▲
1
0
▼

The Klu Klux Libs are at it again.


 invite response                
2013 Jan 15, 3:51am   9,285 views  56 comments

by Tenpoundbass   ➕follow (7)   💰tip   ignore  

A school district in Wisconsin said they will review a high school diversity class that exposed students to radical leftist thinkers and promoted a critical race theory that alleges white people are oppressors.
The “American Diversity” class was taught to students at Delavan-Darien High School in Wisconsin, Fox News has learned.

“They’re teaching white guilt,” one parent told Fox News. “They’re dividing the students. They’re saying to non-whites, ‘You have been oppressed and you’re still being oppressed.’”

The parent, who asked not to be identified, has an 18-year-old son who was enrolled in the class and became alarmed after she looked at some of the handouts provided to the students.

“I felt it was indoctrination,” she said. “This is a radical left agenda and ideology that is now embedded in our school.”

The parent said the students were taught “if you’re white, you’re oppressing. If you’re non white, you’ve been a victim.”

According to handouts obtained by Fox News, “white privilege” was defined as “a set of advantages that are believed to be enjoyed by white people beyond those commonly experienced by non-white people in the same social, political, and economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.”

Students were also given a handout from University of Texas professor Robert Jensen arguing that people don’t have complete control over their fate.

“There is not space here to list all the ways in which white privilege plays out in our lives, but it is clear that I will carry this privilege with me until the day white supremacy is erased from society,” he wrote.

Students were also instructed to visit the toy aisle at Wal-Mart for a hands-on illustration of white privilege.

“They were told to go and count the number of dolls that were representative of blacks as opposed to whites,” the parent said. “It’s meant to divide and victimize non-whites and condition whites to feel guilty and to be more passive.”

She brought the material to the attention of school officials and eventually to Robert Crist, the new superintendent of the Delavan-Darien School District.

“A lot of red flags go up in my mind when I look at the materials,” Crist told Fox News. “Her concern has merit.”

“Ideally, you would want to present one theory that might be way on the left and another theory that may be way on the right and if you find one in the middle you can present that, too,” he said. “Now you have a well-rounded discussion in my opinion.”

Crist said he believes the class was being taught long before he became superintendent. The course is currently undergoing an evaluation.

“The class will not be taught again until that process is fully complete,” Crist said.

He said the teacher, who is young, used the materials to “stimulate the thought process.”

“I don’t believe he intended to indoctrinate anybody,” he said.

But the material that has been presented to students in the conservative community did concern the superintendent.

“I’m out of an old-fashioned school,” he said. “I believe in helping kids understand the basic objectives of curriculum and not use some radical material to get a student to support some kind of a special theory.”

The parent also reached out to the Young America’s Foundation – who first shed light on the controversial course.

YAF staff member Brendan Pringle, called the course “race-baiting.”

“This course offers a snapshot of a larger trend that has plagued university curriculum for years and has only recent crept into high school classrooms,” he wrote in an essay. “Professors and teachers are increasingly telling white students that they are part of the problem of racism, and are telling black students that they are second-class citizens. This race-baiting technique is an attack on American values and can only breed bitterness and envy.”

At the same time, Crist said schools have a responsibility to prepare students for the real world.

“There are a lot of radical people in our country and across the world,” he said. “They need to be ideally attuned to some of the different thought patterns that different cultures may have.”

But did the teacher cross the line?

“Ideally a teacher is not supposed to share their own viewpoint,” Crist said. “With this type of class, the teacher looks for controversial items like that to stimulate the kids into discussing things in regard to cultural diversity.”

The parent said that’s all well and good – but the teacher only offered students one perspective and were not allowed to debate the theory.

“This teacher has free reign to pick the material that he wanted to use,” she said. “He chose extremely radical left thinkers. He didn’t give those kids alternative information.”

The parent said last summer her son got a job washing dishes – working sometimes 10 hours a day.

“I was so proud of him,” she said. “And then to have a teacher tell you that you have these unearned privileges – that because you are white somehow you infringe on other people’s rights. It’s really just awful.”

« First        Comments 15 - 54 of 56       Last »     Search these comments

15   rooemoore   2013 Jan 15, 1:36pm  

thomaswong.1986 says

February 19, 1624: The King of Portugal forbids the enslavement of Chinese of either sex.[11][12]

Cut and paste much? Doofus, rather than plagiarize how about a simple link :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

16   thomaswong.1986   2013 Jan 15, 1:39pm  

rooemoore says

Cut and paste much? Doofus, rather than plagiarize how about a simple link :

what do jackasses on the left know anything about history and facts..

so you rub it into their faces.. for the world to see !

17   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 1:59pm  

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

I guess you could say that about any crime. E.g., my grandfather was a rapist, but that's not so bad,... hell, there are hundreds of thousands of rapists running around even now.

Or, my great grandparents were first cousins. But hey, that's not so bad, there are incestuous relations between siblings that sometimes yield children.

I could go on, but you get my drift...

Great reasoning wrong wong, keep up the great work !

18   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 2:02pm  

As I said the other day, there's only one thing I have ever seen you prove.

19   thomaswong.1986   2013 Jan 15, 2:08pm  

marcus says

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

what do you know about anyones ancestors from 50 150 or 200 years ago..
they may have not even been in the US at the time.

you are prejudging anyone who is white and stamping "son of slave owner" on their forehead.

pretty racist of you dont you think... but as long as you created a industry to get money out of people and govt playing the victim .. your OK with being a racist.

20   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 2:35pm  

thomaswong.1986 says

what do you know about anyones ancestors from 50 150 or 200 years ago..

they may have not even been in the US at the time.

I wasn't talking about anyone specific. I wasn't saying your grandparents are cousins or that your grandfather was a rapist. Jeez. Do I have to explain everything ?

IF I make a generalization about white Americans of European descent
committing genocide against native Americans or owning slaves, and I refer to them loosely as "our ansestors," your current version of denial is, "hey, those weren't my great great great grandparents ?"

Are you drunk wrong ?

thomaswong.1986 says

pretty racist of you dont you think... but as long as you created a industry to get money out of people and govt playing the victim .. your OK with being a racist.

Nominated. Best nonsensical jibberish I've heard in a while.

marcus says

As I said the other day, there's only one thing I have ever seen you prove.

I know that you know what I'm talking about.

21   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 15, 3:08pm  

CaptainShuddup says

The parent said that’s all well and good – but the teacher only offered students one perspective and were not allowed to debate the theory.

Yeah, what about the perspective that the lord chose white people to take over this country by any means necessary.

22   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 15, 9:47pm  

marcus says

Captain, this is such Fox right winger BS.

No it's not, my Sister in law talked about this during the 2011 holiday season, she was taking some college course to get her masters. One of the courses she had to take was this exact same shit, talked about in this article. What in fuck really gets me about you folks, isn't that you are hardcore believers of this SHIT, it's that you deny that this shit doesn't even happen. Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

23   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 10:14pm  

CaptainShuddup says

Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

MAybe we can agree on this:

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

24   Y   2013 Jan 15, 10:19pm  

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats
"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

marcus says

CaptainShuddup says

Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

MAybe we can agree on this:

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

25   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 10:36pm  

SoftShell says

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats

"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

My reason for saying "significant percentage" was not just that I don't know how many republicans are racist, it's because we are all racist to some degree. (except Abe (remember him) He doesn't see race and only judges someone by the content of their character, so not including him, we are all racists).

Maybe I'm biased.

Or maybe the kind of beliefs behind a course that takes white oppression generalizations too far is simply not as prevalent as conventional white racism is, in the first place.

26   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 15, 10:36pm  

marcus says

What I do deny is the exaggerated perception. It's highly unlikely the course in Wisconsin was saying literally that I personally am the oppressor since I am white. Which Fox claimed.

Oh I see, but when someone talks about crime in a town committed by Blacks, then they are encompassing "ALL" Blacks and have singled out Obama, then that person is also a Republican, and further deduction proves that all republicans are racists? How do you guys fit it ALL in there?

27   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 10:42pm  

SoftShell says

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

The point of what you quoted from me there was to frame this in a very true non- biased way. Even if you found a very small flaw in the way I said it (I'm not sure), are you sure that that indicates my being totally full of shit ?

I'm pretty sure that there's something else that bothers you about this:

marcus says

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

28   Y   2013 Jan 15, 10:47pm  

The term "racist" is ambiguous, and not universally agreed upon.

So when you say "we are all racists", that is according to your personal definition of the term.

marcus says

SoftShell says

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats

"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

My reason for saying "significant percentage" was not just that I don't know how many republicans are racist, it's because we are all racist to some degree. (except Abe (remember him) He doesn't see race and only judges someone by the content of their character, so not including him, we are all racists).

Maybe I'm biased.

Or maybe the kind of beliefs behind a course that takes white oppression generalizations too far is simply not as prevalent as conventional white racism is, in the first place.

29   Y   2013 Jan 15, 10:54pm  

Yes, there is ...
Your political bias shines through...You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist". Yet in the next post you readily admit that you "don't know how many republicans are racist".

So, which is it?? Why don't you put a number on that "significant percentage" so I can become 'unbothered'....

marcus says

SoftShell says

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

The point of what you quoted from me there was to frame this in a very true non- biased way. Even if you found a very small flaw in the way I said it (I'm not sure), are you sure that that indicates my being totally full of shit ?

I'm pretty sure that there's something else that bothers you about this:

marcus says

30   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 10:57pm  

SoftShell says

You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist"

Actually I said a significant percentage of republicans are NOT racist (meaning NOT very racist).

Maybe try reading the entire quote again carefully, because only in the context can you get my point (not that you want to (and that's what bothers you)).

31   david1   2013 Jan 15, 11:08pm  

I was actually forced to take a class with a similar content when I was a freshman in college over 15 years ago. (God has it been that long?)

Anyway, though my political views have generally changed 180* since then, my views on this particular issue remain the same.

The right is generally unable to see the shitty upward economic mobility potential of the poor in this country. When presented with the facts, they use examples like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg to argue against it, and blame the individual for not "trying hard enough" or something like that.

Factors in our nations past have put most minorities in the lower income demographic. Liberals recognize that opportunites are fewer for minorities and incorrectly attribute that to race. This is incorrect; the reason why minorites have fewer opportunities than whites is because a hgiher percentage of minorities are poor.

Liberals fail to connect the dots. A poor white kid from the hills of West Virginia has less opportunites than a middle class black kid from surburban Atlanta. Those of Jewish or Asian decent are classified as minority - they are for the most part middle class (or better) and opportunities abound for them (to generally stay middle class, that is)

To the left, I say stop worrying about racism; solve income and wealth inequality and racism will take care of itself.

Racism really only works in one direction - you need to have prejudice against other races and the power to affect other races. The poor old black man who calls me a cracker under his breath as I pass by him is not racist. He is prejudiced yes, but he has no power to use my race to affect me. He can't be racist. If he was my boss and he fired me (or didn't hire me) because I was white, that is racist.

Since the majority of power in this country is held by whites, and it is inevitable that some of the white folks in power are going to be prejudiced against minorites, the majority of racism in this country is white against minority.

If we make it easier and more common for poor folks to attain positions of power, and since a higher percentage of the poor are minorities, we are would improve the lives of minorities in a proportionally greater manner than non-minorites. Therfore, we would limit the opportunites for prejudiced white folks to be racist. If we took all the poor folks and made them rich, and all the rich folks and made them poor, are the white poor folks going to be racist against the rich black folks?

So again, to liberals, connect the dots. Focus on helping poor people.

To conservatives, open your eyes. Poor folks have few opportunities to move up, and the majority of the poor are not poor because they are lazy.

32   marcus   2013 Jan 15, 11:13pm  

Moderate Infidel says

Yeah, what about the perspective that the lord chose white people to take over this country by any means necessary.

Great. Now you're setting up Dan or some other atheist to say in essence:

"See ?

I rest my case"

33   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 15, 11:35pm  

david1 says

The right is generally unable to see the shitty upward economic mobility potential of the poor in this country.

When people make that comment I wonder what do they mean.
If I have a warehouse where I make Tchotchkes out of sea shells, and I can only pay minimum wage for the job. And you choose to stay there for 20 years, guess what. You're still going to be making minimum wage, though min wage may have gone up over the years.

Before 2000 at least, anyone that says there is no upward economic mobility in this country, was blaming people for their own personal short comings.

Many people flounder though out their 20's and 30's doing menial trivial jobs, because they haven't figured out their scheme to how make more money, or what they want to do that is more lucrative. I was 30 before I got my first computer. Before that I did flooring and lived hand to mouth for a good solid 14 years. By then I was also married and had a step daughter a baby from my wife, and another in the oven. That computer arrived just in time. It consumed me, it became my passion. I was sitting infront of it every waking hour, learning everything I could about it. This was not my AOL scuttlebut play thing, I was learning. I would only go do a Carpet job to keep the wolf away, turn the lights back on, pay the rent before we got evicted, buy groceries. My wife would ask me "what are you doing sitting at home all day playing on the computer?" I told her...
"People make a lot of money doing this, I'm going to get a job doing this." She told me... "No you have to go to college for that." I replied "NO You just got to know your Shit!".
I got a job three months later from the guy I bartered a tile job that I got the computer from, as a bench tech. Then with in a year after that I got a job as a Sr. VB6 developer. I was a bit of an interloper and it took a lot of Balls for me to have so much faith in my self. But I did it. Before that I couldn't program a VCR or an answering machine for that matter. I was as low tech as they came a complete Luddite.

If were not for that computer I would still be working hand to mouth like several of my friends still are many months through out the year. Flooring is a feast or famine industry. Though perhaps not, maybe if it wouldn't have been the computer that switched that light on, it would have been something else.

I've always noticed that people over 30 have a better command of their finances, career and life than those under 30. The biggest problem today is, everyone wants to be large right out of the gate. Nobody wants to put in time discovering them selves and paying their dues. It's like everyone thinks they are all born with an honorary degree from the school of hard knocks.

34   Y   2013 Jan 16, 1:28am  

You refuse to use the term "majority" when referring to republicans that are 'not racist', even though you self-admittedly state that you can't put any number on it.

* and we are not 'all racist' by the common, most accepted definition of 'racist'

So it would also be fair to assume, by the way you worded your statement, that you also believe "a significant percentage of republicans are 'very racist'"

If you don't want this assumption made, you should

a- not have made the original statement, or

b- stated a number, and backed it up with facts, as opposed to the ambigeous phrase 'a significant percentage', which leaves everything open to interpretation.

also...

Please provide some proof that 'a majority of democrats are not extreme apologists'. Or is that also an assumption?

marcus says

SoftShell says

You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist"

Actually I said a significant percentage of republicans are NOT racist (meaning NOT very racist).

35   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 1:36am  

Thedaytoday says

IT IS CLEAR THAT THE republican party platform and thus every REPUBLICAN is against womans health, RACIST and disparaging to minorities.

They have no choice, God told them to.

36   Y   2013 Jan 16, 1:43am  

u sound like 121212 reincarnated...

Thedaytoday says

Such a bunch of idiots moaning and bitching about owning assault rifles and large clips with hardly any background checks.

FOOLS!

37   AverageBear   2013 Jan 16, 1:47am  

CaptainShuddup says

I've always noticed that people over 30 have a better command of their
finances, career and life than those under 30. The biggest problem today is,
everyone wants to be large right out of the gate. Nobody wants to put in time
discovering them selves and paying their dues. It's like everyone thinks they
are all born with an honorary degree from the school of hard knocks.

------------------------------
"That's the truth, Ruth".....

38   Y   2013 Jan 16, 1:52am  

An elementary analysis of your writing style reveals your true identity:

Welcome back, 121212 !!

Thedaytoday says

AverageBear says

So before you dismiss Capt's obvervations as BS, it'd best be for you to open your eyes to the college culture, because it's dominated by white guilt; has been for at least 20 years, and I see no signs of it letting up.....

No you can easily dismiss CptIdiot's arguments as he is a bigoted racist

39   AverageBear   2013 Jan 16, 2:04am  

marcus says

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about
what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

-------------------------------------------------
It sounds like you are putting words in Thomas' mouth. There is a HUGE difference between acknowledging the past and perpetuating it. Do you think the average English dude cares, or for that matter, feels bad about me being Irish? I don't think so....I think there's a fine line between acknowledging past atrocities, and perpetuating white guilt, and more often than not, some (not all) liberals run across that line..... I think the most obvious problem facing kids of all colors is those 'household units' without a Dad on the scene. Statistics here in the US for minorities w/o Dads face a harsher reality. I do think that welfare (at this current level and attitude of the general population of elected officials on both sides of the aisle), is perpetuating this sad, sad reality. Welfare/Entitlements is stripping a person's ability to earn their own living, and discover how well they can do things on their own....Fostering white guilt surely won't help the average minority try and understand what it means to bust your ass and enjoy the wealth of your efforts.

40   david1   2013 Jan 16, 2:04am  

CaptainShuddup says

I was 30 before I got my first computer. Before that I did flooring and lived
hand to mouth for a good solid 14 years.

Here we go - this is the perfect example of what I said earlier - Conservatives use an example of one (or a few) in a country of 50 million poor. Even if you can name 100,000 poor who moved into the middle class as you did - that only shows the probability of staying poor if born poor is 99.8%. Not great odds, if you ask me.

Think about how remarkable what you did is, especially in today's context. You were able to afford to accept as payment for labor a computer (and were able to find a barter partner). What if the flooring business didn't allow you to be able to keep the computer - what if you needed to pawn it to feed the family? Then, you were smart enough to see opportunity with the computer, and teach yourself how to use it. The same guy gave you a job repairing computers - maybe he felt he owed you still - but still remarkable considering you were a flooring guy. He is the kicker though - after that, you were lucky (with persistence, I'm sure) to land a job as a Senior BASIC developer with only one year experience fixing computers. That is quite a stretch, I think. This is one of those things where your persistence was combined with being in the right place at the right time.

All of this harkens back to the raw numbers. Children from poor families have less than a 1% chance of ever making it into the top 5% in income. (Economic Mobility Project: Across Generations).

We change that, and since a high percentage of the poor are minorites, and we fix racism.

41   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 2:08am  

Whites are guilty of oppression of minorities in the USA.
I'm certain that is a historical fact.

42   FortWayne   2013 Jan 16, 2:16am  

Moderate Infidel says

Whites are guilty of oppression of minorities in the USA.

I'm certain that is a historical fact.

It was always majorities oppressing minorities for personal benefit of free labor or other tangible benefit. Plenty of people who are white skinned have been oppressed or killed too when they were in minority and there was something to gain from it.

43   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 2:17am  

david1 says

Even if you can name 100,000 poor who moved into the middle class as you did - that only shows the probability of staying poor if born poor is 99.8%.

You know as a flooring installer for 15 years, I bet I have a stronger grasp of the socioeconomic reality of this country better than 90% of those that can recite all of the liberal Studies from memory.

What I found in poor black neighborhoods, those well past their 30's, had a house, a car, supported their family in relatively Middle class standards, just as well as the white neighborhoods. They became the guy setting up construction jobs, or landscaping accounts instead of the guy in the back of the truck. They owned the truck, it took years for them to save up and build what they had but they had it. And how dare the WHITE Liberals marginalize them by calling them stellar examples as if they are incapable of achieving goals and realizing dreams. Who's really the racist in this country?

Now for everyone of those guys, there are ten guys that chose to hang out on the corner store on a milk crate and drink Malt Liquor all day. There's nothing any social engineering can do for these people.
But there's just as many poor white trash in the trailer parks working the meth lab.

That is why Stalin and Hitler rounded folks up like that and dispatched them. And it is the same place they are headed if they cast their lot in with the Socialist Libs that claim they have their backs today. These guys will NOT fit in the Left utopia, it will defy the Liberal agenda and they will be dealt with accordingly.

Buba might prefer to stick to his own, but even he is repulsed by the Liberals blatant racism. Wake up Black people, the Liberals are only using you as a token pawn to force their agenda. They don't see warm cozy houses, painted in pastels with a white picket fence for you. You are institution fodder and nothing else.

Buba belives you can do and achieve the same thing can, where as Jarred cowardly uses you as their mannequin to advance their agenda of Socialism.

44   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 2:23am  

david1 says

All of this harkens back to the raw numbers. Children from poor families have less than a 1% chance of ever making it into the top 5% in income. (Economic Mobility Project: Across Generations).

How many anyone makes into the top 5%?
Oh yeah that's right! Only 5 fucking percent.
Do you clowns read this bullshit before you post it?

Hell 95% of the country can expect to not be in the top 5%.
And to hear you guys tell it, the top 5% in this country are all White.
When the last names of the top richest people in this country are getting harder and harder to pronounce.

45   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 2:25am  

FortWayne says

Moderate Infidel says

Whites are guilty of oppression of minorities in the USA.

I'm certain that is a historical fact.

It was always majorities oppressing minorities for personal benefit of free labor or other tangible benefit. Plenty of people who are white skinned have been oppressed or killed too when they were in minority and there was something to gain from it.

There is nothing to gain from oppressing minorities, it is just based on racism and fear and does actual damage to society morally and economically.

46   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 2:34am  

Dirt poor people are just happy to have a job, they don't feel exploited and believe it or not. They do try to maintain the idea that their situation is only temporary. This isn't 1600 Europe where you're born into servitude and die into it.

Funny with all of this talk about oppression and menial dead end jobs. It wasn't that long ago, when there were large population of Whites that were Livid that illegal Aliens and immigrant workers, took their jobs from them. While Libs claimed they were Jobs nobody wanted. Now that these jobs are dominated by minorities, that the Liberals had the biggest hand in engineering. It's once again the White guy's fault that they even have those jobs, that the same White guys once felt were stolen out from under them.

These jobs were always stepping stones to get to the next place, they were NOT meant to be career paths. Which is what Libs try to label them as.

47   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 2:36am  

CaptainShuddup says

When the last names of the top richest people in this country are getting harder and harder to pronounce.

Exactly, is it Buffet like Jimmy or Buffet like a dinner. I could never get that one.
Sounds suspiciously French.

48   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 2:55am  

Moderate Infidel says

Exactly, is it Buffet like Jimmy or Buffet like a dinner. I could never get that one.

Sounds suspiciously French.

Now Who's Cherry picking?

49   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 3:05am  

CaptainShuddup says

Dirt poor people are just happy to have a job, they don't feel exploited and believe it or not.

Your a "dirt poor people" statistician? How many have you interviewed to come to your conclusion?

50   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 3:10am  

Moderate Infidel says

Your a "dirt poor people" statistician? How many have you interviewed to come to your conclusion?

It's a dirt poor thing for people who came from humble leggings, an apologist Caliberal wouldn't couldn't understand. It's not an insult.
Or in your world perhaps it is, what with dirt being the color of black and all.

51   david1   2013 Jan 16, 3:12am  

CaptainShuddup says

How many anyone makes into the top 5%?
Oh yeah that's right! Only 5 fucking
percent.
Do you clowns read this bullshit before you post it?

It actually breaks down like this:

Bottom 20% probability of making top 5% income: .2%
Bottom 40% probability of making top 5% income: .6%

Now,

Top 5% chance of maintaining top 5% income: 66%

You are basically 330 times more likely to be in the top 5% in income if you are born into it than if you are born in the bottom 20%. You are only 110 times more likely to have a top 5% income if you are born into it than someone in the bottom 40% (READ, nearly bottom HALF)

That is economic mobility? That is the land of the opportunity? Land of opportunity if your Dad is rich maybe.

52   Moderate Infidel   2013 Jan 16, 3:22am  

CaptainShuddup says

Moderate Infidel says

Your a "dirt poor people" statistician? How many have you interviewed to come to your conclusion?

It's a dirt poor thing for people who came from humble leggings, an apologist Caliberal wouldn't couldn't understand. It's not an insult.

Or in your world perhaps it is, what with dirt being the color of black and all.

Sounds like you have a lot of white guilt.

53   dublin hillz   2013 Jan 16, 3:24am  

To a certain extent making prudent choice in the united states such as taking education seriously, choosing right major, not having kids before being done with education, not getting bad credit as a result of credit cards/department stores cards late payments/defaults increases the chances that one will be better off financially in america. It is not guaranteed, but odds are in your favor. At the same time, it is definitely easier to maintain your standard of living all other things being equal if you are born into wealth via inherent advantages such as parents being able to hire tutors, better school districts, better nutrition, lack of exposure to violence/other destructive behaviors in lower class communities and most importantly access to connections.

54   Tenpoundbass   2013 Jan 16, 3:33am  

Hey I've said here countless times, I'd gladly like to see a 10% tax increase across the board to fund a federal healthcare system over Obamacare.
It's not that I'm against raising taxes, I'm against giving away more money for any administration that doesn't have the health of America as a whole in best interest. Instead of picking pet people and projects, raising billions to give the money with out any oversight. Only for it to come to light years later just how much fraud was involved when at the time the money was being handed out, it was suspected by most that there was fraud going on. But the Left and Right were to busy to do anything about it. Because you can't point out the fraud on either side, with out the constituents of the other side taking it as a direct insult. Even though they know damn well it's a free for all.

NO thank you, I'll have none of that.

« First        Comments 15 - 54 of 56       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions