What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

How The Democratic Party Left The White Working Class Behind (1/15 23:48 PST) (1 Viewer)

One issue that I don't know how to fix is the concerns of the "poor rural white who really isn't poor by objective standards and is mad for other reasons"

It's not like all those hardcore Trump supporters who feel marginalized are unemployed and living in rented trailers. How many nice pickups have you seen with Trump flags waving in the back? There's a slew of seemingly normal / employed / middle-class people angry because they are convinced that "this isn't the America I grew up in". They don't like LBGTQ issues "shoved down their throat" (to hear them put it). They are more afraid of the "what WILL Dems do?" bogeyman than anything (coming for our guns / full-scale socialism / etc). They are angry over symbols, like kneeling for the flag, and Aunt Jemima being taken off the syrup bottle. And to talk to them is to wildly bounce between these topics and actual issues that matter.

A lot of these folks do not have the will to think deeper on these issues. My hardcore right neighbor is fully on the "why is Aunt Jemima racist and Little Debbie isn't?" train, and it cannot be explained to him at any level. And things like that are a big reason he leans so hard to the right and is so accepting to the rest of the message. 

It's frustrating. Like I said, there's no talking about it, as these folks are all over the place with their anger - I try to explain to my neighbor why AJ is now seen as a not-so-good stereotype, and within thirty seconds, the conversation on his end is about typical right-media talking points, like BLM riots, one minute later Hunter Biden and China make an appearance, and in four minutes (if I make it that far), Hillary's e-mails will still get a mention.   

How do we fix that? How do make some of these people realize "America is changing, and that's ok"
That is a challenge for sure.  I am hopeful that by making progress with our economy, public health, our social safety net, and income inequality, we can counter these fears of a changing America.  Couple that with a reduction in the us versus them rhetoric, demonizing the other side, and proliferating conspiracy theories (all things that I think will be incrementally improved without Trump in office), and I think there is hope for progress.  But Democrats need to quit insulting, ridiculing, ignoring, disregarding rural populations, and show that they are willing to listen to them.  Surely there are legitimate areas where we can productively focus, even if the Hillary emails, Hunter Biden, AJ issues seem to demand the spotlight. 

 
  • Smile
Reactions: jwb
I read a couple of the articles in OP and gotta be honest, sure felt like a closeted support of UBI and M4A.  That seemed to be the overall complaint, so to speak, “where’s mine?!”.  Which I’m not dismissing or disagreeing with, but the whole we’re falling behind too and someone needs to look out for us sounds like a supportive stance for such programs. 


Leaders on both sides need to worry about the day when the poor on both sides figure this out.  We came close with Bernie.  We need someone younger to take the issue and run with it.
For sure, but then it get's shot down with the "SOCIALISM!!" calls from right.  

 
Again, the entire OP is wrong.

Nixon's 1968 campaign was consciously built around attracting working class white Democrats upset about Civil Rights legislation.  By 1971 the phenomena was so well recognized that the #1 TV show in America was about it.  WWWs weren't abandoned.  They LEFT the party the made them middle class in the first place.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One issue that I don't know how to fix is the concerns of the "poor rural white who really isn't poor by objective standards and is mad for other reasons"

It's not like all those hardcore Trump supporters who feel marginalized are unemployed and living in rented trailers. How many nice pickups have you seen with Trump flags waving in the back? There's a slew of seemingly normal / employed / middle-class people angry because they are convinced that "this isn't the America I grew up in". They don't like LBGTQ issues "shoved down their throat" (to hear them put it). They are more afraid of the "what WILL Dems do?" bogeyman than anything (coming for our guns / full-scale socialism / etc). They are angry over symbols, like kneeling for the flag, and Aunt Jemima being taken off the syrup bottle. And to talk to them is to wildly bounce between these topics and actual issues that matter.

A lot of these folks do not have the will to think deeper on these issues. My hardcore right neighbor is fully on the "why is Aunt Jemima racist and Little Debbie isn't?" train, and it cannot be explained to him at any level. And things like that are a big reason he leans so hard to the right and is so accepting to the rest of the message. 

It's frustrating. Like I said, there's no talking about it, as these folks are all over the place with their anger - I try to explain to my neighbor why AJ is now seen as a not-so-good stereotype, and within thirty seconds, the conversation on his end is about typical right-media talking points, like BLM riots, one minute later Hunter Biden and China make an appearance, and in four minutes (if I make it that far), Hillary's e-mails will still get a mention.   

How do we fix that? How do make some of these people realize "America is changing, and that's ok"
I live in an area that is just like this.  Part of it is they worry about real issues in their minds - how will they afford insurance for one.  Transgender issues rank about 112th on that list.  They see Pelosi speak about not using gender specific terms while they are stuck at home due to state mandated pandemic shutdowns while their rent for business is due.  Yeah, there is a lot of pent up anger on both sides, and politicians only want to look at it from the side that benefits them. 

 
My take is that when they say they feel like they are being left behind it's more about their core values and ideas about these topics and not the economic part.  
They are tied together and feed into each other.  It's about both economic and cultural marginalization.  As economic power diminishes, cultural influence wanes as well. 

Although I think that one is easier to address than the other (economics).  The US already picks winners and losers in this area.  The government should restrict cultural expression.

 
I’d hesitate to say Democrats “left behind” white working class voters. Education polarization is happening all over the world and the US is no exception. In every OECD country, college educated folks are realigning with center left parties as working class voters move to center right parties. Democrats should obviously try to persuade WWC voters back to their side as they are an incredibly important voting bloc, but that’s easier said than done. In the UK for example, Jeremy Corbyn aggressively focused on economic and class issues in an attempt to renew Labour’s strength with working class voters, and he ended up presiding over the largest increase in education polarization in UK history. He flipped some of the richest parliamentary districts while the Tories flipped some of the poorest ones. There are some very deep, profound shifts that Democrats are fighting against here.
This is an excellent, though frightening, point. I fear the world my children will be left if the push towards right-wing nationalism continues. 

 
BTW, the party shift by class and education will be complete when the GOP embraces labor and promotes collective bargaining for the working class. That would be a very interesting shift indeed.  The GOP has already left behind many tenets of conservative economic principles that formed the bedrock of their policy agenda. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BTW, the party shift by class and education will be complete when the GOP embraces labor and promotes collective bargaining for the working class. That would be a very interesting shift indeed.  The GOP has already left behind many tenets of conservative economic principles that formed the bedrock of their policy agenda. 
If the last four years is any example, they still seem to be very pro-business and anti-business regulation, which seems to be pretty antithetical to embracing the NLRA and collective bargaining as currently constructed.  But, you’re right, if they go that direction, it would dramatically increase the class/education demarcation. 

 
If the last four years is any example, they still seem to be very pro-business and anti-business regulation, which seems to be pretty antithetical to embracing the NLRA and collective bargaining as currently constructed.  But, you’re right, if they go that direction, it would dramatically increase the class/education demarcation. 
I could see it happen if they embrace labor rights but reject environmental and development regulation.

The other option is to continue to convince the poor that organizing along their greatest resource, their labor, is against their interest.  It's worked for 4 decades...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1) Compulsory service from ages 16-19 by everyone in the US. You either enter a junior military environment or a "Public Service Corps". Young people are going to PT, going to classes, learn life skills, learn basic money household management, discipline, team work, meritocracy, work ethic, etc, etc. Clearly the modern US family culture has fallen apart. The mass divorce culture didn't help any. The public school system cannot function as surrogate parents. Give these young people early work, early trade training, early life skill training and socialization.
How does this solve the problem that you posed?   As a self-professed conservative, why does your solution involve government controlling people ages 16-19?  Is this primarily about "giving people basic life skills" via a structured program of compulsory service?

 
2) Make youth sports compulsory. High school football saved my life. It gave me a sense of purpose, a team, a surrogate family, an understanding of hard work and sacrifice, and a make shift brotherhood. I'm not the only one here. Our society needs to get kids playing sports. Working as a team. Competing. No more obese kids staring all day into a phone. Outside in open air and in a system where there is a surrogate support system outside the home.
Ok.  Cool.  I can get on board with this in concept.  Overall, big fan of this (even though it involves more government control of kids).

Here's my question:  why just sports?   Why not marching band, choir, participation in theatre productions, etc?   Plenty of kids are terrible at sports -- they simply don't have the basic genetic makeup to be even decent (see:  Ben Simmons 3-point shot, hahaha) -- and these kids (who we all remember from gym class) actually have their sense of self-worth SHATTERED by participation in gym class.   Can't we provide them a different outlet that actually BUILDS rather that DESTROYS their self-confidence?

Don't get me wrong, I loved playing sports.   Still do.  Really wish I wasn't a 45 year-old guy with a body that's breaking down.   Dread the day I have to give up pickup basketball.   Can't imagine switching to golf - jesus, that sounds depressing as I type it.

But plenty of kids won't get that same experience.  They will hate themselves even more if forced to play sports.  What's the right approach for that cut of the population?

 
3) No foreign aid, besides food shipments, of any kind until the deficit is resolved. If we have extra crops and harvests, then by all means, share with the world so people don't starve. But otherwise, the purse strings are closed

Frees up lots of money to help American citizens, including rural ones.
I'm cool with this.  Even though it means another place where the US gets its ### kicked by China.  China is playing the long game on foreign aid - building roads and other infrastructure across the globe, strategically, while we waste all of our money either propping up dictators or invading countries.  We are truly dumb in the way we spend $$ overseas.

I wrote an essay about this topic in 7th grade.   Strongly advocated for the US eliminating all foreign aid.  Vivid memory of my teacher giving me a "C" grade on the paper because she didn't like the subject matter.   Not due to a poorly researched or poorly written paper.  Good times.

Edit to add:  what would you propose we do with the money freed up?   What specifically would you propose to "help American citizens, including rural ones?"   Because that is the main point of this thread, correct?  Helping the white working class?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
4) Mass deportations. Since the Death Penalty is so controversial, and the prison system is so overcrowded and expensive, let's make it simple. Create a classification of crimes where you are stripped of your citizenship, all your assets and are required to leave the country and never return. If Eric Swalwell wants to bang a Chinese spy and give up state secrets like a thirsty broken down simp, then OK, lose your citizenship and get out of the country. Never return. Anyone caught again on US soil is shot by firing squad in two weeks. Want to rob a bank? Deported. Want to throw a molotov cocktail and try to burn people alive? Deported. Want to storm the Capitol? Deported. Want to be a drunk driver and kill some innocent kids in your SUV? Deported. Where will they be sent. Pick the worst country in the world that takes our food aid and tell them do what they want to them, and ship them there as the cost of doing business.

Child molesters get executed by hanging. ( Anyone got a problem with this? Didn't think so.. OK if you have a problem with this, we can build a gigantic rail gun in the desert using solar farms and fire them into the sun. That better? )  Major political crimes are now capital offenses. If Hunter Biden gets caught taking Burisma money for political gain and direct political influence? Then he goes on Death Row. Kushner uses the White House as a personal piggy bank and is convicted? Same thing. For every person deported, a lottery is held to have a prospective immigrant to get a chance to become a citizen.

Our prison system should be a bus stop only for major crimes. People stay long enough to be deported. Or to be sent to a firing squad.

This frees up lots of money to actually support schools, youth sports, libraries, parks, etc, etc.
This is really just a rant.  What evidence do you have that this frees up any money?   Would love to see a link on this -- and not one of your random links that just bombards the recipient with high volume but low quality info.  A link that directly addresses this with compelling facts.

Note:  I have zero issue with your rant.  Much of it resonates.  But I'm skeptical that any of it ties back to the main point of this thread.

Also:  how would you spend the money to "actually support schools, youth sports, libraries, parks, etc"?  And how do those activities tie back to the main point of this thread?   Lots of "mission creep" going on in this single post even.

 
6) No Bill in Congress can exceed five pages in length. If you can't explain it in five pages, then you have a problem. All Bills must be single issue items. All Bills need a two week grace period for everyone to actually read the damn thing before voting. Everyone needs to vote. Anyone missing a vote is stripped of their government salary for the entire year.

This allows public policy to be simple enough for the average rural American to understand it. And reduce financial political pork.
Note that I skipped item #5 because it seemed like a pure rant.   Which again, I'm cool with.

BTW - thank you for a long, thoughtful reply.   Your reply was a really good avenue for engagement; it made we WANT to read it and reply.  Much different than the posts with random links that are all over the place, don't tie to the main topic, etc.  I appreciate the time you put into your reply, and thus am trying to reply in the same spirit.

Item #6, I'm not sure exactly how it helps the white working class -- but I DO think it would foster greater transparency AND accountability for politicians.  And hey, I'm a huge fan of that concept.   It's absurd that Congress plays this game where they bury pure pork in bills that get "debated" and voted on.   IMO it's what we get when so much of Congress has a legal background.  Lawyers love to focus on procedural details instead of identifying big picture, game changing opportunities.

 
7) If you want to sell products in the US, as a major corporation, your company must employ at least 50 percent of it's entire work staff from American citizens. Any product sold in the US, the components to build it must be made with 50 percent of parts derived from wholly US owned and operated and American employed businesses. Apple can decide it wants to make all it's IPhones in China and in those Uighur concentration camps. Fine. You just don't get to sell them in the US.

Any company is free to outsource it's jobs overseas outside of that 50 percent limit, just at an 80 percent tax rate. If you hire a guy in India to be a phone CSR, fine, whatever you are paying him in total compensation, you need to pay 80 percent on top of that in taxes.

We build our IPhone substitutes here. We make our shoes here. We make our clothes here. We give Americans jobs.

Gekko does not desire to make America great again, he simply desires to remind America it's backbone was built on 3000 percent beef eaters and legitimate shooters.
Why can't consumers just buy American?   Why should the government get involved in mandating any of this?  How can you claim to be a conservative and advocate for the big government solution outlined above?   (answer:  because you aren't a conservative, you are a populist)

I have zero interest in anything you wrote in #7.   Why didn't people want to buy American cars in the late 70s and 80s?  Because Motor City did a terrible job of building cars then.   Free market, man.   Let consumers vote with their feet.   The above creates way more problems than it solves.  But hey, you are a conservative.  Supposedly.

 
8x) Prostitution is made legal. New jobs, more tax dollars. People are more well adjusted in general and less likely to riot if their stomachs are full and their balls are empty. Consider this a gift to many of you woke manlets out there. I'm a geriatric retiree gangster and can still pull quality and drop loads but I recognize many here are not so naturally dominant.
Slam dunk.  We should also legalize pot.   

Thanks again for your reply and the thought you put into it.  On balance, after reading all 8 proposals, we share many ideas in common.   I always enjoy finding commonality -- both of intent and of action -- with others.

That said, I'm unconvinced that your 8 proposals would make a meaningful dent in helping the white working class (which, again, is what I took from the OP).  If that isn't what you were trying to advocate for --- helping the white working class --- then perhaps I simply misunderstood your OP.  If that's the case, my apologies.

Either way, I enjoyed reading your thoughts.  Thank you again for sharing.

 
Slam dunk.  We should also legalize pot.   

Thanks again for your reply and the thought you put into it.  On balance, after reading all 8 proposals, we share many ideas in common.   I always enjoy finding commonality -- both of intent and of action -- with others.

That said, I'm unconvinced that your 8 proposals would make a meaningful dent in helping the white working class (which, again, is what I took from the OP).  If that isn't what you were trying to advocate for --- helping the white working class --- then perhaps I simply misunderstood your OP.  If that's the case, my apologies.

Either way, I enjoyed reading your thoughts.  Thank you again for sharing.
Wow. I really respect you Alex but I couldn’t disagree more with your interpretation of his post. I found it 100% drivel, not thoughtful at all, bizarre in some parts and a primer for fascism in other parts, with a strong racism vibe running through the whole thing. Which is why I responded the way I did. 

 
Wow. I really respect you Alex but I couldn’t disagree more with your interpretation of his post. I found it 100% drivel, not thoughtful at all, bizarre in some parts and a primer for fascism in other parts, with a strong racism vibe running through the whole thing. Which is why I responded the way I did. 
Your continual attempts to misrepresent his posts are pretty sad. No one buys it, please be better and move along. You’ve posted the same thing multiple times.  :fishing:

 
Wow. I really respect you Alex but I couldn’t disagree more with your interpretation of his post. I found it 100% drivel, not thoughtful at all, bizarre in some parts and a primer for fascism in other parts, with a strong racism vibe running through the whole thing. Which is why I responded the way I did. 
If there are specific comments/replies of mine that you strongly disagree with, feel free to elaborate.  I would be interested in what you have to say.  Blanket statements aren’t very helpful to me.

 
If there are specific comments/replies of mine that you strongly disagree with, feel free to elaborate.  I would be interested in what you have to say.  Blanket statements aren’t very helpful to me.
I’ve written enough about his comments. I disagree with yours far less except for your willingness to eliminate all foreign aid. I think that’s a terrible idea. Foreign aid helps our economic interests, secures our prosperity, and prevents wars. 

 
I’ve written enough about his comments. I disagree with yours far less except for your willingness to eliminate all foreign aid. I think that’s a terrible idea. Foreign aid helps our economic interests, secures our prosperity, and prevents wars. 
Foreign aid if constructed properly does accomplish something.  I would suggest that a large portion of what we spend is a bad investment.  I’m very open to intelligently designed foreign aid.

 
Here's my question:  why just sports?   Why not marching band, choir, participation in theatre productions, etc?   Plenty of kids are terrible at sports -- they simply don't have the basic genetic makeup to be even decent (see:  Ben Simmons 3-point shot, hahaha) -- and these kids (who we all remember from gym class) actually have their sense of self-worth SHATTERED by participation in gym class.   Can't we provide them a different outlet that actually BUILDS rather that DESTROYS their self-confidence?

How does this solve the problem that you posed?   As a self-professed conservative, why does your solution involve government controlling people ages 16-19?  Is this primarily about "giving people basic life skills" via a structured program of compulsory service?


The problems with the poor urban black community and the impoverished rural white community starts in the home. If you want to change, you need to first change your environment. Which is why Jordan Peterson always tells people in distress the first thing you can do is clean your room.

How many guys here at FBG talk about their divorces and things didn't really get better until they moved out and away from their ex spouse? Or how many here talk about their youth, and how struggles didn't change until they moved away from toxic family?

The military, right now, is the only large scale organization designed to essentially take in someone with completely nothing to their name and help them put together their life in a structured full on no holds barred environment. Does this mean all kids need to be sent to the military? No, but this is why I suggest a paired "Public Service Corps"

Solutions require trade offs. Tim sees it as fascism. I see it as triage. We can try to save the kids from these high risk groups with the unconventional ( and compulsory service is not actually unconventional at all in human history, even in supposed democracies) or we can stay with the conventional and watch them all die. To succeed, you need a formal wide scale logistical structure to get these kids out of those toxic environments.

I don't see a problem also pushing for things like band or choir, but to grow, a person must learn to be comfortable with being uncomfortable. This bizarre modern ideology that everyone needs to be comfortable and all feelings must be validated doesn't not prepare people for real life. The beauty of sports is there are lots of them. If they don't want to play football or do BJJ, then do ping pong or swim. The idea of sheltering people for what makes them uncomfortable is not the pathway to building self confidence. Being outdoors, getting sunshine, being around people, learning how to work as team, getting exercise, finding comradery, these are all positive things.

Kids don't like vegetables or brushing their teeth or going to bed on time, but parents make them do it anyway. I don't see how this is much different. Fewer obese kids staring into phones won't make the world burn. In fact, it will probably make the world better.

 
The problems with the poor urban black community and the impoverished rural white community starts in the home. If you want to change, you need to first change your environment. Which is why Jordan Peterson always tells people in distress the first thing you can do is clean your room.

How many guys here at FBG talk about their divorces and things didn't really get better until they moved out and away from their ex spouse? Or how many here talk about their youth, and how struggles didn't change until they moved away from toxic family?

The military, right now, is the only large scale organization designed to essentially take in someone with completely nothing to their name and help them put together their life in a structured full on no holds barred environment. Does this mean all kids need to be sent to the military? No, but this is why I suggest a paired "Public Service Corps"

Solutions require trade offs. Tim sees it as fascism. I see it as triage. We can try to save the kids from these high risk groups with the unconventional ( and compulsory service is not actually unconventional at all in human history, even in supposed democracies) or we can stay with the conventional and watch them all die. To succeed, you need a formal wide scale logistical structure to get these kids out of those toxic environments.

I don't see a problem also pushing for things like band or choir, but to grow, a person must learn to be comfortable with being uncomfortable. This bizarre modern ideology that everyone needs to be comfortable and all feelings must be validated doesn't not prepare people for real life. The beauty of sports is there are lots of them. If they don't want to play football or do BJJ, then do ping pong or swim. The idea of sheltering people for what makes them uncomfortable is not the pathway to building self confidence. Being outdoors, getting sunshine, being around people, learning how to work as team, getting exercise, finding comradery, these are all positive things.

Kids don't like vegetables or brushing their teeth or going to bed on time, but parents make them do it anyway. I don't see how this is much different. Fewer obese kids staring into phones won't make the world burn. In fact, it will probably make the world better.
Wait - there are kids who are as physically incapable of eating vegetables or brushing their teeth.....as they are of catching or throwing a ball?  Huh.  Never knew that.

I really don’t understand a) how this is a solution for every kid, b) how this addresses your primary issue.

Do you have research that supports this?  I’m open to any and all creative ideas.  This reminds me of an outdated approach from the early 80s called “character education.”  Don Rumsfeld and his wife founded a non-profit in Chicago centered on the concept.  I was on the board for a few years and did some pro bono consulting for it.  Small group of socialites trying to do good but having little measurable impact.

Anyway, thanks for the reply!

 
Why can't consumers just buy American?   Why should the government get involved in mandating any of this?  How can you claim to be a conservative and advocate for the big government solution outlined above?   (answer:  because you aren't a conservative, you are a populist)

What evidence do you have that this frees up any money? 

Also:  how would you spend the money to "actually support schools, youth sports, libraries, parks, etc"?  And how do those activities tie back to the main point of this thread?   Lots of "mission creep" going on in this single post even.


If more Americans are going to find dignity through dollars and dignity through having work then they will need jobs. If America cannot naturally create jobs through current market forces then they'll have to adjust their public policy to create those jobs and hope that it can kick start a positive feedback loop of success that makes American companies, more of them, actually competitive both here and abroad.

If someone wants to say foreign products are often made better, I won't disagree. And cheaper. I won't disagree. But if we don't fix this economy, we all die. Our kids die. We cannot keep spending our grandchildren's money this way and keep printing money like this.

We need more Americans working and we need Americans taking in a living wage. Is this suggestion full of conflict and some ugliness? Sure. No doubt. But there will need to be tradeoffs to make things better.

I don't believe I'm a populist. I believe I am a conservative who sees the pure tactical reality of the situation. I look for answers built on a logistical pathway. We force people down one road or we all die. In a more ideal society, I'd push for other options.

In terms of freeing money, if we have rapists and murderers who would cost up to 75K a year to upkeep for the rest of their lives ( and that cost would grow and would spike for those with severe medical issues common to old age/long term care) and they are no longer America's responsibility, that's a huge money savings. How much does it cost to add some jail cells into shipping barges and tell some backwater country that they can have our surplus corn and wheat so they don't starve, but they need to let our unwanted disembark. And once they do, do what you want with them, because they are no longer citizens. We have no more obligation to protect them nor advocate for them.

I don't see how this method would not free money up. At minimum, it would help to have some states fix some of their own fiscal problems by reducing costs. How to best spend the money is a good question and I think I'd want to cover that in a different thread. But if rural communities are now free of the worst elements ( murderers, drug dealers, rapists, life long criminals are shipped to some hellhole across the world and not sucking down on social services/resources to keep them in jail/prison) and have a natural level of future deterrence ( i.e. appreciate your citizenship in a land of actual opportunity, or keep acting uncivil in a society that demands civility or GTFO)  and have more of that money spent otherwise on prisons redirected into job training, schools, drug rehab programs, etc, etc, that only helps our society.

In short, our nation needs to stop spending money on ungrateful #######s. And some will say that's not fair, it's the system and culture they were raised on and raised with and we can't just leave them behind. And my answer is triage. The best chance to save someone is get them help and resources as kids and get those values and education and guidance into them when it counts the most. So my answer is there will be entire generations of older rural people who will have to have SOME, not all, left behind so the focus can be on saving those kids. The adults and the kids can both die or we can save the kids and maybe some of the adults. The idea that we can save everyone is not realistic. This is a resource management question at it's core. There isn't a bottomless well of money here.

 I don't want to sound harsh, I'm happy to consider how people feel if it lines up with what actually logistically works. However when I have to choose between what works and how people feel, then I'll always pick what works.

Hard choices or we all die. They don't have to be my preferred choices in this thread, but they will naturally have to be some ugly tradeoffs no matter how any of us feel about it.

We don't have to like how the world works but we do have to live in it.

 
a) how this is a solution for every kid, b) how this addresses your primary issue.

Do you have research that supports this?


Compulsory youth sports is not a rock solid guarantee to fix the problems of every single kid out there. However I believe it lines up with actual human development. We were not born and designed to sit at a desk and stare at a screen day long.

Getting rural white kids in these impoverished areas onto soccer teams or football teams or baseball teams is giving them a chance at a surrogate support system outside of their very likely broken homes. You want functional adults, you have to save them as kids. It's simply much easier to sell changes in public policy to help kids than it is to help disenfranchised adults often ignored by mainstream society.

Every possible solution is going to come with some inherent problems built within it. Youth sports is cited as of today as helping some of those who do escape poverty in these areas that hurt young black urban kids and young white rural kids. JD Vance points out how the military gave him the socialization he needed to fit in and survive college and then law school.

In the modern era of human history, there are examples of mandatory/compulsory conscription for the military service ( Israel, South Korea, etc) but there is no precedent for what I'm suggesting. It's an unconventional solution to problems that clearly aren't being solved by current convention. If you are asking about previous precedent of a country/nation shipping off it's undesirables into the welcoming arms of another foreign state under the guise of immigration or some other form of humanitarian aid, I suppose there could be cases of that nature i.e Mariel Crisis

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/criminals-exodus-cuba-us-fears-castro-emptying-his-jails-florida-1386288.html

But what I'm suggesting is a straight deal, no misconception. If you want our surplus wheat and corn to feed your people, then you'll be a waystation for our undesirables. Once there, we don't care anymore. Make them your free labor, executed them, use them to build flag football teams, use them to taste test whether people love Coke more than Pepsi, doesn't matter, they lost the right to their citizenship by being criminals and rapists and murderers and have proven they didn't appreciate the opportunities in our society.

I suggest controversial solutions. But I suspect many out there won't find most of them quite so controversial. The idea of lining up convicted child molesters in front of a firing squad ( and reallocating that money, otherwise to keep them in prison, elsewhere to improve the lives of those attempting to live civilly in a desired civil society), I think that would get more popular support than some here would imagine.

 
Wow. I really respect you Alex but I couldn’t disagree more with your interpretation of his post. I found it 100% drivel, not thoughtful at all, bizarre in some parts and a primer for fascism in other parts, with a strong racism vibe running through the whole thing. Which is why I responded the way I did. 
Could you seriously stop trying to lead every single thread in post count especially when your contribution is a dozen posts of the same drivel repeating itself over and over just attacking Gekko?  The rest of us would like to read the thread between Gekko and Alex in this case.

 
Could you seriously stop trying to lead every single thread in post count especially when your contribution is a dozen posts of the same drivel repeating itself over and over just attacking Gekko?  The rest of us would like to read the thread between Gekko and Alex in this case.
My posts don’t prevent you from reading whatever you want. As to the rest of it, while I appreciate your concern, I’m quite  comfortable with my responses in this thread. Thanks for your interest. 

 
Could you seriously stop trying to lead every single thread in post count especially when your contribution is a dozen posts of the same drivel repeating itself over and over just attacking Gekko?  The rest of us would like to read the thread between Gekko and Alex in this case.
Very :goodposting:

 
My posts don’t prevent you from reading whatever you want. As to the rest of it, while I appreciate your concern, I’m quite  comfortable with my responses in this thread. Thanks for your interest. 
tim, you can reply however you choose.   my goal in here is to try my best....to engage GG in a real discussion.  even if what he writes is hard to follow, is at times more of a rant than maybe what my preferred mode of interaction is, he's making a good faith attempt to share his views.  and i'd like to continue to encourage that. 

if you feel differently, no worries.

 
Can't poor white Christians move and improve their situation like I have been told that poor inner city minorities can?   Bootstraps, choices,  personal responsibility and all that? 


This is a common response by many ( i.e. pull yourself up and make your own destiny) and I can see why many would take it.

Here's my view on it. Years ago, there was a post about the Rooney Rule in the Shark Pool when it was still fairly new. Marvin Lewis had already been hired but not so long before the post was made. I pointed out that I opposed the Rooney Rule as it was constructed ( IMHO a form of extortion) but did not oppose looking at other alternatives to create coaching opportunities or more young coach to owner/GM interactions possible.

The position I took is that no matter how anyone feels personally about black America, we should all, as a baseline of economic reality, want the black culture to find widespread success in this country. The cost of the racial divide regarding African Americans is staggering. The cost of open or silent Affirmative Action. The massive crime rate associated with black Americans, esp to each other. The prison system. The number of children born in broken homes and homes without fathers. The number of black single mothers surviving on social assistance of some kind. I pointed out the "Three Point Hit"  If you have a young black male in prison, he's not contributing to the tax base as a functioning member of our society. (1st hit) Also he's chewing up our tax dollars for the cost of incarcerating him long term ( 2nd hit) And it creates a perpetual negative loop where there are no black fathers in the homes of young black children to perpetuate the cycle of single mothers/incarcerated & wayward fathers, where many of those single mother/children situations end up on welfare/needing some type of government aid ( 3rd hit)

The reality is all of America's problems boil down to resource management issues. We cannot function as a society and have major segments of the population not contributing to the tax base and eating up tax dollars to patchwork the problems of those communities and load up our prisons to create another financial hit.

I pointed out I very much wanted black people to succeed in America but the open irony was that the black noted leaders of the time - Johnny Cochrane ( still alive then), Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had no incentive for racism to end. Their careers and their social power come from racism existing. If racism died tomorrow, they'd be out of work and mostly powerless. It would help society at large, but not their pocketbooks and media campaigns.

In the same way, we can all say impoverished rural white Christian Americans need to figure it out themselves. But if we ignore that problem, it's just massive "Three Point Hit" to destabilize our internal economy and make effective resource management, how we must solve problems, impossible.

We all, as  taxpayers, are going to pay one way or the other for the inability of poor rural white Christian America to save itself. We can ignore it, as many have, and pay in taxes, in our criminal justice system, in our education system, in our cultural divide or we can pay in taxes and look for practical logistical strategies to lift the burden off of all of America.

It's "their problem" but we all, as  taxpayers and citizens carry the weight. If we are going to carry the weight, let's at least make it worth the toil.

I do not believe we as a society should walk in and fix all of rural white poor America's problems. JD Vance doesn't even believe that, which is why I posted so many of his article and videos as context. I do believe however we can spend enough to build the systems in place where they can do better to save themselves.

They have to walk the long hard dark road ahead of them. What we can do is clear some of the obstacles off that road and deny access to the other roads that lead to nowhere for them.

When Americans see this as a resource management problem and not a partisan one, then I believe the logical answers will present themselves naturally.  I recognize your sentiment, I held it myself for many years, but this is NOT altruism. Helping rural white and black urban America is based in our own survival and self interest. What I've described is the difference between altruism and goodwill.

Poor white rural Christian America needs our goodwill. We need it too.

 
This is a common response by many ( i.e. pull yourself up and make your own destiny) and I can see why many would take it.

Here's my view on it. Years ago, there was a post about the Rooney Rule in the Shark Pool when it was still fairly new. Marvin Lewis had already been hired but not so long before the post was made. I pointed out that I opposed the Rooney Rule as it was constructed ( IMHO a form of extortion) but did not oppose looking at other alternatives to create coaching opportunities or more young coach to owner/GM interactions possible.

The position I took is that no matter how anyone feels personally about black America, we should all, as a baseline of economic reality, want the black culture to find widespread success in this country. The cost of the racial divide regarding African Americans is staggering. The cost of open or silent Affirmative Action. The massive crime rate associated with black Americans, esp to each other. The prison system. The number of children born in broken homes and homes without fathers. The number of black single mothers surviving on social assistance of some kind. I pointed out the "Three Point Hit"  If you have a young black male in prison, he's not contributing to the tax base as a functioning member of our society. (1st hit) Also he's chewing up our tax dollars for the cost of incarcerating him long term ( 2nd hit) And it creates a perpetual negative loop where there are no black fathers in the homes of young black children to perpetuate the cycle of single mothers/incarcerated & wayward fathers, where many of those single mother/children situations end up on welfare/needing some type of government aid ( 3rd hit)

The reality is all of America's problems boil down to resource management issues. We cannot function as a society and have major segments of the population not contributing to the tax base and eating up tax dollars to patchwork the problems of those communities and load up our prisons to create another financial hit.

I pointed out I very much wanted black people to succeed in America but the open irony was that the black noted leaders of the time - Johnny Cochrane ( still alive then), Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had no incentive for racism to end. Their careers and their social power come from racism existing. If racism died tomorrow, they'd be out of work and mostly powerless. It would help society at large, but not their pocketbooks and media campaigns.

In the same way, we can all say impoverished rural white Christian Americans need to figure it out themselves. But if we ignore that problem, it's just massive "Three Point Hit" to destabilize our internal economy and make effective resource management, how we must solve problems, impossible.

We all, as  taxpayers, are going to pay one way or the other for the inability of poor rural white Christian America to save itself. We can ignore it, as many have, and pay in taxes, in our criminal justice system, in our education system, in our cultural divide or we can pay in taxes and look for practical logistical strategies to lift the burden off of all of America.

It's "their problem" but we all, as  taxpayers and citizens carry the weight. If we are going to carry the weight, let's at least make it worth the toil.

I do not believe we as a society should walk in and fix all of rural white poor America's problems. JD Vance doesn't even believe that, which is why I posted so many of his article and videos as context. I do believe however we can spend enough to build the systems in place where they can do better to save themselves.

They have to walk the long hard dark road ahead of them. What we can do is clear some of the obstacles off that road and deny access to the other roads that lead to nowhere for them.

When Americans see this as a resource management problem and not a partisan one, then I believe the logical answers will present themselves naturally.  I recognize your sentiment, I held it myself for many years, but this is NOT altruism. Helping rural white and black urban America is based in our own survival and self interest. What I've described is the difference between altruism and goodwill.

Poor white rural Christian America needs our goodwill. We need it too.
Thanks for the post.  I have been thinking more about this, and I think the sad realization is that the groups of people that need the help that we are talking about probably need help in the same ways: education, substance abuse help, jobs, etc.   At the surface it seems like it would be easy to address these groups, but what has happened is that lost in the wash is "me vs them" mentality that we fight over and don't get some of the big picture things done.   IMO there is a party that more consistently addresses these problems that I listed, but also in there are policies that will effect that "me vs them" mentality like like immigration, affirmative action, and others.   

I see it all the time in posts on here from the few people on the right - that D policies are racist and they are mostly talking about a minority more likely to get  a scholarship or a job over them.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top