|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 8:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mises wrote: |
From the link:
| Quote: |
| Households with children with the highest welfare use rates are those headed by immigrants from the Dominican Republic (82 percent), Mexico and Guatemala (75 percent), and Ecuador (70 percent). Those with the lowest use rates are from the United Kingdom (7 percent), India (19 percent), Canada (23 percent), and Korea (25 percent). |
A quarter of Canadians and 82% of Dominicans? |
It begs the question: what constitutes a welfare program?
For instance refugees can receive government assistance when they arrive here. Is that considered welfare? That assistance is gone after a short period of time, but hey, they still got welfare. Maybe? Who knows? What about school lunch programs? Does that count?
I'm skeptical of those numbers. 82% of Dominicans? Well now I understand how they can all afford to live in Manhattan now.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It begs the question: what constitutes a welfare program? |
From the report:
| Quote: |
| The eight major welfare programs examined in this report are SSI (Supplemental Security Income for low income elderly and disabled), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), WIC (Women, Infants, and Children food program), free/reduced school lunch, food stamps (now called Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), Medicaid (health insurance for those with low incomes), public housing, and rent subsidies.4 These programs constitute the core of the nation�s welfare system. |
I don't know if the refugee program is covered in the above.
| Quote: |
| Well now I understand how they can all afford to live in Manhattan now. |
Right? How do poor people manage to live there? Even middle class people? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| An incensed federal judge sentenced a racist Brooklyn woman to indefinite jury duty on Tuesday after she trashed the NYPD and minorities. |
What the hell? They have that authority? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| A frequent argument (Heather MacDonald) is that the welfare system destroyed the family. |
The welfare state has done what slavery and racism couldn't - it has destroyed the black family
- Walter Williams
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
� C. S. Lewis |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Menino80
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Location: Hodor?
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why make an argument based on data and analysis when you can just quote a bunch of people from 70 years ago and the WSJ agitprop page?
rabble! Parasites! Tyranny! Only tax land, dirigibles, and ivory machine tools originating from south of the tropic of capricorn! lie back and think of england! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
[list]The welfare state has done what slavery and racism couldn't - it has destroyed the black family |
I referenced that argument but I don't believe it.
http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2011/04/are-african-women-oppressed.html
| Quote: |
In sub-Saharan Africa, the labor of women was usually the work of daily subsistence. [�] Hunting and warfare, usually the activities of men, could in contrast produce either a big windfall or nothing at all in terms of male production. [�] Therefore, in a very simplistic way, it can be argued that female labor was the necessary labor�the labor from which surplus could be derived�whereas male labor could produce the luxury items, the status items. (Saidi, 2010, p. 15)
This argument ignores, however, the greater power of African women over the fruits of their labor. Often, this power was totally in the hands of women, typically older matriarchs:
The labor of young women, and young men, for that matter, in many East-Central African societies, particularly among the Sabi-speaking group of peoples, was historically controlled by the older female matrilineal kin of the young women, not by men at all. (Saidi, 2010, p. 16)
Indeed, one could argue that African men tended to occupy a peripheral role within the family:
Poewe found in her fieldwork that the marriage institution was highly flexible and discouraged strong, intense, or lasting solidarity between husband and wife. The male in these matrilineal societies did not produce for his progeny or for himself, but usually for a matriclan with whom he might or might not reside. His role, as husband, was to sexually satisfy and impregnate his wife and to take care of her during her pregnancies, but under no circumstances should a man be the object of �exclusive emotional investment or focus of attention. Instead, women are socialized to invest their emotions and material wealth in their respective matrilineages.� (Saidi, 2010, p. 16). |
Black women do all the work and tend to the children while the men attempt Hail Mary acquisitions of luxury items.
The Christian/Islamic idea of mating and family is foreign to the societies in which Africans evolved. The author above cites the slave trade as another shock that altered their self-formed societies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Menino80 wrote: |
| Why make an argument based on data and analysis |
The good news: Williams gives lots of data and analysis in 'The State Against Blacks'. If you want something more recent, try either 'Economic Facts & Fallacies' by Thomas Sowell (specifically the chapter 'Race Facts & Fallacies') or 'Black Rednecks & White Liberals' by the same author.
The bad news: reading these, or any, books will require that you tear yourself away from The Simpsons and The Daily Show for longer than 5 minutes. A tall order. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sergio quoting C.S.Lewis?!? Now I've seen everything.
| Menino80 wrote: |
| Only tax land, dirigibles, and ivory machine tools originating from south of the tropic of capricorn! lie back and think of england! |
The dirigibles shout out was cute. But your snark reveals something about liberals I just don't understand.
Isn't it an article of faith that things get progressively better with time? Experiments are to be made (so far so good) because the results are bound to favor progress (this is where you lose me). Conservatives suggest that change can peel back hidden virtues, and experiments can rock a sound stability predicated upon unknown and unrecognized strengths (Burke, Oakshot).
Chinese students commonly hold a very simplistic iteration of this philosophy. Anytime I would question their system, they would claim time would solve all social problems, as progress was inevitably made. They may or may not tie this directly in with Maoism or Chinese Communist doctrine. Their naivete simply dismissed their modern kleptocracy as something that would eventually be swept aside, like foot-binding or Confucianism.
All of the liberals on this board hold this assumption to one degree or another. Past practices are bad because they coincided with some past evil, particularly Jim Crow or slavery. Or religion is to be suspected because it is old and is occasionally another path for corruption (but what isn't?). Aristotle advocated slavery (he didn't really, he just gave it lip-service for political reasons) therefore we can dismiss the rest of his political philosophy.
Nevertheless, it seems less that everything gets progressively better with time than liberals hold the gains made most dear and ignore or brush aside what was lost. I think the clearest example of this are attitudes towards the New Deal, where FDR made dozens of experiments, only a few of which hit the mark, and many of which constitute failures from which economists have learned a great deal (as I said, I cannot bring myself to assault experimentation).
Don't get me wrong, I am not singling out progressives. It seems to me some conservatives have an equally strong penchant for glorifying the past or smoothing over fair criticism of practices abandoned. And they can answer that charge in turn.
But I'm asking you this because you're relatively new to the forum, but are likely to stay and become a part of it, and I'd like to know how you'd address this.
Last edited by Kuros on Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Menino80
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Location: Hodor?
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ideas created when society had less scope and diversity tend to have less scope and diversity. Economic theory from the 18th and 19th century rests on dozens of assumptions that do not hold up to the slightest scrutiny. No one should be a Georgist just as no one should be a Smithian, Bastiatist, Marxist or a Listian.
They are all predicated on counterfactuals in the past. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Menino80 wrote: |
Ideas created when society had less scope and diversity tend to have less scope and diversity. Economic theory from the 18th and 19th century rests on dozens of assumptions that do not hold up to the slightest scrutiny. No one should be a Georgist just as no one should be a Smithian, Bastiatist, Marxist or a Listian.
They are all predicated on counterfactuals in the past. |
Does this premise extend to all ideas, or just economics? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Well now I understand how they can all afford to live in Manhattan now. |
Right? How do poor people manage to live there? Even middle class people? |
They live in Washington Heights, e.g. W186th St., far, far from midtown (42nd St.), a distance of a good seven miles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Menino80
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Location: Hodor?
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Menino80 wrote: |
Ideas created when society had less scope and diversity tend to have less scope and diversity. Economic theory from the 18th and 19th century rests on dozens of assumptions that do not hold up to the slightest scrutiny. No one should be a Georgist just as no one should be a Smithian, Bastiatist, Marxist or a Listian.
They are all predicated on counterfactuals in the past. |
Does this premise extend to all ideas, or just economics? |
,
Any science that begins with assumptions about "human nature" or "rational behavior" should be seen as incomplete.
This could apply to international relations, organizational theory, consumer behavior, etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Menino80 wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Menino80 wrote: |
Ideas created when society had less scope and diversity tend to have less scope and diversity. Economic theory from the 18th and 19th century rests on dozens of assumptions that do not hold up to the slightest scrutiny. No one should be a Georgist just as no one should be a Smithian, Bastiatist, Marxist or a Listian.
They are all predicated on counterfactuals in the past. |
Does this premise extend to all ideas, or just economics? |
,
Any science that begins with assumptions about "human nature" or "rational behavior" should be seen as incomplete.
This could apply to international relations, organizational theory, consumer behavior, etc. |
I definitely agree with you about the hard sciences and even economics, although your analysis is a bit sweeping. For example, Marx's grand theory is a catastrophe, but he made some good observations. Likewise, George's theory of rents hasn't been totally destroyed, but I would say that relying entirely on land taxes is folly. Nevertheless, it is a solid maxim of property theory that some property tax encourages the alienation of land and efficient land use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fat_Elvis
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: In the ghetto
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| hope the human race would be a little smarter |
It's an evolutionary inheritance. |
Really? Can you prove that?
| mises wrote: |
| We organize ourselves in groups for ease of cooperation and safety (etc). |
Possibly, or maybe this theory, like much evolutionary psychology, is an unfalsifiable 'Just-So' story justifying existing social ills with some lame unprovable recourse to evolution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Really? Can you prove that? |
You're questioning the validity of in-group cooperation as an evolutionary trait? It is widely accepted.
| Quote: |
| Possibly, or maybe this theory, like much evolutionary psychology, is an unfalsifiable 'Just-So' story justifying existing social ills with some lame unprovable recourse to evolution. |
Lets use the falsifiable cry of racism or discrimination or class instead.
...
Even plants demonstrate preferences:
http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/3/4/435.full.pdf
| Quote: |
| Kin recognition is important in animal social systems. However, though plants often compete with kin, there has been as yet no direct evidence that plants recognize kin in competitive interactions. Here we show in the annual plant Cakile edentula, allocation to roots increased when groups of strangers shared a common pot, but not when groups of siblings shared a pot. Our results demonstrate that plants can discriminate kin in competitive interactions and indicate that the root interactions may provide the cue for kin recognition. Because greater root allocation is argued to increase below-ground competitive ability, the results are consistent with kin selection. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
