ravensjt

Last time I checked, countries in Africa and Arabia had their own govts and money. And no pàrt of the american budget had money from other countries in it.

Wealth belongs to those who generate it

The world's resources belong to those who work for them, not dolts who don't work and don't produce.

It.is.not.your.money.mooch.

Are you claiming that calling someone a creationist is an ad hom? Wow, some are very sensitive, ooh that might be an ad hom

Living without a particular obstacle is NOT power. Force*distance=work  Power=force*distance/time That's why when you encounter an obstacle on the highway, you dip into your power reserve (gas tank ie cash in the bank) to increase the amount of force from a harder working engine in order to maintain the same distance over time.  If you happen to live next to a tunnel and the next person happens to live on the other side of the hill thereby presenting an obstacle, that is not power.  People expended energy they had stored to apply force to the hill and displaced it over time, and THAT is power.  Your living by the tunnel is *partially* a RESULT of power insofar as power is required.

That a population of say, 200,000,000 people does not contain the conditions observed to some degree in a population of 20,000,000 people residing in the same setting seems unlikely unless the smaller population is defined by its condition.  From a statistical standpoint it's more likely the the relationship is inverted from your postulation.   That is, it is more likely that members in the smaller  20,000,000 population may catagorically have a larger lack of first hand experience regarding the totality of obstacles faced by members arbitrated within the larger population.  This is one of many reasons why actionable reference with respect to a sustainable system of racial minorities and majorities is unethical, being of an inherently flawed nature, and with the casting of ignorance, widely considered immoral.

Being spoiled has not to do with the alottment of privilege, rather it is only philosophically sustainable to conceptualize that it arrives from a lack thereof.  Being "spoiled" does not ensure the continuity of associated privilege either, potentially quite the opposite

Unfortunately, the sins of white ancestors, does not automatically mean that white people of this day and age should be blamed for it, or it should be taken out on them.  This is a form of jealousy.  Everyone has something that they want.  I want a yacht, that doesn't mean that I hate everyone who has one for having it, or hate  someone born into it (who did not earn it themselves), for being advantaged, privileged, or rich.

So, working hard towards succeeding i think is a smart direction to take, and to not feel like a victim. I think a large portion of the black community has just conceded this. It may have something to do with IQ too.. i don't know. I do know Asians have the highest IQ by country and that seems to correlate with success. However, middle easterners have lower than average IQ and they are still successful... So not to sure about IQ. What i do know is the best of the best middle easterners come here, so maybe that is why there are a lot of successful ones here. It really has to do with how much wealth you bring with yourself here and where you start. Blacks unfortunately don't have this head start but in my opinion they do in other ways such as affirmative action. They can get into good schools, they can make something of themselves... I just think in the end of the day, they have allowed people telling they can't succeed get into their communities minds.

I think the world is getting smaller.  Things you wouldn't hear about in other states that was only reported on local news to a specific area back in the day, is now being sent country wide via 24 hour news networks and social media.  I still think things like this are happening less and less, but more and more peoplpe are hearing about it, which then causes more minorities to stand up to authority figures, which whites just don't do, we do what they say, and if we don't, we admit that we deserved what we got.  If you look at every video that is questionable as far as discrimination, police brutality, or the like, something combatant was said by the "victim" that just would not be said by white people in the same situation (you can say that whites wouldn't be in that situation in the first place, there may be some truth to that), but if we were, we wouldn't talk back.   You had mentioned on DDO in the past about classes that young blacks take to prepare them to combat potential racism, prejudice, or profiling and how to deal with it in the future. 

If these classes do exist, what I would take from that class is to expect it because it is inevitable, when it may not necessarily be the case in each of these situations.  Are they also taught not to consider the circumstance before jumping to the racist conclusion?   I would venture to say that most situations blaming racism are just a misunderstanding, but people are quick to pull the race card, then become irate because of it blowing an absolutely innocent misunderstanding way out of proportion.

The definition you use is Institutional Racism, but what social racism not done by institutions of power? Unless the definition of power is more broad?

What if a Korean where to walk into a convenience store owned by a black person and the black owner said to the Korean "Get out of here, I hate Asians, you eat dog, you steal, get out!" - would that be an act of racism given that the store owner has the "power" granted to him by legal title of the store and personal rights of self defense and property ownership?

Are you saying that blacks cannot be racist?  I know blacks that are racist against blacks.  I have also calmed situations where blacks thought someone was being prejudice when it was not the case.  I interrupted the outrage of said black person to explain what the person being blamed for it was actually doing... then everyone (multiple witnesses) understood and the situation was diffused.  

This quick to judge prejudice and racism accusation is most often the cause of these racial disputes on a personal, real life scenario.  To tell you the truth, I think it is happening less and less face to face these days, even though everyone thinks it is more prevalent due to the problems Social Media brings to the forefront.

What are your thoughts on Social Media and it's consequences as suggested above?  Do you think my statement has merit?

Blacks were brought as slaves to toil on the cotton farms for southern elites. In smaller numbers, Asians came working under slave-like conditions for other elites in charge. Both faced discrimination that tried to lower their opportunities in order to enforce their lower position in society.

However, you would now notice that Asians are unlike any other minority. They carry more power and wealth than whiites - speaking on averages. Blacks on the other hand remain in dysfunctional communities and are still present in a lower socio-economic status.

Asians remain segregated at times, for you can spot multiple "Chinatowns." However, you'd also find Asians who are much more integrated - almost entirely. Nobody really minds either.

Blacks are pseudo-segregated. They have been forced to be desegregated with mixed results. Many of those who co-exist with whites will still form some level of self segregation, which are in dysfunctional communities promoting cancer such as "thug life" or single motherhood. Those who attempt to better themselves may be branded as "Uncle Toms, Oreos, Whitewahsed," or other such derogatory terms.

Can we conclude from this that blacks have followed the wrong method for civil rights, and due so today? Their modern condition is not due to "Institutional racism" (given affirmative action and reverse discrimination policies) but poor communities, crime, cultural marxism, and a failure of working to a sense of upliftment.

Probably not. However, would discrimination against Bantus by the Native tribes be justified? If not, why should white farmers face land seizures instead of finding more reasonable ways of dealing with the situation?

Really? I didn't get that. On what do you base this charge?

There may be, but I still fail to see how the answer would change your answer to the question

I still fail to see how the answers here would change your answer to the question. Can you give me an example?

I do, for real life society in general, but not to how they affect the answer you would give in his scenario.

Do you have a previous history with this guy?

How is the scenario not able to be answered without that information? What difference to your answer would that information make?

It doesn't sound like you know much about science let alone abiogenesis. You Creationists need to go educate yourselves rather than making fools of yourselves. This is the Science forum, not the Science Denial forum.

Jews disproportionnately make up the upper and wealthier classes of various nations, which is done while keeping others down. Does this mean discrimination against Jews could not be anti-Semitic? 

By this logic, the native tribes of South Africa should ethnically cleanse all of the Bantus. 

Read the OP.

You're welcome.

The earliest known life-forms on Earth are putative fossilized microorganisms, found in hydrothermal vent precipitates, that may have lived as early as 4.28 billion years ago, relatively soon after the oceans formed 4.41 billion years ago, and not long after the formation of the Earth 4.54 billion years ago.

Yet, it is science with real scientists doing research. I suppose you're yet another one requiring a great deal of education on what science is. Please do educate yourself so you sound somewhat intelligent.

I don't see how. In 6,000 years of recorded human history, there has NEVER been a single instance of abiogenesis. Not a single one. NEVER. Every single time life has started, it has come from previous life.

Every single experiment trying to simulate early Earth conditions, or set up conditions for abiogenesis, to see if life can start spontaneously, has failed miserably. All of them

Wow. You dodge well.

I asked, "Had South African blacks slaughtered whites wholesale after independence, would that not have been racist?

It has everything to do with what you said because you implied that blacks in South Africa could not possibly be racist in the context of South Africa. So I asked. You seem to be dancing around the simple question.

OK, but that is not what I asked you. But don't worry. It is clear that you do not want to answer. I'll let the Gentle Reader decide why you will not or cannot answer.

Give me an example in modern day America of ethnic power over another group.

How could you misunderstand this question?

"Had South African blacks slaughtered whites wholesale after independence, would that not have been racist?"

Would you like to try it now that you understand it?

Had South African blacks slaughtered whites wholesale after independence, would that not have been racist?

It certainly would've been dumb.... But no, South Africans were/are taking back what was rightfully theirs, Those Whites were the beneficiaries of stolen land. Their Race is a by product of the thievery of their Forefathers 

The lives of white people were rightfully theirs??

Had South African blacks slaughtered whites wholesale after independence, would that not have been racist?

A minority race is also racist if they identify any person as having dominance over them due to skin color even if that person does not. The delusion is still racist thinking.

And what creature did this mutated whatever mate with?

D'oh!

That has been the reason for Chinatown.... kids go there on field trips to see what it is like, that might be fine if it is built for that purpose, but not in random places throughout the US.  The reason for new additions like what you are referring to will be segregation. 

Drive up and down 355 from Frederick Md. to Washington DC, and you will see what I mean.  A grouping of shopping centers, retail, and residences ranging from apartments to condos for up to 5 blocks are dedicated to certain ethnicity, one area will be Indian, one area will be Korean, another will be Ethiopian or Indonesian, where everyone only speaks their own language.  People outside of these ethnicity do not venture in quite often

They even have their own banks. For instance Great Wall (a Supermarket), I don't think I need to say from what country, is right next to the Asia Bank, which is huge.  Which then is backed up by a shopping center with all Asian food, and Asian catered businesses with names that only people that can read the language know what they are and what they do.  This has all happened in the past 5 years.  Think about what will happen in the next 10 or 15 years.

Immigrants should come here and embrace us, not the other way around.  If they like their heritage and their culture so much, why move here in the first place?  If we continue to do what we are doing, there will be little countries all over the US.  And these countries will look exactly like the countries that the immigrants in mass moved from

Fake question.

Do you think that Americans should give no money to any foreign entities for charity, trade or any other reason until the needs of Americans are met"?

I win on the real question.

Untrue. My complaint was that they should not be here at all. Anything after their illegality is moot

The only dissonance is from you trying to conflate taxation and socialism. And I am the one complaining that our tax dollars are being given to foreigners. It shouldn't be as long as there remain Americans in need.

You added in "and only". Why? America is making sacrifices now. So yes, I think Americans would be willing to do so.

Then it wasn't " giving" was it? It was trade, not charity.

Ok.  If you are a citizen and you do not speak English, you do not have to do your civic duty of Jury Duty.  

Try moving to Mexico/ El Salvador/ Ecuador without knowing any Spanish, even knowing the basics is not enough.  I've been to those countries traveling with people fluent in Spanish, and was not allowed to leave the dwelling by myself, and for good reason, and these were far from bad neighborhoods... When I did leave with them, I saw why I shouldn't go out.  You want to feel like you don't belong?  Go to one of those countries without knowing the native language..... 

The funny thing is, the only place I felt comfortable was Costco, because it looks exactly the same and so did the customers.

I want America to be different from those countries, but I also don't want us to be taken advantage of because we are so accepting.  That seems to be what is happening.

Moving them to where? If we took a vote, the overwhelming majority of Americans would be for helping Americans first.

If the owner is spending it how he sees fit, it matters only that its logical to him. No one else can tell him how to spend his earnings.

They are called illegal for a reason. They should not be here.

You seem to be one of those liberals who thinks America owes something to some other countries. Bolderdash. America owes them nothing. It is not relevant. Our money is our money, and it should be used on us first.

Any system where you pretend the earnings of profitable people are the property of everyone is socialism. Call it whatever you want. A rose by another name is still a rose.

Yes I do. To an American government to be used for the betterment of Americans, not foreigners. Taxation isn't socialism.

We import because our past useless governments thought sacrificing American jobs to placate foreigners was a sound policy. america can be self sufficient. It makes perfect sense.

 Many of the homeless are either illegals, or have been dragged down by illegals sucking the life out of their communities.

True, because the money to fix the problem has always been given to foreigners instead of Americans. Trump is going to take a look at that too.

Refugees are not who I am talking about.  I don't think people fleeing oppression are coming here buying up store fronts, houses, restaurants and commercial buildings.

I'm talking about people that are somewhat well off moving to the country without learning a lick of the language.  Try moving to French Canada and not learning any French and see how they treat you.  

I am all about helping the oppressed as long as they are actually oppressed, but I am not about giving entry to people from other countries because they couldn't make enough money to survive on their own accord.

It has everything to do with ownership. People who do not own my money cannot charge me with waste of my money. It is my right to spend it as I think is fit. The same applies to America. If America owns the money, they have the perfect right to spend it as they wish.

Waste would be spending it on things the people don't want.

Illegals should not be here in the first place. And talk about rose colored glasses! They are an overall drain on the economy through crime and social services

How is this relevant to our subject? Our money is for Americans. It should be used on Americans.

Any system where you pretend the earnings of profitable people are the property of everyone is socialism. Call it whatever you want. A rose by another name is still a rose.

If the government used Americans money on Americans first, we wouldn't need so many imports. Sorry, but I fail to see how using the people's money on the people is wrong.

I think you meant selfish, not altruistic. But altruism is not giving the people's money to things not intent ended by the people. Foreigners are not entitled to the money Americans own. Only Americans are.

I don't see how. Those funds are owned by the American people. It cannot be wrong to give it to them.

That money is made by them and owned by them. I do not think taking money from people who have legally made it to give to others who have not, is fairness or freedom. If the government has money to give to non-citizens, then the money is there. I say we use it first on Americans.

Untrue. America is great because it never went down the socialist route. Americans had incentive to push, innovate, excel. No socialist country has ever succeeded. A conerstone of our culture is that you get to keep what you earn. (Less a little tax)

My point is... I would never move to another country without learning the language. Even some countries dialects and accents need practice to understand, and its the same language (like Scotland).  I didn't say there aren't other people that do it, but I doubt there a more people leaving the US doing this than coming in.  And let's say I had no choice for some reason or another, like a job transfer, I would at least learn a bit of it before I went, or have someone with me that did speak the language.  You wouldn't believe the amount of stores, restaurants, retail spaces, landlords, Assisted Living houses etc.  that have their own customers, or tenants, neighbors, or just random people call me requesting service because they (the owner and potential customer) cannot speak English (sometimes they get mad that there is no one on staff that speaks their language).. and no acquaintances can speak English either. 

Here is what I see happening.  Someone makes some money in their own country, saves it up, purchases a business, commercial property or rental properties in the US, then moves here to run said business, but never even thinks about learning the language, or cares about it. 

Or, they purchase the business from relatives that have already been here, making it easier to not only become a citizen, but change ownership without learning the language. 

Let's say it is a shopping center they purchase, they end up converting the shopping center into an ethnic shopping center centered around the country they are from, basically because they moved to an area that is predominantly their own culture.  

All of these scenarios makes sense in so many different revenue/profitable ways, unfortunately it is to the detriment of the US. 

Don't you think it is a bit misleading when you say 13% of the population is this or that?  What we really need to address is that some areas of the country are 80% this or that, or even 100% this or that.  In my area, it is now 70% of the population are immigrants, mostly African, Spanish, Asian, or Indian.  If you were born in my area around my age, regardless if you are minority or not, the demographic change has driven you away.  Most don't even realize that is why they decided to move, or they just don't admit it.   Try to order a coffee at Dunkin Donuts drive through around here and see if you understand what they say....or if they understand what you say.   It gets really annoying.

I grew up in the same location that I live in now.  No one that I grew up with lives here anymore.  They have all moved North to more rural areas, only to be replaced by more immigrants here.  I have no problem with immigration, but I do have a problem with the inevitable segregation that occurs, and the lack of motivation to learn English.  I would never move to another country and not know the language, it's just dumb..... but people do it here, why?  

Because they can find an area that most people speak their language and have the same culture, why would you move anywhere else?  This causes the segregation of culture and heritage.  Not the America that I think we intended.

Xenophobia exists yes, but that is no reason to give other people's money away. Russians should have Russian money. Angolans should have 1st dibs on Angolans money. Why not?

If I were president of a country, not one red cent of my country would be given to any non-citizen as long as a citizen needed money. We (the US) give millions to foreigners while little American girls die in hospitals for lack of medical care funds. That is so wrong it is obscene.

We should not bribe any country. We don't need to. We owe them nothing. When America's money has been spent on Americans, and we have some left over, sure, give it to the foreign needy, but not until Betty-Sue is healthy, secure, and happy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76UuTIbW9W0

Watch this video if you want and have time. This guy is really good at explaining what i can't. He has a similar belief to mine. I add a bit to it, but it's basically the same idea of a lot of people that find this infinite intelligence thing to be plausible. 

Welcome to the Mutt-race brother lol.

Instead of scientifically debunking you responses to 1-6, it's functionally suits my purposes to simply point out your response to #7 as positives are better than negatives

There are no pure races of people outside of some obscure Wakanda noone knows about (at least it appears you do not).

That means everyone is a mutt and not a race. In fact, everyone can hyphenate all 5 of your arbitrary categories you listed earlier with no scientific authority.

There is one race, the hyphenated race.

I'll give you a fighting chance here to defend you ideas as an admitted race affirmer.

1) How many "races" are there?

2) What scientific authority gets to define what a biological "race" is?

3) What exact genetic makeup defines any "race."

4) Can you find a significant population people with exactly those combinations and no deviations?

5) How many "races" are there?

6) How can anyone tell what your "race" is without a comprehensive DNA test.

7) Are there any "pure bred" races? Where do these people live? How do they ensure purity?

So you are basically saying besides the single phenotype of melanin, there are no other assured "racial" or other distinct features or traits.

Thank you for agreeing with my OP.

If you believe the concept of separate human races exist you are racist. If you believe races exist on the basis of color, you are racist.

If you believe races exist, but there are no differences at all between races, then you actually do not believe in the concept of separate races, congratulations, you are not a racist.

One day all people will embrace science and realize there are no multiple races of humans........

Being colorblind not only makes you not a racist, but also not a colorist, which is the highest moral position to strive for in society.