Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 328: Poll Dancing

(+) Yeah! (+)

VintageGin posted...

I would encourage you to think outside your bubble if this is what you believe.

I think you know what I meant based on the rest of my posts context.

I mean if you are born in poverty, you are in poverty. It doesn't matter why you are born in poverty.

It doesn't matter if your ancestor was an old oil tycoon billionaire who lost it all when he polluted a lake and 40,000 people got cancer or if a slave or if a prostitute or if a President. It doesn't change what you are then. You shouldn't be refusing to help them because their circumstances which led them to where they are happened at no fault of their own.

Everyone who is born in poverty should be helped up and people should be limited from being born too far ahead in advantage. The economic disparity needs to end across the board. Not just for some. I don't give a fuck if you are white, African-American, latin-american, alaskan, native american, asian, etc.

---

Corrik7 posted...

The problem isn't African-Americans were once enslaved. The problem is that poor people have very little way to catch up to rich people across the spectrum.

Both can be problems, and they are!
---

Corrik7 posted...

I mean if you are born in poverty, you are in poverty. It doesn't matter why you are born in poverty.

It does if you have less of an opportunity to escape poverty solely because of your race
---

Corrik7 posted...

The poor need help period. Not just the special class of poor.

And how does your solution ensure that black people benefit as much as white people benefit? Not "benefit more than", but "benefit equal to"? Because in our current society, the scales are weighted against black people to the point where a poor white person is equivalent in economic status to a middle-class black person.

---

Inviso posted...

And how does your solution ensure that black people benefit as much as white people benefit? Not "benefit more than", but "benefit equal to"? Because in our current society, the scales are weighted against black people to the point where a poor white person is equivalent in economic status to a middle-class black person.

It's not systemic racism. It's economic disparity. More African-Americans are in trouble with the law because more are disproportionately poorer. More issues with the law leads to more violent situations.

---

Corrik7 posted...

It's not systemic racism. It's economic disparity. More African-Americans are in trouble with the law because more are disproportionately poorer. More issues with the law leads to more violent situations.

And theyre disproportionately poorer because of systemic racism
---

And if youre not sure that systemic racism still exists, just look at the research done on things like prison sentencing and hiring practices when all other variables are equal aside from race

Housing applications, traffic stops, the list goes on
---

Corrik7 posted...

The poor need help period. Not just the special class of poor.

And you can support a solution that fixes a problem, even if it doesn't fix that same problem for everybody.

"We have a solution that will fix a problem for 10,000,000 people"
"SCREW YOU, WHAT ABOUT ME?"

That is the vibe I get.

The correct answer is "Yes, that is a good thing, and we I support fixing that problem for those people. Also, in addition to that, we should go a step further and address a similar problem for these other people."

.

But it needs to be noted that you are still completely blind to the fact that wealth carries over from one generation to the next. And no, not everybody is born with a silver spoon in their mouth, but even your typical "middle class family" with their regular ass spoons will still typically see some amount of carryover from one generation to another. Just the fact that my parents are not in debt and both own their own house means that I can expect to see a modest gain of wealth when they pass away even after you factor in estate taxes.

Meanwhile their is an entire group of people who were not allowed to own land or amass wealth for a significant amount of time and you can see that very tangible way it has affected the ability of their community to compete on this not-equal-playing field.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

And if youre not sure that systemic racism still exists, just look at the research done on things like prison sentencing and hiring practices when all other variables are equal aside from race

Housing applications, traffic stops, the list goes on

That stuff isn't because of racism, it's just that some races are naturally worse in every way!

(/sarcasm)
---

Another good comment explaining the mentality of modern-day Republicans

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/jablog/hes_so_proud_of_how_little_hes_done_watch/g8pcojq?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Part of it is that the whole point of conservatism is to enforce social classes.

Conservatism has the singular goal of maintaining an aristocracy that inherits political power and pushing everyone else down the ladder to create an under class. Secondary to that is a morality based on a persons status as good or bad rather than their actions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4CI2vk3ugk

https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/agre/conservatism.html

There is a key difference between conservatives and others that is often overlooked or not clearly articulated. For liberals, actions are good, bad, moral, etc and people are judged based on their actions. For conservatives, people are good, bad, moral, etc and such status of the person is what dictates how an action is viewed.

In the world view of the actual conservative leadership - those with true wealth or political power - , the aristocracy is moral by definition and the working class is immoral by definition and deserving of punishment for that immorality. This is where the laws don't apply trope comes from. The aristocracy doesn't need laws since they are inherently moral. This is also why people can be wealthy and looked down on: if Bill Gates tries to help the poor or improve worker rights he is working against the aristocracy.

If we extend analysis to the voter base: Conservatives view other conservatives as moral and good by the state of being labeled conservative because they adhere to status morality and social classes. It's the ultimate virtue signaling. They signal to each other that they are inherently moral. Its why voter base conservatives think so what whenever any of these assholes do nasty anti democratic things.

To them Donald Trump is a good person. The conservative isnt lying or being a hypocrite or even being "unfair" because - and this is key - for conservatives past actions have no bearing on current actions and current actions have no bearing on future actions. Lindsey Graham is "good" so he says to delay SCOTUS confirmations that is good. When he says to move forward: that is good.

To reiterate: All that matters to conservatives is the intrinsic moral state of the actor. Obama was intrinsically immoral and therefore any action on his part was bad. Going further - Trump, or the media rebranding we call Mitt Romney, or Moscow Mitch are all intrinsically moral and therefore they cant do bad things.

While a liberal would see a fair or moral or immoral action and judge the person undertaking the action, a conservative sees a fair or good person and applies the fair status to the action. To the conservative, a conservative who did something illegal or something that would be bad on the part of someone else - must have been doing good. Simply because they cant do bad.

A consequence of the central goal of conservatism and the corresponding actor state morality is that primary political goals are to do nothing when problems come up and to dismantle labor and consumer protections. The non-aristocratic are immoral and inherently deserve punishment. They want the working class to get fucked by global warming. They want people to die from COVID19. Etc.

Why do the conservative voters seem to vote against their own interest? Why do so many seem to dense? Why does /selfawarewolves and /leopardsatemyface happen? They simply think they are higher on the social ladder than they really are and want to punish those below them because being below them had made them immoral.
Absolutely everything conservatives say and do makes sense when applying the above.

We also need to address popular definitions of conservatism which are personal responsibility and incremental change: neither of those makes sense applied to policy issues, especially incremental issues.

This year a few women can vote, next year a few more, until in 100 years all women can vote?
This year a few kids can stop working in mines, next year a few more...

We should test the waters of COVID relief by sending a 1200 dollar check to 500 families. If that goes well well do 1500 families next month.

But its all in when they want to separate migrant families to punish them. Its all in when they want to invade the Middle East for literal generations.

The incremental change argument is asinine. Its propaganda to avoid concessions to labor.

The personal responsibility argument falls apart with the whole "keep government out of my medicare thing." Personal responsibility just means I deserve free things, but people more poor than me don't."

Which is in line with the main body of my comment. Look: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U

And for good measure I found this guys video and sources interesting on an overlapping topic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vymeTZkiKD0

---

"Guys, systemic racism doesn't exist in Murica!"

Meanwhile in the actual United States of America:



---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

And you can support a solution that fixes a problem, even if it doesn't fix that same problem for everybody.

nope

---

The Cleopatra casting argument has always struck me as especially strange because Cleopatra was ethnically Macedonian rather than Egyptian if I recall correctly, she was a direct descendant of Ptolemy.

Theres no reason why a black actress couldnt portray Cleopatra, but the idea that the role of Cleopatra should be considered a black part by default seems rooted in a misunderstanding of (or lack of knowledge regarding) ancient Egyptian history.

---

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-american-net-worth#average-net-worth-by-homeownership-status

Race Average net worth Median net worth Average net worth increase compared to 2013
White $123,400 $61,200 14%
Black $54,000 $35,400 22%
Hispanic $57,300 $38,500 26%
Other $86,900 $50,600 20%

---

Its funny because I can honestly kind of see the argument against a black Heimdall. It doesnt really make sense in-universe unless hes from another realm like Hogun.

But Elba was great so whatevs
---

Corrik, how will your solution of policies that help the poor address the economic disparity between white and non-white populations? Because obviously there is some aspect of how our society functions that has allowed white people to gain a tremendous economic advantage of black and Latino people, so merely saying "let's give everyone UBI" is not going to erase that advantage, and it will allow white people to continue to succeed on an uneven playing field. As for your "wealth tax capped at 100k", it's a good idea in theory, but it's also the sort of thing that the wealthy will lobby HEAVILY to prevent, and again, they already have the money necessary to effectively lobby in this fashion. Also, your strategy as it stands only imposes a 100k on inheritence. I'm sure the super rich have lawyers that can exploit loopholes and, for example, transfer their wealth prior to their deaths so it isn't considered inheritance. All of this heavily benefits white people, and thus does nothing to create equality in the economic standing of white people and black people.

---

Corrik7 posted...

nope

Yes, you really can.

Your unwillingness to support programs that help other people says a lot about you.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Yes, you really can.

Your unwillingness to support programs that help other people says a lot about you.

So you are willing to support programs that help poor white people and not African-American people right?

That's your statement. If not, your unwillingness to support programs that help other people says a lot about you.

Literally dumb argument.

You aim to fix a system when it is broken. Not to fix a problem that came from the root for just one subset.

The fact you aren't willing to fix an issue for everyone in support of just trying to band-aid it for some says a lot about you.

---

Corrik7 posted...

So you are willing to support programs that help poor white people and not African-American people right?

That's your statement. If not, your unwillingness to support programs that help other people says a lot about you.

Literally dumb argument.

You aim to fix a system when it is broken. Not to fix a problem that came from the root for just one subset.

The fact you aren't willing to fix an issue for everyone in support of just trying to band-aid it for some says a lot about you.

Your solution DOESN'T help everyone though. It helps white people. It does nothing to fix the problems that have allowed white people to gain and average of $70,000.00 more in net worth than their black counterparts (or $25,000.00 more median net worth).

---

My solution helps everyone. And, arguably, it punishes rich of every race (which is proportionately white).

---

Palbatross posted...

The Cleopatra casting argument has always struck me as especially strange because Cleopatra was ethnically Macedonian rather than Egyptian if I recall correctly, she was a direct descendant of Ptolemy.

Theres no reason why a black actress couldnt portray Cleopatra, but the idea that the role of Cleopatra should be considered a black part by default seems rooted in a misunderstanding of (or lack of knowledge regarding) ancient Egyptian history.

I don't know the whole story of the Cleopatra thing happening, but is it really a black-versus-white thing happening here, or is it Israeli as Egyptian royalty thing, because I remember BvS/Wonder Woman facing lots of early criticism specifically because of her nationality?

I'm not trying to interrupt the racism in movies nor blackface history discussions, but just an outside question because I was more under the impression the Cleopatra buzz was less skin color and more religious/nationality division.

---

Anyone else ready to join the winning block side yet?

---

Mega Mana posted...

I don't know the whole story of the Cleopatra thing happening, but is it really a black-versus-white thing happening here, or is it Israeli as Egyptian royalty thing, because I remember BvS/Wonder Woman facing lots of early criticism specifically because of her nationality?

I'm not trying to interrupt the racism in movies nor blackface history discussions, but just an outside question because I was more under the impression the Cleopatra buzz was less skin color and more religious/nationality division.

It's both
There is also the "Israel is a terrorist country and Gal Gadot served in the IDF and therfore she is a terrorist" but I don't pay those people any attention because they always exist and I couldn't care less about them
I am just concered about the "only Egyptian actors can play a Egyptian character" bullshit

---

Corrik7 posted...

My solution helps everyone. And, arguably, it punishes rich of every race (which is proportionately white).

No it doesn't. If there are institutional flaws that have a negative impact on black people (the kind of flaws that have them at an economic disadvantage to their white counterparts), then giving UBI to everyone just means that black people will have to dedicate their UBI to overcoming those institutional flaws, while white people can invest it more freely and gain a greater advantage from it.

---

Yeah that's suspicious, especially considering modern Egyptians aren't THAT similar to ancient Egyptians, right?

---

Corrik7 posted...

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/average-american-net-worth#average-net-worth-by-homeownership-status

Race Average net worth Median net worth Average net worth increase compared to 2013
White $123,400 $61,200 14%
Black $54,000 $35,400 22%
Hispanic $57,300 $38,500 26%
Other $86,900 $50,600 20%

Even though those numbers are highly inaccurate thank you for reinforcing my point.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

"Guys, systemic racism doesn't exist in Murica!"

Meanwhile in the actual United States of America:

In fairness, this is more a demonstration that America used to be racist than one it is now, or at least can be fairly characterized as such. "Fifty years ago the median for black Americans would be zero and whites would have less, but since Civil rights both groups have had time to build up wealth!". Shit like that. It's not a relatively informative metric

---

TheRock1525 posted...

Even though those numbers are highly inaccurate thank you for reinforcing my point.

I'm sure they are. *Rolls eyes*

---

It is easier to increase the percentage of a lower value, so yes Corrik, that rather enforces his point.

If I earn $10k and you earn $20k, if I go up 20% and you go up 15%, you're *still* doing better than me.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I'm sure they are. *Rolls eyes*

There are dozens of studies that show a far greater Gap and the one you pick was done in partnership with a credit card company

---

Corrik7 posted...

You aim to fix a system when it is broken. Not to fix a problem that came from the root for just one subset.

Thats what we are advocating, for multiple broken systems

You just dont seem to think that racial inequality is one of those systems.

Trust me, none of us wants to STOP helping oppressed people, including poor whites, with reparations for slavery
---

It also doesn't actually matter numerically what the gap is.

It exists and even corrik's numbers show it is getting wider.

---

https://twitter.com/estarLA/status/1316102996984438785?s=19

---

Mega Mana posted...

I don't know the whole story of the Cleopatra thing happening, but is it really a black-versus-white thing happening here, or is it Israeli as Egyptian royalty thing, because I remember BvS/Wonder Woman facing lots of early criticism specifically because of her nationality?

I'm not trying to interrupt the racism in movies nor blackface history discussions, but just an outside question because I was more under the impression the Cleopatra buzz was less skin color and more religious/nationality division.

Fair I did conflate the rest of the conversation in this topic with the article itself.

---

Like I guess the bottom line is, Corrik, do you believe that opportunity in the United States is equal for whites and minorities born of the same class of wealth? Because it seems like you do
---

Here's one of the other things, Corrik.

There is a racial disparity in wealth between black people and white people in this country. Even your own statistics (regardless of how accurate or inaccurate they are) agree with this.

There is also a massive wealth disparity between the rich and the poor in this country.

Unless your solution is: "we're going to fix wealth inequality by giving poor white people a specific sum of money, and giving black people a greater sum of money to bridge the racial wealth gap", then merely offering the same amount across the board does nothing to fix the racial wealth gap. And as a result, white people will continue to maintain an inherent advantage in wealth and opportunity.

---

Inviso posted...

Here's one of the other things, Corrik.

There is a racial disparity in wealth between black people and white people in this country. Even your own statistics (regardless of how accurate or inaccurate they are) agree with this.

There is also a massive wealth disparity between the rich and the poor in this country.

Unless your solution is: "we're going to fix wealth inequality by giving poor white people a specific sum of money, and giving black people a greater sum of money to bridge the racial wealth gap", then merely offering the same amount across the board does nothing to fix the racial wealth gap. And as a result, white people will continue to maintain an inherent advantage in wealth and opportunity.

Disparity will lessen by taking from the rich which is predominantly white

---

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/37045/air-force-says-new-hypersonic-missile-will-hit-targets-1000-miles-away-in-under-12-minutes

This is cool and all I guess, but I can't see why we need weapons like these.

---

Corrik7 posted...

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/37045/air-force-says-new-hypersonic-missile-will-hit-targets-1000-miles-away-in-under-12-minutes

This is cool and all I guess, but I can't see why we need weapons like these.

Because weapons manufacturers donate a lot of money to politicians who decide the military budget
---

Corrik7 posted...

Disparity will lessen by taking from the rich which is predominantly white

How?

Like, you mentioned capping the transfer of estate wealth to 100k. Fine. But let's take Trump for example. Let's pretend that he's actually worth the billions of dollars he claims. If he dies, then Eric/Don Jr./Ivanka/Baron/Tiffany maybe all get 100k. However, each and every one of them has lived their entire life under the Trump umbrella and has been able to utilize the resources of their family to increase their wealth. Sure by the time their father dies, they will have less overall wealth, but they've still had a massive head start over someone who did not have that immense starting advantage.

But this doesn't really matter, since none of it helps to correct the wealth imbalance between black and white people. The two races are unequal, and that is a problem even if you start giving out UBI to everyone.

---

Inviso posted...

How?

Like, you mentioned capping the transfer of estate wealth to 100k. Fine. But let's take Trump for example. Let's pretend that he's actually worth the billions of dollars he claims. If he dies, then Eric/Don Jr./Ivanka/Baron/Tiffany maybe all get 100k. However, each and every one of them has lived their entire life under the Trump umbrella and has been able to utilize the resources of their family to increase their wealth. Sure by the time their father dies, they will have less overall wealth, but they've still had a massive head start over someone who did not have that immense starting advantage.

But this doesn't really matter, since none of it helps to correct the wealth imbalance between black and white people. The two races are unequal, and that is a problem even if you start giving out UBI to everyone.

If they have over 100k in assets, they won't be able to receive anything from the estate.

The system alleviates the disparity over time. It will only take a generation or two before it's relatively even across the board.

I believe the California idea or whatever I saw which surely was nonsense cuz it is dumb was to give every African-American with a slave ancestor 250k or something. All you did was take those charts above and put African-Americans in the highest median wealth and exacerbate Latinos, while ignoring a lot of the White wealth is tied up in a small %.

---

https://twitter.com/wittywebhandle/status/1315817533765758976?s=21

---

https://twitter.com/cherijacobus/status/1316032609491849221?s=21

given that MI and VA were two of the three states Trump of which Trump sent LIBERATE tweets, it seems pretty likely these terrorists were inspired directly by Trumps tweets.

---

Also this is fucking awful:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1316126006797885440?s=21

---

Why would they want to stop the count?

---

Because theoretically it is easier to count smaller areas of the United States.

---

See quite a few people criticizing Nancy Pelosi based off her wolf blitzer interview today.

---

red13n posted...

Because theoretically it is easier to count smaller areas of the United States.

Census shouldn't be fucked with. Though it arguably is by counting illegal immigrants also.

---

Corrik7 posted...

See quite a few people criticizing Nancy Pelosi based off her wolf blitzer interview today.

Whatd she do?


---

Corrik7 posted...

Census shouldn't be fucked with. Though it arguably is by counting illegal immigrants also.

The census counts persons, not citizens.

Also it was originally supposed to run until January 31st so they have tried to move the date multiple times which is complete crap.

---