Buzz, have you considered that some people find it valuable to debate those of differing ideological persuasions? Although forum arguing isn't the highest form of debate, it is worthwhile because: (1) it exposes you to other forms of thought, which is particularly valuable in the internet age because people tend to prefer news sources which confirm (not challenge) their beliefs, (2) it allows you to practice arguing against others of that persuasion, which comes in handy mightily IRL, and (3) it forces you to think critically, which I think is a bit fun.
Quote:
|
You mean like in Jamaica and Haiti?
|
I mean the black (meaning Subsaharan descent) immigrants from the Carribean as a whole; I've not bothered with looking at statistics of immigrants from individual nations. If that's the route you seek, I'd prefer using the Dominican Republic instead of Haiti (as Haiti is, well, Haiti).....
Quote:
|
The fact that it isn't easy is not beside the point. It IS the point. It's hard to compete with people who live in higher income communities that have better school systems. It's hard to become a contributing member of society when that same society has shown for the last hundred odd years that it doesn't want you to contribute.
|
Nonsense. If there were a lack of jobs for unskilled workers, there wouldn't have been a surge of illegal immigration. Further, to say illegals face the same barriers as blacks would be dishonesty - they face more. Most speak little to no english, have little formal education, and send a great deal of their paycheck
back home. Oh, coming from Chicago is hard? What about nations which have went through successive coups, were subjected to bat**** economic experiments, were governed by kleptocratic mass-murderers, been torn apart by civil war, and are only just recieving modern amenities such as potable water on demand and regular electricity?
Quote:
|
Tell me, Hip Hop Bunny, what is the real reason the black community makes on average less than whites? You don't seem to wanna say. You just wanna make hints. Are they just lazy? Are they just stupid?
|
Batlord, there's any of multiple explanations which could be applied. However, let's be clear; the "black community" we speak of are those descended from slaves in the USA. Nigerian-Americans, as I've previously stated, have (on average) the highest level of education of
any group in the nation (even higher than the Ashkenazi, although IQ tests - if you put stock in them - tell us Ashkenazi are supposed to be more intelligent)....
How about
:
1. The standard Austrian School argument that government mandated welfare is harmful to the lower classes.
2. The moderate right wing argument that the multiplicity of welfare programs on a federal, state, and local level make abusing the safety net easy.
3. The centrist argument that transitioning from welfare to gainful employment is difficult because of the lack of an immediate benefit in terms of gross net income, thus disincentivizing individuals.
4. Large scale immigration, both legal & illegal, has depressed wages in entry level jobs. Add to this a rhetorical question, "Who will work harder for less: kid from the 1st world who has welfare waiting for him or kid from the 3rd worl whose family is relying upon his remittances?", and you've a problem.
5. The effect raising minimum wages has had on the increasing mechanization and automation of jobs that were formerly entry level, making it harder for people to gain skills.
Whether or not genetics is involved seems to be a moot point considering the wild variations in outcomes when we compare the various demographic groups which make up the black community; descendants of american slaves, carribean immigrants, hispanic blacks, subsaharan blacks, afro-arabs, etc.
Now, that being stated, a word of caution on ethnocentrism. When we ask ourselves why are descendants of American slaves performing worse than immigrant blacks in the USA, we are engaging in a bit of ethnocentrism. Why? Because the metrics we're using to gauge quality of life were created, largely, by white people, and they continue to be validated by professionals who remain largely white and almost exclusivelly based in the Occident and it's periphery.
Take, say, the Sioux as an example. Now, although we all thinkof the Sioux as riding on horses, it's a fact that Horses had been extinct the Americas for some time until they were re-introduced by Europeans. Prior to this, the Sioux had a rather grueling existence - their nomadic lifestyle was limited by the strength of their backs & those of their pack dogs. Yet, despite this, they also had no knowledge of the wheel until - again - introduction by Europeans.
Now, we all think of the wheel as one of those basic things. Something a caveman thought up, long long ago. Does the fact that the Sioux didn't have the wheel mean they are genetically inferior, lazy, or stupid? Or, could it quite possibly be that they didn't view it as all too horrible, had different priorities, and generally had a different outlook than we and our ancestors?