- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,177
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Maybe this will help those who don't understandthe objections to this bill.
I provided evidence of racism in this post.We don't know what causes the rest of it. You're working from a standpoint that racism is assumed and the burden of proof is on us to show otherwise--but your side is the one making the claim, you have the burden of proof. The chart was presented as supposed evidence--but we can clearly see that one of the numbers is cultural in origin. If one number isn't racism how can it be taken as evidence the others are??You do not say what causes the 2:1 ratio, you only point out that part of the chart doesn’t identify racism.
Yes. To the same degree that Africans don't exist.Asians don't exist.I provided evidence of racism in this post.
Your point escapes me, though, especially since there is no mention of Asians in anything you quoted.
You have yet to establish that racial differences in income can't be proof of racism. Towards the end of my series of posts in this thread I have concluded that Asians earn more despite the racism they face.I provided evidence of racism in this post.We don't know what causes the rest of it. You're working from a standpoint that racism is assumed and the burden of proof is on us to show otherwise--but your side is the one making the claim, you have the burden of proof. The chart was presented as supposed evidence--but we can clearly see that one of the numbers is cultural in origin. If one number isn't racism how can it be taken as evidence the others are??You do not say what causes the 2:1 ratio, you only point out that part of the chart doesn’t identify racism.
So financial evidence only counts when it favors your side? Because the chart I'm pointing to has Asians on top (yours omits them entirely) and the reasons are very obviously cultural, not racial. If Asians are on top for non-racial reasons then racial differences in income can't be proof of racism.
Read on.Yes. To the same degree that Africans don't exist.Asians don't exist.I provided evidence of racism in this post.
Your point escapes me, though, especially since there is no mention of Asians in anything you quoted.
That was his point--no mention of Asians in your chart.
There are always confounding factors in social analysis. There are in the investigation into the upswing in violence after the George Floyd tragedy. Yet you and Trausti cling to a monocausal theory, and reject any possible confounding factors.
Your chart on wealth inexplicably excluded Asians. Why? We know why.
Because most Asian Americans are not descended from generations of Asian slaves held by White Americans.
Granted, there were a LOT of Chinese immigrants brought into the Country as indentured servants, and were forced to work in horrid and dangerous conditions. (The history of the property I had in Boulder County is full of tales of "Chinamen" being sent into mines with explosives and getting killed in the explosions. I read that there was a fixed fine of fifty cents for killing a "Chinaman".)
But that was not nearly the millions of people who were brought to America in chains, and whose descendents now comprise the majority of black Americans. Americans enslaved a population of black Africans for generations. Suddenly their "owners" were forced kicking and screaming to set them free.
Only a moron could possibly think that a few generations later, that population would be on equal economic footing with the descendents of their ancestors' "owners".
Frankly, it's shameful to have to explain this to you.
Well, at least we know why you're pointing out that Asians have been included in "All other". It's the "Asians earn more than non-Hispanic whites, therefore the poverty of blacks can't be down to racism" mantra again, right? As I mentioned earlier, it belongs to the same family of arguments as saying "We elected a Kenyan Negro as our nations leader twice, for crying out loud. Therefore no racism." and "I'm no racist. One of my best friends is a Jew."
There is a crucial difference between the Asian-American and Afro-American segments of the US population. 78% of Asian-Americans are foreign born, and they brought money with them. They tend to be former members of the financially better off sector in the countries they came from. Also, better educated and better qualified as well as experienced in the professional class of jobs. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are very selective about who they let into the country and become citizens.
Of COURSE it’s cultural. The economic disparity is a symptom of the persistent stratification of American society that has its roots in slavery. They (Asians and Africans) are nowhere near “on the same footing”.Your chart on wealth inexplicably excluded Asians. Why? We know why.
Because most Asian Americans are not descended from generations of Asian slaves held by White Americans.
Granted, there were a LOT of Chinese immigrants brought into the Country as indentured servants, and were forced to work in horrid and dangerous conditions. (The history of the property I had in Boulder County is full of tales of "Chinamen" being sent into mines with explosives and getting killed in the explosions. I read that there was a fixed fine of fifty cents for killing a "Chinaman".)
But that was not nearly the millions of people who were brought to America in chains, and whose descendents now comprise the majority of black Americans. Americans enslaved a population of black Africans for generations. Suddenly their "owners" were forced kicking and screaming to set them free.
Only a moron could possibly think that a few generations later, that population would be on equal economic footing with the descendents of their ancestors' "owners".
Frankly, it's shameful to have to explain this to you.
In both cases their economic status was set to basically zero. They were on equal footing. How long they were oppressed may have cultural influences but it can't have economic ones because debts don't descend upon one's offspring. Nobody can be born below zero.
How so? "No racism involved in the lower income of Afro-Americans because the average income of Asian-Americans is higher than that of non-Hispanic Whites." is just an assertion. You need more than a 'because' to make that assertion stick.Well, at least we know why you're pointing out that Asians have been included in "All other". It's the "Asians earn more than non-Hispanic whites, therefore the poverty of blacks can't be down to racism" mantra again, right? As I mentioned earlier, it belongs to the same family of arguments as saying "We elected a Kenyan Negro as our nations leader twice, for crying out loud. Therefore no racism." and "I'm no racist. One of my best friends is a Jew."
No, it's because they expose the flaw in your data.
Sheesh. Notwithstanding your anecdote, none of them were brought in as slaves, lived like slaves for a hundred years after the abolition of slavery, were denied the kind of education and job opportunities, which is still a thing on an informal but effective basis. Apart from education they were not encumbered by the ballast of past and present discrimination. That, in a very important way, is something else they brought with them.There is a crucial difference between the Asian-American and Afro-American segments of the US population. 78% of Asian-Americans are foreign born, and they brought money with them. They tend to be former members of the financially better off sector in the countries they came from. Also, better educated and better qualified as well as experienced in the professional class of jobs. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are very selective about who they let into the country and become citizens.
1) Most immigrants from third world areas bring little with them other than education.
Nice anecdote.2) Immigration is picky when it comes to work-based visas, but there's no such pickiness for relationship visas. My wife's application listed the schools she had attended, that's it--and there was nothing on the form about the results of that education. Nothing said she left secondary education at 16 because she tested out rather than by dropping out. Her tertiary education only listed the name of her school (and is a pain to verify.) What they were interested in was whether it was a genuine marriage and whether I had the financial means to keep us above 125% of the poverty line.
You are the one who brought up blaming the police, not me. Moreover, your DA rationale makes no sense unless you are saying the DAs refuse to prosecute murder cases.then clearly the reason there are more murders is due to the police not doing their jobs.
That, and local lefty DA's that refuse to prosecute. Blame the police sure, but that's just the stereotypical lefty ignoring that there are consequences to building their great utopia.
You are mistaken. All this researcher did is find a correlation. Read the linked Vox article.There are always confounding factors in social analysis. There are in the investigation into the upswing in violence after the George Floyd tragedy. Yet you and Trausti cling to a monocausal theory, and reject any possible confounding factors.
We are pointing to an uptick in murders in cities with large BLM protests. Not in other cities. They already looked for confounding factors, unlike most racism "research" that fails to consider socioeconomic factors even though it's almost always an obvious one that should be considered.
I provided evidence of racism in this post.We don't know what causes the rest of it. You're working from a standpoint that racism is assumed and the burden of proof is on us to show otherwise--but your side is the one making the claim, you have the burden of proof. The chart was presented as supposed evidence--but we can clearly see that one of the numbers is cultural in origin. If one number isn't racism how can it be taken as evidence the others are??You do not say what causes the 2:1 ratio, you only point out that part of the chart doesn’t identify racism.
So financial evidence only counts when it favors your side? Because the chart I'm pointing to has Asians on top (yours omits them entirely) and the reasons are very obviously cultural, not racial. If Asians are on top for non-racial reasons then racial differences in income can't be proof of racism.
You are mistaken. Contrary to your beliefs, you have no clue what i think.I do have a clue what you tend to think of right-wingers, and a lot more than a clue, because I have your posts, in which you describe what you think about them. Okay, so you know that some conservatives are thoughtful, considerate and generous people. Great! But on the basis of your regular posting here, you still got the vast majority of them wrong (and yes, some are villains; some left-wingers are as well).laughing dog said:Unsurprisingly, you have no clue what I think about conservatives. Most of my family and in-laws are conservative. Some conservatives are thoughtful, considerate and generous people. Others are not. Some are villains, some are misguided, some are right about some matters and wrong about others (like most people of all ideological stripes).
You are mistaken. Your suggestion was to stop posting in this thread for a couple of years. Not to stop posting entirely.I can understand English reasonably well; as you should know, misunderstandings on this boards are ubiquitous, even among native English speakers, and your suggestion was not clear.laughing dog said:I am sorry you cannot parse simple English. Plainly stated, it means for you to adopt your own suggestion and wait a couple of years before posting again in this thread.
That said, my suggestion was not to stop posting now, but to come back in a couple of years regardless of when the ongoing discussion in this thread stops. But if I remember and I'm still posting on this website, I will come back and to see what happened with the predictions that teachers would stop teaching.
......Of course that it would be idiotic to do so. .But what you called 'idiotic' was not "to teach US history without slavery".laughing dog said:Of course it is idiotic. No one remotely familiar with the USA or its history knows it would be idiotic to teach US history without slavery.
That is a straw man.But again I recommend you come back in a couple of years to this thread, and see whether teachers stopped teaching the history of slavery.
You are clearly unfamiliar with teaching in the US at that level. Movies can be a very useful pedagogical tool in helping student understand concepts or history.laughing dog said:The issue is how to approach the issue of slavery. I will use two movies about the pre-Civil War South to provide a simple example. The first is Song_of_the_South which presents slavery as a relatively benign institution, and 12_Years_a_Slave_(film) which does not. Both are hypothetical examples of a presentation of slice of "history" of the slavery in the USA.
I did not watch "Song_of_the_South". I did watch "12 Years a Slave". But iirc, while based on a true story, that was fiction. I would expect that teachers would teach history, rather than movies. Still, let me ask you: are you claiming that teachers today teach history by showing children "12 Years a Slave" or similar movies, and that due to SB148, they'll stop doing so?
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. —
Florida House Bill 1055 is raising some eyebrows on the education front.
Behind the bill, Republican lawmaker Bob Rommel is proposing cameras at the front of the classroom, requiring teachers in session to also have a microphone.
If the bill is passed, board members from each school district would have to take a vote if they want to implement the policy at their schools by Jan. 1, 2023.
“It’s nonsense,” said David Freeland, president of the Education Association of St. Lucie County.
Like many other teachers unions, Freeland is opposed to the idea.
“We have a growing teacher shortage, really they should be focusing on getting teachers in classrooms with meaningful pay, child security, those types of things. Instead, they choose to spend their time working on a bill that is completely unnecessary,” Freeland said.
This seems absolutely ridiculous. It would be a lot more cost effective to put classroom content moderators in there to stop problems of teaching science, math, history, and literature. This simply provides us the most effective manner to meddle in the classroom, and then we can be at peace that the alt-right is in control of the message and there is no longer any indoctrination in the schools.Florida teachers unions opposed to bill suggesting cameras, microphones in classrooms
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. —
Florida House Bill 1055 is raising some eyebrows on the education front.
Behind the bill, Republican lawmaker Bob Rommel is proposing cameras at the front of the classroom, requiring teachers in session to also have a microphone.
If the bill is passed, board members from each school district would have to take a vote if they want to implement the policy at their schools by Jan. 1, 2023.
“It’s nonsense,” said David Freeland, president of the Education Association of St. Lucie County.
Like many other teachers unions, Freeland is opposed to the idea.
“We have a growing teacher shortage, really they should be focusing on getting teachers in classrooms with meaningful pay, child security, those types of things. Instead, they choose to spend their time working on a bill that is completely unnecessary,” Freeland said.
So... the large increase in homicides in rural areas is due to?There are always confounding factors in social analysis. There are in the investigation into the upswing in violence after the George Floyd tragedy. Yet you and Trausti cling to a monocausal theory, and reject any possible confounding factors.
We are pointing to an uptick in murders in cities with large BLM protests. Not in other cities.
link said:Homicide rates increased in cities of all sizes. The largest percent increase occurred in the biggest cities. In Los Angeles, homicides increased from 258 to 351 in the past year, a 36% jump. Rural areas were not exempt from the rise in homicides. Homicide rates in cities of 10,000 people or less increased by 25% last year, though the total number of homicides were still small compared to larger areas.
It's not going to last.
Right now, it's illegal for teachers to film students, so when the student and the teacher tell different stories about what happened in the classroom, it's 'he said/she said.'
Or 'he said/she and her parents screeched.' Our Sheila said YOU said she was a bitch! She said you don't care if she fails! She said you called her a slut! And she NEVER lies.
But after a few of their darling angels get shown up by 'let's go to the tape you fuckers insisted on,' the same parents that demanded classroom cameras will be crying for their removal.