1.5 Million Missing Black Men

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/10/opinion/la-oe-schmit...

They used to talk about a "Peaceful Rise" and had for a very long time. They stopped.

[0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dotted_line [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_Sou... [2] - http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-11/23/c_1329116... [3] - http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/chinas-d...

I'm going to see if I can scare up some data regarding families in Scandinavia, but I don't think your point necessarily contradicts the parent post.

Try wandering into any programming thread and talking nonsense about eg static typing then complaining about people trying to shut down the conversation.

That brings up an interesting issue for me. It's a somewhat popular trope, that there is an equivalence between Amy offending people and Bob asking her to stop. It's really a rhetorical tactic -- an attempt to disrupt Bob by forcing him to philsophically justify what is obviously and intuitively true to everyone.

There may be a question of whether something is offensive or otherwise does harm to others, of course. But absolutely if someone finds something offensive, they should stand up and say so -- and not be shut down by the new political correctness (i.e., the frequent knee-jerk reaction to people who point out issues of race, gender, etc.).

The U.S. and western powers keep the conservative Middle Eastern dictatorships in place, preventing any social and political reform. That is, in fact, a major cause of resentment by people of the Middle East toward the West.

In fact, Al Qaeda's goal is to overthrow the Middle Eastern dictatorships (and inflict their own oppressive dictatorship on the people there). They targeted the U.S. because they believed that American support is the reason those governments are stable, and that they first have to drive the U.S. out of the Arabian Penninsula.

The people in most Middle Eastern countries have no choice in the matter, and geopolitics is a major reason why.

Attitude seems to be changing for the better anyway.

Here's also an article [0] on the subject that cause quite a stir back in 2011.

[0]:http://www.npr.org/2011/06/29/137499303/author-tells-black-w...

Actually, some studies have shown that hunter-gatherers have much more free time than we do. Our wants grow more quickly than our technology can satisfy them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_affluent_society

http://www.amazon.com/Is-Marriage-White-People-American/dp/B...

See this map: http://www.censusscope.org/us/map_nhblack.gif

I study economics and am facing unemployment upon graduation. I'm thinking of travelling, teaching, and/or working for an NGO or a non-profit.

I don't find QE evil. I find it to be an ineffective solution to a problem caused by the corruption and negligence of a select cohort of my elders who hold positions of power in this country. These individuals are not evil; we are all susceptible to greed and selfish interests. They are the product of whatever environment they were raised in.

I'm not crying and wringing my hands without offering a solution. I'm proposing that a New Deal-style investment in infrastructure, education, R&D, and the introduction of virtual currencies could help the economy in the long run.

What do you think?

1. That # of Jihadist does not indicate how violent and militant a culture is because it is not a cross-cultural term.

2. That cross cultural measures of murder rates do not indicate that the Middle East is home to particularly violent cultures.

3. That the Middle East is home to lots of military action, but that it is produced by foreign and local interests and can be explained by financial motives rather than cultural ones.

Therefore slavery still exists. It just got sneaky.

Well sort of sneaky - the English were calling their white slaves convicts. When people did crimes like steal bread, they could be sent all the way across the oceans on six month voyages to work. Yeah, they could eventually be free... but even if they managed that; then getting back was near impossible for most.

I am white and I think I am in the very same group as blacks and all other races, namely the group called "individuals". All we need to do is fight for individual rights and teach people respect is earned on an individual basis. Nothing can be assumed from group membership in real life; every leftist would agree with this statement, yet you want to make laws based on group membership. Nothing can be assumed based on group membership. Whoever does is the true racist. Stop peddling your divisive ideologies. Stop drawing lines around people. We drew lines around places in maps and today we have wars over those lines. Your lines around people create the same kind of conflicts on a smaller scale. Please stop it. There's only one kind of person, the individual. Let's protect individual rights and everyone will be OK, and by that I mean everyone, not just the groups your crony leftists select to be privileged to the detriment of some other group's disadvantage.

You can try and create "race", "religion", "gender" labels all you want but to me there's only one sort of person, the individual, and nothing can be said about an individual a priori.

Stop propagating divisiveness.

It's odd that in the last 40 years of policy where these things where all mandated, promoted, and force, it only made things worse - for everyone (ex: dumbing down the education system to the lowest common denominator, hiring based on race rather than merit, breaking up the black family structure, seeing racism under every rock and corner to excuse bad behavior, promoting said bad behavior as either "authentic" or as the natural result of "white racism", etc).

Maybe, just maybe, your personal bias of viewing blacks as some type of helpless children that have to be taken care of - is the problem, and not the solution.

You are right that white people being friendly is an issue. But that is the fly in the room. Black culture is the elephant.

Admittedly, though, white culture has been in decline since the late 18th century, so that's also a problem. Whites are doing all kinds of things to exacerbate the problem. Like accepting postmodern views that reject individualism and reason in favor of racism, classism, feminism, psychological determinism, and so on. Totally rejecting individual responsibility. In other words, yes, white culture is a huge problem---but not in the way people think.

What can white people do to fix this specifically?

However, it doesn't really need to be fixed. All that needs to happen is for individuals to decide that they want to live rational, virtuous lives.

If you doubt that black culture preaches the opposite, listen to (modern) black music. (Or look at black incarcertaion rates.)

I say "modern" because much of the best American music was created by blacks. But that was a while ago.

The North was not much better, where racial segregation in places like Chicago and Seattle was enforced through redlining, blockbusting, restrictive deed covenants, &c., and outright government policy.

Much of the country was ruled by an explicit white supremacist ideology for much of the 20th century, often enforced through open terroristic violence (lynching).

Imprisonment for a crime is not discrimination. You're insane.

I hope anyone reading your comment and feeling generous donates to the ACLU instead of the SPLC.

In reality, as widely documented, drug busts are often the only way to get a violent person off the streets. It's not "justice" per se, since they're sometimes punished for the lesser crime, but police typically know who the bad guys are in their neighborhood, who the likely murderer or rapist is, who's breaking and entering, but it's not all that easy to apprehend someone and get a conviction. And if they don't get a conviction, there's the risk of double jeopardy -- can't be prosecuted for the same thing twice. So sometimes it's more expedient to get them off the streets on a lesser charge such as possession.

If you explore the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (bjs.gov) you will discover some startling and depressing facts. About half of the roughly 16,000 gun homicides per year are committed by black males 16-39, and most of their victims are also black. What takes so many black males out of society can be explained by this type of statistic -- gang bangers fighting it out in the ghettos. (Hispanics are also disproportionately represented, but not as highly as blacks.) By contrast, the majority of white deaths from guns are suicides.

Indeed if it weren't for this tragically high violence among Blacks, guns would hardly be considered a political hot potato issue in the U.S. because per capita violence would be about on par with Canada and Western Europe.

Then of course there are many other crimes of violence and property -- robberies, muggings, rapes, B&E, shoplifting, etc., that snare black youth in the legal system for years.

The U.S. has a socio-economic problem with the African-American population that has not alleviated, 50 years after the Civil Rights Act that emancipated Black people, gave them the power of the vote, moved the country toward greater protection of minority rights, and opened the legislative door to quotas and affirmative action to try to uplift the black population economically.

Obviously, there is still racism in modern day U.S. society, but it is almost more notable by its infrequence, e.g. the headlines that happen every time a white cop shoots a black suspect, a tiny fraction of overall shootings yet given disproportionate attention by society because of residual outrage at the casual profiling and brutality from an earlier era.

What can be done? In my opinion, economic development would help to alleviate these problems more than almost any other solution that's been tried. I would focus on ghetto areas, both black and Hispanic, and designate them as "special economic zones" that would have greatly reduced taxation and regulation, similar to what's been successfully done in China and other developing areas. For example, an entrepreneur would be able to establish a factory in an SEZ with minimal EPA scrutiny and minimal paperwork, something that normally would take months or years, with all sorts of NIMBY lawsuits and red tape.

Get people working real jobs, get them on a path to middle class prosperity, and their children will see a way out of the hopelessness and despair that characterize the ghettos.

I would ague that marriage is not a need. It's an artificial construct that we impose on ourselves in a time when we don't need to do it. Women don't need you to survive, they can be their own providers now.

And why do you need to be betrothed to one woman for all eternity? Nature would love for you to spread your seed amongst many more women - larger bio-diversity.

But nobody is stopping you if traditional marriage is what you want to do, of course, more power to you.

It takes two to tango.

I wouldn't say it's a fetish for Asian girls(physical traits and sexuality). What attracts many white males is the fact many Asian women are usually more mature, intelligent and feminine than others.

And from personal experience, Asian women are just as into white men as white men are into Asian women.

I'm a white guy, and the only women who have ever been super into me immediately after meeting me in a club have been Asian. This has happened multiple times in clubs in SF, LA, Hong Kong, and Shanghai.

"Asian Americans of both genders who are U.S.-raised are much more likely to be married to Whites than their non-U.S.-raised counterparts."

I found a summary of the study: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/20...

"Two wrinkles on this: We found no evidence of the stereotype of a white male preference for East Asian women. However, we also found that East Asian women did not discriminate against white men (only against black and Hispanic men). As a result, the white man-Asian woman pairing was the most common form of interracial dating—but because of the women's neutrality, not the men's pronounced preference."

I once dated a very attractive Asian woman. What was surprising to me was that lots of Asian guys who would have normally passed me on the street without comment were all of a sudden making snide remarks. It seemed to me that these guys felt like I was stealing one of 'their girls' or something. It's just an anecdote, but it was surprising to me. It probably happens to anyone in a mixed race relationship, in the same way that unattractive guys with a hot girlfriend get comments about 'she can do better than you'.

http://www.nber.org/digest/may11/w16664.html

>Rucker estimates that each additional year of exposure to desegregated schools increased black men’s annual earnings by roughly 5 percent, increased their wages by 2.9 percent, and led to an annual work effort that was 39 hours higher. At the same time, for these black male adults the probability of poverty decreased by between 1.6 and 1.9 percentage points. Overall, five years spent in desegregated schools yielded an estimated 25 percent increase in annual earnings and increased annual work effort of 195 hours. Desegregation also resulted in significant long-run improvements in blacks' adult health, as measured by self-assessed general health status; the effect of a five-year exposure to school desegregation is equivalent to being seven years younger.

Some of the first American gangs were Irish (Forty Thieves, Dead Rabbits) and integration of the Irish in American society certainly didn't cause an increase in Irish street gangs.

The stats back up that people prefer to date within their own race when they can. Ultimately I am just arguing that people's choice is important to the whole topic, if black women would prefer to date black men, pointing out that they could date white or asian men won't help the situation.

I think that claim is sufficiently substantiated that it ought not be called an "assumption."

This assumption is very much true in modern American society, though somewhat less so than previously.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2008.01135.x

>The theory of African American alienation is upheld, as African Americans are generally less willing to interracially date than other races and are especially less willing to date European Americans.

One anecdote

> My girlfriend

Another anecdote

> During high school a huge percentage

Now we're talking percentages, which is better. But you'd still need something better than your recollections (and probably something more specific than "huge").

Obviously, there are plenty of mixed-race relationships, and plenty of them are happy. But there is research that seems to indicate that there is something to what the parent comment was suggesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attraction#Simila...

Same article claims that in the US in 2010 the rate was 8.4%.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage#Canada

Now you switch to saying that the problem was black women saying "I can't get a date that matches my extremely specific qualifications". So finding a life partner is now just a matter of getting a date, and preferring someone of your own race is now an 'extremely specific qualification'...and you think I've lost the thread?

And yes, if that was my son's problem, I'd tell him to either lift and be awesome or accept being forever alone.

The hypothetical problem I presented was 'Dad, quite a lot of people express hostility towards me on the basis that I'm black. Help me out.' as opposed to 'I can't get a date that matches my extremely specific qualifications.' While the latter problem could be an instance of the former, they're far from being identical. You'll forgive me if I don't go the effort of providing Venn diagrams to support this claim.

As for requiring some specific experience to be a good parent, I find the idea a bit ridiculous.

That's not what I'm suggesting, and is wholly an invention on your part. What I said was that you don't seem to have through through the sort of problems that your offspring would be likely to encounter; my thesis is that this lack of apparent concern would be a major disincentive to marriage for a lot of black women insofar as they're looking beyond their short-term personal desire and thinking about things like family formation...as discussed in the original article.

I’m perfectly aware of what this is supposed to do on the surface, but I am sharing with you that there is a discrepancy between what you claim to be doing and how at least one person perceives what you are actually doing.

You may think that you’re preparing the reader for an unpleasant truth, but note that if what you were about to say was inarguably true, you could just say it and present the evidence. You yourself admit that it’s just a perspective, another way to say that it’s an opinion.

So by prefacing your perspective with a disclaimer that you know in advance that you are going to present an unpleasant perspective, what you’re saying is that you are going to be unpleasant, you know you are going to be unpleasant, and you know that this isn’t an uncomfortable but incontrovertible truth like the Bible not being literally true.

So what it comes down to is this: Instead of just giving an unpleasant perspective, you have given an unpleasant perspective AND told everyone that you know it’s unpleasant, know that it isn’t and incontrovertible truth, and are telling everyone any ways.

This drags yourself into the discussion. Instead of just thinking about your perspective, we are also asked to think about the fact that the perspective is unpleasant, why it is unpleasant, why you choose to share an unpleasant perspective, why you announce it to us, and so forth.

People might, for example, think that you say such things purely because you enjoy being controversial. Is that true? I don’t know! But when you tell me that you are bing controversial on top of actually being controversial, it’s certainly a reasonable thing to wonder.

Which is why I go back to what I suggested to you: If your perspective is worth sharing, just share it. Leave out the preparation. Don’t derail your point by inviting speculation as to why you’re sharing an unpleasant perspective if you know in advance its unpleasant.

I hope you understand that I’m trying to help you share your ideas--whether I agree with them or not--in the best possible and most constructive manner.

Crime is not perfectly fungible. There just isn't another victimless crime available with this kind of popularity and profitability.

Firstly, it doesn't break the statistics down by race. Blacks are arrested disproportionately for drug crimes [1][2], you can't assume because the general prison population is 20% that the same is true of a subpopulation.

The FBI shows that White commit disproportionately more violent crimes[3] - though it is important to note that the FBI stats are arrests, and not prison. Blacks get harsher prison sentences for all categories, and thus would make up a higher percentage of prison populations than if sentences were even across races.

To show you why its other peoples problem look at your own sentence here:

>black men are killing each other

Over what? The answer here is the drug war creating hyper competitive and very well paying black markets, especially prevalent in poor communities where drug abuse is the most common (and thus drug dealing and territory are more lucrative).

No one is absolving the black community of responsibility, it would be crazy to do so. But to place ALL of the blame on a community with the worst schools, the least nuclear families, the highest rates of drug use, and the least financial stability would be well passed insensitive.

The problem is the subjugation of the lower class, blacks just happen to be disproportionately in the class and have been for generations. Looking at these statistics by race is a red herring in the first place. What we need is to be seeing crime statistic based on socioeconomic status. It will then be obvious what parts of society are breeding crime.

[1]http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2... [2]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/29/opinion/high-time-the-inju... [3]http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/c...

There are plenty of obvious things that need fixing, even if you don't believe at all in affirmative action-like programs:

1. Clear conflicts of interest in the criminal justice system, like regular prosecutors being responsible for bringing charges against police, with whom they have close professional and often personal relationships.

2. The unjustifiable war on drugs, which disproportionately affects black communities.

3. Bad behavior by police officers, which likewise disproportionately affects black communities. This is pretty hard to measure because the offenders are the same people who are counting the stats. But we frequently get to see it in shocking display, like when a police officer is caught on video shooting a man who is running away and then planting evidence on him.

Just an example, but up until maybe a generation ago, it was nigh-impossible to get a mortgage on your house if you were black or decided to live in a neighborhood that was less than 95% white. Even when going through federal aid programs.

Meaning people end up having to go through what are basically loan sharks to get housing for their family, and if anything at all happened, the house is lost instantly. Makes it pretty hard for the grandparents to retire in their tiny house when nobody actually owns the property.

I think the crime level stats are usually confounding with poverty rates. Pretty sure the color of one's skin doesn't make it more likely to kill someone, but there's an argument for poor environments (for example, the worst apartment possible because literally no one else will rent to you, in an area with poor social services) helping spawn crime.