If reparations are ever granted, there also needs to be a credit totaling the social benefits already paid out, section 8 housing, welfare, food stamps, Medicaid etc.
It is ironic that the same liberals who wax on about reparations are pushing policies that overwhelmingly hurt the poor and blacks even today. Justice Kennedy's comment from the 90's is a perfect illustration: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." While maybe great for a Harvard Law grad who has the drive and ability to seize every opportunity, most people are neither qualified to not interested in doing this. Most of us want a stable (culturally, geographically, economically) location in which to raise a family. Yet the liberal consensus in Washington has been tearing that down for decades: the Right on economics; the Left on culture; and both in geography.
Meanwhile, while wealthy, white, liberal elites preach "defund the police" and "sleep around" and "history is racist" through every institution they control, they teach their own kids very differently.
Don't forget the war on drugs pushed by conservative elites which incarcerated a good portion of the black males in poor communities. That along with the crazy idea that you can house 1000s of impoverished people in large complexes isolated from the rest of the city and not get insular deviant behavior. Creating "The Projects" was part of the Roosevelt's New Deal and combined with the drug wars to create the environment for what we see today.
I have been mystified for years at the destruction of the black family AFTER slavery and Jim Crow.
You look back and you cannot help but admire the grit and determination it took to survive those things and keep families and communities intact.
Then along comes the war on poverty and the great society and all of a sudden you see this incredible decline. Why?
There are times, in my most cynical moments, when I think that Lyndon Johnson and that whole crew of democrats from the 1960's and 1970's knew what they were doing, and the erosion of the black family and black communities was planned with buying black votes a bonus. Its almost like they knew they were going to poison them with sugar.
See my reply above. The New Deal is what created the projects and that combined with the drug wars pushed mostly by conservatives created what we see today. By the time Johnson arrived on the scene the Black family had already been harmed.
Also, "These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."
That quote alone tells you everything you need to know about Johnson's intentions in "helping" black people.
Nice Coleman Hughes essay. I like Coleman Hughes and his writing. That said, I'd quibble with some of his 'facts' but his thesis is right on the mark. He says that 25% of Southerners owned slaves; most historians believe that 5% did. He also says in the South substantial wealth was 'inherited'; that's just false. The Civil War decimated the Southern economy and it's destruction by the North was intentional. It took almost a hundred years for it to reemerge as a viable economy, some areas doing better than others. The majority of people living in the USA today are descendants of immigrants who arrived post-1890, many arriving with nothing to their name. (My own ancestors left behind everything they owned no matter where they were from - Latvia, Ireland, Scotland - that is, if they owned anything in their home country). In the USA, people who inherit money do so because they have relatively stable families over decades, with one generation giving to the next. But stuff can also happen and when dysfunction is introduced - alcohol, drugs, immorality, divorce etc - it can destroy generational wealth. (Even religion can upset the apple cart. In my own family, the largest fortune was made in 19th century granite & monument works in the New England area. One relative gave her entire fortune to the Catholic Church is the 1950's!). Hard work and family cohesiveness looms large as one of the greatest factors in 'wealth formation'. You're a lucky person indeed if you're family has kept the thread going.
Coleman's discussion on spending and consumption disparities ring true. I have lived in NYC for 35 years after 20 years of a 'thrifty New England' upbringing. When I was young, I literally had kids in my class who wore rags. But any NY subway, on a daily basis one can observe ghetto kids with the latest phones, sneakers and backpacks, far better outfitted than what I observed as a kid. During Covid, one had to line up to shop in Soho where the tony shops like Prada, MARNI etc are located. It was jaw dropping to see dozens of primarily black kids dressed up in the latest gear worth thousands and thousands of dollars each. It was a stunning sight as least for me. I have not denied my kids anything, but I would not indulge them in such a gross display of consumption (and they know it and have incorporated my thriftiness in their own adult lives today).
Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned about the risk of destroying the black family structure in the 1960's due to social policies that would encourage women on public assistance to raise families without fathers. His analysis turned out to be prophetic. Over 50% of black children don't live with a father in their household.
Considering the divorce rate among whites at around 38% and blacks at approx 42% - I think fatherless households are roughly equivalent no matter if one is white or black.
Divorce rates may be similar but you need to look at births in wedlock. Over 70% of black children are born to single moms. So there are proportionally way less black marriages to start with.
While I am in total agreement that it is best for children to live in two parent families, the amount of children living in single parent families is rising across all groups. Currently 75% of white children, 69% of Hispanic Children, 43% of Black children live in two parent families with all groups seeing a downward trend over the last generation. So, this is not the result of poverty or the cause of general poverty. However, it is a very concerning factor with regards to the health and well being of our children.
Not public housing because we know how much of a disappointment that has become, but real infrastructure to improve quality of life in impoverished neighborhoods. Public libraries, schools, venues, improved street lights, better roads, etc. In poor neighborhoods youтАЩll have no problem finding a 7-11 but where are the grocery stores? Coffee shop/Internet cafes? Poor neighborhoods often get seen as unattractive for business and as I see it the reason is a lack of care by city planners and public agencies. ThereтАЩs never a problem with investing in a well lit park for an affluent neighborhood. But drive down the poor part of town and itтАЩs so dark and unattractive you wonтАЩt want to stop anywhere even if there was somewhere to stop.
This will certainly strengthen the black community, but these are also the hardest things to do. I am convinced, the only way to change culture is to shame it. Until that happens nothing will change, unfortunately.
Shaming will cause further rebellion. Convincing an entire population that education would be beneficial is more difficult but necessary. That education must include valuing family and excepting that work is the way to maintain your life. All crime must be punished until people realize that committing a crime will land them in jail.
If teachers were paid and treated fairly, there would be no need for a teachers union. If the union would act on the teachers behalf when students cause problems in the classroom, a union would be useful. Otherwise the teachers union and most if not all unions only serve to perpetuate themselves. You can't reform employers, so until then, some sort of organization is needed to protect workers. I was in a union for many years and the only thing that they did was, if you paid your dues, they protected you from them. It's a difficult problem without an easy solution.
From the Newark NJ BOE website "For the 2022-23 school year, the starting salary for a teacher with a BachelorтАЩs in the Newark Board of Education is $62,000, starting salary for a teacher with a MasterтАЩs degree is $64,000, and starting salary for a teacher with a Doctorate is $66,000. Teachers with more experience can earn more than $100,000!"
Starting salary in FL. $44,000. They are listed as the 14th highest in the US and it's all downhill from there. If you're going to talk about numbers you have to look at all the states. No one becomes a teacher in public education to build wealth.
The "short hours" include the hours before and after school for preparation, The "generous vacations that many teachers use to improve their skills and pay for out their own pockets. The
"fat pensions" that aren't enough to live on. Then there's the money that teachers spend on supplies for their classrooms that aren't provided by the school, the administrations that don't back the teachers when the children act up and threaten them. The parents that the teachers have to deal with who think that their child is an angel and would never cause any trouble. Here's one small incident. A teacher was told that she had to tutor students that couldn't read at grade level. One student told her, "My daddy can't read, and I don't need to learn to read neether (sic)." When's the last time you taught in a public school classroom?
According to US government statistics, the average amount of hours per week a teacher works is 53. They get between 9-12 weeks total off per year. The average worker takes off 17 days in total or a little over 3 weeks. Total hours work per year has teachers working above average total hours, but less than other professional class workers in private employment.
I have several teachers in my family. So I know that most of what you say is BS. If teachers were so dedicated, why are our urban schools such failures. And where I live, health care plans are gold-plated and pensions are 6 figures. You are buying into union propaganda. While I am sure there are many good and dedicated teachers, as a whole, they are a disappointment.
It would be prudent if you backed up your BS claim with some evidence. I can't answer for urban schools throughout the US. Just because where you live the streets are paved with gold, that doesn't make it true for everywhere. I'm not a unionist and don't even know what they are saying. "As a whole the are a disappointment." So, you're saying that millions of teachers throughout the country are a disappointment. I think you have a case of overeach.
This woi├▒f certainly strengthen the black community, but these are also the hardest things to do. I am convinced, the only way to change culture is to shame it. Until that happens nothing will change, unfortunately.
Great point, Sophia! It is NOT the skin color, per se, that is the problem today. Nor is it "white supremacy" (a bogeyman that never dies). It is a culture borne out of prison culture and the pathology of drugs and gangs that has been glorified and spread by music culture and as a protest against past social sins. The "War on Poverty" and the expansion of the welfare state, with its family killing requirements, is the real villain.
The black family was split up across different plantations - husband and wife and children sent to different masters. Strengthening the family is key to success but we canтАЩt pretend slavery didnтАЩt contribute.
Black families were not always split up. A number of slaveholders endeavored to keep them together often forming their own enclaves. Thomas Jefferson had generations of families living together; those who left, Sally Hemings brother for instance, did it so on their own volition after being freed. ItтАЩs impossible to generalize the тАШslave experienceтАЩ as there was lots going on and situations differed.
Yes, black families were split up by slavery. And they were grieved by that. And they sought to get back together again when slavery ended.
It only took a few decades for Democrats to destroy even the *desire* to keep black families together. Welfare removed black men from the family picture just as effectively as slave-owners ever did.
Thomas Sowell (90+ year old legendary black economist) does an excellent job of debunking the notion that the breakdown of the black family was a legacy of slavery. ItтАЩs an attractive and intuitive idea but not supported by facts.
Black columnist Jason Riley of the Wall Street Journal also disabuses the fact that the black community has always been in turmoil since slavery. He cites pre-1960тАЩs statistics when blacks had higher employment rates, lower divorce rates than whites and far more stability than inner city black life today. Seems like LBJтАЩ тАШGreat SocietyтАЩ giveaway and new welfare laws which created dependency did quite a bit of harm.
I agree. And sadly, the programs that create government dependency are causing poor results in rural/rust belt white communities today as well. Bad policy and poor cultural choices (undervaluing education, having children early and out of wedlock) increasingly impact both American blacks and whites. We need to have a real conversation about what values and actions result in success or failure. I think economist Glenn LouryтАЩs concept of Social Capital is spot on and needs to be a part of this conversation.
And many blacks are still on plantations created by their democrat masters - inner cities on government 'assistance' payed by all races. See how that is working out by visiting:
You said "Strengthening the family is key to success but we canтАЩt pretend slavery didnтАЩt contribute." Again, that was many generations in the past. And nobody alive today owned slaves in America.
Before LBJ's Great Society 75% of black children were born to married parents and had a father to help raise the children. Because of the rules of welfare more than 72% of all black babies are born out of wedlock and there is no male presence to help raise the children.
Is that because of slavery or bad left wing policy designed to keep the black communities "in their place" and to keep voting for the Socialist Party?
If reparations are ever granted, there also needs to be a credit totaling the social benefits already paid out, section 8 housing, welfare, food stamps, Medicaid etc.
It is ironic that the same liberals who wax on about reparations are pushing policies that overwhelmingly hurt the poor and blacks even today. Justice Kennedy's comment from the 90's is a perfect illustration: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." While maybe great for a Harvard Law grad who has the drive and ability to seize every opportunity, most people are neither qualified to not interested in doing this. Most of us want a stable (culturally, geographically, economically) location in which to raise a family. Yet the liberal consensus in Washington has been tearing that down for decades: the Right on economics; the Left on culture; and both in geography.
Meanwhile, while wealthy, white, liberal elites preach "defund the police" and "sleep around" and "history is racist" through every institution they control, they teach their own kids very differently.
Don't forget the war on drugs pushed by conservative elites which incarcerated a good portion of the black males in poor communities. That along with the crazy idea that you can house 1000s of impoverished people in large complexes isolated from the rest of the city and not get insular deviant behavior. Creating "The Projects" was part of the Roosevelt's New Deal and combined with the drug wars to create the environment for what we see today.
You are not entirely wrong.
I have been mystified for years at the destruction of the black family AFTER slavery and Jim Crow.
You look back and you cannot help but admire the grit and determination it took to survive those things and keep families and communities intact.
Then along comes the war on poverty and the great society and all of a sudden you see this incredible decline. Why?
There are times, in my most cynical moments, when I think that Lyndon Johnson and that whole crew of democrats from the 1960's and 1970's knew what they were doing, and the erosion of the black family and black communities was planned with buying black votes a bonus. Its almost like they knew they were going to poison them with sugar.
See my reply above. The New Deal is what created the projects and that combined with the drug wars pushed mostly by conservatives created what we see today. By the time Johnson arrived on the scene the Black family had already been harmed.
Didn't he say something like: "We'll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 100 years." ?
Also, "These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."
That quote alone tells you everything you need to know about Johnson's intentions in "helping" black people.
He did. Sadly, I think he was right.
I don't doubt that LBJ knew exactly what he was doing.
ThereтАЩs something to be said for тАШpersonal agencyтАЩ no matter the odds and environment.
Coleman Hughes wrote a great piece for Quillette that analyzed the cultural and behavioral differences that play into the wealth discrepancies between races. https://quillette.com/2018/07/19/black-american-culture-and-the-racial-wealth-gap/
Nice Coleman Hughes essay. I like Coleman Hughes and his writing. That said, I'd quibble with some of his 'facts' but his thesis is right on the mark. He says that 25% of Southerners owned slaves; most historians believe that 5% did. He also says in the South substantial wealth was 'inherited'; that's just false. The Civil War decimated the Southern economy and it's destruction by the North was intentional. It took almost a hundred years for it to reemerge as a viable economy, some areas doing better than others. The majority of people living in the USA today are descendants of immigrants who arrived post-1890, many arriving with nothing to their name. (My own ancestors left behind everything they owned no matter where they were from - Latvia, Ireland, Scotland - that is, if they owned anything in their home country). In the USA, people who inherit money do so because they have relatively stable families over decades, with one generation giving to the next. But stuff can also happen and when dysfunction is introduced - alcohol, drugs, immorality, divorce etc - it can destroy generational wealth. (Even religion can upset the apple cart. In my own family, the largest fortune was made in 19th century granite & monument works in the New England area. One relative gave her entire fortune to the Catholic Church is the 1950's!). Hard work and family cohesiveness looms large as one of the greatest factors in 'wealth formation'. You're a lucky person indeed if you're family has kept the thread going.
Coleman's discussion on spending and consumption disparities ring true. I have lived in NYC for 35 years after 20 years of a 'thrifty New England' upbringing. When I was young, I literally had kids in my class who wore rags. But any NY subway, on a daily basis one can observe ghetto kids with the latest phones, sneakers and backpacks, far better outfitted than what I observed as a kid. During Covid, one had to line up to shop in Soho where the tony shops like Prada, MARNI etc are located. It was jaw dropping to see dozens of primarily black kids dressed up in the latest gear worth thousands and thousands of dollars each. It was a stunning sight as least for me. I have not denied my kids anything, but I would not indulge them in such a gross display of consumption (and they know it and have incorporated my thriftiness in their own adult lives today).
Correct about the postwar South - povertyville USA for nearly a century (for whites and blacks).
Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned about the risk of destroying the black family structure in the 1960's due to social policies that would encourage women on public assistance to raise families without fathers. His analysis turned out to be prophetic. Over 50% of black children don't live with a father in their household.
Considering the divorce rate among whites at around 38% and blacks at approx 42% - I think fatherless households are roughly equivalent no matter if one is white or black.
Divorce rates may be similar but you need to look at births in wedlock. Over 70% of black children are born to single moms. So there are proportionally way less black marriages to start with.
Fair point.
While I am in total agreement that it is best for children to live in two parent families, the amount of children living in single parent families is rising across all groups. Currently 75% of white children, 69% of Hispanic Children, 43% of Black children live in two parent families with all groups seeing a downward trend over the last generation. So, this is not the result of poverty or the cause of general poverty. However, it is a very concerning factor with regards to the health and well being of our children.
We're going to have to rely on our Asians to take care of the rest of us as everyone else shirks their responsibility for raising the next generation.
And invest in infrastructure for poor neighborhoods across America
You mean like public housing? Because that worked out so well.
Not public housing because we know how much of a disappointment that has become, but real infrastructure to improve quality of life in impoverished neighborhoods. Public libraries, schools, venues, improved street lights, better roads, etc. In poor neighborhoods youтАЩll have no problem finding a 7-11 but where are the grocery stores? Coffee shop/Internet cafes? Poor neighborhoods often get seen as unattractive for business and as I see it the reason is a lack of care by city planners and public agencies. ThereтАЩs never a problem with investing in a well lit park for an affluent neighborhood. But drive down the poor part of town and itтАЩs so dark and unattractive you wonтАЩt want to stop anywhere even if there was somewhere to stop.
This will certainly strengthen the black community, but these are also the hardest things to do. I am convinced, the only way to change culture is to shame it. Until that happens nothing will change, unfortunately.
Shaming will cause further rebellion. Convincing an entire population that education would be beneficial is more difficult but necessary. That education must include valuing family and excepting that work is the way to maintain your life. All crime must be punished until people realize that committing a crime will land them in jail.
Which means breaking the power of the teachers unions and serpents such as Randi Weingarten.
If teachers were paid and treated fairly, there would be no need for a teachers union. If the union would act on the teachers behalf when students cause problems in the classroom, a union would be useful. Otherwise the teachers union and most if not all unions only serve to perpetuate themselves. You can't reform employers, so until then, some sort of organization is needed to protect workers. I was in a union for many years and the only thing that they did was, if you paid your dues, they protected you from them. It's a difficult problem without an easy solution.
From the Newark NJ BOE website "For the 2022-23 school year, the starting salary for a teacher with a BachelorтАЩs in the Newark Board of Education is $62,000, starting salary for a teacher with a MasterтАЩs degree is $64,000, and starting salary for a teacher with a Doctorate is $66,000. Teachers with more experience can earn more than $100,000!"
Speaks volumes.
Starting salary in FL. $44,000. They are listed as the 14th highest in the US and it's all downhill from there. If you're going to talk about numbers you have to look at all the states. No one becomes a teacher in public education to build wealth.
Well, there's always the short hours, generous vacations, great healthcare and fat pensions to consider.
The "short hours" include the hours before and after school for preparation, The "generous vacations that many teachers use to improve their skills and pay for out their own pockets. The
"fat pensions" that aren't enough to live on. Then there's the money that teachers spend on supplies for their classrooms that aren't provided by the school, the administrations that don't back the teachers when the children act up and threaten them. The parents that the teachers have to deal with who think that their child is an angel and would never cause any trouble. Here's one small incident. A teacher was told that she had to tutor students that couldn't read at grade level. One student told her, "My daddy can't read, and I don't need to learn to read neether (sic)." When's the last time you taught in a public school classroom?
According to US government statistics, the average amount of hours per week a teacher works is 53. They get between 9-12 weeks total off per year. The average worker takes off 17 days in total or a little over 3 weeks. Total hours work per year has teachers working above average total hours, but less than other professional class workers in private employment.
I have several teachers in my family. So I know that most of what you say is BS. If teachers were so dedicated, why are our urban schools such failures. And where I live, health care plans are gold-plated and pensions are 6 figures. You are buying into union propaganda. While I am sure there are many good and dedicated teachers, as a whole, they are a disappointment.
It would be prudent if you backed up your BS claim with some evidence. I can't answer for urban schools throughout the US. Just because where you live the streets are paved with gold, that doesn't make it true for everywhere. I'm not a unionist and don't even know what they are saying. "As a whole the are a disappointment." So, you're saying that millions of teachers throughout the country are a disappointment. I think you have a case of overeach.
This woi├▒f certainly strengthen the black community, but these are also the hardest things to do. I am convinced, the only way to change culture is to shame it. Until that happens nothing will change, unfortunately.
Shame has been a very powerful force throughout human history.
Shame is a potent remedy! Great point.
Great point, Sophia! It is NOT the skin color, per se, that is the problem today. Nor is it "white supremacy" (a bogeyman that never dies). It is a culture borne out of prison culture and the pathology of drugs and gangs that has been glorified and spread by music culture and as a protest against past social sins. The "War on Poverty" and the expansion of the welfare state, with its family killing requirements, is the real villain.
Yes, rap and the macho culture.
Smart black kids who do well in school are taunted by their peers for "acting white."
ThereтАЩs a great podcast - I think hosted by Kmele Foster - where Thomas Sowell (mentioned above in comments) talks about this very issue.
The black family was split up across different plantations - husband and wife and children sent to different masters. Strengthening the family is key to success but we canтАЩt pretend slavery didnтАЩt contribute.
Black families were not always split up. A number of slaveholders endeavored to keep them together often forming their own enclaves. Thomas Jefferson had generations of families living together; those who left, Sally Hemings brother for instance, did it so on their own volition after being freed. ItтАЩs impossible to generalize the тАШslave experienceтАЩ as there was lots going on and situations differed.
Wow..itтАЩs a jungle out there. Thanks for the link!
Yes, black families were split up by slavery. And they were grieved by that. And they sought to get back together again when slavery ended.
It only took a few decades for Democrats to destroy even the *desire* to keep black families together. Welfare removed black men from the family picture just as effectively as slave-owners ever did.
Thomas Sowell (90+ year old legendary black economist) does an excellent job of debunking the notion that the breakdown of the black family was a legacy of slavery. ItтАЩs an attractive and intuitive idea but not supported by facts.
Jim Howes, sounds interesting- do you have a link? (And Thomas Sowell doesnтАЩt need an intro)
Black columnist Jason Riley of the Wall Street Journal also disabuses the fact that the black community has always been in turmoil since slavery. He cites pre-1960тАЩs statistics when blacks had higher employment rates, lower divorce rates than whites and far more stability than inner city black life today. Seems like LBJтАЩ тАШGreat SocietyтАЩ giveaway and new welfare laws which created dependency did quite a bit of harm.
I agree. And sadly, the programs that create government dependency are causing poor results in rural/rust belt white communities today as well. Bad policy and poor cultural choices (undervaluing education, having children early and out of wedlock) increasingly impact both American blacks and whites. We need to have a real conversation about what values and actions result in success or failure. I think economist Glenn LouryтАЩs concept of Social Capital is spot on and needs to be a part of this conversation.
Aye. Charles Murray talks about this in his book Coming Apart.
And many blacks are still on plantations created by their democrat masters - inner cities on government 'assistance' payed by all races. See how that is working out by visiting:
heyjackass.com
Slavery was outlawed 165 years ago. Sorry.
Try harder.
Outlawed isn't the same as ended. It took several years after the emancipation proclamation for slavery to end.
I was responding to тАЬThe black family survived slavery and Jim Crow, but it was the loving hand of government that killed it.тАЭ
Try reading harder.
You said "Strengthening the family is key to success but we canтАЩt pretend slavery didnтАЩt contribute." Again, that was many generations in the past. And nobody alive today owned slaves in America.
Try writing coherently.
Before LBJ's Great Society 75% of black children were born to married parents and had a father to help raise the children. Because of the rules of welfare more than 72% of all black babies are born out of wedlock and there is no male presence to help raise the children.
Is that because of slavery or bad left wing policy designed to keep the black communities "in their place" and to keep voting for the Socialist Party?
Other than getting almost 60,000 American boys killed and destroying the futures of black kids in our nation, did LBJ do anything useful?
Two things, he enriched himself while in office and had a child with his mistress while in as President.