"Jews are smartest race in the world and superior humans", Israeli Lawmaker claims - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the nations of the Middle East.

Moderator: PoFo Middle-East Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
#14978065
Paddy14 wrote:I don't know much about this subject, but AFIK, intelligence doesn't depend only on passed down genes. Diet, environment, and socio-economic factors are equally important. So it is basically for cultural reasons that certain groups of people do well academically.

I think the reason my Jewish friends say nothing about this is because they are well-mannered people who live in a society (Australia or the UK) where saying 'we are the best' is something which does not make you friends. My dad has this saying "Self praise is no recommendation". :D


Obviously, environment will be a factor. This is especially obvious in places where we have people who would not be able to be tested by IQ tests in a conventional way. There is the very famous example of the intelligence scientist who went around imperial Russia asking questions to these peasants, and even though they were oftne quite wrong, they were quite witty in their responses. He recorded them because it showed that even though these people were getting the questions obviously wrong by modern standards, it was due to a lack of proper education and not due to a lack of wits.

This is why you can have a Russian scientist or a Japanese electronic engineer be born from grandparents who would have had IQs of like 85 or 90... Not because their IQ is actually 85 or 90 in some "meta" sense, but because they grew up in a situation devoid of adequate social stimulation and education.

So that is, of course, a challenge for IQ. Yet, it is easy to work around it...

You know, the average IQ in India is actually something like 90, but we know that Indians tend to outperform many in the West and certainly perform far better than groups in the West who tend to have lower IQs. It's a situation where the environment is purely accountable for it.

Perhaps one could say that the 3 to 5 IQ point difference that exists between whites & Asians, or whites & Ashkenazim (which is sometimes said to be a ten point difference, though!) can have some cultural affects that can raise/lower the IQs by a few points...

But to produce a whole standard deviation lower than the white norm in the same country is pretty bloody radical.

I found this interesting -

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog ... st-genetic


That'd be something of an outlier.

There's the famous Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study that everyone talks about and, of course, seemingly endless material in The Bell Curve that discuss it. Pinker's own book The Better Angels discusses it a bit as well....

And the consensus, at least according to Wikipedia, is pretty politically inocrrect:

The heritability of IQ for adults is between 57% and 73%[6] with some more-recent estimates as high as 80%[7] and 86%.[8] Genome-wide association studies have identified inherited genome sequence differences that account for 20% of the 50% of the genetic variation that contributes to heritability.[9] IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics, for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood. This phenomenon is known as the Wilson Effect.[10] Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores;[11] however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects


Wikipedia

No one likes to talk about it, though, because it makes us feel sad. :(
#14978092
From Verv's article wrote:however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects
That was my point, when you take into consideration poor IQ scores.

Good healthcare and nutrition, along with good education, can have serious benefits to IQ performance, and overall intelligence.

Mind you, some people have to take into account that your education never stops, til the moment you die.
#14978094
Godstud wrote:That was my point, when you take into consideration poor IQ scores.

Good healthcare and nutrition, along with good education, can have serious benefits to IQ performance, and overall intelligence.

Mind you, some people have to take into account that your education never stops, til the moment you die.


So would you say that there are emergency levels of bad parenting in the black community in America?

if that is the case, then you would imagine that there would be solutions geared to fixing single-parent households, and shifting the black social dynamics to mimic white demographic norms...

And, indeed, whites would be pushed to mimic Asian demographic norms if we felt that there were characteristics within this that were more successful than white norms, and certainly there would be lots of effort in establishing these precise norms (which I admit it does exist though not in such direct terms).

I think there is also an issue that we have here...

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

I say this because I know people who grew up in rather hopeless situations but were ultimately cognizant of the fact and determined to never repeat it. As someone who does not drink now, I often ask other non-drinkers why they don't drink...

There's basically three categories for Westerners...
- Ex-alcoholics
- Alcoholic parents & the likes who wrecked their lives and gave them determination to not drink
- "I don't like drinking at all."

You would think that the result of atrocious parenting would be one that would either end with the destruction of the children's lives, or it would result in the next generation determiend to not replicate those results, as I have met many of my peers who went through said experiences determined to do so.

regardless... You would think that, at some point, improvements would occur, right?
#14978108
Verv wrote:There's basically three categories for Westerners...
- Ex-alcoholics
- Alcoholic parents & the likes who wrecked their lives and gave them determination to not drink
- "I don't like drinking at all."
You forgot the fourth one: "I want to live a long life, so drinking too much is counter-productive, so I am going to cut back, or stop.

Nutrition most certainly is a factor, but it's hardly due to "bad parenting". :roll: You also have to look at poverty and poor education in black communities, which leads to lower IQ scores. most IQ tests are culturally based, and so there might be other factors not being accounted for.

All said, I doubt there is actually a "smartest race", since we're all genetically similar enough that there is no scientific distinction between "races", because they are mostly a social construct.
#14978127
Everyday high IQ people ask lower IQ people to solve their problems. The smartest person is the one who has the answer to the current problem. Their IQ is basically irrelevant.
#14978135
Godstud wrote:Yes, IQ is, for the most part, irrelevant. We do agree on something, @One Degree.


Yes we do, but I still have the highest IQ on Pofo and am also the smartestest person. :)
I raised my IQ to 987 before I got tired of taking tests. The scores are cumulative, right?
#14978141
Godstud wrote:That was my point, when you take into consideration poor IQ scores.

Good healthcare and nutrition, along with good education, can have serious benefits to IQ performance, and overall intelligence.

Mind you, some people have to take into account that your education never stops, til the moment you die.

It is interesting @Godstud I saw a Ted talk about a very intelligent and bright young doctor, she was at the top of her class, yet had a terrible car accident. Lost many of her past intellectual abilities. She had to work extremely hard just to gain some ground that she lost.

Neuro science is fascinating. Our brains are malleable. So are our environmental conditions. Diet, exercise, lifestyle habits all have influences on human intelligence. I think people should work on improving it all for all.
#14978150
So would you say that there are emergency levels of bad parenting in the black community in America?


There are emergency levels of bad parenting in all communities in America. But that answer is a cop-out so I would have to answer, no. Not really. If you look at the black middle class in America, growing in well integrated areas, the differences are not so stark as they are in the so-called inner city black ghettos.

if that is the case, then you would imagine that there would be solutions geared to fixing single-parent households, and shifting the black social dynamics to mimic white demographic norms...


Whites have two things that blacks do not. The most obvious is what I call "the presumption of niceness". A young white man walking into an employer has a certain leg up over his black contemporary. Study after study confirms this. It is not really open to debate. But what do we do about it? This is an enormous problem and the last election brought the message home in a big way.

The second thing thing is that whites have money. Money means a safer neighborhood, more opportunities for early childhood development, less exposure to "bad elements" and, of course, much better schools. This alone explains a great disparity in opportunity which drives outcomes.

So many people want, as you do, blacks to "mimic white social dynamics" but want to leave out the money part. How do you do that? Would I be the same guy today had I not been born and raised in a safe, nurturing and financially comfortable community. Money is HOW one pays for opportunity. Tell me if you can think of another way.

I work with homeless people (and families) a great deal of the time and the thing I hear most from "concerned" citizens is, "everyone ought to have a place to sleep". And that's it. So I ask you. How did you get your place to sleep? The answer is, that you paid for it. With money. And there is a continuity there. You were born to a family that housed you (paid for it) moved to a job that housed you or paid you to be housed, and have some notion that you can always be able to 'at least make the rent'. This is not true (especially the later) for a great many people. It is certainly not true of an inner-city black mother of three whose husband was just killed in a drive-by. Or left them alone. One thing I never hear is this. Middle class families with two trained/educated parents can 'afford' a divorce. Many families cannot.

But suppose that the father of the aforementioned family with three kids does want to do the right thing. He attended poor schools, lives in an employment wasteland lacking any high paying jobs. So because he loves his kids he works two full time jobs to support himself and them. What does he earn? In Arizona (a state with a much higher minimum wage than other states at $11.00 an hour) he earns, after taxes, about $3500.00 a month. Call $500.00 of that taxes. So he has $3K to mess with working 80 hours a week. He has to support himself on that. What does that take? Call it $1500.00 a month if he rides the bus to both jobs, lives in a dump and eats Ramen. (And has no heath insurance because it is too expensive.) Let me pause here to mention that he would be, working two jobs, in the highest paid 28% of workers in Georgia.) So he gives mom $1500.00 a month for as long as he can sustain working two jobs. 80 hours a week. (And as a practical matter we all know that this is unsustainable and probably can't be done anyway.) We can stop here. With her $1500.00 a month in support this poor woman cannot survive with three children and certainly not, given the cost of health care, afford to work herself.

See what I mean?

So back at you. Where does the money come from to break this cycle of poverty? I think I know but, trust me, you will not like it.


And, indeed, whites would be pushed to mimic Asian demographic norms if we felt that there were characteristics within this that were more successful than white norms, and certainly there would be lots of effort in establishing these precise norms (which I admit it does exist though not in such direct terms).


Yea. No. Can't be done. The US is too diverse and will likely never accept some sort of hive-like social engineering. Indeed shouldn't.

I think there is also an issue that we have here...

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

I say this because I know people who grew up in rather hopeless situations but were ultimately cognizant of the fact and determined to never repeat it. As someone who does not drink now, I often ask other non-drinkers why they don't drink...



There's basically three categories for Westerners...
- Ex-alcoholics
- Alcoholic parents & the likes who wrecked their lives and gave them determination to not drink
- "I don't like drinking at all."


Bad analogy. Not drinking is about something you do not do. It takes some personal effort but it does not cost time or money. (Perhaps a few hours for AA but economically, stopping drinking is a net monetary gain.)


You would think that the result of atrocious parenting would be one that would either end with the destruction of the children's lives, or it would result in the next generation determiend to not replicate those results, as I have met many of my peers who went through said experiences determined to do so.

regardless... You would think that, at some point, improvements would occur, right?


Well this happens. It also happens that the children of educated and affluent parents go the other way and wind up in prison.

The determination you mention is a good thing. It works for some few people. Maybe even a lot of them. But even the determined person who has a poor education, no money, and a visage that does not serve them well cannot automatically set their jaw and become a doctor. Doctors are made in the first few years of their lives. By the end of high school they are done gambling as they say. If they have not excelled by then they are not going to get into the best colleges nor are they going to be able to get the best training. And if they have gotten into any trouble with the law before then, the road is even harder.

Except you ask?

Money.

If there is money for them to have a second chance then they just might have a shot at a much better life.

So you see Verve, at the end of the day the solution does not start with some theoretical social engineering. It starts with money. If you want a bigger portfolio you have to do one of two things. Either be a very savvy investor (or massively lucky) or you have to put more money in. It is the same with investment in children. You want to fix families in poverty? You have to fix the poverty. Lecturing parents on how white folks act is certainly not the answer. Telling a young black 12 year old that he is special and can be an engineer (or even should want to) is a good thing to do. But if it does not represent a realistic economic possibility what is the point? The kid is not dumb. He can see who it is in his neighborhood who has the money. And if it is the drug dealer then whoever is selling engineer has a tough row to hoe.

So if we want to fix the problems we have with the underclasses we have to work to eliminate the underclasses. That means that we have to transfer some of the money from more affluent people to less affluent people. We have to level the playing field. We have to work to build our middle class. In the days when we had our most robust middle class, the tax rates on the wealthiest people approached 90%. For decades over 70%. And that spurred more investment. We have been sold a bill of goods. We are told that if we make the very wealthy wealthier they will magically spend the money creating good jobs for the poorest among us. This is demonstrably bullshit. We did it and they didn't. What they did is use their increased wealth to buy politicians and solidify their gains. What the rest of us got is a $1.00 lottery ticket and a dream.

When I was young the life was from school to a company to a gold watch to a modest retirement and the grave. Now there is no long-term company, no gold watch, social security and maybe a 401K and the grave.

I get that if you want to motivate one young black boy you might be able, early on, to motivate him with words of encouragement. Much like a twelve step program. But how do you motivate a generation of young people who live in a world of discrimination by the police and employers, surrounded by crime, attending schools that are more warehouses than learning places and who have no real political power to advance their case.

Show me the money Verve.
#14978158
Bad parenting is not a cop out @Drlee. It is a factor. You are making the mistake of treating them as a stereotype. One factor does not disprove or invalidate another factor. This is the problem with your scenario. It does not apply to the majority. If we were to accept your reasoning, then how do you explain the majority overcome these factors.
Another common problem with these arguments, they make the assumption what we are doing doesn’t work because it hasn’t worked for everyone. It obviously has worked for many. Including the Black community pointing out the problem of single parent households and advocating for a change in Black men’s views.
These are individuals and they will require different solutions. Some we will not be able to help. Strong parenting is a necessity for the success of other approaches.
We should not make excuses for the inexcusable. We should also not use this as an excuse not to help those we can. Simply quit seeing them as a group. Crime is not acceptable and should never be excused by environment. It is an injustice to those who are not criminals in the same situation.
#14978177
So what is your point? The "black community" whatever that is, should fix the problems in some families and that will fix the problem altogether? That doesn't even make sense.

But I admit that your notions of white responsibility to act to fix this problem especially when it means they have to spend a substantial amount of money, by looking to blacks to fix themselves is a common belief. Two problems though.

These are not solely race-based problems. They are, in the white community as well. Absentee parents are common in the white poor community.

No sport. The problem is first and foremost about money. If we are not willing to make substantial resources available to the people who want to break their chain of poverty, they will simply remain poor.
#14978182
Drlee wrote:There are emergency levels of bad parenting in all communities in America. But that answer is a cop-out so I would have to answer, no. Not really. If you look at the black middle class in America, growing in well integrated areas, the differences are not so stark as they are in the so-called inner city black ghettos.



Whites have two things that blacks do not. The most obvious is what I call "the presumption of niceness". A young white man walking into an employer has a certain leg up over his black contemporary. Study after study confirms this. It is not really open to debate. But what do we do about it? This is an enormous problem and the last election brought the message home in a big way.

The second thing thing is that whites have money. Money means a safer neighborhood, more opportunities for early childhood development, less exposure to "bad elements" and, of course, much better schools. This alone explains a great disparity in opportunity which drives outcomes.

So many people want, as you do, blacks to "mimic white social dynamics" but want to leave out the money part. How do you do that? Would I be the same guy today had I not been born and raised in a safe, nurturing and financially comfortable community. Money is HOW one pays for opportunity. Tell me if you can think of another way.

I work with homeless people (and families) a great deal of the time and the thing I hear most from "concerned" citizens is, "everyone ought to have a place to sleep". And that's it. So I ask you. How did you get your place to sleep? The answer is, that you paid for it. With money. And there is a continuity there. You were born to a family that housed you (paid for it) moved to a job that housed you or paid you to be housed, and have some notion that you can always be able to 'at least make the rent'. This is not true (especially the later) for a great many people. It is certainly not true of an inner-city black mother of three whose husband was just killed in a drive-by. Or left them alone. One thing I never hear is this. Middle class families with two trained/educated parents can 'afford' a divorce. Many families cannot.

But suppose that the father of the aforementioned family with three kids does want to do the right thing. He attended poor schools, lives in an employment wasteland lacking any high paying jobs. So because he loves his kids he works two full time jobs to support himself and them. What does he earn? In Arizona (a state with a much higher minimum wage than other states at $11.00 an hour) he earns, after taxes, about $3500.00 a month. Call $500.00 of that taxes. So he has $3K to mess with working 80 hours a week. He has to support himself on that. What does that take? Call it $1500.00 a month if he rides the bus to both jobs, lives in a dump and eats Ramen. (And has no heath insurance because it is too expensive.) Let me pause here to mention that he would be, working two jobs, in the highest paid 28% of workers in Georgia.) So he gives mom $1500.00 a month for as long as he can sustain working two jobs. 80 hours a week. (And as a practical matter we all know that this is unsustainable and probably can't be done anyway.) We can stop here. With her $1500.00 a month in support this poor woman cannot survive with three children and certainly not, given the cost of health care, afford to work herself.

See what I mean?

So back at you. Where does the money come from to break this cycle of poverty? I think I know but, trust me, you will not like it.




Yea. No. Can't be done. The US is too diverse and will likely never accept some sort of hive-like social engineering. Indeed shouldn't.



Bad analogy. Not drinking is about something you do not do. It takes some personal effort but it does not cost time or money. (Perhaps a few hours for AA but economically, stopping drinking is a net monetary gain.)




Well this happens. It also happens that the children of educated and affluent parents go the other way and wind up in prison.

The determination you mention is a good thing. It works for some few people. Maybe even a lot of them. But even the determined person who has a poor education, no money, and a visage that does not serve them well cannot automatically set their jaw and become a doctor. Doctors are made in the first few years of their lives. By the end of high school they are done gambling as they say. If they have not excelled by then they are not going to get into the best colleges nor are they going to be able to get the best training. And if they have gotten into any trouble with the law before then, the road is even harder.

Except you ask?

Money.

If there is money for them to have a second chance then they just might have a shot at a much better life.

So you see Verve, at the end of the day the solution does not start with some theoretical social engineering. It starts with money. If you want a bigger portfolio you have to do one of two things. Either be a very savvy investor (or massively lucky) or you have to put more money in. It is the same with investment in children. You want to fix families in poverty? You have to fix the poverty. Lecturing parents on how white folks act is certainly not the answer. Telling a young black 12 year old that he is special and can be an engineer (or even should want to) is a good thing to do. But if it does not represent a realistic economic possibility what is the point? The kid is not dumb. He can see who it is in his neighborhood who has the money. And if it is the drug dealer then whoever is selling engineer has a tough row to hoe.

So if we want to fix the problems we have with the underclasses we have to work to eliminate the underclasses. That means that we have to transfer some of the money from more affluent people to less affluent people. We have to level the playing field. We have to work to build our middle class. In the days when we had our most robust middle class, the tax rates on the wealthiest people approached 90%. For decades over 70%. And that spurred more investment. We have been sold a bill of goods. We are told that if we make the very wealthy wealthier they will magically spend the money creating good jobs for the poorest among us. This is demonstrably bullshit. We did it and they didn't. What they did is use their increased wealth to buy politicians and solidify their gains. What the rest of us got is a $1.00 lottery ticket and a dream.

When I was young the life was from school to a company to a gold watch to a modest retirement and the grave. Now there is no long-term company, no gold watch, social security and maybe a 401K and the grave.

I get that if you want to motivate one young black boy you might be able, early on, to motivate him with words of encouragement. Much like a twelve step program. But how do you motivate a generation of young people who live in a world of discrimination by the police and employers, surrounded by crime, attending schools that are more warehouses than learning places and who have no real political power to advance their case.

Show me the money Verve.

Aw hell Drlee you sound like a socialist!
Lol
So many of these clueless types rant on about blaming the Black community. They don't actually go to these communities and deal with the issues. I worked as a community organizer dealing with failing schools. organizing parents. You sit with the parents in their homes and discuss what are the issues they have.

Money is a big issue. Then you got superintendents of schools making 350k a year plus perks talking about how well they do. Lol.

I laugh at these dumb ass theories they have about the solutions. My sup of school district has ten golden rules. 4 out of 10 of them where boiled down to 'don't ask for money '.

Pendejos!
#14978194
Drlee wrote:So what is your point? The "black community" whatever that is, should fix the problems in some families and that will fix the problem altogether? That doesn't even make sense.

But I admit that your notions of white responsibility to act to fix this problem especially when it means they have to spend a substantial amount of money, by looking to blacks to fix themselves is a common belief. Two problems though.

These are not solely race-based problems. They are, in the white community as well. Absentee parents are common in the white poor community.

No sport. The problem is first and foremost about money. If we are not willing to make substantial resources available to the people who want to break their chain of poverty, they will simply remain poor.


No, I am saying we should quit telling everyone what the problem is because it is not that simple. We have spent a lot of money, but you are claiming the problem is still money. What do you propose? Tell me how money is going to make a parent a better parent. Tell me how money is going to stop you from getting shot. Tell me how money is going to do away with drugs. Tell me how money is going to offset an 80 IQ. Tell me how money is going to erase antisocial behavior. We must work with individuals and all my years of working with them told me you never know what might work. Something must ‘spark’ in the individual for programs to work. You can’t just throw money at it. If that were true, the problems would no longer exist.
#14978198
This is where our earlier discussion of poverty not being just an issue of money comes into play.
Poverty is much more than a socioeconomic status which is why when talking about money it then gets tied to the instituions in peoples lives.
But should be very clear to not erase the significance of money as a means in peoples life where everything is commodified. Even those with more stable lives work to make money in order to survive out of necessity.
#14978238
Wellsy wrote:This is where our earlier discussion of poverty not being just an issue of money comes into play.
Poverty is much more than a socioeconomic status which is why when talking about money it then gets tied to the instituions in peoples lives.
But should be very clear to not erase the significance of money as a means in peoples life where everything is commodified. Even those with more stable lives work to make money in order to survive out of necessity.

Marx talks about the differences between the lumpen proletariat versus the working class. Oscar Lewis controversial work about the culture of poverty--talks about it too. Have you read that piece? There is another work by Jay McLeod called--Ain't No Makin'It. Sociologist from Harvard analyzing poverty problems. A good read. I got an entire library on those issues @Wellsy
#14978240
Tainari88 wrote:Marx talks about the differences between the lumpen proletariat versus the working class. Oscar Lewis controversial work about the culture of poverty--talks about it too. Have you read that piece? There is another work by Jay McLeod called--Ain't No Makin'It. Sociologist from Harvard analyzing poverty problems. A good read. I got an entire library on those issues @Wellsy

I have not.
I only recently came to a view point that poverty is more than having little money, the predicament of having needs beyond your means. This has been due to my reading of Andy Blunden in his project on ethical politics and his summary of Armatya Sens work in economics.
#14978245
We have spent a lot of money,


First. We have not spent "a lot of money" if you consider the amount spent and the magnitude of the problem. All you have to do is go into inner city schools and compare them with schools in the suburbs. What we have done is look for the least amount of money that is consistent with keeping our poor out of open revolt.

...but you are claiming the problem is still money. What do you propose? Tell me how money is going to make a parent a better parent.


May I use myself?

If I was a bad parent (whatever that means) but had my current income I would have the option to:

Live in a safe neighborhood where my child could be exposed to "good, well directed kids" who believe in their own future.

Send my kid to preschool.

Have them met by a competent adult when they got home from school.

Choose a private school consistent with my child's needs or, because of my influence, compel the public schools to do their job.

Set my child on a believable collegiate track.

Make sure my child had good nutrition.

Make sure my child had a good computer and other study aids.

Make sure my child had health care.

Expose my child to the better things and cultivate his/her desire to have the.

You mean like that?

Tell me how money is going to stop you from getting shot.


By allowing "you" to move to my little suburb where the last shooting was two years ago.

To provide much greater community policing where violence is a problem.

Tell me how money is going to do away with drugs.


By allowing my child to be in an environment where drugs are not as prevalent and where the kids with whom he associates are less likely to be doing them. And certainly remove any incentive to sell them. To fund treatment and anti-drug education. To provide after school/work recreation opportunities that offer alternatives to getting stoned.

Tell me how money is going to offset an 80 IQ.


By opening up options for training or education aimed at my child's ability to learn and taught at a pace at which he/she can learn. By supporting the child longer so that he/she has time to learn. By giving them a basic income while they are learning to support themselves. You should note that 80 is not devastatingly low.

Tell me how money is going to erase antisocial behavior.


What do you mean by antisocial? Since you are talking about learned behavior, allowing the kid to be separated from bad influences. My making the kid see normal behaviors every day rather than antisocial ones. By enabling treatment and counseling if it came to that.


We must work with individuals and all my years of working with them told me you never know what might work.


You may not know what works but tons of people do. What may work for one child may not work for another but here generalities are just fine. But if you prefer to be specific, money allows us to apply a solution (including individual treatment and counseling, as soon as it is detected rather than waiting for bad or irreversible outcomes.

Something must ‘spark’ in the individual for programs to work. You can’t just throw money at it. If that were true, the problems would no longer exist.


What does this mean. Are you saying that if I have a psychologically challenged child, the availability of money for treatment is irrelevant? Faced with challenged students I can tell you how not to "spark" them. Present them with a school system that does not have enough money to help them or even diagnose them.

Look at how easy and how obvious these answers are OD. Please do not insult us by saying that there is enough money. There is not. And what there is available is frequently in the wrong hands.

As I have repeatedly said. At the end of the day the solutions to the problems you mention come down to money. Money is not an end to it. There is more to be done. But lack of money IS an end to it. Unless there is money to teach that 80 IQ guy to drive a truck, fix a car, assemble a computer, install roofing or some other career consistent with his/her abilities the person will not succeed no matter how kind, compassionate and concerned we are. No money is no action. Of course we could always send the poor our "thoughts and prayers".

Aw hell Drlee you sound like a socialist!
Lol


If doing what is right for the poor, the disenfranchised and the downtrodden makes me a socialist, sign me up! :D

Really though. A conservative would look at these expenses are investments into the future. It seems so obvious to me. That is why Reagan did immigration amnesty. Why Nixon started the environmental protection agency. Bush's thousand points of life. Why Bush II invested so heavily on HIV treatment in Africa. Don't you think it is odd Tianai that conservatives have come to see programs that help children succeed and become taxpaying citizens as "liberal" or "socialist". And, as you can see from One Degrees posts, investing in the future of families not to mention children does not appeal to him as a good thing for society to do. I don't what to live in that world.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 18

"Ukraine’s real losses should be counted i[…]

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]

@Rugoz A compromise with Putin is impossibl[…]

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]