5 steps to fix black society

[s0me0nesmind1]

And everyone else from that country is worthless?

There is a difference between an exception and a rule. Just because Micheal Jordan won six championships doesn't mean I failed to do so because I didn't try hard enough at basketball over the years. I put in the time and effort, but the ceiling wasn't there. So did millions of others who didn't become Michael Jordan despite their best efforts.

Pointing out any deviation from the norm, while a great story and commendable effort on the part of the parties involved, does nothing to address the larger issue of societal change. You can't extrapolate one example as the blueprint for everyone.

Protip: He is indicating to you that there is no rule.

 

[nehalem256]

There is only a small correlation between intelligence and genetics. The majority of differentiation that shows in testing between different income groups and their children's test scores have been shown to be due to environmental factors. At the beginning of a school year the improvement in scores for young children grows at similar rates by the end of the school year despite income classification. It is during the summer months that higher income households show a larger growth in their children's test scores than lower income households. That gap widens each summer in early education, but then stays consistent through the following school year. By fourth or fifth grade that 3 month boost adds up to a large overall advantage.

Estimates in the academic research of the heritability of IQ have varied from below 0.5[2] to a high of 0.9 (on a scale where 1.0 would signify that IQ is 100% inherited.)[5][further explanation needed] IQ heritability increases during early childhood, but it is unclear whether it stabilizes thereafter.[6] A 1996 statement by the American Psychological Association gave about .45 for children and about .75 during and after adolescence.[7] A 2004 meta-analysis of reports in Current Directions in Psychological Science gave an overall estimate of around .85 for 18-year-olds and older.[8] The New York Times Magazine has listed about three quarters as a figure held by the majority of studies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Doesn't seem so small to me.

And I believe we were talking about a meritocracy not a an intelligencocracy.

Other traits such as hard working and values(or making good choices such as not having a child at 16) are as important if not more important.

Not surprisingly home life is a huge factor in a child's education. There are advantages to having more than one parent, or parents who aren't working two or three jobs, or best yet - able to enroll them in activities that help teach them during the summer months.

No duh. Which must be why the people who throw the biggest fit about economic inequality also are advocating against single parenthood? :hmm:

 

[Oyeve]

1. Kill
2. All
3. The
4. White
5. People

I remember Eddie Murphy singing that on SNL way back!

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

No duh. Which must be why the people who throw the biggest fit about economic inequality also are advocating against single parenthood? :hmm:

 

[HendrixFan]

Actually it isn't that bad.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/01/social-mobility-america

The only real difference is for the bottom 20%

Of course when the bottom 20% is made up of people that have 20 kids with 11 women or single mom's with 2 baby daddies in prison I am not exactly surprised.

You are saying that are class mobility is indeed bad, but not SO bad because we have one of the worst income disparities in the world? Yikes that is a tough position for even YOU to take.

I already explained that raising the floor is a HUGE step in fixing the problem. Despite the huge problem we have with our bottom quintile, lets brush that aside for a minute and analyze those numbers. Bear in mind our bottom quintile is much more "sticky" than Denmark. Why does that matter? Because that means we effectively brush aside poverty and look at the class mobility of the remaining four quintiles. We should have a HUUUUUUUGE advantage without the statistical anchor that bottom quintile is on mobility. Right?

Wrong.

At each quintile we still do worse than Denmark in social mobility. Even when the bottom quintile is effectively factored out. And why factor out such a huge and glaring problem and a whole quintile effectively stuck?

We don't have mobility. The author of that piece is too stupid to realize he is proving himself wrong because of his pathetic grip on math.

 

[Exterous]

A lot of these kids' parents are not what we'd call hands-on, or even capable of being hands on. I agree with your theory but I think in practice if it came to pass you'd find inept parents now with even less money, which means greater chance of being kicked out of wherever they live and then an even worse outcome for their kid.

It seems you and I disagree on how large a negative effect this would have on parents and I doubt there is any data to support either of our stances over the other (unless you know of any in which case I would genuinely be interested in reading it)

The system needs to be changed to give carrots and sticks.

I completely agree

 

[HendrixFan]

Absolutely true. If you have a child at 16 you have severely retarded your life prospects.

If you make bad choices why should I feel bad if you end up poor?

Because the problem is cyclical. Teen pregnancy astoundingly leads to teen pregnancy for the next generation. Which keeps people in poverty.

You don't have to feel bad. You don't need to care. But if, and I guess the if is a key word here, if you want to fix the problem of poverty and stop directing welfare that direction and create opportunity for those who can have a positive contribution to society to make a positive contribution to society and help us maximize our efficiency and growth by hitting all sections of or labor and intellect pool; then we we might want to fix it.

Don't feel bad. At all. Just fix it. Use the same tactics I outlined earlier. Raise minimum wage to a living wage. Stop giving out perpetual welfare and push people back to work. That includes the EITC, which should be reversed in ideology to give tax credits for NOT having children. Make the incentive to not have children unless you can take the tax hit. But you have to follow that up with free contraceptives that are easy to come by and honestly pushed onto young people.

Then nobody will feel bad and everyone will have a much better chance. We break bad cycles and bad habits. The best part is it becomes a nice financial windfall for all taxpayers! Yay tax cuts.

 

[HendrixFan]

It simply boils down to a matter of people that are willing the climb the latter - and those that aren't willing to climb the latter. This is why the middle class diminishes - the groups that aren't willing to climb the latter stay there. As you do that, that latter starts getting longer and longer and longer to set yourself apart.

Thank you.

 

[BoberFett]

I think what HendrixFan is trying to say is that everyone who moves to this country with nothing and busts their ass to move themselves and their family to a higher standard of living is an outlier, a phenomenal success story, while US born blacks are inferior and cannot overcome their environment. Or at least that seems to be his message, he believes US born blacks are inferior.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Thank you.

Thank you Anandtech Spelling/Grammar checker, could you please go back and edit the original to ladder?

 

[HendrixFan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Doesn't seem so small to me.

I already explained where those differences in IQ scores come from. You have to dig deeper than the surface to get the true results. Read up more on it and the heritability is more in the .15 to .2 range when properly calibrated.

 

[nehalem256]

I already explained where those differences in IQ scores come from. You have to dig deeper than the surface to get the true results. Read up more on it and the heritability is more in the .15 to .2 range when properly calibrated.

You were referring to academic achievement which is different from IQ.

Because the problem is cyclical. Teen pregnancy astoundingly leads to teen pregnancy for the next generation. Which keeps people in poverty.

People with poor values teach their children poor values

You don't have to feel bad. You don't need to care. But if, and I guess the if is a key word here, if you want to fix the problem of poverty and stop directing welfare that direction and create opportunity for those who can have a positive contribution to society to make a positive contribution to society and help us maximize our efficiency and growth by hitting all sections of or labor and intellect pool; then we we might want to fix it.

Someone has to be the bottom 20%. Might as well be people who make poor life choices.

If you want to fix the problem of poverty simply start treating people in poverty as children. If they cannot handle freedom then they shouldn't have it.

Don't feel bad. At all. Just fix it. Use the same tactics I outlined earlier. Raise minimum wage to a living wage. Stop giving out perpetual welfare and push people back to work. That includes the EITC, which should be reversed in ideology to give tax credits for NOT having children. Make the incentive to not have children unless you can take the tax hit. But you have to follow that up with free contraceptives that are easy to come by and honestly pushed onto young people.

Which is a meaningless statement given that no one is able to define what a "living wage" is. Probably because a living wage for a single mother with 3 bastard children would be prohibitively absurd.

 

[HendrixFan]

I think what HendrixFan is trying to say is that everyone who moves to this country with nothing and busts their ass to move themselves and their family to a higher standard of living is an outlier, a phenomenal success story, while US born blacks are inferior and cannot overcome their environment. Or at least that seems to be his message, he believes US born blacks are inferior.

Nice strawman.

There are plenty of families to come to the US and struggle that aren't black. Immigrants have historically and continue to be relegated to the lower income groups for generations. I would never support such an outrageous claim because there are no stats to back it up. If you have some incredible statistics showing immigrants move quickly and reliably to the upper income levels please show them.

I've reiterated a few times here, and in similar threads throughout the years, that the problems in poverty are intertwined and work together in a negative way. One leads to the other, which leads to the other and so on until it loops back around. This applies to everyone in poverty and not just black people.

As far as blacks in specific, I think I have made some good arguments in various affirmative action threads over the years as to why I think blacks in the US struggle more than blacks in other nations. (hint - being enslaved for centuries then freed to a separate but equal class of citizen has untold and unrepeatable impacts that can't be measured against other nations for proper statistical analysis)

What is clear is that the majority of problems in black society are problems shared with anyone living in poverty, so it isn't a black issue as much as a poor issue.

 

[HendrixFan]

You were referring to academic achievement which is different from IQ.

Nominal.

I was referring to testing done with children, not achievement. Unless you consider the test scores the achievement, but again that is hardly different than IQ testing. They are scores for a test one way or the other.

People with poor values teach their children poor values

Despite your reputation, which is well established here, I don't think we are too far apart on this issue. We both see it as an issue but you seem to think it is the root and I think it is more of a symptom despite its cyclical nature. Again, I go back to the fact that black people in upper income levels don't have the same issue, whereas poor people of other races have the same issue. That leads me to believe is a poverty issue and not a problem with "black society".

Someone has to be the bottom 20%. Might as well be people who make poor life choices.

Someone does have to be the bottom 20%. But with the floor raised the bottom 20% won't be so bad. So bad as to create cyclical problems that keep the same families in the bottom 20%. You know? Break the cycle, fix the problem, and we all benefit.

If you want to fix the problem of poverty simply start treating people in poverty as children. If they cannot handle freedom then they shouldn't have it.

There are REAL barriers in place. They don't have freedom, not in the sense that someone in the other quintiles does. I see you glossed right past the sociological explanation for unwed childbirth I mentioned above. When you are trapped in a pit of despair with no real way out, because as most of this page has shown there is no class mobility, your actions are completely different.

I see just as many kids being kids in the nice areas I live in now as I did growing up in the worst parts of town. The difference is the kids in better areas have the support system and structure to keep them from going off the tracks, no matter the transgressions. Even with oftentimes (though certainly not the majority) those kids are doing much worse things than the poor kids but not having to pay the price for their actions.

It is very hard to describe, but having lived in both environments it is clear karma doesn't exist and there are two different worlds with different outcomes for the same behavior.

Which is a meaningless statement given that no one is able to define what a "living wage" is. Probably because a living wage for a single mother with 3 bastard children would be prohibitively absurd.

Anyone can define it, it just wouldn't be a full agreement ever. I think someone who is physically capable of working 40 hours a week should be able to provide for a family of four beyond just the bare necessities. A small house or apt, a cheap car or public transportation depending on location, food and a small bit of fun money. If you work full time there is no reason that shouldn't be reasonable.

 

[woolfe9998]

Narrow view here. Who creates the jobs? People. Jobs don't need to be "created" for those on welfare roles when anyone can create their own job. America has lost it's drive for small business and having citizen working to better themselves, their families, and their communities. Everyone wants either a handout, and those that claim they don't want a handout still at least want someone else to hand them a job on a silver platter. It is still part of the same mentality of entitlement and enabling. Some of the wealthiest and successful people are completely self made. That was the original American dream. That even a person with little money, little education, but the right drive could succeed if they applied themselves. The ability to succeed in that way hasn't changed, but too many have taken the easier way out.

How to instill that drive again into people that don't want to hear that is a bit mind boggling.

So, now the standard is that we yank the benefits and people will not simply be motivated to get a job, but actually to start their own business? Meaning that the expectation is that these people who we have on welfare, who are our least well educated citizens, will all go out and start businesses. Frankly, your notion that people wanting to be employed by others is some kind of entitlement mentality is ridiculous. What kind of economy exists anywhere on the planet where the vast majority of people are self-employed?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Jobs are created by demand which results in consumer spending. Pulling welfare benefits will not create any jobs. It may destroy some as those people aren't spending the welfare checks anymore, and the people who get the money back in lower taxes may or may not be spending it.

Like it or not, you can't do anything about welfare without first stimulating the economy to create the jobs that these people are expected to fill. Without the jobs being available, it is immaterial that some of them are lazy and don't want to work. Take away the laziness and you have a highly motivated person without a job or any means of support.

 

[Naeeldar]

Despite your reputation, which is well established here, I don't think we are too far apart on this issue. We both see it as an issue but you seem to think it is the root and I think it is more of a symptom despite its cyclical nature. Again, I go back to the fact that black people in upper income levels don't have the same issue, whereas poor people of other races have the same issue. That leads me to believe is a poverty issue and not a problem with "black society".

You do realize there are some fairly large differences in characteristics with black and to a lesser degree Hispanics (although percentages are larger in blacks) for violent crimes/felonies, specifically murder, right?

I don't have a clue why and I won't even hazard a guess but poor blacks are much more involved in murders/violent felonies then poor whites. It happens with whites but it's overwleming far less. hispanics have certainly grown in recent years with this as well.

However, that to me is a very large and defining difference between the different groups of poor people.

Anyone can define it, it just wouldn't be a full agreement ever. I think someone who is physically capable of working 40 hours a week should be able to provide for a family of four beyond just the bare necessities. A small house or apt, a cheap car or public transportation depending on location, food and a small bit of fun money. If you work full time there is no reason that shouldn't be reasonable.

I almost don't even know how to respond to this. If i'm reading this right your saying minimum wage should cover providing for a wife (who does not work) and two kids and some fun money? First off if you are making minimal wage your whole life that is an issue in itself. Second I'm 29 making right at 6 figures and I would not for the life of me think that my wife could not work with us having two kids. But somehow minimum wage will allow it? Quite frankly if you are on minimum wage you probably should not be having kids. If people took this approach you would see the poor improve because they would wait 5-10 years until off minimum wage and making more money.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Deadbeat Dad Fathers 22 Children By 14 Women

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/22500729/deadbeat-dad-fathers-22-children-by-14-women

Father of 24 children found dead inside Detroit building

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/30/father-24-children-found-dead-inside-detroit-building/
​

 

[nehalem256]

Nominal.

I was referring to testing done with children, not achievement. Unless you consider the test scores the achievement, but again that is hardly different than IQ testing. They are scores for a test one way or the other.

Testing tests knowledge and intelligence. IQ is not suppose to be about knowlege.

Despite your reputation, which is well established here, I don't think we are too far apart on this issue. We both see it as an issue but you seem to think it is the root and I think it is more of a symptom despite its cyclical nature. Again, I go back to the fact that black people in upper income levels don't have the same issue, whereas poor people of other races have the same issue. That leads me to believe is a poverty issue and not a problem with "black society".

When people say "black society" it really means poor-black society.

Someone does have to be the bottom 20%. But with the floor raised the bottom 20% won't be so bad. So bad as to create cyclical problems that keep the same families in the bottom 20%. You know? Break the cycle, fix the problem, and we all benefit.

There are REAL barriers in place. They don't have freedom, not in the sense that someone in the other quintiles does. I see you glossed right past the sociological explanation for unwed childbirth I mentioned above. When you are trapped in a pit of despair with no real way out, because as most of this page has shown there is no class mobility, your actions are completely different.

Except their own actions are causing their class immobilty.

I see just as many kids being kids in the nice areas I live in now as I did growing up in the worst parts of town. The difference is the kids in better areas have the support system and structure to keep them from going off the tracks, no matter the transgressions. Even with oftentimes (though certainly not the majority) those kids are doing much worse things than the poor kids but not having to pay the price for their actions.

It is very hard to describe, but having lived in both environments it is clear karma doesn't exist and there are two different worlds with different outcomes for the same behavior.

You mean things like intact families?

Anyone can define it, it just wouldn't be a full agreement ever. I think someone who is physically capable of working 40 hours a week should be able to provide for a family of four beyond just the bare necessities. A small house or apt, a cheap car or public transportation depending on location, food and a small bit of fun money. If you work full time there is no reason that shouldn't be reasonable.

By define I mean a concrete number. You are probably talking about $20+/hr. The idea that say a 16 year old HS kids should make $20/hr is going to be regarded as absurd by most people.

 

[berzerker60]

Well gosh, if there's an anecdote...

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Because the problem is cyclical. Teen pregnancy astoundingly leads to teen pregnancy for the next generation. Which keeps people in poverty.

You don't have to feel bad. You don't need to care. But if, and I guess the if is a key word here, if you want to fix the problem of poverty and stop directing welfare that direction and create opportunity for those who can have a positive contribution to society to make a positive contribution to society and help us maximize our efficiency and growth by hitting all sections of or labor and intellect pool; then we we might want to fix it.

Ahhh - so if you want to live in a utopia. I heard those don't exist.

 

[Agent11]

There ought to be financial consequences for those who do not send their children to school. A problem many blacks have expressed to my wife (college professor) is that there is pressure to not "play the white man's game" and get an education. That's their perspective.

Then we have the culture of "you owe me" which when it rears it's head is mighty ugly. A student who could not pass her classes (and who has free legal access) decided that her failure was because the college (and again my wife) was racist. Her getting the lowest scores in class apparently had nothing to do with it. It was because she was black. So repeated charges of race and threats of litigation kept this one going for a long time. The college doesn't dare ask her to leave.

In my county we have the highest rate of property taxation of any in the US. Yep, we're #1. A great deal goes to the inner city, not suburban schools, and the students aren't doing well in graduating. It isn't the teachers. It isn't the money. It's that going to school and learning are not only considered irrelevant, but actually discouraged by the community.

How much money do you have to throw at this to fix things? There isn't enough.

That brings me back to welfare reform. The system needs to be changed to give carrots and sticks.

qft. There are serious cultural problems in many areas that can only really be addressed by the black community itself. They don't want non blacks to tell them how to fix it.

I think it would help if it was easier to find work, and if black leadership would mobilize on these issues with as much fervor as they did Martin, but that may be too much to hope for.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

What is clear is that the majority of problems in black society are problems shared with anyone living in poverty, so it isn't a black issue as much as a poor issue.

tell me about how poor asians are doing in this country.

 

[berzerker60]

tell me about how poor asians are doing in this country.

http://nationalcapacd.org/spotlight-asian-american-and-pacific-islander-poverty-demographic-profile

it is easy to overlook the nearly two million Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPIs collectively—AAs for the category of Asian Americans and NHPIs for the subcategory of Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders) who live in poverty...

• AAPI poor are one of the fastest growing poverty populations in the wake of the Recession. From 2007 to 2011, the number of AAPI poor increased by more than half a million, representing an increase of 38% (37% increase for AAs in poverty and a 60% increase for NHOPIs in poverty). The general poverty population grew by 27%. The only other racial/ ethnic group with a larger percentage increase was Hispanic, with a 42% increase.
• Dramatic increases in AAPI poverty have not been reflected in the poverty rate. Despite an increase of over 50% in the number of AAPIs living in poverty from 2000, the AAPI poverty rate has changed little from 2000 (12.8% in 2000, 13.1% in 2011). Large increases in the numbers of AAPI poor have been accompanied by large increases in the overall AAPI population base, including large numbers of highly skilled, highly educated immigrants.
• The AAPI poverty population is increasingly native born. Almost 60% of the net increase in AAPI poverty was in the native born segment of the population. The proportion of native born poverty is higher for NHPIs than for AAs; however, for both populations, the rate of increase and the net numeric increase was higher for native born poor than for immigrant poor.
• This is in contrast to the AAPI non-poor population—particularly for AA non-poor—where immigration accounts for the majority of net population growth.

 

[Naeeldar]

http://nationalcapacd.org/spotlight-asian-american-and-pacific-islander-poverty-demographic-profile

Nothing about violent crime there. I'd be interested in some stats on that which I may have to research.

the only group I know of that has been growing in violent crime is Hispanics. Haven't read much on Asians.

 

[HumblePie]

You do realize there are some fairly large differences in characteristics with black and to a lesser degree Hispanics (although percentages are larger in blacks) for violent crimes/felonies, specifically murder, right?

I don't have a clue why and I won't even hazard a guess but poor blacks are much more involved in murders/violent felonies then poor whites. It happens with whites but it's overwleming far less. hispanics have certainly grown in recent years with this as well.

However, that to me is a very large and defining difference between the different groups of poor people.

This is a major aspect to consider. This goes back to the people with poor values passing those values on. People who are more likely to murder others will pass that on to their children despite economic standing.

Another thing to consider is economic mobility both up and down.

1) Whites, Asians, and some middle eastern decent people (like India) have a far easier time moving from poverty up to middle class or higher.
2) Blacks and Native Americans have a far harder time moving up from poverty to middle class and beyond.
3) Hispanics are about middle of the road for upward mobility. Mainly because of having to account for the undocumented which are too scared to try to climb too high. Those that are documented and have good values tend do VERY well though in climbing the economic social ladder.
4) Blacks are the only race that has any significant "downward" mobility of losing economic standing.


On the surface this looks like a straight racial issue. But there is quite a bit of difference in values taught by parents of those races to their kids. Whites, Asians, and Indians are more apt to teach their kids to stay in school, work hard, work smart, don't burn bridges, and you'll succeed. Overwhelmingly they do.

Those who teach their kids they'll never get anywhere in life and to stop "acting white" tend not to do that well in the end. The really telling point is number 4 for this. How many black athletes, rap stars, or other celebrities made the move from poverty to being rich and back down to poverty in comparison to other races? It's far more likely. What is the usual blame? Drugs and crimes even for those that make it out of poverty to being rich. Add on to that money management skills they never learned and a black person that was launched from poverty to the land of the rich is more likely to fall back down to poverty than any other race. Those black individuals that came out of poverty the hard way of working hard, improving themselves, and being part of the community around them don't tend to slip downward in economic standing.