Dealing with the illogical perceptions of White America

Not sure about Sanger but - I do know Eugenics ideology and its history quite well. Mendel argued one should not help the poor as this would be tampering with the natural order. The poor are in their place for a reason "genetic inferiority" and to help them would be to promote the spread of inferior genes. This was Mendel's position (one of the early proponents of the theory) however, this does not represent the sum total of the ideology.

 

Mendel was wrong

In a caste society the poor are locked into their poverty

But America is merit based

Our poor are there through bad choices of their own choosing

 

Interesting assertion. Could you supply the data?

 

I agree that Mendel was wrong. Your statement on the poor is also wrong. While some are where they are because of bad choices - many are poor because working 40 hours a week does not provide a living wage. Many are poor because they grew up in a disfunctional environment which was not of their choosing - hence they did not get good training/socialization or education.

When a kid goes to school hungry every day - and is surrounded by poverty gangs and other disfunction - it is preposterous nonsense to claim that this has nothing to do with that kid not rising to the top.

There is a difference between a person not taking advantage of the opportunity provided and one not given much of an opportunity to begin with.

Your claim that ours is a merit bases system is also flawed - for reasons explained to you previously. Oligopolies engage in anti competitive and other nefarious practices to bastardize free and fair markets. This ensures that "Merit" is not the deciding factor.

I will give you one personal example. For years I worked in sales in the chemical industry. There used to be 10 or more companies vying for the attention of good salespeople in that sector. If you sold something (making the company more money) - you got paid - as companies were competing for the attention of good sales people.

Now there are 2 companies in that sector - large publicly traded oligopolies. These companies bought up all the competition (something that is supposed to be illegal). This creates downward pressure on wages due to reduced competition for labor. They squeeze every penny out of the sales person. Finance actually take courses on how to screw the salespeople. (not a joke).

If you do not like it - too bad - you only have one other company to go to and they do the same thing (and are essentially owned by the same international financiers that sit on the board of directors).

Merit has been stripped out of the equation. It has been transplanted by "OBEY" and do as you are told and do not expect to be compensated much for your efforts. Decreased compensation for effort is justified by "the shareholders - we have to do what is best for the shareholders".

When private companies were in the market - bonuses and perks were common. These have gone the way of the dinosaur. In a private company you have the owner at the top - and then the worker. There was appreciation for what the worker did. In a large oligopoly it is the BOD at the top - they choose the CEO and other top leaders. Next is the shareholders and way way down is the worker.

So how does this play out in the economy ? What happens to the money that the company steals from the salesperson - and "stealing is actually the proper term". If the sales person gets that money it gets quickly spent in the local economy. Instead - it goes to a nameless faceless shareholder who may not even live in the country never mind spend in the local economy.

"We have a merit bases system" is largely a platitude. Sure there are some areas where this exists but, it gets less and less every year.

When you see things like the Dow/Dupont merger you should be saying WTF - how is this not a violation of anti-competition law. How does this not reduce competition ? What is seldom discussed is how this also reduced wage competition. Reduction of wage competition is in fact one of the main reasons for the merger. Merging the companies will result in huge layoffs - the math for the shareholders is great - the math for the middle class and economy ? not so much.

 

While we cant all be brain surgeons or Wall St investment bankers very few high school graduates without criminal records or drug addictions and who have gone to a trade school are working for minimum wage

Bad choices can begin at a very early age

Yes many kids are cursed by the sort of pad parents - or single mom parent, that lead to poverty

But they are emulating that bad behavour and most will grow up to be bad adult role models themselves

You dont break the cycle of poverty by rewarding bad personal decisions

 

~~~~~~
Why would you spread false conspiracy lies?
The Three Women Behind The Black Lives Matter Movement …
http://madamenoire.com/528287/the-three-women-behind-the-black-lives-matter-movement/
Source: Black Lives Matter Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi co-founded the Black Lives Matter Movement when George Zimmerman was acquitted in 2013 for fatally shooting Trayvon Martin. They created the hashtag, which spread like wildfire.

George Soros' Open Societies Foundation and others in his U.S. funding operations soon began to support #BLM in 2013, just as they support #OWS and #AntiFa.

 

It is a whole lot more than those working at min wage that do not earn a living wage. You did show some understanding that environment/nurture (bad parents and other factors) have a role which is a start.

What you completely avoided was the points I made on Monopolism and how this eliminates or reduces "merit". Did my comments not make sense or something ?

 

I dont know what monopolism is

But I know that behind every able bodied loser at the bottom of society is a lifetime of bad personal choices

 

No they are there because that is where they chose to settle. History is full of people with plenty of potential that accomplished for one reason or the other nothing. People waste their potential all the time and for a wide variety of reasons.

 

~~~~~~
Would you agree that the greatest contributor to poverty in America is the breakdown of the Family Unit? The breakdown of the Family Unit is the direct result of LBJ's "War on Poverty" and "Great Societies Programs"

.
POV: LBJ’s War on Poverty 50 Years Later | BU Today …
http://www.bu.edu/today/2014/pov-war-on-poverty-50-years-later/
... LBJ’s War on Poverty ... Yet the “war” declared by Johnson centered almost exclusively on one of the Great Society ... to the surprise of the program’s .

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

50 Years After LBJ’s “War on Poverty,” a Call for a New ...
https://www.democracynow.org/2014/1/9/50_years_after_lbjs_war_on
Fifty years ago this week, President Lyndon B. Johnson launched his “war on poverty,” which led to many of the federal and state initiatives low-income Americans rely on today — Medicaid, Medicare, subsidized housing, Head Start, legal services, nutrition assistance, raising the minimum wage, and later, food stamps and Pell grants.

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

The Collapse of the Family Unit as the Building Block of …
http://www.akdart.com/culture2.html
The Collapse of the Family Unit ... For 40 years after the family's breakdown in the ... under President Johnson's "War on Poverty," and by turning a blind eye to ...

 

Soros is Jewish???

 

There is a reason why Mendel is primarily known for his work in genetics.

 

Monopolism/Oligopolism is what is explained in the previous post - decreased competition. Monopoly is when you have only one supplier - Oligopoly is when you have just a few (who essentially are able to control price - and often work together to control price) because of lack of competition. This is a bastardization of fair and free markets and it also decreases labor competition.

You are creating a black vs white - good vs evil paradigm. Sure there are some losers at the bottom - a lifetime of bad choices. Some at the bottom are there for other reasons. Then there is a whole lot in the middle who are being shafted and sodomized by the Oligopolies - despite making reasonably good choices and decisions.

 

I agree that people waste - or do not realize- their potential. The idea that this is where they chose to settle is way too simplistic and often just not true. Nurture has a lot to do with things. Who your parents were and the kind environment in which you were raised. Social status and other social factors - particularly social connections - and of course economics (wealth or lack thereof and general economic conditions) also plays a role.

There is a reason for the adage - I would rather be lucky than good ... or its not what you know its who you know. The adage "If one works hard one will succeed" is simply not always true. Sure - hard work helps - but there are may other factors.

 

I would not agree. I would claim that breakdown of the family it is a contributing factor but - there are many other factors - some that are far more important.

There is only so much pie to go around. If the piece of the pie allocated to the middle class shrinks at a rate faster than the pie is growing this is going to create more poor - by definition. It is simple mass balance.

The idea that the continued movement of wealth from 90% into the hands of the 10% hasn't contributed to poverty is to deny logic, reason and simple math.

The factors that have facilitated this transfer have little to do with breakdown of the Family unit. Sure on an individual basis would likely find some statistical correlation but on a macro basis the whole group is getting poorer regardless of the Family unit.

 

And do factor in compound interest over 30 or more years !

 

And what might that reason be ?

 

~~~~~~
As fellow poster requested, "Could you supply the data"? Certainly if you're so certain of the premise you're putting forth there should be more than sufficient data to support what you've written.

 

I do not understand ? Data for what ? All I said was that interest rates should be factored into the calculation of what is paid into SS vs what is paid out ?

 

So white people oppose welfare because they think they are losing their social and financial status?

THEY ARE!

The liberals are LITERALLY taking from those that have, to give to the have-nots. It has nothing to do with race.

But liberal idiots will tell us that we have an obligation to the collective and to stop being racist... even conduct studies to attempt to "prove" it.

Get over yourself, and get your little meat hooks out of my pockets. Its really that simple. ​

 

When African Americans make up 11% of the population, and use 30% of the social safety nets..... they use the most.

This is a very simple commonsense concept.

That isn't racist, its just a simple fact.

 

If all you have, in addressing people with opposing views, is screaming "Racist!"... you might need to get a new agenda.

 

Sorry, that is one of the most respected groups and if they weren’t they wouldn’t be used. It might make you feel better knowing they fight against black hate groups as well. I am sure organizations like that are always being sued. I remember being upset when they fought for the neo-Nazis to be able to march through the Jewish neighborhood because it was legal.. It is obviously you know very little about SPLC

 

Wonderful...more unacknowledged racism, It’s kind of sad that these “white” conservative organizations don’t care enough about poor people. I guess they see the needy as gold bricks. It’s a wonderful way to be able to hurt human beings, but be happy because they fight for billionaires

 

No we scream racist...to racists!