• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Group contemplating challenge to UNC Affirmative Action

And there's a very simple reason why "marriage is an effective poverty-fighting tool." It's because the poverty line for a family of 3 is only $4,060 higher than the poverty line for a family of 2. It's not because marriage = middle-class lifestyle. You get that effect because you split the cost of housing more over more bodies. Roomates would do the same thing if you captured combined incomes in the family statistics.

This thread is largely terrible. To many people trying to offer solutions and not enough trying to see the situation we're in more clearly.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Fuck you I'm not your research assistant. This shit is knowable. Your ignorance isn't my burden. There's a whole wide world of international economic statistics, in fact there's an entire organization (the OECD) more or less dedicated to them.
Click to expand...

You made a direct claim disputing my point without any supporting data, your bullshit isn't my problem.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
And there's a very simple reason why "marriage is an effective poverty-fighting tool." It's because the poverty line for a family of 3 is only $4,060 higher than the poverty line for a family of 2. It's not because marriage = middle-class lifestyle. You get that effect because you split the cost of housing more over more bodies. Roomates would do the same thing if you captured combined incomes in the family statistics.

This thread is largely terrible. To many people trying to offer solutions and not enough trying to see the situation we're in more clearly.
Click to expand...

Single moms definitely should room with another single mom to create a two parent household. That makes a ton of sense.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
You made a direct claim disputing my point without any supporting data, your bullshit isn't my problem.
Click to expand...

You made a claim about methods (that Russia and China were better comparisons for the US than European countries of 50-80 million), not an empirical claim. And that claim is crazy. Like, completely insane. The organization whose data I'm using exists precisely because the relevant policymakers and experts have long thought that the member countries are good comparisons. There's nothing in the history of the world that suggests that something that scales to 80 million wouldn't scale to 300 million. The big problems with scaling occur well before 80 million. And even if the jump from 80 million to 300 million was a problem, our federal system can assign administrative responsibilities to states and even counties.

And then you asked some lazy empirical questions that you could easily look up. Pre-tax income inequality is broadly similar among North Atlantic countries, you can see that in the OECD stats linked above. I can't help you if you're not going to try to help yourself.
 
Last edited:
Billy Mitchell said:
SCOTUS decision on Michigan's AA laws.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-682_j4ek.pdf

Michigan passed a law banning use of affirmative action at state universities. SCOTUS upholds the ban as constitutional.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but what do six justices on the Supreme Court know about the Constitution? Do 58% of the electorate of a blue State really know what's best for them? What if you hosted a government racial discrimination party and nobody showed up?
 
Everyone can rejoice! Jh's kids have a better chance of getting into Michigan now kinda!
 
bigdoublezero said:
Oh man, jhmd thinks the Air Force is racist?

:popcorn:
Click to expand...

Too bad appellate counsel for this policy were unaware of how persuasive you think that your historically competitive "But, but, but other people do it!" argument was on the merits. Maybe they could have squeezed out a third vote and the rebuke wouldn't have been as lopsided. Maybe next time.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Too bad appellate counsel for this policy were unaware of how persuasive you think that your historically competitive "But, but, but other people do it!" argument was on the merits. Maybe they could have squeezed out a third vote and the rebuke wouldn't have been as lopsided. Maybe next time.
Click to expand...

this is a great post
 
bigdoublezero said:
I didn't call the Air Force racist. You did.
Click to expand...

You have said that many times, but repetition is a poor substitute for accuracy. A policy may be poorly reasoned with condemning the entire organization.

The dishonesty epidemic is spreading.
 
jhmd2000 said:
You have said that many times, but repetition is a poor substitute for accuracy. A policy may be poorly reasoned with condemning the entire organization.

The dishonesty epidemic is spreading.
Click to expand...

Sort of like how you condemn entire organizations that support affirmative action policies? Which is it, bud?

I'd be ashamed to call the Air Force racist.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/21/u...poverty-hardship-hits-back.html?smid=fb-share

Of the 353 most persistently poor counties in the United States — defined by Washington as having had a poverty rate above 20 percent in each of the past three decades — 85 percent are rural. They are clustered in distinct regions: Indian reservations in the West; Hispanic communities in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas; a band across the Deep South and along the Mississippi Delta with a majority black population; and Appalachia, largely white, which has supplied some of America’s iconic imagery of rural poverty since the Depression-era photos of Walker Evans.

As a refresher to a much-evaded point, most of the Nation's poor are not just not helped by racial preferences, but it actively works against them. Not the sign of a well-reasoned policy, in my view.
 
Last edited:
Calling the Air Force racist is enough originality for me today. That's a good one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top