'It Is Still The Trump Cult': Why The GOP Isn't A Party But A 'Hot Mess'

Okay, but take this to it's natural conclusion. We acknowledge there is inequality of outcome, it's very clear and repeatable across race. Therefore, if opportunity is truly equal as you say, there must be a lack of productivity attributable to race. Would you say some races of people are less productive than others because of their race? Due to their race, they're less likely to seize opportunity?

See, it's not a pretty conclusion. It's either that, or it's a 3rd factor related to both race and opportunity driving the correlation of outcomes (e.g. inequality of opportunity)

 

This may be hard for you to see, but children of the wealthy may be handicapped in their own way:

• They seem to expect more, and become less independent
  
• Less is generally expected of them, and they become less responsible
  
• They seem more prone to distraction, and less likely to deliver value

My opinion is that a wealthy family does best by its children if it does not shower them with privilege.

Children of all circumstances, well-guided, but left to their carefully cultivated good judgment will, given exactly the same opportunities, have the same prospects for outcome. The parents of advantage must decide if they want to make their kids more dependent by giving them a privileged start. We cannot and should not do that for them.

Absolute equality of opportunity? . . . Heck, absolute anything is an unreachable myth. Unless it escaped you, we're talking generalities here.

 

There is no conclusion to be drawn from my position, but there is from yours.

You do not address the productivity / lack of productivity attributable to height, BMI, eye color, thickness of eyelashes, head size, shoe size, or quantity of nosehair.

Inequality is no less clear across those spectra than the racial spectrum, yet you advocate for very broad, easily distinguishable segments of the electorate for political power, and not for true justice.

True justice is that the opportunity is equal, and the outcome is the individual's responsibility.

 

That's because we don't see repeatable and widespread disparities of outcome across those qualities like you do with race. What explains the disparities in outcome for race in your mind?

 

Bullcrap again. The only reason you don't see repeatable and widespread disparities of outcome across those qualities is because you don't look for them. And why might that be . . . Hmm? Because it isn't politically expedient!

There is indeed a racial divide in income, but it is not so wide as you'd have others believe, and it is due in large part to the dependency mindset the Democrat Party has sold so many on. For the first time in a very long time, significant reductions in that gap were being made during the Trump presidency when the economy was screaming along, but that's ancient, unpopular history now.

 

C'mon don't be obtuse.

This is what it looks like you're saying:

1. There's a racial disparity in income

2. Opportunity is equal

3. Some other factor that is either race or closely related to race is causing disparity in income

Why would this disparity exist if opportunity is truly equal? It makes no sense.

 

Explaining the cause of the disparity is easy . . .

Two hungry deer are standing within a mile of an apple tree and within 100 yards of a house.

Deer A knows nothing of the person in the house who feeds apples to deer, so it walks to the tree and feeds on the apples.

Deer B has been getting apples at the house for months, walks to the house and waits, and waits and waits . . . for one apple.

Stop feeding the deer . . .

 

By the way @GeneWright , don't you think just as many fox and skunk would visit the house as deer if the person living there fed them too? Trouble is, you're focused only on the deer, and they're the ones who have become dependents.

You own it . . . fix it!

 

Why do outcomes make it seem like deer A is usually white? Because it sounds like you're implying minorites are inherently lazy or dependent if you choose a lens that's entirely personal.

 

My first inclination was to dismiss your silly commentary as I usually do, but I am giving the benefit of the doubt that....and realizing you are a Practitioner of the Ideology of Division, which is the reason I don't reply to you or Nation (BTW, what happened to his FDQ Exit?).....that you can not possibly be this ignorant and therefore you are espousing the ATTICA Theorem for the purpose of receiving an anti-Attica response that justifies your illogical logic to yourself.

I would have given a hell of a lot more credence to your misguided understanding of collective economics, if you had made the only logical explanation of the theory Mr. Toughcoins was relating, in a simplified manner: the transfer of multi-general wealth.

The problem for deer B? The apple supplier dies.

 

That's actually exactly one of the points I was hoping someone would suggest. That's a major source of inequality of opportunity.

You have stated that transfer of intergenerational wealth is responsible for the racial disparity. That acknowledges a intergenerational wealth as a factor of inequality in opportunity. Now, why do you think intergenerational wealth is more concentrated in white people than minorities?

The reason is of course old archaic laws: slavery, Jim Crow laws, redlining, segregation, precivil rights era racism, and the like. Almost entirely, those law don't exist anymore, but the effects are still present and it's ignorant not to acknowledge it.

 

No, I didn't, dumazz. You changed what I stated, to fit your delusional ATTICA Racist Ideology of Division ignorance.

I stated: THE TRANSFER OF MULTI-GENERATIONAL WEALTH.

No, you are not stupid. You are a manipulative ideology of Division Practitioner.

Transfer of multi-generational wealth is not what you think it is. So, proceed to deer B family.

 

What "theory" were you referring to here? I had assumed it was a theory to explain the racial disparity we see in so many areas. My apologies if I was mistaken.

 

Perhaps...but people still have to compete to grasp the "equity" they so richly deserve. Equity only happens "naturally" through competition. We should be focused in the "Opportunity" part and less on Government Mandated "equity" part. Folks are free to bite off as much "equity" as they care to chew.

Task #1: Disband the Teachers Union like Reagan did to the Air Traffic Controllers.
Task #2: Disband all Public Employee Unions as un-Constitutional.

 

Has anyone else noticed that folks on the Left only talk about "solutions" (their solutions) and never about requirements. How can anyone choose the "correct" solution without first doing a Requirements Analysis?

That's the problem with Politics...everyone has done their own "requirements analysis" and, because they don't have the same input, they come up with different conclusions. What's needed is a "group" requirements analysis...so we can rise above Political Barriers.

 

What about the police union?

 

This reply by you supports my interpretation of your selective interpretation of the posts of other members, and your deliberate knowledge gap, to wit:

You answered previously, after I had typed in caps: " THE TRANSFER OF MULITI-GENERATIONAL WEALTH". I did so, to explore what I perceive is your intent of bias toward the racist explanation as the cause of collective economics.

The problem: I did not originally type " THE TRANSFER OF MULTI-GENERATIONAL WEALTH".

What I did type was: ".....the transfer of multi-general wealth...". GENERAL.

Yet you want me to explain a theory that you hope will support your Ideology of Division that espouses Racism as the cause, and do not understand collective economics? Please......

 

Please allow me to interject...

Simply by the happenstance of birth, people will never begin their journey from an equal starting point. You can just take that as a given. People choose differently in life. Choice is Freedom and Freedom is Choice. this is why Supply-side economics prevails over Demand-side economic. We've seen both over the past 24 months...which do you prefer? (...but I digress)

After the happenstance of birth, people progress in different directions and at different rates. This is nearly 100% the result of environment. The only way I can see to achieve the dream of equal opportunity is by encouraging nurturing and productive environments for both children and adults.

Regardless of which flavor of religion on which you base your life (everyone has a religion whether they know it or not)...they all share one common characteristic...all religions are roadmaps to building a nurturing and productive environment. Now you may denigrate all the ancient and traditional trappings of many organized religions...but you can't overstate the benefits to diversity, equality, charity, and opportunity.

Most on the Left believe they can control Nature. They believe the only way to achieve equality is through government regulation. Government regulations can only be effectively administered by the threat of negative consequences for noncompliance (aka. Force). As that power becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, you see what is playing out in Ukraine. Socialism created Putin...not the other way around.

As Dr. Milton Friedman reminds us..."The bad moral value of Force triumphs over Good Intentions"...

 

All Public employee unions are un-Constitutional because the people making the agreements aren't they people who incur the financial obligation. The Police Union, just like the Teachers Union, protects incompetency and destroy Public confidence in the institutions they're tasked to protect and improve. The criminals running these unions are eating Public institutions from the inside out.

If you wanna take a BIG chuck out of inequality, start by disbanding Municipal Unions and supporting competition in education through school choice. Every "Democrat of Means" I know living in DC sends their kids to private schools.

 

I assumed you mistyped and gave you the benefit of the doubt because what does that even mean in this context?