Black Lives Matter thread

Originally posted by BackFire
What do you think is the solution to a problem like this?

I have talked myself out of every solution I can think of.

But the prime solution is reducing single-parent homes among the black community. This is a culture problem. Over 70% of black children are being raised in single parent homes. No other issue hits any other race demographic in the US harder than single-parent homes hit black people.

But any solution to reducing this giant number just does not work to me. One solution was to remove welfare benefits for single parent homes as this was greatly incentivize and reverse the extreme majority cause for the destruction of the black family: welfare. Sure, this might work somewhat. But it would harm the children more than it would force adults to start raising kids, together. When you harm children indirectly with policies like these, you very well could increase the crime problem among young black Americans. How is that a win-win solution?

Another solution is religion and a revival of the black family unit through religious organization. Working with black churches and other religions to prioritize the message of the importance of the family unit might help reduce this, somewhat. But many black majority churches are ALREADY preaching this message: "Fathers, go home to your kids. Mothers, try to make the relationship work with your men."

Perhaps the church solution is the only un-harmful solution I can think of.

Another solution proposed, which I talked over with my very close friend who works in Social Services (DHHS), is a positive incentive instead of a negative one. Make the incentive to be married and cohabitating much greater than raising children in a single parent home. But now...now we are getting into the UBI territory and this is also something I support. 🙂

UBI: turns out, UBI reduces single motherhood. Go figure! On the limited data we have on UBI, it reduced single motherhood and increased post-secondary education among both sexes. How's them apples?

UBI could potentially solve a significant portion of our black crime problems. 🙂

Originally posted by dadudemon
We differ, here, and we differ specifically because the facts do not support your position and I also believe that holding your position is inadvertently the racist one. I'll explain why after the facts:

It is a nurture problem (which can include culture). It's not specifically an education or poverty problem. Hispanic people in the US are more impoverished and less educated than our black population. Yet, proportionally to poverty, the black population commits 5 times the homicides per capita.

So why is disregarding black culture an actual racist position? Because ignoring real black issues that would save actual black lives steps over the line into actual racism; when you consciously start ignoring the actual issues that leads to 7000+ murdered black people each year, you've crossed the into racism. The black population is currently experiencing similar issues that the Italian American population experienced during the 1910s-1940s. The infighting with plenty of murder and violence killed far too many young Italian American men.

Here's one thing I have not done yet, with the data: controlled for single parent homes vs. father-mother homes. I have a guess that part of the reason US Hispanic peoples experience the 5 times less homicide rate, when controlling for poverty (where people try to incorrectly place the blame*), I bet you marriage rates are much higher among the Hispanic peoples. We do know there is a strong correlation between single parent homes and 3 other factors (and these 3 factors are not mutually exclusive): crime, education, and mental health.

*I was also one of the people who was incorrectly spreading the "education and poverty" talking point about the black violence issue. I was wrong. It wasn't until I analyzed the data, myself, and controlled for poverty that I saw that the facts did not fit my position. So, I had no choice but to adjust my position.

Originally posted by Newjak
Okay so what specific things do you think need to change in order the violence to stop?

Check out the post I just made to Backfire. In short, it's not as simple as yelling at black people to get married and stay married to the same person their entire lives.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I have talked myself out of every solution I can think of.

But the prime solution is reducing single-parent homes among the black community. This is a culture problem. Over 70% of black children are being raised in single parent homes. No other issue hits any other race demographic in the US harder than single-parent homes hit black people.

But any solution to reducing this giant number just does not work to me. One solution was to remove welfare benefits for single parent homes as this was greatly incentivize and reverse the extreme majority cause for the destruction of the black family: welfare. Sure, this might work somewhat. But it would harm the children more than it would force adults to start raising kids, together. When you harm children indirectly with policies like these, you very well could increase the crime problem among young black Americans. How is that a win-win solution?

Another solution is religion and a revival of the black family unit through religious organization. Working with black churches and other religions to prioritize the message of the importance of the family unit might help reduce this, somewhat. But many black majority churches are ALREADY preaching this message: "Fathers, go home to your kids. Mothers, try to make the relationship work with your men."

Perhaps the church solution is the only un-harmful solution I can think of.

Another solution proposed, which I talked over with my very close friend who works in Social Services (DHHS), is a positive incentive instead of a negative one. Make the incentive to be married and cohabitating much greater than raising children in a single parent home. But now...now we are getting into the UBI territory and this is also something I support. 🙂

UBI: turns out, UBI reduces single motherhood. Go figure! On the limited data we have on UBI, it reduced single motherhood and increased post-secondary education among both sexes. How's them apples?

UBI could potentially solve a significant portion of our black crime problems. 🙂

What about education? I imagine that is also something that would be helpful.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Check out the post I just made to Backfire. In short, it's not as simple as yelling at black people to get married and stay married to the same person their entire lives.

You see I think there is fundamental flaw in how you're interrupting the data.

It ignores the generational issues that have plagued blacks since this country was founded. You can argue it's similar to what we saw Italians but the average historical signification of slavery and racially discrimination runs much deeper than what the Italians and even the Irish had to endure in this country.

This includes things like not being able buy more valuable or desirable property. High arrest numbers well before the end of segregation even ended. Sentencing discrepancies.

Not to mention a number of the issues that caused the Italian and Irish crime waves did all stem from the base threats of poverty, poor educational opportunities, and poor upward trajectory problems. As those issues stopped being problems you also decreases in those high crime rate communities.

It's also important to note as well that while african americans have a higher murder rate than hispanics, hispanics still have a higher one then whites. It also holds true that when you remove homicide Hispanics are almost even with african americans in terms of violent crime rates. Especially for improvised communities.

So yes the normal societal mechanisms like education, population density, and poverty still hold true for being able to discern higher crime areas.

Originally posted by BackFire
What about education? I imagine that is also something that would be helpful.

Education is an unclear topic when it comes to this. It has very swift diminishing returns after completing high school. Meaning, there does not seem to be a positive benefit beyond high school (for all people).

And this may be a correlation vs. causation problem, too. Perhaps individuals who express the Conscientious portion of OCEAN are also far less likely to get into trouble with the law (crime).

So you're just measuring the conscientious personality trait and not actually the education variable. And, this is likely true based off of research they've put into "successful outcome" research when trying to figure out how much IQ plays in success - conscientious is a far better predictor than IQ for success outcomes. But IQ still helps a bit (statistically significant).

It's fare more important to come from a two-parent home where both parents are involved with the children than education is. At least we know that much. But, guess what? Involved parents raise educated children almost invariably. 🙂

Originally posted by dadudemon
Education is an unclear topic when it comes to this. It has very swift diminishing returns after completing high school. Meaning, there does not seem to be a positive benefit beyond high school (for all people).

And this may be a correlation vs. causation problem, too. Perhaps individuals who express the Conscientious portion of OCEAN are also far less likely to get into trouble with the law (crime).

So you're just measuring the conscientious personality trait and not actually the education variable. And, this is likely true based off of research they've put into "successful outcome" research when trying to figure out how much IQ plays in success - conscientious is a far better predictor than IQ for success outcomes. But IQ still helps a bit (statistically significant).

It's fare more important to come from a two-parent home where both parents are involved with the children than education is. At least we know that much. But, guess what? Involved parents raise educated children almost invariably. 🙂

I also think education gets limited by your upward trajectory. For instance you can have a PHD but if there isn't a lot of ability to earn liveable wages it doesn't matter.

Also higher debt to higher education is making education less of a viable strategy for getting out of poverty.

Originally posted by Newjak
So the solution is just to find ways to keep the black nuclear family together?

Yup. Based on the data they collected form people who commit crimes, the correlation is very strong. I posted on this, before, and cited the science. It was something like 70%-80% (just a coincidence). If we saw marriage rates rise back up to 60%+, we'd see a massive and proportionate drop in violent crime in a single generation (15-20 years).

Originally posted by Newjak
You see I think there is fundamental flaw in how you're interrupting the data. It ignores the generational issues that have plagued blacks since this country was founded. You can argue it's similar to what we saw Italians but the average historical signification of slavery and racially discrimination runs much deeper than what the Italians and even the Irish had to endure in this country.

I apologize if it seems like I'm am specifically trying to contradict you but you're wrong again about this based on the facts, as well. Black families had higher marriage rates than white people up until 1955 and they dropped below white people for the first time.

A working age black man made 97 cents to every dollar a working age white man made in 1905 and, today, it's down to around 65 cents (I forget the actual figure).

This was specifically due to the break up of the nuclear family from harmful policies that were implemented during the civil right movement which started very shortly after WWII.

This does not mean that black people, who descended from slaves, did not have their own problems before the Civil Rights Movement destroyed the black nuclear family. They did. Violence was still more prevalent among black populations but no where near the rates they are, today. We also had education issues among our black people.

Originally posted by Newjak
Not to mention a number of the issues that caused the Italian and Irish crime waves did all stem from the base threats of poverty, poor educational opportunities, and poor upward trajectory problems. As those issues stopped being problems you also decreases in those high crime rate communities.

Good news or bad news, the Irish did not go through extreme amounts of Crime from 1890 to 1930s during their "transition from extremely poor immigrants to Socio-Economic Parity with existing US averages." Sure, they had some crime issues but not like the Italian immigrants and the black people in the crime explosion post-Civil Rights Movement.

Originally posted by Newjak
It's also important to note as well that while african americans have a higher murder rate than hispanics, hispanics still have a higher one then whites. It also holds true that when you remove homicide Hispanics are almost even with african americans in terms of violent crime rates. Especially for improvised communities.

So yes the normal societal mechanisms like education, population density, and poverty still hold true for being able to discern higher crime areas.

This touches on a different topic and it runs dangerously close to ignoring black issues.

It's possible that both of these are true:

Black violence is multiple times higher compared to other race demographics

Violence can be partially attributed to poverty and education.

By not specifically tackling black specific issues, you run the risk of not actually addressing black issues. If you implement education policies that improve Hispanic literacy rates by 4%, you'll likely not address almost all of the black violence issues. Make sense?

Some solutions may work for all groups.

Here's one comparison I did not make: when controlling for poverty, is Hispanic violence similar to non-Hispanic white violence? Meaning, there may not be a Hispanic violence problem, just a poverty/education issue. However, the Drug War created multiple Latino drug cartels and US-Latino gang violence. I am of the opinion that if we end the drug war and decriminalize drugs, we will solve multiple Latino-specific issues.

Originally posted by Newjak
2 family households also tend to have more resources at their disposal to be able to supply their child with a better upbringing.

True, but, before the break-up of the black nuclear family, almost all homes were one-parent income homes (fathers). Of course, my next point would be the much lower rates of black crime before the CRM.

This might get us off track and make is start talking about inflation, the buying power of the dollar, and median household income.

Originally posted by Newjak
I also think education gets limited by your upward trajectory. For instance you can have a PHD but if there isn't a lot of ability to earn liveable wages it doesn't matter.

Well, there are 2 different points to consider, here:

1. Black people have a much easier path to success to earn a Ph.D. Many institutions are simply starved for black students. They want to put them through college, for free. The opportunity is there, the students are not. This is part of the culture issue. You're considered an Uncle Tom, race traitor, sell-out, etc. among some black communities for going to college. I am part of a volunteer program, where I am. One of the goals of the program is to help young men (almost all young black men of high school or middle school age) stay in school and apply for college. Many times, it's as easy as picking out a college and applying for the thousands of opportunities. It's the "parenting" part of the process. They need a parent to help them stay in school and help them apply for grants and scholarships. Someone to have their back. And, really, that's what this volunteer program really is doing: filling the involved parenting gap in these young men's lives.

2. Even when controlling for degree holders, it gets much worse. It was something like 16 times more likely to murder than degree holding peers. I saw this chart a few weeks ago. This is why I mentioned the swiftly diminishing returns on post-secondary education.

Originally posted by Newjak
Also higher debt to higher education is making education less of a viable strategy for getting out of poverty.

Yup and we are getting off topic a bit, now. But we talked about this a lot in another thread. There's benefits for everyone and it is quite capitalist to have free post-secondary education for qualified programs and students.

If 2.052 by moving down 1 on pi is accurate by 2052 Blacks should make it good.

I don't get this shit at all--looking into a victim's history to justify their murder. It's happening now to Blake (and the men killed by Rittenhouse) in Kenosha, it's happening now with Breonna Taylor, it happened to George Floyd, and so on...completely disregarding that they were no threat to police when they were practically executed because they had broken the law in their past and served time, or because they were suspected of a minor crime, or because they were were not 100% and immediately obedient to police--Taylor never even had a chance.

Motherfvckers arguing this seem to want the state to execute anyone who's so much as had a traffic citation, nevermind a criminal record...but only if it's not them or anyone they care about.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I don't get this shit at all--looking into a victim's history to justify their murder. It's happening now to Blake (and the men killed by Rittenhouse) in Kenosha, it's happening now with Breonna Taylor, it happened to George Floyd, and so on...completely disregarding that they were no threat to police when they were practically executed because they had broken the law in their past and served time, or because they were suspected of a minor crime, or because they were were not 100% and immediately obedient to police--Taylor never even had a chance.

Motherfvckers arguing this seem to want the state to execute anyone who's so much as had a traffic citation, nevermind a criminal record...but only if it's not them or anyone they care about.

In Breonna's, we were all told that the police swatted the wrong residence. And that the criminal was already in jail. And that Breonna was completely innocent.

Turns out, they didn't swat the wrong residence and Breonna was involved.

In Kyle's case, he lawfully defended himself from attackers. The attackers being very terrible people has nothing to do with that and that is not the justification for Kyle's self-defense case.

In George Floyd's case, I don't think a single person has justified the 3 cops on his back on KMC. But we did get new evidence of the entire arrest where Floyd refused to get into the car. And very recently, we have new evidence that Floyd took the Fentenyl tablet right as he was getting confronted for the fraud.

Originally posted by dadudemon
In Breonna's, we were all told that the police swatted the wrong residence. And that the criminal was already in jail. And that Breonna was completely innocent.

Turns out, they didn't swat the wrong residence and Breonna was involved.

In Kyle's case, he lawfully defended himself from attackers. The attackers being very terrible people has nothing to do with that and that is not the justification for Kyle's self-defense case.

In George Floyd's case, I don't think a single person has justified the 3 cops on his back on KMC. But we did get new evidence of the entire arrest where Floyd refused to get into the car. And very recently, we have new evidence that Floyd took the Fentenyl tablet right as he was getting confronted for the fraud.

Regarding Taylor, it doesn't matter if the information was incorrect the first time around or if she was involved. Police went in to execute, not to arrest. Shot first, asked questions later--that is precisely the problem here, as in several other cases sparking outrage.

Rittenhouse was attacked by crowds after killing his first victim. The excuse of self-defense does not apply since he was a willing participant and agitator in a turbulent situation. He was not in his home, or his home town, or his home state, and had no other business in Kenosha other than to confront and start shit with protesters with a rifle he was not legally allowed to carry.

In Floyd's case, perhaps his death has not been ghoulishly justified on KMC, but I've seen and heard it elsewhere online and from people around me. It's sick to think that a guy who was scared shitless of being murdered by cops and did nothing to hurt them deserved the forceful treatment he got from those cops, which led to his death--because he was high and tried to pay for cigarettes with a fake $20 bill.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Regarding Taylor, it doesn't matter if the information was incorrect the first time around or if she was involved. Police went in to execute, not to arrest. Shot first, asked questions later--that is precisely the problem here, as in several other cases sparking outrage.

According to the details, Breonna's boyfriend shot first. But he maintained that they did NOT warn him. Just banging on the door in the middle of the night.

I think no-knock warrants should be illegal. Is it really that hard to check for exits before swatting a residence so you don't have to use no-knock warrants? "But we are afraid they will get their guns and shoot at us!" True, true. What do other countries do?

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Rittenhouse was attacked by crowds after killing his first victim.

This is definitely wrong. He was attacked for putting out a dumpster fire. With a dude firing a gun in his general direction moments before he shot an attacking Rosenbaum. The vids and analysis have been posted in the Blake thread - it's not disputed information.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
In Floyd's case, perhaps his death has not been ghoulishly justified on KMC, but I've seen and heard it elsewhere online and from people around me. It's sick to think that a guy who was scared shitless of being murdered by cops and did nothing to hurt them deserved the forceful treatment he got from those cops, which led to his death--because he was high and tried to pay for cigarettes with a fake $20 bill.

No, Floyd was scared out of his mind of being arrested because:

1. He was high off his balls with 3-4 illicit drugs in his system.

2. He just committed a crime.

3. Another arrest meant he was going back to prison for a very long time due to his previous criminal history.

Originally posted by dadudemon
According to the details, Breonna's boyfriend shot first. But he maintained that they did NOT warn him. Just banging on the door in the middle of the night.

I think no-knock warrants should be illegal. Is it really that hard to check for exits before swatting a residence so you don't have to use no-knock warrants? "But we are afraid they will get their guns and shoot at us!" True, true. What do other countries do?

This is definitely wrong. He was attacked for putting out a dumpster fire. With a dude firing a gun in his general direction moments before he shot an attacking Rosenbaum. The vids and analysis have been posted in the Blake thread - it's not disputed information.

No, Floyd was scared out of his mind of being arrested because:

1. He was high off his balls with 3-4 illicit drugs in his system.

2. He just committed a crime.

3. Another arrest meant he was going back to prison for a very long time due to his previous criminal history.

If police did not warn them, then how were Taylor and her boyfriend supposed to know it was police? Banging on someone's door late at night would make anyone with nowhere else to turn defensive, especially if they were involved in criminal activity as alleged.

What was so goddamned important that they had to arrest them then? Why not first thing in the morning, when there is plenty of light, as they leave the apartment and least suspecting arrest?

Suppose they had a child with them when they were shot at by police--would that child's injuries or death be justified because his parents were alleged criminals? Of course not.

Why so much use of force to arrest suspected money launderers and drug users/dealers? We don't see that shit with money launderers and druggies higher up on the socioeconomic ladder too often, and there are plenty of examples of motherfvckers who've physically assaulted or shot at cops or went on heavily-armed killing sprees who were arrested, alive and unscathed. So why was that not possible with these two, or Blake, or Floyd?

Speaking of Floyd, regardless of what he was actually afraid of, he was still scared shitless and non-violent. It's another example of excessive force from police which led to yet another unnecessary death.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yup. Based on the data they collected form people who commit crimes, the correlation is very strong. I posted on this, before, and cited the science. It was something like 70%-80% (just a coincidence). If we saw marriage rates rise back up to 60%+, we'd see a massive and proportionate drop in violent crime in a single generation (15-20 years).

I apologize if it seems like I'm am specifically trying to contradict you but you're wrong again about this based on the facts, as well. Black families had higher marriage rates than white people up until 1955 and they dropped below white people for the first time.

A working age black man made 97 cents to every dollar a working age white man made in 1905 and, today, it's down to around 65 cents (I forget the actual figure).

This was specifically due to the break up of the nuclear family from harmful policies that were implemented during the civil right movement which started very shortly after WWII.

This does not mean that black people, who descended from slaves, did not have their own problems before the Civil Rights Movement destroyed the black nuclear family. They did. Violence was still more prevalent among black populations but no where near the rates they are, today. We also had education issues among our black people.

Good news or bad news, the Irish did not go through extreme amounts of Crime from 1890 to 1930s during their "transition from extremely poor immigrants to Socio-Economic Parity with existing US averages." Sure, they had some crime issues but not like the Italian immigrants and the black people in the crime explosion post-Civil Rights Movement.

This touches on a different topic and it runs dangerously close to ignoring black issues.

It's possible that both of these are true:

Black violence is multiple times higher compared to other race demographics

Violence can be partially attributed to poverty and education.

By not specifically tackling black specific issues, you run the risk of not actually addressing black issues. If you implement education policies that improve Hispanic literacy rates by 4%, you'll likely not address almost all of the black violence issues. Make sense?

Some solutions may work for all groups.

Here's one comparison I did not make: when controlling for poverty, is Hispanic violence similar to non-Hispanic white violence? Meaning, there may not be a Hispanic violence problem, just a poverty/education issue. However, the Drug War created multiple Latino drug cartels and US-Latino gang violence. I am of the opinion that if we end the drug war and decriminalize drugs, we will solve multiple Latino-specific issues.

I also don't think you can just tie everything to single vs dual parent families. Even in dual parent families you'll see increases in crime rates in lower income, lower educated, and higher population density areas.

Also when you talk about the wage earnings of 1905 you have to put it in context. This would still be the first one to two generations of freed people. This time period was also the time where black land ownership was the highest the whole '40 acres and mule' initiatives. Yet we almost immediately see black ownership and wages start to decrease after this time period. Often you can attribute them specifically to racial profiling and bias in the acts and institutions that are supposed to help make these generational wealth. For instance agricultural acts would overwhelmingly favor white farmers causing African Americans to lose their farms. Or influential white institutions wouldn't properly advise them on how to create wills meaning farms and land weren't passed on correctly.

Also African Americans still were more likely to work lower wage jobs.

So yes for about a generation or two african americans were doing better until racists institutions put a major halt to that.

In fact there isn't a single other minority that has recieved the same level of racial bias as what african americans have seen. With the exception of possibly the native american population.

Originally posted by dadudemon
True, but, before the break-up of the black nuclear family, almost all homes were one-parent income homes (fathers). Of course, my next point would be the much lower rates of black crime before the CRM.

This might get us off track and make is start talking about inflation, the buying power of the dollar, and median household income.

Well, there are 2 different points to consider, here:

1. Black people have a much easier path to success to earn a Ph.D. Many institutions are simply starved for black students. They want to put them through college, for free. The opportunity is there, the students are not. This is part of the culture issue. You're considered an Uncle Tom, race traitor, sell-out, etc. among some black communities for going to college. I am part of a volunteer program, where I am. One of the goals of the program is to help young men (almost all young black men of high school or middle school age) stay in school and apply for college. Many times, it's as easy as picking out a college and applying for the thousands of opportunities. It's the "parenting" part of the process. They need a parent to help them stay in school and help them apply for grants and scholarships. Someone to have their back. And, really, that's what this volunteer program really is doing: filling the involved parenting gap in these young men's lives.

2. Even when controlling for degree holders, it gets much worse. It was something like 16 times more likely to murder than degree holding peers. I saw this chart a few weeks ago. This is why I mentioned the swiftly diminishing returns on post-secondary education.

Yup and we are getting off topic a bit, now. But we talked about this a lot in another thread. There's benefits for everyone and it is quite capitalist to have free post-secondary education for qualified programs and students.

I would also be interested in knowing what the crime rates are for single parent households below the average dual income family and for single parent households that make around that much as well.

Looks like the former cops arrested for the George Floyd incident are all turning on each other by playing the blame game.