Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maybe this is one of the problems

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
    In my opinion, and anecdotal experience, the issue of fatherless children is exaggerated. This is due to welfare systems put in place to support single parents. In Ireland we have a situation where the father of the children buys a house and the mother gets welfare support to rent it from him. As long as his name isn't on the birth cert and he gets his mail sent to a different house they generally get away with it.
    That abuse is galling but it is a price we pay as a society to support the majority who do need the support and don't abuse the system. The result is higher levels of educational achievement, higher rates of social mobility, lower rates of poverty and lower rates of crime. The waste on the prevention side is far outweighed by the saving of not having a large prison population and higher numbers of police.
    Here, the fathers don't buy anything, We have housing projects where the single parent families live, these are usually very large apartment complexes, several of them covering several city blocks.
    This may help explain how the projects became a breeding ground for gangs.
    Learn how urban blight gave way to gangs, bordellos and drug trade in the heart of Chicago. Relive the bleak past of the Chicago Housing Projects.

    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    In my opinion, and anecdotal experience, the issue of fatherless children is exaggerated. This is due to welfare systems put in place to support single parents. In Ireland we have a situation where the father of the children buys a house and the mother gets welfare support to rent it from him. As long as his name isn't on the birth cert and he gets his mail sent to a different house they generally get away with it.
    That abuse is galling but it is a price we pay as a society to support the majority who do need the support and don't abuse the system. The result is higher levels of educational achievement, higher rates of social mobility, lower rates of poverty and lower rates of crime. The waste on the prevention side is far outweighed by the saving of not having a large prison population and higher numbers of police.

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

    White street gangs are piling up bodies on the streets of Chicago are they?
    They certainly were, until the feds stepped in and put an end to it.

    Although, I'm not sure how you confused research on drug use with street gangs.

    Post edited to remove personally focused content.
    Please refrain from doing this, thank you.
    ACG Staff
    Last edited by panther3485; 13 Jul 20, 21:48.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    You didn't specify anything and I'm not going to assume. Drug use is far more rampant in the white population, per capita. The problem is, blacks are treated differently for the same crime.

    So, whites use illegal drugs at a far higher rate, but blacks are arrested and punished for drug offensives more often. Without veering too deep into that subject, we can just chalk it up as another example of white privilege and systemic racism.

    https://www.naadac.org/assets/2416/k...es_ac17ho8.pdf
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377408/
    https://www.hamiltonproject.org/char...iminal_justice

    Let's end the systemic racism and see where the chips fall. With that, whatever happens, happens. As long as we're all playing by the same rules, that's all that matters.

    Not being married doesn't impede a couples ability from creating a stable home. Being married is no guarantee that the couple will have a healthy home. It isn't marriage that suddenly creates a strong relationship.

    Overall, an anomaly you found doesn't warrant being generalized.
    White street gangs are piling up bodies on the streets of Chicago are they?

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

    What problem do you think? Street gangs, rampant drug abuse, generational poverty, high rates of out of wedlock childbirth, high crime rates.
    You didn't specify anything and I'm not going to assume. Drug use is far more rampant in the white population, per capita. The problem is, blacks are treated differently for the same crime.

    So, whites use illegal drugs at a far higher rate, but blacks are arrested and punished for drug offensives more often. Without veering too deep into that subject, we can just chalk it up as another example of white privilege and systemic racism.

    https://www.naadac.org/assets/2416/k...es_ac17ho8.pdf
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377408/
    https://www.hamiltonproject.org/char...iminal_justice

    Let's end the systemic racism and see where the chips fall. With that, whatever happens, happens. As long as we're all playing by the same rules, that's all that matters.

    Not being married doesn't impede a couples ability from creating a stable home. Being married is no guarantee that the couple will have a healthy home. It isn't marriage that suddenly creates a strong relationship.

    Overall, an anomaly you found doesn't warrant being generalized.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
    What problem are you referring to?
    What problem do you think? Street gangs, rampant drug abuse, generational poverty, high rates of out of wedlock childbirth, high crime rates.

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    What problem are you referring to?

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
    It's a national phenomenon.



    5 children, 3 marriages, 2 naturalisations, ..... and pays no taxes,

    the deadbeat
    You forgot the bankruptcies, and an official court decision against his fraudulent charity. By the way, why don't ever conservatives talk about the issue of corruption with charities in general? They only care about Clinton's and Soros' Foundations. Meanwhile, many televangelists have made fraud their religion...
    Last edited by pamak; 12 Jul 20, 23:47.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    It's a national phenomenon.

    Trump has five children from three marriages: Don Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump with Ivana Trump; Tiffany Trump with Marla Maples; and Barron Trump with First Lady Melania Trump.
    5 children, 3 marriages, 2 naturalisations, ..... and pays no taxes,

    the deadbeat

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

    The FLDS community has been running the same scam for 70 years,
    I can't think of many success stories about the welfare system other than it supports the crooks and the lazy. (other than it perpetuates itself)
    Considering that a big percentage of American has been at some point in their life recipients of some type of welfare (including in these days), I am not convinced by your type of thinking.

    https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pres...5/cb15-97.html

    21.3 Percent of U.S. Population Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month

    And the fact that children are the most frequent recipients of such help father undermines your claim. From the same link:

    Children under age 18: Those under 18 were more likely to receive means-tested benefits than all other age groups.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Every system will be exploited by some. It does not matter if it is about the safety net, or tax deductions or business regulations or deregulations. The mere presence of fraud is not a good argument for abolishing a system. There must be some attempt to weigh the benefits that come from the cases when the system works as it is intended to do versus the cost that comes from the cases of fraud which will be inevitable present in any social or economic or political program.
    The FLDS community has been running the same scam for 70 years,
    I can't think of many success stories about the welfare system other than it supports the crooks and the lazy. (other than it perpetuates itself)

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post

    That's part of the scam, the mothers all qualify for welfare as long as the father isn't in the picture, each child means more welfare and rent subsides. So the father takes a cut of the monthly cash flow from each of the "Baby Mammas" , plus the dude gets to move between each apartment or house.
    This allows street drug dealers to keep moving around.
    Every system will be exploited by some. It does not matter if it is about the safety net, or tax deductions or business regulations or deregulations. The mere presence of fraud is not a good argument for abolishing a system. There must be some attempt to weigh the benefits that come from the cases when the system works as it is intended to do versus the cost that comes from the cases of fraud which will be inevitable present in any social or economic or political program.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

    Did you intend the double negative?

    Given usual child support guidelines, this "stud" should be shelling out over $51,000 per month(at least) for those 34 kids. I rather doubt he is. But the taxpayers are likely covering his shifty, slimy, dead-beat ass.

    Symptom?
    That's part of the scam, the mothers all qualify for welfare as long as the father isn't in the picture, each child means more welfare and rent subsides. So the father takes a cut of the monthly cash flow from each of the "Baby Mammas" , plus the dude gets to move between each apartment or house.
    This allows street drug dealers to keep moving around.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Jutland View Post
    I would say its a symptom and not not a cause.
    Did you intend the double negative?

    Given usual child support guidelines, this "stud" should be shelling out over $51,000 per month(at least) for those 34 kids. I rather doubt he is. But the taxpayers are likely covering his shifty, slimy, dead-beat ass.

    Symptom?

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Might be a bit of both. In medicine, a symptom points to the cause, which gives rise to that symptom in the first place.
    and both with respect to medicine and to the remark you addresses, the symptom does not cause the disease. It is caused by the disease. So, when somebody says that "x" is a symptom of a broader social problem, you cannot use medicine to claim that x is the cause of that problem.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X