Black unemployment 'a serious problem'

[Kali]

I am opposed to social programs that do nothing bu create life long government dependency. It don't matter what color any member of the welfare class is. Unless, you're a Libbo, of course. Then it matters.






How about they get their heads out of their asses and make their own way in life?

There are no life long government programs anymore-unless you are disabled. So what is your point? :roll:

How about you get your head out your ass and have a heart. Why would you rather people die than our gov. help them? I would much rather my tax dollars go towards helping people than spending money on useless war.

 

[apdst]

There are no life long government programs anymore-unless you are disabled. So what is your point? :roll:

I personally know generations of families who have sucked off the government tit. Ever hear of Section 8?

How about you get your head out your ass and have a heart. Why would you rather people die than our gov. help them? I would much rather my tax dollars go towards helping people than spending money on useless war.

Nobody gave me any welfare. Since I have my head in my ass and I seem to be able to make in the real world, there's not much excuse for anyone else to not be able to do it. Right?

 

[ScummyD]

Why do you want people to die due to lack of food, housing and basic needs?

Why would you assume so much without reasonable basis for doing so???

If we do away with social programs tell me what is your plan? Let people starve to death to teach them some lesson?

Did you miss it where I clearly stated:

Social safety nets are an important aspect of modern society.​

 

[ScummyD]

Do we gas them, imprison, them, or just let them struggle to the point where desperation is released? Usually, when a desperate person acts, they do not think things through.

We should pull their toe and finger nails out one day at a time, then their teeth, then an eye at a time, then crucify them and burn them at the stake.

Nice. Two incoherent hysterical responses to my comment back to back.

 

[Shewter]

Did anyone else catch the part of the op article that stated black college grads have to "disguise their voices" or "hide their blackness" when applying for jobs?

I wonder if they consider the impact of ebonics on perceived professionalism?

 

[zimmer]

How about you get your head out your ass and have a heart. Why would you rather people die than our gov. help them? I would much rather my tax dollars go towards helping people than spending money on useless war.

Having people dependent on government is not compassion, it is heartless.

You want your tax dollars to help people... why not reduce all our taxes so we can do with the money as we best see fit. I don;t need a conduit of a few hundred stooges buying votes.

Those "useless wars" freed 50 million people and could have been prevented had the UN not been corrupted to the core (UN Oil-for-Food Program). Remember Saddam lost a war and signed an agreement... which he failed to live up to... because he figured he had the UN in his back pocket. Then we had 911... and the UN Inspecteurs? Oh Snap! They were booted out YEARS before.

Of course agreements mean nothing to folks like you, unless it means confiscating wealth to spread around.

That BS has failed miserably, but government is the only place more money is thrown at abject failure.

.

 

[PeteEU]

Having people dependent on government is not compassion, it is heartless.

You want your tax dollars to help people... why not reduce all our taxes so we can do with the money as we best see fit. I don;t need a conduit of a few hundred stooges buying votes.

Now if you could actually stick to facts and not run your mouth with the Karl Rove talking points memo then it might add to your credibility.

Those "useless wars" freed 50 million people

Oh? Lets see, Iraq has 32 million and Afghanistan around 12... not 50 million combined.. Fail. And funny how you define "free"

and could have been prevented had the UN not been corrupted to the core (UN Oil-for-Food Program).

Considering that you have zero evidence of massive corruption to the core, and you as usual conveniently forget the actual truth about oil-for-food and where Saddam got most of his money, then well.. fail. You do know that Saddam got most of his money from illegal oil smuggling, which as approved by the US government (both right and left wing).

Remember Saddam lost a war and signed an agreement... which he failed to live up to... because he figured he had the UN in his back pocket.

Pathetic simplistic bs.

Then we had 911... and the UN Inspecteurs? Oh Snap! They were booted out YEARS before.

Oh SNAP, they were given access again.. oh SNAP.. and did not find anything.. fail again.

Of course agreements mean nothing to folks like you, unless it means confiscating wealth to spread around.

Actually they mean far more to "people like us" than they mean to you and your cohorts.

That BS has failed miserably, but government is the only place more money is thrown at abject failure.

Yea like throwing billions after the Vice Presidents company, who then turns around and steals from the Tax payer without any consequences.

 

[Partisan]

Hey Pete, I was wonderring if you could put your U.S. bashing on hold for a minute to answer a question?.....
Does Spain have a problem with high black unemployment or is black population such a small percentage that it makes the problem insignificant?......
What is the percentage of black persons in Spain?.....

 

[UtahBill]

You lost me at "I don't see any Americans starving.".. Get back to me when you are in the REAL U.S.A.

I am not black, but I did grow up hungry. Not starving, but hungry. My mother rarely cooked enough for us to have leftovers, and her kids did not have free access to the pantry or fridge in her house. When I joined the Navy I gained only a few pounds in bootcamp, thanks to all the exercise. But right after boot camp, I gained 20 pounds in a short time span. IT was all you can eat, and no more required exercise. That was about 40 years ago, when we didn't have as many social programs.

2 of my siblings were either chronically unemployed, or underemployed. We are all old enough to be retired, or nearing retirement. Another is retired military and he worked only part time after his 20 years in the Air Force. They chose to be that way.

People CHOOSE, most of the time, their situation. As was said in an earlier post, we should help the helpless, not the clueless.

I have friends who are quite well off, they have lots in assets and savings, even tho some of them have a low "income". They qualify for commodities, and go get them on a regular basis, and have actually given us some. If it is free, people will line up for it, even when they don't need it. They will load it into their new Toyota Avalon or Chevy Subruban and haul it home.

Granted, these people were poor at one time, and remember it clearly, so they go for the free stuff.

Funny thing about the current group of young poor people, a large percentage of them, passed on the one free thing that they need the most, an education. I have no facts or figures, just observing the actions of those who I know take advantage of social programs. For most of us, all the help we need is available for free, we just choose to avoid any "free" that requires some personal effort...

 

[American]

Yea higher crime.. :roll:

This experiment has been tried other places.. its called 3rd world countries and it has not worked even remotely. You know that drug war in Mexico.. guess why people get into such things?

This is an American domestic issue. You don't get to vote. And you are wrong about what you said.

 

[zimmer]

Pete... here is some Christmas crow... enjoy:

Now if you could actually stick to facts and not run your mouth with the Karl Rove talking points memo then it might add to your credibility.

Ahh... You folks haven't been able to flush it from your system I see. In the last days I've heard all the Bush era knee-jerk reactions. Wishing for the good'ol days? LOL

Oh? Lets see, Iraq has 32 million and Afghanistan around 12... not 50 million combined.. Fail. And funny how you define "free"

Well, whoopee! It wasn't Old Europe that helped get rid of the Tyrants and terrorists. Turn it back 65-years and you would probably be complaining the Allies didn't free the Europeans of their tyrants.

Considering that you have zero evidence of massive corruption to the core, and you as usual conveniently forget the actual truth about oil-for-food

Lost on Pete EU. When the UN was corrupted by Saddam, when they turned their eyes in the other direction to his smuggling, you don't think this empowered him? Of course not... LOL.

As for doing nothing for 8-years... thank Clinton for that.

Pathetic simplistic bs.

Really? Saddam lost a war and played games for 12-years and 16-UN Resolutions. A school boy would understand that the UN was meaningless, toothless and corrupt. He kicked out their Inspecteurs de la UN... without consequences.

We know you Euros have difficulty understanding the real world... it's why you folks have been on the wrong side of virtually every issue for the past 30-years.

Oh SNAP, they were given access again.. oh SNAP.. and did not find anything.. fail again.

Every country, and the UN believed he had WMD, and believed he would reconstitute his programs.

Eat this Dr. Simpleton:

Dr David Kay's Testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee
CRG: Dr David Kay's Testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee

David Kay
In my judgment, based on the work that has been done to this point of the Iraq Survey Group, and in fact, that I reported to you in October, Iraq was in clear violation of the terms of Resolution 1441. Resolution 1441 required that Iraq report all of its activities: one last chance to come clean about what it had.

We have discovered hundreds of cases, based on both documents, physical evidence and the testimony of Iraqis, of activities that were prohibited under the initial U.N. Resolution 687 and that should have been reported under 1441, with Iraqi testimony that not only did they not tell the U.N. about this, they were instructed not to do it and they hid material.

...

CORNYN: You said something during your opening statement that intrigues me, and something that I'm afraid may be overlooked in all of this back and forth; and that has to do with proliferation.

You said that there was a risk of a willing seller meeting a willing buyer of such weapons or weapon stockpiles, whether they be large, small or programs, whether it's information that Iraqi scientists might be willing to sell or work in cooperation with rogue organizations or even nations.

But do you consider that to have been a real risk in terms of Saddam's activities and these programs -- the risk of proliferation?

KAY: Actually, I consider it a bigger risk. And that's why I paused on the preceding questions. I consider that a bigger risk than the restart of his programs being successful.

KAY: I think the way the society was going, and the number of willing buyers in the market, that that probably was a risk that if we did avoid, we barely avoided.

Actually they mean far more to "people like us" than they mean to you and your cohorts.

LOL... yes... you folks really showed us in Copenhagen... ROTFLMFAO. You showed us how it's done.

Yea like throwing billions after the Vice Presidents company, who then turns around and steals from the Tax payer without any consequences.

Jeezuz... this thread gets funnier with every word you type. Clinton and Halliburton signed no-bid contracts too... for good reason... and at much higher rates!!! ROTFLMFAO...

HALLIBURTON — THE CLINTON CONTRACTOR
Waxman's second objection concerns the way the company will be paid for its services. The LOGCAP payment method, known as a cost-plus-award, calls for KBR to be paid its costs plus a profit of 1 percent. According to the General Accounting Office, KBR could also earn "an incentive fee of up to nine percent of the cost estimate, based on the contractor's performance in a number of areas, including cost control." In one of his letters to the Corps of Engineers, Waxman says that the cost-plus-award system is "generally discouraged in the executive branch because it provides the contractor with an incentive to increase its profits by increasing the costs to the taxpayer." But in fact, the cost-plus-award method is an extremely common arrangement throughout the defense-contracting industry; one can leaf through the pages of Defense Daily and see many hundreds of contracts handled on the same basis. Given such widespread use, it is hard to conclude that the cost-plus-award method somehow makes the Halliburton contract a sweetheart deal for a politically favored company. (Nor is the contract unusually generous; the LOGCAP's range of a 1 percent to 9 percent fee is in line with standard government/industry practice.)

[Editor's note — Since this article was published in National Review magazine, Halliburton has said that while the LOGCAP that was in effect from 1992 until 1997 called for a one-to-nine percent profit range, the LOGCAP in effect now calls for significantly less, a one-to-three percent profit margin.]

.:2wave:

 

[danarhea]

I have a better idea, quit coddling people in general and start holding people accountable for their success and failures.

No more welfare, no more Section 8 housing, no more AA.

Take a few years but the end results would be positive.

As in Alcoholics Anonymous? You have to be kidding me.

 

[Partisan]

As in Alcoholics Anonymous? You have to be kidding me.

I think he is referring to Affirmative Action....

 

[danarhea]

I think he is referring to Affirmative Action....

OK. Damn, did I ever read that one wrong. :rofl

 

[American]

As in Alcoholics Anonymous? You have to be kidding me.

Yeah, everyone knows that blacks don't go to liquor stores for alcohol, right? :roll:

 

[Stinger]

Sounds familiar to the stinger shuffle! From illegal immigration to legal:2wave: You could have admitted your error:roll:

Ann yes when the left could not maintain their own positions resorts to the bogus claims.

You guys still at it I see.

 

[zimmer]

Bump.........

 

[Caine]

So tell me your ideas on change. What we should do to help people? What is the answer? We must have some form of programs to protect starving children. What is your answer so we can put people to work and make sure no child in the U.S.A. goes to bed hungry? You want them all to starve?

Do I want them to starve? No

Do they obviously want to starve? Yes, if they aren't making a certifiable effort to get out there and get a job and support themselves. When you have generations of families through decades who depend on government assistance, you have a problem of motivation, not a problem of "needing help". You may want to claim that these people don't exist, but Ive only been working in policing for 4 years and Have met dozens of families like this.

There are no life long government programs anymore-unless you are disabled. So what is your point? :roll:

Funny when I see people who have lived in government housing for 15+ years, and now their adult children live right next door.

How about you get your head out your ass and have a heart. Why would you rather people die than our gov. help them? I would much rather my tax dollars go towards helping people than spending money on useless war.

Funny.

War spending has an ending point, when the war ends.

Once you start spending money on welfare, you can't just abruptly stop spending billions on it, if you can even slowly stop spending that money.

At that point too many people have become dependant upon that money.


Government welfare is stealing from the wealthy/hard working and giving it to people who are either in the minority and need an extra temporary boost, which I don't have a problem with, or most often than not, people who are too ****ing lazy to support themselves.

 

[Kali]

There are cut off limits these days for how long you can get help and for how much money per kid you can get it for. Ithink after 3 kids you do not get anymore unless the children are disabled. You are also required to look for work and expected to find work when on welfare these days.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

This may be of some help:

How Does Welfare Work? | eHow.com


There are specific guidelines to receive benefits, but I am unsure of how continuing support is offered once a family is receiving benefits. I believe it varies from state to state, but I'm not familar with the requirements. I will look them up for my state because now I'm curious.

Does anyone know what their state requires?

I found some information here.

In the 1990's the welfare program underwent several changes, perhaps the one most well known was replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children with TANF. Under the TANF program federal government gives money to states by way of block grants which allows states to have more authority and flexibility when trying to administer welfare programs. This program represents a changed version of the purpose of welfare. Instead of long-term program assistance, welfare is considered a short-term program that will help individuals become better able to support themselves. Meaning the head of the household is required to be working within 2 years of starting to receive benefits, and the families have an imposed limit of no more than 5 years of cash assistance

HOWEVER - that is outlining benefits limits and conditions for TANF and isn't all inclusive of benefits for the poor.

After having paid daycare expenses for two small children 12 years ago (apx. 1200.00/mo in Kansas), I can imagine how hard that would be to pay for someone making at or below poverty level. Simply put - it wouldn't happen. So I understand some of the tough situations people are in - but there has to be more workable solutions than continuing on with welfare programs as they are now.

I'm not cut of the cloth that I believe we should shove poorer people under the rug and forget about them.. but as the old saying goes:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
Chinese Proverb

 

[Kali]

What is the answer? I really wish I knew.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

So tell me your ideas on change. What we should do to help people?

Nothing at the federal level. The Constitution does not grant the federal government the authority to intervene on this most local of matters. It's up to the states to each address that problem as they see fit.

What is the answer? We must have some form of programs to protect starving children.

An assumption without basis.

What stopping you from assuaging your feelings of guilt using your own money?

What is your answer so we can put people to work and make sure no child in the U.S.A. goes to bed hungry?

1) It's not the government's job to "put people to work". The very fact that this particular recessions sole origin was the continued interference of government in places it doesn't belong should have you realizing that government isn't the solution, but the problem.

Why is it you refuse to see the problem?

2) Government can't stop hunger. All the government programs imposed upon us since the Great Society served only to stop the decline in poverty and maintain it at a nearly constant level thereafter. This country hands food out to people for free, yet people still go hungry. Any awake person would be able to figure out that if hunger still exists when food is being given away for free that the problem isn't a shortage of food, but something else.

That something else is socialism.

You want them all to starve?

They're not my kids, they're not my problem. My desires are irrelevant to the issue.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

What is the answer? I really wish I knew.

Self-reliance.

Oops, that's counter to the socialist mantra of stealing from the people who create the to support the people who won't....er can't.

 

[Grim17]

I don't have time to read every post here, so I'm going to post what I found, and how I see it.

First, there is nobody that will stand up against racism faster than me. I deplore it, and should not be tolerated under any condition in American society. With that said, here my 2 cents...

A possible reason the Black unemployment rate is higher than it is with Whites, might be due to the fact that the percentage of Blacks that drop out of high school is double that of Whites. It comes down to who's more qualified. Even if education itself isn't a factor for a job opening, a person who graduated high school will always look better than someone who quit. It's about character.


Anyway, just my 2 cents.

 

[DeeJayH]

how low would black unemployment go if clockers and pimps were included as employed :3oops: