The GI bill and black veterans.

[fast]

It seems to me obvious that educational segregation was the culprit, not the GI Bill.

Thank you. I'm not sure why it seems obvious, as it sure wasn't clearly spelled out.

The effect, tho, is the same.

It seems to me that the effect of the GI Bill had a positive effect on African American veterans in the south. That very fact wasn't made clear. Wonder why that is!

Efforts such as this help to illuminate why the cycle of poverty persists among AAs.

Explain, because although the author may have wanted his readers to walk away with that idea, it doesn't pan out. The devil is in the detail of his wording.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

It becomes a problem when it's enough to reduce wages.

it won't be on a scale big enough to hold blacks down.

And you know this how?

If wages for any given group are depressed appreciably below their true value an arbitrage situation is created and somebody's going to exploit it.

Really now?

Yes. The market is quite good at exploiting such things.

According to the EPI

Since the late 1970s, wages for the bottom 70 percent of earners have been essentially stagnant, and between 2009 and 2013, real wages fell for the entire bottom 90 percent of the wage distribution. Even wages for the bottom 70 percent of four-year college graduates have been flat since 2000, and wages in most STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) occupations have grown anemically over the past decade.​

Surely there must be at least some wage depression involved with nearly FOUR DECADES of wage depression. And yet the arbitrage situation and its exploitation seen a little slow in coming. Maybe it's those pesky market forces, whatever they are and that you will explain and SOURCE.

And there's nothing racial in this quote--you're not showing discrimination.

that quote is directed at wage depression, not discrimination. Care to address it?

You're just showing that wages are not what you want them to be.

What hasn't the market address nearly forty years of wage stagnation?

- - - Updated - - -

 

[Horatio Parker]

The effect, tho, is the same.

It seems to me that the effect of the GI Bill had a positive effect on African American veterans in the south. That very fact wasn't made clear. Wonder why that is!

That's the fact they're disputing.

Efforts such as this help to illuminate why the cycle of poverty persists among AAs.

Explain, because although the author may have wanted his readers to walk away with that idea, it doesn't pan out. The devil is in the detail of his wording.

You've indicated this more than once. Please explain.

 

[laughing dog]

You are mistaken - it was not racism, but the SES of those vets that caused their rejections.

Back then there was a lot of racism. It's only in the time after affirmative action that racism ceased to be an important factor.

How do you know it wasn't their SES?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The restaurant doesn't run out of seats. They might not be the top of the line seats but they do get in.

So there was never any segregation post WWII in southern colleges?

Were there people with GI bill benefits that couldn't find a seat in a college??

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It becomes a problem when it's enough to reduce wages.

it won't be on a scale big enough to hold blacks down.

And you know this how?

If wages for any given group are depressed appreciably below their true value an arbitrage situation is created and somebody's going to exploit it.

Really now?

Yes. The market is quite good at exploiting such things.

According to the EPI

Since the late 1970s, wages for the bottom 70 percent of earners have been essentially stagnant, and between 2009 and 2013, real wages fell for the entire bottom 90 percent of the wage distribution. Even wages for the bottom 70 percent of four-year college graduates have been flat since 2000, and wages in most STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) occupations have grown anemically over the past decade.​

Surely there must be at least some wage depression involved with nearly FOUR DECADES of wage depression. And yet the arbitrage situation and its exploitation seen a little slow in coming. Maybe it's those pesky market forces, whatever they are and that you will explain and SOURCE.

And there's nothing racial in this quote--you're not showing discrimination.

that quote is directed at wage depression, not discrimination. Care to address it?

You're just showing that wages are not what you want them to be.

What hasn't the market address nearly forty years of wage stagnation?

- - - Updated - - -

If wages are depressed for everyone in a profession then there's no arbitrage opportunity. It will in time be corrected by fewer people choosing those fields, though.

When it's across a whole swath and persists for 40 years you're looking at something else--it's not an error in the first place, that's why it's not being fixed. It's just they aren't paid what you think they're worth--all you're showing is that you don't know what labor is worth, not that there is anything evil going on.

 

[Horatio Parker]

So there was never any segregation post WWII in southern colleges?

Were there people with GI bill benefits that couldn't find a seat in a college??

Is this a trick question? Or do you mean were there black vets eligible for GI bill benefits that couldn't get into a college. Yes, due to segregation and the small number of black colleges in the south.

 

[fast]

"...For those black veterans more likely to be limited to the South in their collegiate choices, the G.I. Bill exacerbated rather than narrowed the economic and educational differences between blacks and whites."

Thanks to the GI Bill, many black veterans that were limited to the South in their collegiate choices substantially benefitted.

Not only did black Americans benefit, but white Americans benefitted too.

To no fault of the GI Bill, even though MANY black Americans benefitted, MORE white American benefitted than did blacks.

Since more whites were being benefitted than the massive number of blacks that were benefitted, there is a mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill.

It could show how blacks benefitted so much more after the introduction of the GI Bill. It could even show how many more northern born blacks benefitted over southern born blacks because of present or lacking opportunities. No, let's not do that. Let's harp on the statistical consequence comparing the widening educational gap between whites and blacks.

Substantial more blacks were getting this "step up", but the paper deliberately avoids the positive. It cannot even pin point any negatives and is left to cast some statistical occurrence in such a negative race related way that could only cause confusion and ill-will.

 

[SimpleDon]

You are mistaken - it was not racism, but the SES of those vets that caused their rejections.

Back then there was a lot of racism. It's only in the time after affirmative action that racism ceased to be an important factor.

It wasn't just racism, they made a lot of bad choices, too.

 

[Horatio Parker]

"...For those black veterans more likely to be limited to the South in their collegiate choices, the G.I. Bill exacerbated rather than narrowed the economic and educational differences between blacks and whites."

Thanks to the GI Bill, many black veterans that were limited to the South in their collegiate choices substantially benefitted.

Not only did black Americans benefit, but white Americans benefitted too.

To no fault of the GI Bill, even though MANY black Americans benefitted, MORE white American benefitted than did blacks.

Since more whites were being benefitted than the massive number of blacks that were benefitted, there is a mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill.

It could show how blacks benefitted so much more after the introduction of the GI Bill. It could even show how many more northern born blacks benefitted over southern born blacks because of present or lacking opportunities. No, let's not do that. Let's harp on the statistical consequence comparing the widening educational gap between whites and blacks.

Substantial more blacks were getting this "step up", but the paper deliberately avoids the positive. It cannot even pin point any negatives and is left to cast some statistical occurrence in such a negative race related way that could only cause confusion and ill-will.

"Many" in the context of the paper is a relative term. Relative to AAs outside the south, southern AAs fared significantly worse.

For white men, the combination of World War II service and G. I. benefits had substantial positive effects on collegiate attainment, with a gain of about 0.3 years of college and an increase in college completion of about 5 percentage points. For black men, however, the results were decidedly different for those born in the southern states versus those born elsewhere. The combination of World War II service and the availability of G.I. benefits led to an increase in educational attainment of about 0.4 years of college for black men born outside the South, while there were few gains in collegiate attainment among black men from the South.

Limited collegiate opportunities for blacks from the South decreased the effect of the G.I. Bill for this group and help to explain why this group did not share the same gains in collegiate attainment as whites and blacks in the North. At the conclusion of World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted in their choices to about 100 public and private institutions.

Many whites, when addressing race in the US, wonder why it is that AAs continue to be worse off despite the increased opportunities since the civil rights era.

One reason is that black families have had less wealth to pass on due to redlining and lack of traditional mortgages. This is a somewhat obscured effect of racism, since many whites are unaware of these practices. This point about the GI Bill and educational segregation in the south is similar. If a southern AA vet can't get into a college because of segregation, the GI Bill is something of a hollow promise.

 

[SimpleDon]

"...For those black veterans more likely to be limited to the South in their collegiate choices, the G.I. Bill exacerbated rather than narrowed the economic and educational differences between blacks and whites."

Thanks to the GI Bill, many black veterans that were limited to the South in their collegiate choices substantially benefitted.

Not only did black Americans benefit, but white Americans benefitted too.

To no fault of the GI Bill, even though MANY black Americans benefitted, MORE white American benefitted than did blacks.

Since more whites were being benefitted than the massive number of blacks that were benefitted, there is a mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill.

It could show how blacks benefitted so much more after the introduction of the GI Bill. It could even show how many more northern born blacks benefitted over southern born blacks because of present or lacking opportunities. No, let's not do that. Let's harp on the statistical consequence comparing the widening educational gap between whites and blacks.

Substantial more blacks were getting this "step up", but the paper deliberately avoids the positive. It cannot even pin point any negatives and is left to cast some statistical occurrence in such a negative race related way that could only cause confusion and ill-will.

No one is saying that the GI bill was anything but a tremendous benefit for everyone who could take advantage of it whether they were white or black. It is just that it had a much larger impact on whites because of the segregation in the South.

The article is about the "mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill."

We are told over and over here that there is no reason for us to try to repair the damage that the centuries of legal discrimination caused. That it is sufficient that we eliminate the legal discrimination, that the market will correct if the victims are somehow worthy they will do the extra hard work that they have to do to catch up with whites. As if passing the civil rights laws erased not only the discrimination that minorities faced but it erased any residual damage caused by the discrimination. Or alternately, passage of the laws removed any opportunity to correct the damage because that would be illegal reverse racism.

It is important to remember how pervasive racial discrimination was (and to an unacceptable degree that it still is.) This is a reminder that even a race neutral, universally beneficial program like the GI bill had the affect of increasing the gap between the races.

 

[fast]

Well, it comes across as ungrateful and unappreciative. It stinks of being racially provocative. It's so one-sided that it wreaks of having an ulterior motive--that of intentionally inciting anger.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Well, it comes across as ungrateful and unappreciative. It stinks of being racially provocative. It's so one-sided that it wreaks of having an ulterior motive--that of intentionally inciting anger.

On the contrary, it's enlightening. Those who don't learn from history etc.

I know a AA neocon who uses examples such as this to argue that Democrats are the more racist party. Reforms such as the New Deal benefitted blacks a good deal less.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Well, it comes across as ungrateful and unappreciative. It stinks of being racially provocative. It's so one-sided that it wreaks of having an ulterior motive--that of intentionally inciting anger.

Who is being ungrateful and unappreciative? And why the anger?

 

[bleubird]

Thanks to the GI Bill, many black veterans that were limited to the South in their collegiate choices substantially benefitted.

Not only did black Americans benefit, but white Americans benefitted too.

To no fault of the GI Bill, even though MANY black Americans benefitted, MORE white American benefitted than did blacks.

Since more whites were being benefitted than the massive number of blacks that were benefitted, there is a mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill.

It could show how blacks benefitted so much more after the introduction of the GI Bill. It could even show how many more northern born blacks benefitted over southern born blacks because of present or lacking opportunities. No, let's not do that. Let's harp on the statistical consequence comparing the widening educational gap between whites and blacks.

Substantial more blacks were getting this "step up", but the paper deliberately avoids the positive. It cannot even pin point any negatives and is left to cast some statistical occurrence in such a negative race related way that could only cause confusion and ill-will.

No one is saying that the GI bill was anything but a tremendous benefit for everyone who could take advantage of it whether they were white or black. It is just that it had a much larger impact on whites because of the segregation in the South.

The article is about the "mathematical, computable, statistical, numerical FACT that can be drawn on a graph depicting a gap whereby the educational differences between whites and blacks changed with the introduction of the race neutral GI Bill."

We are told over and over here that there is no reason for us to try to repair the damage that the centuries of legal discrimination caused. That it is sufficient that we eliminate the legal discrimination, that the market will correct if the victims are somehow worthy they will do the extra hard work that they have to do to catch up with whites. As if passing the civil rights laws erased not only the discrimination that minorities faced but it erased any residual damage caused by the discrimination. Or alternately, passage of the laws removed any opportunity to correct the damage because that would be illegal reverse racism.

It is important to remember how pervasive racial discrimination was (and to an unacceptable degree that it still is.) This is a reminder that even a race neutral, universally beneficial program like the GI bill had the affect of increasing the gap between the races.

Well done,SimpleDon.
However,the fact that black GI,s could rarely get loans for any homes outside of their neighborhood ,is an important fact of the history of The Great USA.
Buy a home in the '50,s cheap gave the buyer children a leg up.
If you were a black veteran in the '50,s no leg up for your children.
Education is and has always been about location.Rich neighborhood or poor.
Planned? I do not know.
Systemic? Yes!