White privilege - How is it different to Western, or American Privilege?

[Hicup]

I mean, if white can be privileged in the US, compared to other ethnicities, then doesn't that logic extend to American privilege, or Western privilege, contrasted to other nations? So, it follows that, even if it were possible to convince enough white people to hate themselves, and curb this hypothetical privilege, what to do about all the US privilege when it happens?

Or, does the privilege brigade stop its campaign at American borders? We have a lot of American's we call poor, that have a boatload more than other none privileged nations around the world. What's to be done with us?

Serious question.

Tim-

 

[Nemiroff]

Hi Tim.

Do you know what people refer to as white privilege? It's not an instant success card.

Personally I think the name white privilege is beyond stupid. None of the things it describes are in any way a privlege. Things like not being suspected of stealing by default due to your skin color isnt a privilege. And blaming your peer for not being under suspicion instead of the person actively discriminating against you is beyond stupid. But the effect is real, and often unnoticed by that peer.

Asking a person to understand that they have an edge isnt asking them to hate themselves. And honestly that edge is something that minorities simply desire have, it's called equal treatment.

I'm white btw, and I think minorities who use the term privilege instead of discrimination to describe this phenomena are making a big mistake. but it is a real phenomena.

What your concerned about with poor people in our borders isnt the issue. It's just that when you take a black man and a white man of the same income, they get a very different experience in highering, law enforcement encounters, and even shopping, that make their lives just that much more harder, and it's real. There is no self hate in acknowledging the reality of others. I certainly don't feel guilt, but I do feel some empathy. Kinda like saying sorry to someone who lost a leg in a car accident. Your not guilty, but you acknowledge that their situation really sucks.

 

[LowDown]

I mean, if white can be privileged in the US, compared to other ethnicities, then doesn't that logic extend to American privilege, or Western privilege, contrasted to other nations? So, it follows that, even if it were possible to convince enough white people to hate themselves, and curb this hypothetical privilege, what to do about all the US privilege when it happens?

Or, does the privilege brigade stop its campaign at American borders? We have a lot of American's we call poor, that have a boatload more than other none privileged nations around the world. What's to be done with us?

Serious question.

Tim-

What they call white privilege is actually majority privilege. The majority in any country is going to have advantages.

There's not a lot of white privilege in China or India. It would be hopeless to think that you could convince the Chinese to curb the advantages their homeland provides them there in their own country.

 

[Felis Leo]

Hi Tim.

Do you know what people refer to as white privilege? It's not an instant success card.

Personally I think the name white privilege is beyond stupid. None of the things it describes are in any way a privlege. Things like not being suspected of stealing by default due to your skin color isnt a privilege. And blaming your peer for not being under suspicion instead of the person actively discriminating against you is beyond stupid. But the effect is real, and often unnoticed by that peer.

Asking a person to understand that they have an edge isnt asking them to hate themselves. And honestly that edge is something that minorities simply desire have, it's called equal treatment.

I'm white btw, and I think minorities who use the term privilege instead of discrimination to describe this phenomena are making a big mistake. but it is a real phenomena.

What your concerned about with poor people in our borders isnt the issue. It's just that when you take a black man and a white man of the same income, they get a very different experience in highering, law enforcement encounters, and even shopping, that make their lives just that much more harder, and it's real. There is no self hate in acknowledging the reality of others. I certainly don't feel guilt, but I do feel some empathy. Kinda like saying sorry to someone who lost a leg in a car accident. Your not guilty, but you acknowledge that their situation really sucks.

I agree with you, Nemiroff, and I have stated this on other forums. Not being treated like garbage is not in itself a privilege. That should be the standard. The opposite of oppression and ill-treatment is not "privilege," it is simply "not being oppressed." Any more than not being morbidly obese does not mean you are in phenomenal physical shape, or vice-versa.

 

[Hicup]

Hi Tim.

Do you know what people refer to as white privilege? It's not an instant success card.

Personally I think the name white privilege is beyond stupid. None of the things it describes are in any way a privlege. Things like not being suspected of stealing by default due to your skin color isnt a privilege. And blaming your peer for not being under suspicion instead of the person actively discriminating against you is beyond stupid. But the effect is real, and often unnoticed by that peer.

Asking a person to understand that they have an edge isnt asking them to hate themselves. And honestly that edge is something that minorities simply desire have, it's called equal treatment.

I'm white btw, and I think minorities who use the term privilege instead of discrimination to describe this phenomena are making a big mistake. but it is a real phenomena.

What your concerned about with poor people in our borders isnt the issue. It's just that when you take a black man and a white man of the same income, they get a very different experience in highering, law enforcement encounters, and even shopping, that make their lives just that much more harder, and it's real. There is no self hate in acknowledging the reality of others. I certainly don't feel guilt, but I do feel some empathy. Kinda like saying sorry to someone who lost a leg in a car accident. Your not guilty, but you acknowledge that their situation really sucks.

But for any of that to be true, it/you, would have to prove to me that this is systemic. I don't buy that rationale. Your look is what causes concern for people, of all stripes. I used to work retail back in the day, and it didn't matter what your skin color was, it was how you were dressed, and how you presented yourself that raised suspicion. Poor white folks are equally represented in this category, IMO. I'm not suggesting that there are racist people out there, certainly that is the case, but I don't buy that it translates necessarily to the color of ones skin when all things are held equal, as you highlight above. For instance, the black experience in, say, Canada is vastly different than it is in the US, why? Well, it may have something to do with; in Canada neighborhoods are not typically segregated like they are in the US. In the US, these segregated neighborhoods are mostly self-segregated.

I don't know the cure, but blaming the majority of white people for the plight of some black people isn't it, it doesn't feel right to me, and I fear that it does more harm than good, but thank you for your response, I was hoping to get reasonable people to reply to this phenomenon.


Tim-

 

[Nemiroff]

But for any of that to be true, it/you, would have to prove to me that this is systemic. I don't buy that rationale. Your look is what causes concern for people, of all stripes. I used to work retail back in the day, and it didn't matter what your skin color was, it was how you were dressed, and how you presented yourself that raised suspicion. Poor white folks are equally represented in this category, IMO. I'm not suggesting that there are racist people out there, certainly that is the case, but I don't buy that it translates necessarily to the color of ones skin when all things are held equal, as you highlight above. For instance, the black experience in, say, Canada is vastly different than it is in the US, why? Well, it may have something to do with; in Canada neighborhoods are not typically segregated like they are in the US. In the US, these segregated neighborhoods are mostly self-segregated.

I don't know the cure, but blaming the majority of white people for the plight of some black people isn't it, it doesn't feel right to me, and I fear that it does more harm than good, but thank you for your response, I was hoping to get reasonable people to reply to this phenomenon.


Tim-

Well we have repeated studies where identical resumes were sent out with generic vs ethnic names being the only difference and saw a huge difference in the number of call backs.

That's objective proof for racial discrimination and double standards in hiring. Court and arrest records show unequal treatment in law enforcement (like marijuana arrests) and harsher sentencing for identical crimes, previous record accounted for.

 

[Hicup]

Well we have repeated studies where identical resumes were sent out with generic vs ethnic names being the only difference and saw a huge difference in the number of call backs.

That's objective proof for racial discrimination and double standards in hiring. Court and arrest records show unequal treatment in law enforcement (like marijuana arrests) and harsher sentencing for identical crimes, previous record accounted for.

But that is simply not true, if it were and could be proven, then where are all the lawsuits? Lawyers love to sue, where are all of them? As to law enforcement, that has also been shown to be untrue.


Tim-

 

[Rogue Valley]

But that is simply not true...

Yes, it is true. Abundantly true. The term "red-lining" didn't just fall out of the sky one fine day.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Privilege is usually situational so privilege can present itself in all manner of forms based on where you are and the situation you find yourself in.

 

[Hicup]

Yes, it is true. Abundantly true. The term "red-lining" didn't just fall out of the sky one fine day.

Then prove it, show me all the lawsuits, the systemic nature of red-lining? It is illegal, and if it happens all the time, as being suggested then the evidence should be overwhelming, it isn't, and you know it! By the way, could the reverse also be true when prior to 2008 anyone, regardless of financial standing, race, or ethnicity seemed to be "rubber-stamped" for a mortgage.. Either way, I do not, and did not argue that it doesn't occur, that is not my premise. What I am saying is that the society has taken large steps to protect people from it, and will punish those that do harshly. Hardly the actions of a society that has systemic racism in its core.



Tim-

 

[Hicup]

Privilege is usually situational so privilege can present itself in all manner of forms based on where you are and the situation you find yourself in.

I can agree with that, but it is NOT systemic, which is what the left wants us all to believe. They want us to believe it so much that white people (young ones, older ones aren't that stupid) will guilt themselves into voting for them.. By the way, Carl Sagan is perhaps my favorite scientist that ever lived!

Tim-

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Well we have repeated studies where identical resumes were sent out with generic vs ethnic names being the only difference and saw a huge difference in the number of call backs.

That's objective proof for racial discrimination and double standards in hiring. Court and arrest records show unequal treatment in law enforcement (like marijuana arrests) and harsher sentencing for identical crimes, previous record accounted for.

The data shows it is true when comparing large sample sets. For an individual to sue they would have to show they were discriminated in their specific case, which can be next to impossible to do. It is like what scientists claim about climate change. Climate change will result in more extreme weather events like hurricanes, but you still can’t blame any specific hurricane on climate change.

 

[YorkshirePete]

Hi Tim.

Do you know what people refer to as white privilege? It's not an instant success card.

Personally I think the name white privilege is beyond stupid. None of the things it describes are in any way a privlege. Things like not being suspected of stealing by default due to your skin color isnt a privilege. And blaming your peer for not being under suspicion instead of the person actively discriminating against you is beyond stupid. But the effect is real, and often unnoticed by that peer.

Asking a person to understand that they have an edge isnt asking them to hate themselves. And honestly that edge is something that minorities simply desire have, it's called equal treatment.

I'm white btw, and I think minorities who use the term privilege instead of discrimination to describe this phenomena are making a big mistake. but it is a real phenomena.

What your concerned about with poor people in our borders isnt the issue. It's just that when you take a black man and a white man of the same income, they get a very different experience in highering, law enforcement encounters, and even shopping, that make their lives just that much more harder, and it's real. There is no self hate in acknowledging the reality of others. I certainly don't feel guilt, but I do feel some empathy. Kinda like saying sorry to someone who lost a leg in a car accident. Your not guilty, but you acknowledge that their situation really sucks.

As they say "if you haven't been there you have zero to say"
I presume you are not black and 3 rd gen crammed into a city by redlining.?
Or "would you rather be black or white in these United States?
Deafening silence ?

 

[Nemiroff]

As they say "if you haven't been there you have zero to say"
I presume you are not black and 3 rd gen crammed into a city by redlining.?
Or "would you rather be black or white in these United States?
Deafening silence ?

I think your replying to the wrong person or simply didnt read my post. I criticized the term privilege but said its effects are 100% real and 100% discrimination.

By using the term privilege you are shifting blame to your peer for getting the job and did nothing wrong, probably didn't even know about the other candidates instead of the boss who did the actual discriminating.

You are being discriminated against and arent being given a fair shot, but that doesn't mean that not being automatically suspected and dismissed is somehow a privilege. It is the default that should be the case for everyone. Blame the employer/ enforcer for doing the unfair discrimination instead of the peer who has his own struggles and probably didn't even know you were an unfairly treated applicant/ defendant.

Raise awareness without blaming the innocent, and you may create allies instead of resistance.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Well we have repeated studies where identical resumes were sent out with generic vs ethnic names being the only difference and saw a huge difference in the number of call backs.

That's objective proof for racial discrimination and double standards in hiring. Court and arrest records show unequal treatment in law enforcement (like marijuana arrests) and harsher sentencing for identical crimes, previous record accounted for.

True but there are so many factors at play that 'racial discrimination' in itself no longer has any meaning.

For instance consider:

There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved. The Reverend Jesse Jackson, as quoted in US News, March 10, 1996​

If you are in a neighborhood or culture in which it is mostly black people who are preying on, oppressing, bullying, threatening, raping, murdering, robbing, doing harm to other people regardless of what ethnicity or race those others are, you will feel as Jackson felt and be more suspicious of black people than white people in that environment even though most black people in that environment aren't doing the bad stuff. In a rare moment of brutal honesty, Rev. Jackson admitted that.

If you have bad experiences with black people and not with white people, you will see skin color differently than otherwise.

If you have been an employer who had a succession of difficult black employees who claimed racial persecution when you tried to give instruction or correct bad behavior and who would file racial discrimination suits if you suspended or terminated them, you quickly get to the point of not wanting to hire them at all. I have actually been in that situation having a series of new African American hires that proved to be less than stellar employees. My maintenance supervisor, a great guy who happened to be black, quietly informed me of what was going on--civil rights activists were planting these people in an effort to agitate to the point I or my supervisory staff would fire them and then they intended to file suit for racial discrimination. Thinking he was one of them, they told my maintenance supervisor. It is very difficult to extricate yourself from that sort of situation and you become suspicious of anybody with black skin who applies for work.

Does racial prejudice exist? Of course it does. But the civil rights do-gooders did the black community absolutely no favors when they starting demanding special treatment and special protections for black workers. Or when everybody has to walk on eggs around black people lest they be accused of some offense like saying a wrong word or phrase they would normally say or bringing watermelon to the company potluck dinner. Employers just trying to make a living and keep a business healthy and who want a cohesive workforce that gets along with each other just doesn't want to have to deal with that.

Wherever people are allowed to just be people and there is no militant racism nonsense being pushed, black employees are doing just fine and are loved and appreciated and promoted as much as anybody else.

 

[Nemiroff]

But that is simply not true, if it were and could be proven, then where are all the lawsuits? Lawyers love to sue, where are all of them? As to law enforcement, that has also been shown to be untrue.


Tim-

As Bob said, this study was made up resumes so noone was actually hurt and no lawsuit has merit. Individual applicants have no way to prove why they were rejected or even know who the competition was. Lawyers cant do much.

As for the enforcement, you claim these findings were overturned so I'm guessing I dont need to show you the stats since you are aware of them. Can you show me evidence that they were overturned tho because I have never heard of that at all.

 

[Nemiroff]

True but there are so many factors at play that 'racial discrimination' in itself no longer has any meaning.

For instance consider:

There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved. The Reverend Jesse Jackson, as quoted in US News, March 10, 1996​

If you are in a neighborhood or culture in which it is mostly black people who are preying on, oppressing, bullying, threatening, raping, murdering, robbing, doing harm to other people regardless of what ethnicity or race those others are, you will feel as Jackson felt and be more suspicious of black people than white people in that environment even though most black people in that environment aren't doing the bad stuff. In a rare moment of brutal honesty, Rev. Jackson admitted that.

If you have bad experiences with black people and not with white people, you will see skin color differently than otherwise.

If you have been an employer who had a succession of difficult black employees who claimed racial persecution when you tried to give instruction or correct bad behavior and who would file racial discrimination suits if you suspended or terminated them, you quickly get to the point of not wanting to hire them at all. I have actually been in that situation having a series of new African American hires that proved to be less than stellar employees. My maintenance supervisor, a great guy who happened to be black, quietly informed me of what was going on--civil rights activists were planting these people in an effort to agitate to the point I or my supervisory staff would fire them and then they intended to file suit for racial discrimination. Thinking he was one of them, they told my maintenance supervisor. It is very difficult to extricate yourself from that sort of situation and you become suspicious of anybody with black skin who applies for work.

Does racial prejudice exist? Of course it does. But the civil rights do-gooders did the black community absolutely no favors when they starting demanding special treatment and special protections for black workers. Or when everybody has to walk on eggs around black people lest they be accused of some offense like saying a wrong word or phrase they would normally say or bringing watermelon to the company potluck dinner. Employers just trying to make a living and keep a business healthy and who want a cohesive workforce that gets along with each other just doesn't want to have to deal with that.

Wherever people are allowed to just be people and there is no militant racism nonsense being pushed, black employees are doing just fine and are loved and appreciated and promoted as much as anybody else.

Most crime in black communities is dont by blacks. Most crime in white communities is done by whites. Most crime happens within a community so you arent saying anything of value there. Do you not believe in judging an individual on his own merit?

Furthermore this raises a great chicken and egg problem. Did the increased criminality cause the lack of opportunity, or did lack of opportunity cause increased criminality? Especially when the lack of opportunity goes back for generations. Rather than creating a perpetual repition of hardship and wasted potential should we not take steps to fix the problem and increase the productivity of our nation as a whole while also doing the ethically right thing?

I agree affirmative action like policies are ****ty band aids. Rather than counter-balanced racial programs we should give them the equal treatment under the law they are constitutionally entitled to. This includes equal public school funding and not ignoring their communities politically. But social investment isnt the right wing way (big government) so the aa bandaid was the agreed upon solution.

I would greatly support getting rid of racial policies AFTER minority schools get the same funding as good neighborhood *public* schools and basic community resources, but removing the racial policies by itself will not create a racially fair situation, it will only be more unfair.

If you were born in a ditch covered in oil, you would be resentful of the climb as well as the people calling you lazy. Equalize the start line and then you can pass judgement all you want. Until then, the critics are ignorant and in the wrong

 

[Nemiroff]

As they say "if you haven't been there you have zero to say"
I presume you are not black and 3 rd gen crammed into a city by redlining.?
Or "would you rather be black or white in these United States?
Deafening silence ?

also, it would be nice if you gave a person a chance to respond before making the "deafening silence" claim

 

[JustHanging]

But for any of that to be true, it/you, would have to prove to me that this is systemic.
...
Tim-

Black-white wage gaps expand with rising wage inequality

As of 2015, relative to the average hourly wages of white men with the same education, experience, metro status, and region of residence, black men make 22.0 percent less, and black women make 34.2 percent less.


That sounds pretty systemic to me. What do you think?


NOTE: Haven't used anything from this source before, but they seem reputable at first glance:

Economic Policy Institute

LEFT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.

Factual Reporting: HIGH

 

[AlbqOwl]

Most crime in black communities is dont by blacks. Most crime in white communities is done by whites. Most crime happens within a community so you arent saying anything of value there. Do you not believe in judging an individual on his own merit?

Furthermore this raises a great chicken and egg problem. Did the increased criminality cause the lack of opportunity, or did lack of opportunity cause increased criminality? Especially when the lack of opportunity goes back for generations. Rather than creating a perpetual repition of hardship and wasted potential should we not take steps to fix the problem and increase the productivity of our nation as a whole while also doing the ethically right thing?

I agree affirmative action like policies are ****ty band aids. Rather than counter-balanced racial programs we should give them the equal treatment under the law they are constitutionally entitled to. This includes equal public school funding and not ignoring their communities politically. But social investment isnt the right wing way (big government) so the aa bandaid was the agreed upon solution.

I would greatly support getting rid of racial policies AFTER minority schools get the same funding as good neighborhood *public* schools and basic community resources, but removing the racial policies by itself will not create a racially fair situation, it will only be more unfair.

If you were born in a ditch covered in oil, you would be resentful of the climb as well as the people calling you lazy. Equalize the start line and then you can pass judgement all you want. Until then, the critics are ignorant and in the wrong

I defy you to find any point of my post that rejects the idea of hiring people on merit. Therefore your question I believe is intentionally insulting and ignores the point I was making.

Lack of opportunity does not necessarily create crime. Opportunity to commit crime creates opportunity in the minds of the criminally minded. During the 1930's and 40's amidst crushing poverty, there was far less crime, certainly far less violent crime, than currently exists. People living in the inner cities were not living in war zones. The crime rate for Appalachia even now is about 50% of the rate in the rest of the country. So let's set aside any notion that poverty is the root of crime. Opportunity to commit crime by the criminally inclined along with a good chance of getting away with it is the leading cause of crime. Permissiveness re crime by those who make excuses for the criminally inclined greatly exacerbates the problem.

Currently we have a President who believes in creating opportunity for all Americans without respect for race, ethnicity, creed, color, or political affiliation. In addition to wages beginning to rise at a rate we haven't seen in decades, home ownership is rising, and poverty is plummeting as many who had given up are coming back into the work force. We now have more jobs than we have trained or qualified people to fill them. This has opened the door to the hard core unemployed--apprenticeships, openings for trainees etc. have brought unemployment to its lowest levels in decades and the lowest unemployment EVER to many demographic groups. Anybody who wants to work can find a job. It might not be a great job but it will be a job. And having a job and acquiring references for work ethic, ability to learn, to be productive opens doors to much better jobs.

The best opportunity is not being condescending to various demographics. The best opportunity comes with a robust economy and demand for labor and makes it a sellers market for the wage earner. Unless the left finds a way to screw it up--and they are doing their damndest to do that--it will only get better.

 

[Nemiroff]

I defy you to find any point of my post that rejects the idea of hiring people on merit. Therefore your question I believe is intentionally insulting and ignores the point I was making.

Lack of opportunity does not necessarily create crime. Opportunity to commit crime creates opportunity in the minds of the criminally minded. During the 1930's and 40's amidst crushing poverty, there was far less crime, certainly far less violent crime, than currently exists. People living in the inner cities were not living in war zones. The crime rate for Appalachia even now is about 50% of the rate in the rest of the country. So let's set aside any notion that poverty is the root of crime. Opportunity to commit crime by the criminally inclined along with a good chance of getting away with it is the leading cause of crime. Permissiveness re crime by those who make excuses for the criminally inclined greatly exacerbates the problem.

Currently we have a President who believes in creating opportunity for all Americans without respect for race, ethnicity, creed, color, or political affiliation. In addition to wages beginning to rise at a rate we haven't seen in decades, home ownership is rising, and poverty is plummeting as many who had given up are coming back into the work force. We now have more jobs than we have trained or qualified people to fill them. This has opened the door to the hard core unemployed--apprenticeships, openings for trainees etc. have brought unemployment to its lowest levels in decades and the lowest unemployment EVER to many demographic groups. Anybody who wants to work can find a job. It might not be a great job but it will be a job. And having a job and acquiring references for work ethic, ability to learn, to be productive opens doors to much better jobs.

The best opportunity is not being condescending to various demographics. The best opportunity comes with a robust economy and demand for labor and makes it a sellers market for the wage earner. Unless the left finds a way to screw it up--and they are doing their damndest to do that--it will only get better.

"It is very difficult to extricate yourself from that sort of situation and you become suspicious of anybody with black skin who applies for work."

Along with the content before that line seemed to suggest judging people based on the perceived actions of groups as justified as opposed to judging them on individuals. I cant comment or verify that experience of yours but can only say it is horrifying, and those people should face justice. However that shouldn't damn an entire population.

Trump is continuing the economic recovery that started before him. His deregulation agenda isnt going to create well paying jobs, and his trade war may cost us many many more jobs. Instead of bringing back mindless factories and deadly mines that only paid well thanks to unions and will soon be replaced by automation, we should be investing in our people and building up better, high tech jobs for our future. But this is rather off topic for this post. The racial policies in question here existed well before him and have little to do with him.

 

[AlbqOwl]

"It is very difficult to extricate yourself from that sort of situation and you become suspicious of anybody with black skin who applies for work."

Along with the content before that line seemed to suggest judging people based on the perceived actions of groups as justified as opposed to judging them on individuals. I cant comment or verify that experience of yours but can only say it is horrifying, and those people should face justice. However that shouldn't damn an entire population.

Trump is continuing the economic recovery that started before him. His deregulation agenda isnt going to create well paying jobs, and his trade war may cost us many many more jobs. Instead of bringing back mindless factories and deadly mines that only paid well thanks to unions and will soon be replaced by automation, we should be investing in our people and building up better, high tech jobs for our future. But this is rather off topic for this post. The racial policies in question here existed well before him and have little to do with him.

I think it is perfectly reasonably to be suspicious if your experience has been consistent as I described it. To extrapolate that to ALL experience however, in an effort to make somebody appear racist, is intellectually dishonest.

I disagree strongly that the good economic news preceded President Trump's agenda. Even President Obama was still blaming President Bush and the Republicans as he was on his way out. He still does.

And I disagree strongly with your opinion of President Trump's agenda, most especially when all economic indicators point to something different than you seem to want them to be.

 

[Nemiroff]

I think it is perfectly reasonably to be suspicious if your experience has been consistent as I described it. To extrapolate that to ALL experience however, in an effort to make somebody appear racist, is intellectually dishonest.

I disagree strongly that the good economic news preceded President Trump's agenda. Even President Obama was still blaming President Bush and the Republicans as he was on his way out. He still does.

And I disagree strongly with your opinion of President Trump's agenda, most especially when all economic indicators point to something different than you seem to want them to be.

It's perfectly reasonable to be suspicious, but it doesnt change the fact that the suspicious person is no longer judging a person just on individual merit. I didnt extrapolate anything or try to make you look bad. I simply asked a question assuming you would be for judging an individual to highlight a conflict in your beliefs. It wasnt an assumption of guilt, That was all you. I'm not surprised you took my question to the extreme since it seems both sides on this forum are generally at each others throats, but I'm new here and that isnt my style.

Let's leave trump and obama to the other 900 threads they are being discussed on and keep this one on topic

 

[Mithrae]

I disagree strongly that the good economic news preceded President Trump's agenda.

https://www.google.com/search?q=us+unemployment+rate

US unemployment rates had been declining since 2010, with no appreciable trend change over the past two years. That's literally the most absolutely basic level of fact-checking that is possible.

 

[Nap]

Black-white wage gaps expand with rising wage inequality

As of 2015, relative to the average hourly wages of white men with the same education, experience, metro status, and region of residence, black men make 22.0 percent less, and black women make 34.2 percent less.


That sounds pretty systemic to me. What do you think?


NOTE: Haven't used anything from this source before, but they seem reputable at first glance:

Economic Policy Institute

LEFT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.

Factual Reporting: HIGH

Just as in the "gender gap" there are several other variables that need to be taken into account in order to draw any kind of conclusion (profession,hours worked, etc).

Also, African immigrants earn 30% more than US born black Americans. This would indicate the issue has much less to do with the color of one's skin and more about culture.

https://www.blackenterprise.com/black-immigrants-in-u-s-earning-30-more-than-u-s-born-blacks/