we're all blue in the face about lazy people and how they should get off their asses. Until then, ignoring foundational problems in the system won't make things for the better. All the work in the world doesn't protect a black man from racial profiling, hasher and longer sentences, housing discrimination, loan discrimination, wage discrimination, job discrimintation, glass-ceilings, and a host of other things. I'm not saying that one shouldn't try, but all that hard work is worth a lot less. We don't live in a meritocracy.
 
They key on this issue is that as a society we need to do everything we can to improve life in poor areas, and in particular poor inner city areas.

The opportunity to succeed their is much lower than in any other area of the country due to all the obstacles in the forms of broken homes, violence, drug markets, gangs.

A child growing up in that environment has much less of a chance of doign well in school and succeeding in life than someone that doesn't have all those obstacles in their neighborhood and family environments.

It's not suprise so few succeed and so many fall into crime and drug use and end up further tarnishing their chances of success by having a criminal record etc. They have many more opportunities to get involved in drug sales (dealers the only people hiring in that neighborhood), gangs (need protection) etc. than kids growing up in nice areas or even in poor rural shitholes.

Thus the single biggest problem is the isolation and abandonment of these neighborhoods that lead to large chunks of the minority population being born into environments where the deck is stacked against them from the beginning.

Yes, personal choice still matters. But our choices are heavily influenced and constrained by the environments we live in. If we really want to fight urban poverty and crime, changing the environments has to happen.

And not in the form of typical gentrification efforts that simply push these people and problems out of these neighborhood and somewhere else as they're replaced by commerical property and new condos and apartments they can't afford.

It means getting rid of the trouble makers who are too far gone to rehabilitate and improving the neighborhood for the people that live there. Improving housing while keeping it affordable for them, bringing jobs to that area and having programs to put area residents into those jobs and so on. There's no easy solution to it, but it's time we really start making some serious efforts at fixing these areas and truly helping the people living in them, instead of doing nothing but arresting them and displacing them elsewhere through traditional gentrification efforts.
 
dohdough, bootstrapping has to be a valid argument. We can't just sit around and wait for racism to disappear because it will never disappear. Mankind will always find something to divide itself. Even when we're all the same color, there will be one huge identifier that will mark the haves and the have nots. So the only thing left is bootstrapping.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']It means getting rid of the trouble makers who are too far gone to rehabilitate and improving the neighborhood for the people that live there. Improving housing while keeping it affordable for them, bringing jobs to that area and having programs to put area residents into those jobs and so on. There's no easy solution to it, but it's time we really start making some serious efforts at fixing these areas and truly helping the people living in them, instead of doing nothing but arresting them and displacing them elsewhere through traditional gentrification efforts.[/QUOTE]

Isn't that kind of utopian? Has any nation ever succeeded at this (I'm talking from the socioeconomic perspective, not the race perspective)
 
[quote name='camoor']Isn't that kind of utopian? Has any nation ever succeeded at this (I'm talking from the socioeconomic perspective, not the race perspective)[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying you can make society perfect.

I'm saying we can at least truly try to fix bad neighborhoods on a case by case basis rather than doing little more than constantly arresting people who live there and not solving the problems that cause that have caused that area to be a crime hot spot for decades. And that we can do more than past gentrification efforts that usually do nothing to help those who live there but rather just displace them elsewhere.

And yes, there are numerous examples of various community interventions in the criminological literature that show big reductions in crime at least from police and other agencies actually working with communities and solving problems that are leading that area to be crime prone. Though that doesn't speak to all the other social ills of course, those are beyond my area of focus and expertise.
 
[quote name='depascal22']dohdough, bootstrapping has to be a valid argument. We can't just sit around and wait for racism to disappear because it will never disappear. Mankind will always find something to divide itself. Even when we're all the same color, there will be one huge identifier that will mark the haves and the have nots. So the only thing left is bootstrapping.[/QUOTE]
Well just to clarify, I'm not saying that we shouldn't work hard to end racism. When I'm talking about bootstraps, I mean that working harder(than white people) and not being an absentee father won't magically solve the racism problem. You'll still have to deal with being black means socially. In other words, you can't fix classism to solve racism.

You can be a black family living in a nice suburb with a nice household income of $250k, but that still doesn't isolate them from being followed in stores, pulled over by police, lacking the overall wealth of white neighbors, and all sorts of other stuff.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I'm not saying you can make society perfect.

I'm saying we can at least truly try to fix bad neighborhoods on a case by case basis rather than doing little more than constantly arresting people who live there and not solving the problems that cause that have caused that area to be a crime hot spot for decades. And that we can do more than past gentrification efforts that usually do nothing to help those who live there but rather just displace them elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

Good point. From what I've seen, gentrification typically occurs because a prime piece of land is housing folks who could not afford to live there were it not for the abject living conditions. Not to sound crass, but gentrification is more of a market correction then a true effort to clean up the neighborhood.

Interestingly enough I live in a community that realizes the need to provide housing for all tiers of the econimic perspective. The community paper often reiterates this point - someone's got to wait tables, stock grocery shelves, and pick up the trash, and if the community doesn't provide nearby housing then we all pay more and contribute to increased traffic congestion. Of course it doesn't hurt to live near policy wonks who have, on average, the highest IQ in the nation.

[quote name='dmaul1114']And yes, there are numerous examples of various community interventions in the criminological literature that show big reductions in crime at least from police and other agencies actually working with communities and solving problems that are leading that area to be crime prone. Though that doesn't speak to all the other social ills of course, those are beyond my area of focus and expertise.[/QUOTE]

Cueing on the last sentence, it just seems to me that a community like this would be prime pickings for an organized crime outfit or hardcore gang.
 
Well, I think everyone would agree that racism like that needs to go away. But at the same, time there's really not much that can be done. There are always going to be people who hate those different than them. All we can do is hope that their number shrink as society continues to become more diverse (the country will be majority minority in 20 years or so, and likely majority Hispanic in 40 or 50 years), and of course deal with any incidents of direct racism--like racial profiling--when possible. As well as deal with all the structural inequality that does follow race lines for sure etc.

But at the end of the day, it's still up to each individual to work as hard as they can to succeed and overcome whatever obstacles are in their path. It sucks that paths aren't equal, and sucks even more than a lot of that inequality is along racial lines, but that's just the world were in and you can only play with the hand dealt you.

Again, that doesn't absolve the rest of society from doing what we can to reduce those inequalities. We can't wipe out racism, but we can work to fire police officers and police leaders who engage in and support racial profiling, we can work to stop ignoring and isolating poor inner city neighborhoods, we can use programs like affirmative action to help level the playing field some etc.

Point being it's not an either/or situation. Society has to do it's part to change things, but every individual still has to have the drive and work ethic to do their own part to overcome obstacles and succeed as society isn't going to change overnight.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Well just to clarify, I'm not saying that we shouldn't work hard to end racism. When I'm talking about bootstraps, I mean that working harder(than white people) and not being an absentee father won't magically solve the racism problem. You'll still have to deal with being black means socially. In other words, you can't fix classism to solve racism.

You can be a black family living in a nice suburb with a nice household income of $250k, but that still doesn't isolate them from being followed in stores, pulled over by police, lacking the overall wealth of white neighbors, and all sorts of other stuff.[/QUOTE]

What helps is to set a positive example. Be that guy that volunteers to coach soccer. Help out on field trips. Have positive encounters with everybody you meet.

I moved to the mostly white suburbs of Indianapolis in 2007 and I have never been pulled over or harassed by cops. Why is that? Probably because I don't openly smoke weed, blast rap music, or generally act the fool in public. I don't own or brandish firearms at anytime and I always drive with license, registration, and insurance. Is it really that hard? I know there's inequities in the judicial system but the easiest way to beat the damn system is to stay the eff out of it.

As for discrimination against guys in the ghetto, wouldn't you shun men that actively sell drugs instead of raising their kids? Wouldn't you shun men that make your life miserable during your short walk through "their block"? I know we're locked up at an extremely high rate but what do you do about it? Stay clean.
 
[quote name='camoor']
Cueing on the last sentence, it just seems to me that a community like this would be prime pickings for an organized crime outfit or hardcore gang.[/QUOTE]

1. Organized crime and hardcore gangs are very rare and not a problem in the vast majority of cities. There's not a big mafia presence any more, and most "gangs" are just groups of loosely affiliated small groups of youths causing problems together.

So those things aren't huge threats in most communities.

2. A community where police and other city agencies are partnering with, and working with, community members is one of the least likely places for gangs and crime in general to take hold.

Crime, gangs etc. settle in highest concentrations neighborhoods that are essentially past the tipping point. The residents who cared enough to intervene (be it directly or by calling the cops) have moved away, or became too afraid to intervene anymore etc., the cops aren't doing much as they aren't getting as many calls for service from that area unless something major happens like a shooting etc.
 
[quote name='depascal22']What helps is to set a positive example. Be that guy that volunteers to coach soccer. Help out on field trips. Have positive encounters with everybody you meet.

I moved to the mostly white suburbs of Indianapolis in 2007 and I have never been pulled over or harassed by cops. Why is that? Probably because I don't openly smoke weed, blast rap music, or generally act the fool in public. I don't own or brandish firearms at anytime and I always drive with license, registration, and insurance. Is it really that hard? I know there's inequities in the judicial system but the easiest way to beat the damn system is to stay the eff out of it.

As for discrimination against guys in the ghetto, wouldn't you shun men that actively sell drugs instead of raising their kids? Wouldn't you shun men that make your life miserable during your short walk through "their block"? I know we're locked up at an extremely high rate but what do you do about it? Stay clean.[/QUOTE]

You sir win post of the day.
 
[quote name='camoor']Good point. From what I've seen, gentrification typically occurs because a prime piece of land is housing folks who could not afford to live there were it not for the abject living conditions. Not to sound crass, but gentrification is more of a market correction then a true effort to clean up the neighborhood.[/quote]
I don't think I would describe it as a "market correction" because value created in different ways. For instance, many cities were gentrified as a response to desegregation. The GI Bill, FHA, and racism created the White Flight, so capital/resources were removed from the cities and created suburbs(along with the interstate system of course, but the creation of it was devastating to many communities and another topic) as well as having infrastructure built around them. Obviously, urban centers went to shit and some cities decided to invest some money to attract businesses and residents. But one has to understand that gentrification doesn't happen overnight. It takes decades. It's not some random event of chance; its a concerted effort of capital to displace those without. Development projects are cheap so you can maximize profits. And it works for reverse-gentrification(the displacement of poor people into more suburban areas) now.

Interestingly enough I live in a community that realizes the need to provide housing for all tiers of the econimic perspective. The community paper often reiterates this point - someone's got to wait tables, stock grocery shelves, and pick up the trash, and if the community doesn't provide nearby housing then we all pay more and contribute to increased traffic congestion. Of course it doesn't hurt to live near policy wonks who have, on average, the highest IQ in the nation.
Click to expand...
It's nice when it works, but it doesn't work forever. Boston was like that 15 years ago. Now people are getting completely priced out.

[quote name='depascal22']What helps is to set a positive example. Be that guy that volunteers to coach soccer. Help out on field trips. Have positive encounters with everybody you meet.

I moved to the mostly white suburbs of Indianapolis in 2007 and I have never been pulled over or harassed by cops. Why is that? Probably because I don't openly smoke weed, blast rap music, or generally act the fool in public. I don't own or brandish firearms at anytime and I always drive with license, registration, and insurance. Is it really that hard? I know there's inequities in the judicial system but the easiest way to beat the damn system is to stay the eff out of it.[/quote]
This is nice and all, and I'd even go as far to say that I know a few black men that haven't been pulled over by cops, but statistics straight from law enforcement refute my personal anecdotes. If I remember correctly, some places just stopped trying to report racial numbers because it was so out of hand.

That also doesn't change the fact that whites were 4 times as likely to have drug related contraband than black people when stopped. Which means that the overt drug use and brandishing of firearms are irrelevant. Not to mention that black people are treated differently than whites. Staying out of the system isn't as big of a problem as being targeted by the system. That's the difference. Black people didn't somehow start losing their collective minds and becoming criminals in the 70's. They were criminalized.

As for discrimination against guys in the ghetto, wouldn't you shun men that actively sell drugs instead of raising their kids? Wouldn't you shun men that make your life miserable during your short walk through "their block"? I know we're locked up at an extremely high rate but what do you do about it? Stay clean.
Click to expand...
In a capitalistic society, drugs are currently one of the few avenues someone from an economically depressed area can attain capital. Is that a fault of the individual or the system when economically depressed areas are purposely kept that way?
 
[quote name='dohdough']
In a capitalistic society, drugs are currently one of the few avenues someone from an economically depressed area can attain capital. Is that a fault of the individual or the system when economically depressed areas are purposely kept that way?[/QUOTE]

The system is largely to blame, and we need to work to change things.

But people are still responsible for their actions. If you're selling drugs, you should be dealt with (though probably not incarcerated unless they're also getting involved in violence etc.) and you should be shunned by law-abiding citizens as you're further adding to the decay of the neighborhood by helping proliferated drugs.

Even in poor ghettos the majority of residents are just working hard and doing their best to get buy. Those are the people that deserve our sympathy, and those are the ones we should be working to help by getting the criminal riff raff out of their areas and working to improve their communities economically.

Yeah, it sucks that many have fallen into crime in large part because of the system. But they don't get a free pass for the bad decisions they made because of it. Some are just lost causes and just need locked up, others need removed for a bit and rehabilitated etc., but overall we have to focus more on fixing the communities for the law abiding citizens and future generations.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']The system is largely to blame, and we need to work to change things.

But people are still responsible for their actions. If you're selling drugs, getting involved in violence etc., you belong in prison if caught and you should be shunned by law-abiding citizens.

Even in poor ghettos the majority of residents are just working hard and doing their best to get buy. Those are the people that deserve our sympathy, and those are the ones we should be working to help by getting the criminal riff raff out of their areas and working to improve their communities economically.[/QUOTE]
See, I don't completely disagree with you, but the torture factories and modern-day slave labor that is our prison system kinda sours me to the whole "lock them up and throw away the key" thing that's so prevalent in the system. I don't think "shunning" all criminals is the way to go. I'm not saying that some people shouldn't be removed from the general population, but that doesn't mean that we need to lock away all addicts, non-violent offenders, or even all violent offenders for that matter.
 
I agree with all that.

Prison should be for the worst of the worst. Serious violent offenders, people with very long criminal records who've had many chances already etc.

For minor offenders they need shunned, but should be in community based treatments with a focus on rehabilitation. It does more harm than good to remove minor offenders from the community as you're taking away some one's mother or father etc. and thus increasing the chances their kids get on the wrong track etc.

So yeah, the criminal justice system in the US still needs a major reform. Pretty much all the research evidence out there shows that the "lock them up and throw away the key" mass incarceration with long sentences approach does little to nothing to prevent crime.

Politicians just have no interest in the evidence and moving away from those kind of policies get's them labeled as "soft on crime" which is political suicide given our society on average still has very harsh and punitive views on how to deal with crime.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']1. Organized crime and hardcore gangs are very rare and not a problem in the vast majority of cities. There's not a big mafia presence any more, and most "gangs" are just groups of loosely affiliated small groups of youths causing problems together.

So those things aren't huge threats in most communities.

2. A community where police and other city agencies are partnering with, and working with, community members is one of the least likely places for gangs and crime in general to take hold.

Crime, gangs etc. settle in highest concentrations neighborhoods that are essentially past the tipping point. The residents who cared enough to intervene (be it directly or by calling the cops) have moved away, or became too afraid to intervene anymore etc., the cops aren't doing much as they aren't getting as many calls for service from that area unless something major happens like a shooting etc.[/QUOTE]

Interesting. Watching the news, I was always under the impression that gangs were a serious and prevelent problem.

[quote name='dohdough']I don't think I would describe it as a "market correction" because value created in different ways. For instance, many cities were gentrified as a response to desegregation. The GI Bill, FHA, and racism created the White Flight, so capital/resources were removed from the cities and created suburbs(along with the interstate system of course, but the creation of it was devastating to many communities and another topic) as well as having infrastructure built around them. Obviously, urban centers went to shit and some cities decided to invest some money to attract businesses and residents. But one has to understand that gentrification doesn't happen overnight. It takes decades. It's not some random event of chance; its a concerted effort of capital to displace those without. Development projects are cheap so you can maximize profits. And it works for reverse-gentrification(the displacement of poor people into more suburban areas) now.


It's nice when it works, but it doesn't work forever. Boston was like that 15 years ago. Now people are getting completely priced out.[/QUOTE]

I should have been more specific. There are local government policies that keep the prices of a certain area of housing artificially low, but the folks have to first prove that their income does not exceed a set amount. I know that one area of housing is in a real nice section of town near where I live, it's nice, it's beautifully landscaped, it's nothing like "the projects". Residents must chip in and do the collective yard maintenance themselves or they will get fined. In addition, any new condominum or apartment building must allocate a certain percentage of units to the program (I think it's 5%).

I live in the kind of place that would make most conservatives absolutely livid. Needless to say it works beautifully and I love it.
 
[quote name='camoor']Interesting. Watching the news, I was always under the impression that gangs were a serious and prevelent problem.[/quote]

The media is a terrible source for an accurate picture of the crime problem as they only focus on the extreme and dramatic case. That's the "dramatic fallacy" as Marcus Felson called in it his book "Crime and Everyday Life."

The media puts a lot of attention on murders, gang crimes etc. and thus people think they are far more common than they area.

And gangs do exist--it's just that large and highly organized ones (the real bloods and crips of the 80s and 90s etc.) are very few and far between.

Gangs in reality are more just groups of youths that get together, give themselves a name and commit some crimes together. It's not some huge, organized enterprise with a steady membership and clear chain of command etc. Just a group of neighborhood youths causing problems, with members coming and going frequently etc.

It's a problem. But it's not an organized crime problem and it's not usually a case where taking down one "gang" will have a big impact on the crime rate. There's always going to be neighborhood youth banding together and causing problems in ran down areas.
 
[quote name='camoor']Interesting. Watching the news, I was always under the impression that gangs were a serious and prevelent problem.[/quote]
I'd say they haven't been a real problem in maybe the last 20 years. Now the 70's, 80's, and early 90's, it was a completely different game because they were a lot more organized.

Oh, and stop watching network news...or at least try to ignore the parts when they always talk about a particular part of the city being "overrun" with "gangs." ;)


I should have been more specific. There are local government policies that keep the prices of a certain area of housing artificially low, but the folks have to first prove that their income does not exceed a set amount. I know that one area of housing is in a real nice section of town near where I live, it's nice, it's beautifully landscaped, it's nothing like "the projects". Residents must chip in and do the collective yard maintenance themselves or they will get fined. In addition, any new condominum or apartment building must allocate a certain percentage of units to the program (I think it's 5%).

I live in the kind of place that would make most conservatives absolutely livid. Needless to say it works beautifully and I love it.
Click to expand...
Boston has a similar policy, but it's based on square footage as well as income. The problem comes when the percentage necessary doesn't counter act all of the displacement. I'm not sure what development is like in your neck of the woods, but at one point there was at least 1 tower going up every year for the last 10 years in Boston. I remember one year, there were like 4. It was crazy.

I hope your hood has better success.
 
[quote name='dohdough']I'd say they haven't been a real problem in maybe the last 20 years. Now the 70's, 80's, and early 90's, it was a completely different game because they were a lot more organized.
[/QUOTE]

Even then it was overblown and really only a problem in certain major cities like LA that did have big, organized gangs. Most other cities just had small groups rather than gangs, and lots of Blood/Crip wannabe's that had nothing to do with the real gangs etc.

i.e. Boston thought they had a major gang problem in the 90s when youth gun homicides went way up.

But they did a big intervention/study (commonly referred to as the "Boston Gun Project" and/or "Pulling Levers") and found it was just a lot of "groups" of youths selling drugs and shooting each other rather than any big, organized gangs.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Even then it was overblown and really only a problem in certain major cities like LA that did have big, organized gangs. Most other cities just had small groups rather than gangs, and lots of Blood/Crip wannabe's that had nothing to do with the real gangs etc.

i.e. Boston thought they had a major gang problem in the 90s when youth gun homicides went way up.

But they did a big intervention/study (commonly referred to as the "Boston Gun Project" and/or "Pulling Levers") and found it was just a lot of "groups" of youths selling drugs and shooting each other rather than any big, organized gangs.[/QUOTE]
Oh for sure. I meant that organized crime, rather than a bunch of neighborhood youth gangs, was a bigger problem back in the day. Shakedowns aren't as common, or at least as public, as they used to be.

edit: By bigger problem, I meant that there aren't as many balls out gang wars like the Ghost Shadows and Flying Dragons shooting up neighborhood restaurants.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top