Institutional Racism in Employment and Unemployment, Again

Aaron Glatnz has a good but too brief article at NewAmericaMedia on the continuing racial impact of the Bush recession/depression on the US, with its still 9.7 percent unemployment rate:

The unemployment rate for whites held steady at 8.8 percent compared to February and went down for Asians from 8.4 percent to 7.5 percent. But it rose to 16.5 percent for blacks from 15.8 percent. Hispanics showed a slight increase as well from 12.4 percent to 12.6 percent.

White and Asian Americans, according to these statistics, are not hurting as much as groups of workers as black and Latino Americans. One major reason for the differential is that governments are now cutting public services on a huge scale, as a quote from Seth Wessler, a researcher at the Applied Research Center, indicates:

“If the bus line you depend on is cut, it’s impossible to look for a job or even hold onto the one you have . . . and we know that across the country – from New York to Los Angeles – bus service is being cut and fares are increasing.”

Glatnz also quotes Peter Edelman, director of the Center on Poverty, Inequality, and Public Policy at the Georgetown University, about where job growth will come as the economy presumably recovers:

“The jobs that we project over the next decade that are reasonably well paying involve a degree of skills and a degree of preparation…and people of color have disparate educational attainment,” and will be less able to land that work without an associates degree or certificate from a local community college.

Census jobs may help some communities, but only temporarily and with modest paying jobs. They will be gone soon. And inequality in education looms again as a large factor in maintaining the systemic racism still foundational in this society.

There are many angles to this sorry story, and one recent one is how poorer American students are increasingly dropping out of college or seeking out the weak diploma mill colleges as a solutions to soaring costs. One recent investigative report by Peter Byrne discusses this issue in connection with an assessment of the situation of the University of California’s wealthy regents who are business investors, such as the chair of the regents who

has an abiding interest in education—a financial interest: while serving as chairman of the Regents, and head of the investment committee, he took control of a very profitable, national network of “diploma mills,” worth about $3 billion. These “career education” schools rely on federally subsidized student loans to generate profits that are then privately invested. Some of Blum’s schools have been investigated by government agencies (and sued by individuals) for, allegedly, delivering substandard educations, and, allegedly, concentrating on generating government-guaranteed student loan revenue at the expense of providing students with quality educations.

This article discusses the “creeping privatization of the University of California system,” a reality that means

as the UC system becomes increasingly expensive (and racially exclusive), lower income students are turning toward diploma mills.

The same is likely true for other major universities across the country. This is a structural and national problem, not just a local one, as the country becomes ever more unequal along racial and class lines.


  1. marandaNJ

    My comment could be appropriate here. The administration can decide. The case is that in my city, the library system has fallen 18 million dollars short. Well, Many Afican Americans who don’t own computers use the library computers across the city. They also bring their children to the library to borrow books and do research papers etc. I know this for a fact because my job takes me to several local libraries.
    The upshot is that by mid-June, out of 8 libraries in this large city, only 4 will remain open! So, let’s do the math folks. How can people who don’t own a car drive to these 4 locations, use the computers, borrow reading material? We’re talking a major disadvantage to poorer Americans. Once you shut down the libraries, it’s like any chance of advancement for millions of people goes out the window.
    I know this situation will probably be a causal factor in many high school and college kids dropping out. It’s just too much of a challenge to maintain studying, especially if you need to hold down a job too.
    The only positive aspect is that the libraries are not shutting down on the basis of affluent citizen location. There will basically be a library for the four corners of the city. Two of these “corners” are in affluent locations, and two are not.
    I’ve always advocated that poor African Americans keep believing that an education can help close the gap. But, how much pressure can any human being take? If you don’t have access to reading material, how can you persue an education? It’s very depressing.

  2. Joe

    Maranda, you are right. How can any society long survive, much less move in a truly democratic, people-powered direction, without libraries and other essential public services for those who are not rich?

  3. marandaNJ

    Everybody knows America is teetering on the edge Joe. Whether anybody actually comes out and says it, Everybody Knows.
    I heard on National Public Radio that we are Now beyond the point of No Return in our national deficit. And that China has lifted a cap on how much monies we can borrow from them. Soon, let’s face it, we will be a subsidiary of China. What else can logically happen?
    How did this happen? Wall Street, Big Business, Golden Parachutes. Pure capitalism will not work in a society as large as ours unless there are Some Restrictions and Lines of Demarcation that all businesses must follow. Reagan believed in a trickle-down theory. Well, recently, not a darn thing has been trickling. The people who had access Took the Money and Ran. And left half of America devoid of their life long savings, essential facilities shut down, borrowing from other countries on a day-to-day basis just to keep up the illusion we’re still in control.
    The library closings is a sign of where this society is heading. An ill-read, uninformed, instant-gratification nation that values gossip and mob rule over reason and historical facts. Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451 Was science fiction. Not any more.

  4. DJohnson

    Let me see if I’ve got this straight, marandaNJ. The country is “teetering on the edge” because our of the deficit. Your solution seems to be… more spending! Libraries, buses, and other “essential facilities.” You know you can’t have it both ways, right? The reason our debt is so high is because our governments have been transferring money from the productive to the non-productive at a furious rate for about fifty years now. You can’t do that forever; eventually the goose dies.

    I fully agree with you that we’re on an edge, though. Americans who are less than, say 40, are staring at a lifetime of working to pay off debts incurred by others on the behalf of others. Why would they agree to that? Why would they spend their lives working to provide lavish retirement benefits and health care to people who are largely wealthier than they are? They won’t. They will vote with their feet wherever possible, and they’ll literally vote, too.

    That’s the best scenario, that the productive class will refuse the bit and begin rebuilding our economic base. The worst scenario is that they accept it and America joins the demographic, economic, and cultural death spiral with the rest of the West.

    It won’t be public libraries that ensure our survival. It won’t be buses. And it certainly won’t be heaping yet another unrealistic social program on top.

  5. marandaNJ

    Darren, Wake up and smell the coffee! And don’t assume I mean that Any and All “Social” programs should be approved. That’s a whole heapa assumptions there.
    Let’s back up and be Real..I mean Really Real, OK? Yes, the country is teetering on the edge because as I mentioned, an entire program on NPR with several Unbiased economists said we are indeed past the point of no return. Got that? We now must borrow from China to keep afloat.
    The fact is we are not in this sitch because of social programs. We are here because a Cartel of Huge Businesses such as Exxon, Shell, Mobile plus a number of multi-billionaires Decide how this wealth should be divied up. Are you So Naive not to know this? Do you really think your little vote at the old local VFW hall next to Joe’s Bar and Grill counts?
    Don’t you know the Rockefellers sent Germany millions to build weapons As Well as American factories [Read the book The Arms of Krup] during both world wars to hedge their bets. They didn’t give two damns about “patriotism” and all that rot..they just wanted to make money no matter which side wins.
    War is a money-maker Darren. Many big industries thrive during wars. You don’t, I don’t..we just plug along like buffoons paying the bill. But if the Huge Corps want a war, they’ll figure out a way to have one. We’re in Iraq and now Afghanistan because we need an edge in the heart of OPEC country..of which we are not members as you must know. 9/11 was just the fuse that lit the dynamite. Now we’re entrenched and we ain’t leavin’.
    With all our technology, you really think we can’t find about 600 rogue terrorists in the whole of Iraq? C’mon, wake up! We wanted to be there Cause Big Business Wanted It!
    And just for the record, no I don’t believe in every single social program that comes down the pike. Some of them are just silly. But when it comes to LIBRARIES, that defines a society Darren. A society who doesn’t read is doomed. A society without access to free reading material is capable of sliding back to the Middle Ages [ exaggeration..but you get the point].
    The exchange of information Is What Makes a Society Technologically advanced. So yeah, I got a soft spot in my heart for libraries.

  6. DJohnson

    Who is Darren? Not me.

    I like a good paranoid fantasy as much as the next guy, and I certainly won’t defend large corporations, whose cravenness is matched only by that of the political class. But there’s one and only one cause of the debt the government faces: runaway spending on social programs. Sure, we spend a lot on “defense,” too, but the military contractors are pikers compared to the entitlements crowd. And it’s much, much worse than it looks, because the real cost of, say, Medicare is the enormous future liability, which doesn’t show up in any budget numbers.

    I actually think libraries are a great example. It’s possible that in 1800 you could argue that public libraries were a good idea. Maybe. Books were expensive, transportation was expensive, communication was expensive. Those things are cheap now, and I see no reason why public libraries are necessary.

    The main post was about how the world was ending and minorities are hardest hit. That’s actually true. As it turns out, blacks and hispanics are less likely to be part of the high-achieving class, which means they’re disproportionately affected when incentives for investment are reduced. When the productive class is discouraged from producing, the ones who are hurt first and worst are the common workers who depend on investors to make jobs for them. As usual, the friendly fire in class warfare is more significant than the enemy.

  7. marandaNJ

    Unbelievable. So post-1800 there was no use for libraries? I can only assume you don’t read much yourself, Sir. And by the way, books are extremely expensive. If you have a child in elementary school, do you mean to tell me you are supposed to Buy Them Every Book they read? Many children are avid readers and will go through 3 “chapter books” a week. A children’s paperback book at Barnes and Noble now costs $5.99. You dream Mr. Johnson.
    And on the subject of Medicare, I will benefit from Medicare in the not-to-distant future myself. And thank God. As a self-employed person, my premiums are now $659 a month. And I am a professional, college educated person.
    And if you are under the illusion that Only the Unskilled Labor is being hurt by this recession..again you need a coffee break and some think time. Many of my middle class professional friends had a huge chunk of their life savings evaporate in the stock market. Why? Because of “social programs”? No.
    Because 1.Banks were loaning monies to people who were severely unqualified 2. Investment corps like A.G. Edwards were pushing stocks that had very little intrinsic value. It’s called price-to-earnings ratio. It’s like selling a house that cost $200,000 a year ago for $400,000 today Hoping Against Hope that someone will come along and then re-buy at $450,000.
    The investor believes that his initial $200,000 will augment, when actually even the damn $200,000 house had termite damage and faulty plumbing through-out.
    And let’s not even talk about derivatives. They are a “product” that investment companies have been pushing also. It’s a bet on a bet on bet! One small factor doesn’t come through and Whammy! The whole house of cards falls and Mr. Johnson just lost $100,000.
    This country has paid dearly [on a personal basis and as a nation] because huge corporations were operating on an irresponsible basis. We do need government “interference” whatever you label it, if we can ever trust the banking system again.
    You underestimate what money and power can do Mr. Johnson.

  8. DJohnson

    Yes. Books are cheap. Have you been to a used bookstore?

    But let’s say books were not cheap. Does that mean they must be funded publicly? Cars aren’t cheap, should the government take money from me to buy you a car, too? And a TV? And some nice new clothes? And your refrigerator’s been making a funny noise, how about if my neighbors and I buy you a new one? No problem, we’re “the rich.”

    Damn that AG Edwards! Forcing your friends to buy stocks against their will. By the way, what do you figure is the PE ratio of social security? The government actually *is* forcing me to “invest” in that, and I’d be surprised if the PE is less than 50. For a truly bad investment, you can’t beat the Washington.

    I’m basically on your side regarding the financial collapse. It seems clear that the tacit public/private partnership between the I-banks and quasi-government agencies like the Fed and Fannie Mae created a bad situation. The incentives for prudence and risk management were stripped away. It’s the corporatist dream of privatizing profit and socializing risk.

    There’s nothing wrong with derivatives per se. They’re a useful tool for hedging risk and managing capital. The problem arose when the underlying asset became so prone to wild collapse, like residential mortgages did. If the investment banks and their agents were exposed to some of that risk, I am sure their decisions would have been better.

    I am fully aware of what money and power can do. What you seem not to realize is that the ultimate source of both is not corporate America, but the government. There’s no more corrupt organization with more distorted incentives that it. It’s scope should be radically reduced to we’re not exposed to this kind of mess again.

  9. marandaNJ

    Johnson said:What you seem not to realize is that the ultimate source of both is not corporate America, but the government.
    What’s comical here Sir, is that you actually believe The Two Are Separate Entities! There was recently a new law passed that put no cap on how much Big Corporations could fund the campaigns of senators and members of the house of representatives. Do you have any idea the political implications of this? Previously, if you had enough money, you could almost certainly buy your very own maneuverable battery-operated politician. Now it seems, you don’t even have to pretend you don’t own the doll. You bought him, you can pull the string in the back of his neck and make him talk In Public.
    My entire point was that big business basically manips the government. In the public eye, partisan politicians argue and shout, but behind closed doors, hands shake and deals are struck constantly. Are you honestly not aware of this?
    The Biggest Lobbyist at Present [a medical student told me this] are the Drug Manufacturing Companies.
    Watch this Very Short video. It might help.
    It’s a very rational [not alarmist] discussion why we are really in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have other American troops surrounding the entire Persian Gulf. Many troops in Iran etc. It’s to secure the OPEC region which holds the world’s largest supply of oil. The administration suggests there are vicious civil wars in the Middle East that we are “supposedly” keeping under control. Oh pish posh! That “the policemen for the world” scam won’t even sell in Kansas anymore!
    There were no plans for gradual troop withdrawal. We are right where we want to be and Exxon and Shell and the other multi-billion oil companies got exactly what they wanted. Why not just explain to the American public the real reason we are there? Cuz it’s not politically correct to use the word Imperialism.
    Now just for the record, we sure as hell do need this oil. But let’s not treat the American public like mindless idiots. Call a jackal a jackal. And let Americans vote on whether we want to sacrifice our sons and daughters for control of the Persian Gulf. Or should we not be able to do that?

  10. DJohnson

    MarandaNJ, I basically agree with you. The back-scratching arrangement between business and government is a disgrace and it makes a mockery of both democracy and capitalism. However, when you start focusing on what can be done about it, there’s really only one solution: government has to be smaller. Much smaller.

    It’s because the stakes are so high that business is forced to enter politics. As long as the government takes on the role of picking winners, any company that wants to be a winner has to pony up. Take Microsoft for example. For twenty years Microsoft plugged along just fine, making products people wanted to buy. Then one day in 1995 the federal government decided Microsoft was too successful and needed to be taken down a peg. They took Microsoft to court for antitrust — an utterly absurd charge, given the competitive nature of the software market. Microsoft when from proudly having no lobbyist in Washington to spending huge amounts on lobbying. The power of government forces even the reluctant business to play ball.

    Does it go the other way? Do businesses seduce government? Sure. Take the tobacco settlement. This was a transparent attempt by the established tobacco companies to form a cartel that would be enforced by the power of law. They bought off the government by creating that ridiculous slush fund account, and in exchange the government has made it illegal to compete with big tobacco.

    We see GM focusing its attention on becoming a good bailout candidate rather than on making good cars. We see banks holding the country hostage so the government will subsidize them. And so on. The SEC, Fed, FDA, and myriad other agencies all work against the interest of consumers at least a good portion of the time. We’d be better off without each and every one of them.

    So here’s the point: if the government wasn’t powerful enough to do these things, they wouldn’t happen. It’s only because the government is in a position to extract $2 trillion (!) from the taxpayers every year that they’re able to participate in this dirty little partnership.

    By the way, US oil companies were recently shut out in the bidding competition for Iraqi oil development. If this war is really to benefit oil companies, it’s a pretty pathetic attempt. Besides, wouldn’t they be better off if Iraqi oil were just kept off the market all together?

  11. marandaNJ

    At this point Mr. Johnson, I am having a difficult time ascertaining your ultimate message. Is it that the less government intervention we have the better?
    Well, when we’re talking about 300 million people [the approx size of the US] it would be pretty difficult to function without Some Government. In fact, having a set of rules and regulations that dictate the behavior of a society is one of the history books’ components of what constitutes a Civilization.
    A general statement such as less is better, again considering the pop of the country, is a little too broad for me. Perhaps what we really differ on is how and when the government chooses to govern, and set standards and dictates.
    We are not by nature an unselfish species, Mr. Johnson. We would certainly be fighting and kicking each other for the most food or shelter or whatever, without structure. However, the school taxes I begrudge paying allows my children to receive a free education also. The libraries you seem to think are unnecessary {Go to Used Book Stores!} would be a tremendous benefit to your and your children if you ever needed them to be.
    Plus, as the whole purpose of this blog trys to tell us, we are indeed a very racist society. We would rather just help ourselves and our families Rather Than Anyone Else..white or black. We must be pushed to even help [through taxes] other white citizens.
    We must be pushed Even More to help African-Americans because the inevitable white mentality is “Well, they’re not like us..really. Why should I be responsible for them?” Because they’re American Citizens and have Every Right to the full benefits of our society.
    One more poli sci note. There is no such thing as a pure “ism” if you follow me. Not with 300 million people. Not even with 10,000. There’s no such thing as pure communism. In the Soviet Union, it was the top Party officials who recieved all the benefits over and above the rank and file. So what’s “everybody gets an equal share of the pie” about that?
    There’s no such thing as pure socialism or a “pure” democracy..even though we dream. There’s no such thing as pure fascism. Show me Any Government and tell me what they call their society, and I can show you how parts of that society do Not follow their official label or “ism”.
    Again, you generalize too much for my sensibilities. No, I don’t believe less is more. I just believe certain programs are desirable and valuable, and certain government funded programs are a waste of the taxpayer’s monies. It’s all about discriminating in my estimation, not a clear-cut less is more.

  12. DJohnson

    Hey, I’m not an anarchist. At the very least we need a government to run the army so we’re not an easy target for the truly evil regimes out there.

    You also seem to think I’m a heartless bastard. I’m not. I just don’t believe the government is a particularly good way to make people who are badly off better. The free market, on the other hand, has a stellar track record of making the poor into the rich.

    Boy, I FULLY agree about the basic selfishness and racism of people. It will never, ever be different no matter what we do. It’s part of the human condition. The question is, that being the case which is better, a winner-takes-all battle for control of the government, or letting a thousand flowers bloom by protecting individual freedom even when we don’t always like what people do with it?

  13. marandaNJ

    Once again, we’re arguing about two different things here. I own my own business, a free enterpriser myself! I got nothin’ against free enterprise. Puts food on my table every night.
    However, and I say this will all due pride, I am honest and work hard for my customers. I was raised to have integrity about business because my parents owned Their Own Business for 40 years!
    They taught me 1. don’t be greedy 2. give the customer More Courtesy and Respect than they expect and they’ll return again and again. Any business will fail if you “hit and run”. For long term returns, you must be excruciatingly honest. If you own someone 5 cents, bring it to their attention!
    The maxim that I and My Family Lived by, and millions of businesses don’t, is we didn’t bamboozle people. Why would you think I am anti free markets?
    However, if we were constantly selling faulty goods, you’re damn skippy the government would Need to intervene. Not all people have the morals my family had. Surely you must know that. Of those lovely “thousand flowers” some of them need a swift kick with a fine or a short jail term in the way they Use Every Con Possible to extract pennies from customers.
    For Pete’s Sake, you need a doctoral degree in electronics when you purchase a cell phone today! Just to figure out how the damn thing works. It’s easier than ever to fool people if that was your intent.
    Plus, there’s never going to be a winner takes all battle. With huge companies competing against each other, this is the Real System of Checks and Balances. It’s like a herd of hippos constantly gouging each other with their tusks. So lest we worry, don’t!
    Nobody wants the flowers to stop blooming. Let’s be practical. The middle class man just wants his taxes, that he works so diligently to earn, to attempt to keep business clean. It didn’t work for the investment houses. The SEC was asleep at the switch from what I read Many Times. So all my freely earned free-enterprise prizes went to protect me from what? What are we Payin’ agencies like the SEC for, for Pete’s Sake, Mr. Johnson!
    Again, don’t use the All or Nothing tactic with me please. You know darn well, that’s Not what I was advocating. Nice try, but no cigar.

  14. marandaNJ

    Also Mr. Johnson said: “I just don’t believe the government is a particularly good way to make people who are badly off better.”
    Well, again I need specifics here. With a disenfranchised group of people, like African Americans were for centuries, I think government intervention in the form of Affirmative Action was the best thing that our country could do for black Americans. That certainly fits with free enterprise in my estimation.
    You give blacks some advantage because they were denied the simple taken-for-granted advantages white people prospered with for centuries. But that person must work to keep his position. That’s fair I believe.
    Then we terminated that program because whites whined it wasn’t equitable. How democratic was that! That doesn’t smell like democracy to me.
    As far as education is concerned, every child of an American citizen should receive a free education. That also sounds democratic. How can people compete in a free enterprise system Without an education?
    As far as unemployment insurance..well, here again. Let’s do the numbers. You work like a dog for an employer for 20 years and then get “laid off” through no fault of your own. Your family needs food. What do you do in the interim? I think that’s fair that the government help you til you get back on your feet. There’s also a cap on how long you can collect unemployment in case anyone pulls a fast one. That’s democratic, right?
    The library system. My favorite subject. Access to free reading material for all citizens. And you think this program should get the boot? Because we can “just buy” all reading material we need huh? When you were in college, and you needed to write a 15 page term paper. Did you really Purchase all the reading material you needed? Of course not. You utilized the library. Duh!
    Social security. People work for 40 to 45 years to keep America “the most powerful country on Earth”. We’re talking rank and file factory workers, office workers, small business employees etc. They are old and can no longer work. What should America do with this “used up old lady” Mr. Johnson? Just chop her up for fertilizer? You paid into the system for 40 years. So what “civilization” that is not a “truly evil regime” allows their aged to just fend for themselves when they’re not able to?
    Exactly what programs Would You Keep Operating, Mr. Johnson? It’s a hard call isn’t it?

  15. DJohnson

    You’ve chosen perfect examples of why I believe the government is inferior to the free market. You’re making my point for me!

    Do you really believe that the reason companies don’t provide defective or faulty products is because of the government? No way. Ask yourself: if you provided bad service, how long would your customers stick around? Mine would be gone in a heartbeat — long before any paper-pushing government bureaucrat could have done anything about it. The free market punishes bad work far more efficiently and reliably than the government. In fact, if you look at the cases where companies *have* survived despite bad products or service, it’s almost always because they’re being protected by the government. GM, AT&T, USPS, United Airlines. These companies have been code for bad service, and they’ve all been wards of the state to one degree or another. Who does good work? McDonalds, Southwest Air, FedEx, Intel…

    The fact that education is important is not a justification for the government to pay for it. The opposite is true: education is too important to leave to the government-union partnership. Free it up!

    I think you’re a little confused about the difference between something being “democratic” and it being “nice.” Unemployment benefits and affirmative action have little to do with democracy per se. They’re both decided based on the system of democracy we have in America, but the question is whether they’re any good. We probably disagree a little on both counts.

    I suspect you like both affirmative action and government unemployment benefits. I think affirmative action is poison, and unemployment benefits are probably okay but perhaps managed poorly.

    You understand that *somebody* has to buy all the books in the library, right? There’s no library fairy that magically populates the shelves while you sleep, snug in your bed. The question is, Who pays? I believe that the people who benefit from a thing should pay for it. I don’t benefit from the public library, so I don’t want to pay for it. When I was in college, I most certainly *did* benefit from that library, and I paid for it, too.

    I hadn’t thought of the fertilizer idea. Usually I think glue is a better use for old, used up workers. But I’m open to other ideas.

    I don’t think which programs I’d keep operating is a hard call at all. Almost none. The military. Maybe some bare-bones welfare programs to supplement private charities. No Department of Agriculture (makes us all poorer to enrich farms), no public education (spends at least twice as much as needed to get half the result), no regulatory agencies (serve the interest of the industries their supposed to regulate rather than consumers), no post office (why?), no Social Security (if workers can pay 15% taxes to get 1% return, surely they can pay 15% of their wages to get higher returns — and provide money for investment, too!), no Department of Energy, and of course no libraries.

    Since this website is ostensibly about racism, I’ll tie it back. I’ve never understood why blacks in particular are so fond of big government. Government supported slavery for hundreds of years. Governments pass prevailing wage jobs to prevent blacks form competing. Governments institute pie-in-the-sky social engineering programs that destroy black families and doom black kids to an upbringing far worse than just poverty. Why do blacks trust the government at all? Is it just cynicism – the government seems at the moment to be transferring wealth to blacks? I hope not. That thinking is pernicious and short-sighted. Is it a predisposition for the Left? I know women tend to be to the left of men, are blacks to the left of whites for some hereditary reason? It’s possible, but I don’t know why it would be that way.

    I don’t get it.

  16. marandaNJ

    Mr. Johnson tells us: ‘I hadn’t thought of the fertilizer idea. Usually I think glue is a better use for old, used up workers. But I’m open to other ideas.’
    You are one heck of a benevolent person Mr. Johnson, I must say. Let me know when you turn 64 and I’ll be right there to kick you out on the street. If humor was your goal here, I’m not laughing.
    You approve of a military but not a free education? And after a marine comes home tired and war-torn..what does he come home to if there’s no free education? A bunch of Neanderthals who can’t even read a Stop sign? Only the most absolute primitive [some of them not even on any standardized map] countries are without a free education system. I can’t believe you think this.
    Sounds like you believe in an entirely dog-eat-dog society. Just throw the cards up in the air [of course none of us can even read the cards except the very well-to-do who can afford a private school] and let ’em fall where they may. But to protect this perfectly chaotic backward society, let’s have a military. God forbid all the illiterates, that a lack of education will generate, should be put in harm’s way by a ‘truly evil regime’.
    And by the way, I am Not in Favor, since you keep trying to pigeon hole me, of tons of give-away government programs that tax the average citizen to death.
    I do not believe that illegal immigrants who cross the border should receive free health care at tax payer expense. I don’t know of any other country on Earth who does this. Nobody can afford to. Once people become legal citizens and contribute to the tax base, then they are entitled to government benefits..but not until.
    I do not believe people should use welfare as a means of avoiding getting an education and entering the American mainstream. I think welfare is fine,but only for very short periods of time until people get back on their feet. Some people have made a career out of welfare. This is a generational downward spiral and in the end only brings prolonged poverty.
    I still don’t know how the new health care system will fare. But I’m not alone. Nobody seems to know. I certainly believe the health insurance companies, and health care system, had a merry ride for too darn long, and need to be reined in.
    I also thought it was just plain absurd of you to ask me if I knew if ‘somebody’ paid for county libraries. Gosh, by golly, thanks for telling me! I honestly thought it was the Library Fairy all this time!

  17. DJohnson

    There’s no such thing as a “free” education system. It’s just a question of who pays. You understand that, right? And just because a thing is important doesn’t mean the government has to do it. You understand that, too, right?

    You say you’re not in favor of “tons of give-away government programs.” Really? Name a couple you’re not in favor of. Just one or two that you think ought to be abolished. You say you’re opposed to prolonged welfare. Good. Me too. However, you have no idea how to stop it. Simply striking a moral pose is fine when you’re a college sophomore, but in the real world you have to actually do things differently if you want different outcomes. So, what would you be willing to do differently to avoid prolonged welfare? A stern talking-to?

    And you’re welcome about the library fairy thing. A lot of people make that mistake. I must say, you’re taking it well — no tears!

  18. marandaNJ

    Johnson said:You say you’re not in favor of “tons of give-away government programs.” Really? Name a couple you’re not in favor of. Just one or two that you think ought to be abolished.
    Sure Pal! Anytime, any day! Get a pen.
    Well, I already mentioned prolonged welfare. Actually there are laws in place now that prohibit that. But if it came to a vote, I’d probably make the length shorter.

    I don’t think free pre-school programs helped anybody. At that age, parental involvement does the trick such as simply reading to your child. If someone says they don’t have time to read to their child..well folks..reading is such a necessity for me that’s like saying you don’t have time to talk to them at all.
    I think there’s too much government beaurocracy.We could accomplish just as much with more organization.
    I don’t think taxpayers should pay for congressmen taking vacations. What the heck is that all about! And no lunch meetings or dinner meetings or parties or concert tickets or even a trip to the zoo at taxpayer’s expense!
    I don’t think subjects such as music and art in schools need to be paid for by taxpayers. Those subjects are wonderful and creative but American children across the board are lacking in math, science and reading skills. Cut the Old MacDonald and make multiplication a longer class. That would also translate into No Art Supplies which are expensive.
    Nix on the public art..and that’s from Washington DC to everywhere else. It’s very expensive and the monies could be put to better use. 12 years ago, we had a Huge Statue put outside our airport! It was supposed to add prestige to the city. Prestige, schmestige. Damn thing cost $500,000!
    Churches and houses of worship should Not Be Tax Free Institutions. Sorry evangelists!
    Let’s ask people to pay to get into the Smithsonian Institute. I heard it’s free! What gives?
    I already mentioned not allowing illegal immigrants Any Health Care. They do not bring revenue into the tax base. When they file income taxes and become legal, then they are entitled to government benefits.
    By the way, Taxpayers pay for a ‘free education system’? Aunt Viola, wake up! I jes got a news flash frum Little Rock! We’s all got ta pay the gov’mint with taxes fer educatin’ Jethro! Damn and whin ah read ‘free edercatin’ I really done thought it were fer nothin’. Thank ye kindly Mr. Johnson Sir fer clearin’ that one up fer me. Want some possum stew?

  19. marandaNJ

    Also Johnson said:And you’re welcome about the library fairy thing. A lot of people make that mistake.
    Uh..hate to sound elitist but None of My Friends make that mistake! You got buddies who think the Library Fairy supplies books? I guess you didn’t go to a very reputable college. Sorry you wasted your money Mr. Johnson. You and your friends Apparently Need the Library a heck of alot more than I do!


  1. uberVU - social comments

Comments are closed.