Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

halfmanhalfbronco

Ok, so let's have a meaningful talk about inner city violence.

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, easybronc said:

Lots of stupid ideas here.  The MWC board never disappoints.

The most effective way to reduce inner city violence is to end welfare.  Make families to take care of their own, stop paying women to have kids without dads.  More kids with dads, male role model at home, more incentive to get jobs, stay in school, not get arrested, etc.  End welfare.

Ok, so let us assume welfare has played a roll in the problem.  In your bootstraps model, who watches the kids?  How does the now single mother at work pay for child care?  What about the lack of jobs in certain inner cities?  What about the dad doing years in prison because he bought some pot?   Don't do the crime if you can not do the crime amirite?  Let's ignore the reasons why politicians decided a social safety net was necessary, just bootstrap up, right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
2 hours ago, SalinasSpartan said:

So your solution to inner city violence is literally every resident should just move?

My advice to anyone looking to escape the violence is to move to a better place.

I realize that some people like the violence and won't move.  Other people are blind to the concept and stay in poverty / crime needlessly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

It costs money to move.  Hard to do that if you don’t have two Nickels to rub together.

Don't make excuses.  It can be done, it's not that difficult.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

You are joking right.  A one bedroom apartment in our area costs ~1500 a month.  

No, I'm not joking.

Why are you assuming your City / State is the only option?

There are a ton of affordable, non-violent options.  Take a risk and leave the ghetto for a better State if need be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

My advice to anyone looking to escape the violence is to move to a better place.

I realize that some people like the violence and won't move.

So how does the sage advice of “if you don’t like inner city violence, move” address the problem of inner city violence? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, easybronc said:

Lots of stupid ideas here.  The MWC board never disappoints.

The most effective way to reduce inner city violence is to end welfare.  Make families to take care of their own, stop paying women to have kids without dads.  More kids with dads, male role model at home, more incentive to get jobs, stay in school, not get arrested, etc.  End welfare.

Why would men that don’t stay with the woman and the kid when they’re getting paid, stay when they stop? Taking away welfare resulting in loving partners and fathers seems like underpants gnome logic.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, youngredbullfan said:

Eliminate generational poverty. 

That's the simplest way to sum up what everyone (who isn't an idiot) has been saying in this thread. 

 

There's many ways to do it, but all of them cost money. A lot of money. This is something that most of white America is unable to deal with yet. Maybe we'll get there one day. 

We, and you especially, are going to need different rhetoric.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

No, I'm not joking.

Why are you assuming your City / State is the only option?

There are a ton of affordable, non-violent options.  Take a risk and leave the ghetto for a better State if need be.

It actually is hard, my friend.  Listen, I grew up in poverty.  Raised by a single mom who made $7.00 an hour taking care of my sister and I.  The average cost to move for a single person, bare minimum is 5k.  That may seem like nothing to you.  To my mom, sister and I, 5k may as well have been 5 million.  You simply do not get it.  That is ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

We, and you especially, are going to need different rhetoric.

What I will say:

The promise of our great nation's ideals compels us to extend the American Dream to everyone!

 

What I'd like to say:

Some people may have to give up buying that second boat or stuffing their fat suburban mouths with yet another helping of PF Changs so that black people who live 10 miles away from them aren't consigned to a life of despair, poverty, misery, and an early death.

 

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

It actually is hard, my friend.  Listen, I grew up in poverty.  Raised by a single mom who made $7.00 an hour taking care of my sister and I.  The average cost to move for a single person, bare minimum is 5k.  That may seem like nothing to you.  To my mom, sister and I, 5k may as well have been 5 million.  You simply do not get it.  That is ok.

It's pretty incredible that people don't get this. If you were born with capital, you have more options. If you go through life without questioning it, you start assuming everyone was born with capital.

Like, duh, why don't poor people who have to walk 10 miles to get to a grocery store just, like, buy a Beamer? Just solved the problem of food deserts. Boom.

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sactowndog said:

I would make it mandatory.  Everyone should have some military training and if we had mandatory military service we would get in less dumb wars.  

This makes zero sense whatsoever. More military training does not equal less dumb wars.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SDSUfan said:

All of these things are true but not central to the discussion.  changing ones behaivior doesn't require the clock to be reset. It requires that society no longer accept the obvious dysfunction in these communities  and begin a cultural shift away from the attitudes and morals that foster it.

BTW; The best job at Popeye's isn't the $10/hr guy, it's his boss.

Work is its own reward. Good behavior is its own reward.

Stay in school.

Don't break the law.

Don't have kids out of wedlock.

Get a skill

Work hard

These central truths are in reach for EVERYONE. It doesn't take genius. It takes delaying gratification, eating shit sandwiches and getting up the next day and doing it again.

 

 

If your pie in the sky ideas worked there would be no poor.  Typical con.... blame the poor 100% to justify not doing anything and showering tax cuts and corporate welfare on the rich but never ask them to act responsibly. 

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sactowndog said:

I would add immigration enforcement.  Taking a parent from a child for crimes committed years ago only exacerbates the problems.  To many conservatives talk about fathers but turn the other way.  We need family friendly policies across immigration, welfare, justice etc.  

I won't argue against the immorality of separating families but I doubt this is a significant factor in causing black on black crime.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I do think that well meaning white 60s liberals caused some of this with some of the first generation welfare models.  

We have this idea that we need to moralize welfare and punish/teach poor people how to do things the "right way."  60s Liberals got a case of "white man's burden" and religious fundamentalists thought they needed to tie their anti-sex, anti-drug, pro religion dogma to social welfare.  

We created places like Cabrini Green in Chicago and said the only way you can get any type of public housing assistance is to live in this type of hell hole.  You are not allowed to leave these black areas because we won't hire you and you can't get any type of mortgage.  It is the "prison model" where if you concentrate a bunch of criminals together all you breed is criminality.  If all you to is concentrate poor people in public housing projects you have food deserts, no jobs, crime, and the only thing that pays the bills is drugs.  It is a self fulfilling prophecy.

The answer is to stop this food stamp and housing voucher/project madness.  Can you imagine if instead of a check we would send social security recipients a $600 housing voucher and some food stamps every month?  Dumb!  

Just give everyone UBI and then people magically do have the money to move...and can take their time to find a job. Stop moralizing welfare and putting all these strings on it!

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, youngredbullfan said:

What I will say:

The promise of our great nation's ideals compels us to extend the American Dream to everyone!

 

What I'd like to say:

Some people may have to give up buying that second boat or stuffing their fat suburban mouths with yet another helping of PF Changs so that black people who live 10 miles away from them aren't consigned to a life of despair, poverty, misery, and an early death.

 

So....socialism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Ok, so let us assume welfare has played a roll in the problem.  In your bootstraps model, who watches the kids?  How does the now single mother at work pay for child care?  What about the lack of jobs in certain inner cities?  What about the dad doing years in prison because he bought some pot?   Don't do the crime if you can not do the crime amirite?  Let's ignore the reasons why politicians decided a social safety net was necessary, just bootstrap up, right?

 

I Love You Man GIF by memecandy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Akkula said:

Well, I do think that well meaning white 60s liberals caused some of this with some of the first generation welfare models.  

We have this idea that we need to moralize welfare and punish/teach poor people how to do things the "right way."  60s Liberals got a case of "white man's burden" and religious fundamentalists thought they needed to tie their anti-sex, anti-drug, pro religion dogma to social welfare.  

We created places like Cabrini Green in Chicago and said the only way you can get any type of public housing assistance is to live in this type of hell hole.  You are not allowed to leave these black areas because we won't hire you and you can't get any type of mortgage.  It is the "prison model" where if you concentrate a bunch of criminals together all you breed is criminality.  If all you to is concentrate poor people in public housing projects you have food deserts, no jobs, crime, and the only thing that pays the bills is drugs.  It is a self fulfilling prophecy.

The answer is to stop this food stamp and housing voucher/project madness.  Can you imagine if instead of a check we would send social security recipients a $600 housing voucher and some food stamps every month?  Dumb!  

Just give everyone UBI and then people magically do have the money to move...and can take their time to find a job. Stop moralizing welfare and putting all these strings on it!

Most public housing was directed at post-war working class, and many were white.  The projects in NOLA, Los Angeles, Chicago and NYC were well-integrated or mostly white, and were initially well-funded.  But the government is not designed to handle the O&M of skyrise residential, so it fell into decay, and the working class (also as a result of white flight and suburbia) moved out and the cities then filled them with the unemployed, many of which were black.  I agree with the overzealous government not being able to properly analyze long-term costs to maintain safety and health in public housing.  Your remedy for housing vouchers and food stamps has a flaw in that back in the 80's and 90's they used to give out food stamps, and it was used as barter for things that they weren't designed for.  Currently housing vouchers are used, but it doesn't do much to deter bad habits, as you have to live somewhere to receive it, so it would be used for rent regardless. 

Public housing was intended to be temporary, and the reality of government not going to help the unwilling was in place.  It needs to be brought back.  I am more than fine subsidizing folks who are working, striving for a better life, and trying to move on up.  I am not fine with those that treat government like a parent that spoils you with an allowance even if you didn't do anything to deserve it.  We first need to find a way to have enough jobs and a blend of housing stock in the private market for neighborhoods to stand on their own, and then we remove the perpetual welfare (unless a waiver is granted for specific reasons) mindset in government and in the lowest-income communities.  This also goes for the rural housing program with USDA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Akkula said:

If your pie in the sky ideas worked there would be no poor.  Typical con.... blame the poor 100% to justify not doing anything and showering tax cuts and corporate welfare on the rich but never ask them to act responsibly. 

Typical white guilt liberal.  This is a two way street.  Handing over more money is not going to fix the problem if the communities don't also make some changes.  Cultural changes.  What is valued.  D.C. spends a ton of money per student and has terrible results.  Raining money is not some miracle cure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

It actually is hard, my friend.  Listen, I grew up in poverty.  Raised by a single mom who made $7.00 an hour taking care of my sister and I.  The average cost to move for a single person, bare minimum is 5k.  That may seem like nothing to you.  To my mom, sister and I, 5k may as well have been 5 million.  You simply do not get it.  That is ok.

This is true, and mirrors my circumstances, too. I had one difference. My mother was actually able to relocate to Vegas with my sister and a soon-to-be born me. We were dirt poor, and (gasp) on public assistance. But one of the fundamental differences between poverty and generational poverty was my mother was able to borrow a little bit of money from her mother to make the relocation from Northern California. The move fundamentally changed our life for the better, eventually allowing us to move from poverty, to lower middle class, to upper middle class. When you are born into generational poverty, even borrowing a few hundred dollars from family to relocate is impossible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

We, and you especially, are going to need different rhetoric.

Why? Did we fix generational poverty? Because if so, the Appalachias need some help. We don’t quite hear as much about them, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...