African-American over reliance upon public assistance, section 8, foodstamps and medicaid?

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by tyisny

Originally Posted by DB WEST

Originally Posted by PoloLax

Earned the right to have Jordans? 

You're right, he did earn it. But it doesn't matter. Little Jamal needs to realize that Jordan's won't do anything for him when he IS IN FACT getting robbed for them. Little Jamal needs to understand that he works hard to earn an item that most can't have (Which is why people would rob him for them) and don't need. The Jordan's won't fight back for him. Saving the money from the barbershop he works at over years will allow him to one day get out of that enviroment.

As a teen he wants the Jordan's, then he gets older he wants to the phone, then the Benz, etc. If his society has indeed forgotten about him then at one point he will not be able to obtain the pricier items he wants when he gets older because he won't have the funds to afford them. That leads to illegal activity, crimes, etc. It's a circle, and it's not just African American's in the hood, it's everyone. It's about saving money, not getting the luxary items that everyone else has. Money will always be pissed away.

The wealthiest people I know sometimes have the shabbiest clothes, have *%*+ cars and don't look like then have ten cents to their name. They have money because they don't buy into the material wants that everyone else has.

I think the amount of money that is spent on social services is negligible compared to all the money we're spending on these adults who applied for mortgages to finance homes outside of their means that ended up in foreclosure, greedy bankers who collateralized those mortgages in order to profit from it, and crooked CEO's who take risks knowing the government will bail them out if things go wrong.  Don't expect young Jamal to manage his money well when their is college educated Ari doing the same thing on a larger scale.

  

The problem is both of these groups. Between them you have a large percentage of the population that is outright corrupt and thieving from the middle class. 

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by tyisny

Originally Posted by DB WEST

Originally Posted by PoloLax

Earned the right to have Jordans? 

You're right, he did earn it. But it doesn't matter. Little Jamal needs to realize that Jordan's won't do anything for him when he IS IN FACT getting robbed for them. Little Jamal needs to understand that he works hard to earn an item that most can't have (Which is why people would rob him for them) and don't need. The Jordan's won't fight back for him. Saving the money from the barbershop he works at over years will allow him to one day get out of that enviroment.

As a teen he wants the Jordan's, then he gets older he wants to the phone, then the Benz, etc. If his society has indeed forgotten about him then at one point he will not be able to obtain the pricier items he wants when he gets older because he won't have the funds to afford them. That leads to illegal activity, crimes, etc. It's a circle, and it's not just African American's in the hood, it's everyone. It's about saving money, not getting the luxary items that everyone else has. Money will always be pissed away.

The wealthiest people I know sometimes have the shabbiest clothes, have *%*+ cars and don't look like then have ten cents to their name. They have money because they don't buy into the material wants that everyone else has.

I think the amount of money that is spent on social services is negligible compared to all the money we're spending on these adults who applied for mortgages to finance homes outside of their means that ended up in foreclosure, greedy bankers who collateralized those mortgages in order to profit from it, and crooked CEO's who take risks knowing the government will bail them out if things go wrong.  Don't expect young Jamal to manage his money well when their is college educated Ari doing the same thing on a larger scale.

  

The problem is both of these groups. Between them you have a large percentage of the population that is outright corrupt and thieving from the middle class. 

 

[kix4kix]

Why don't we realize why these programs are needed in the first place?

No policy is meant to stay in place forever, however, what most opposed to government assistance programs say in response to the existance of these programs is to sieze them all together, which if you think about it is wishful thinking and quite unrealistic. Our economy is designed to have an unemployment rate at about 6 percent. It is foolish to not have public assistance. The fact that people abuse the system is something that can be rewritten with a new policy, which I feel is way overdue. A clearer and more defined approach to who is recieving what, and that a need is CLEARLY there. The andwer is not an end to these programs, but rather a redefined policy on how the money is distributed, and how to regulate it more effectively, coupled with provisions that will further the process of phasing out several outdated programs.


As far as the root of the issue, it comes down to spending, the Government spends way too much money, on way too many things. Call me a liberal, but I do care about others. We are the richest country in the world, even our poor should live a good life.

 

[kix4kix]

Why don't we realize why these programs are needed in the first place?

No policy is meant to stay in place forever, however, what most opposed to government assistance programs say in response to the existance of these programs is to sieze them all together, which if you think about it is wishful thinking and quite unrealistic. Our economy is designed to have an unemployment rate at about 6 percent. It is foolish to not have public assistance. The fact that people abuse the system is something that can be rewritten with a new policy, which I feel is way overdue. A clearer and more defined approach to who is recieving what, and that a need is CLEARLY there. The andwer is not an end to these programs, but rather a redefined policy on how the money is distributed, and how to regulate it more effectively, coupled with provisions that will further the process of phasing out several outdated programs.


As far as the root of the issue, it comes down to spending, the Government spends way too much money, on way too many things. Call me a liberal, but I do care about others. We are the richest country in the world, even our poor should live a good life.

 

[Nike Jordan]

When rich people get money from the government, it's called a tax credit.

When poor people get money from the government, it's called a handout.

 

[Nike Jordan]

When rich people get money from the government, it's called a tax credit.

When poor people get money from the government, it's called a handout.

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Budweiser

This dude enPHan is really batting a thousand between this and the Ninjahood thread.

my man

  

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Budweiser

This dude enPHan is really batting a thousand between this and the Ninjahood thread.

my man

  

 

[lostsoulswander]

Originally Posted by mustbefire

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Why AA as if they are the only poor folks?

?

 

[lostsoulswander]

Originally Posted by mustbefire

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Why AA as if they are the only poor folks?

?

 

[rexanglorum]

The political classes, especially those on the left, want more and more people to rely on government for more and more things, it expands their power. If we only had welfare for people who were poor, we could give them enough money to lift everyone above the poverty line and do so at a fraction of the cost for what we spend on programs that ostensibly exist to help the poor.

Helping poor people is a very good thing and this is where I diverge with my libertarian friends, who want to help the poor entirely through private charity. The World is a very random and capricious place and good people fall on bad times caused by things such as massive layoffs, natural disaster, illness, illness in the family and perhaps the most common cause of poverty, beyond the poor person's control, being born to and being the child of irresponsible and/or unlucky parents, who are poor. I am all for helping the poor with public money but we should do so differently then how it is done now.

We need a negative income tax, where people who make less then a certain amount of money (let us settle for the mean of the median income and the poverty line with 3,000 added per child, this number, about 30k for a single person) would get a subsidy of 50% of the difference between his or her wages and this target number so someone who is unemployed all year and makes no money would get 15k per year. If that person works and makes 20k per year, there is a 10k difference between his or her wages and the target number so he or she would get a 5k subsidy. After you surpass the traget number you would not be taxed 50%, you would be taxed nothing until you get to souble the target number, so 60k, and for every 30k above that your marginal tax rate would increase by 5 percentage points and cap out at 25% (so every dollar over 180k and up to infinity would be taxed at 25%).

This setup removes the welfare "poverty trap." Right now, people on welfare lose many benefits if they work because if they take a part time, minimum wage job they get certain non cash benefits removed and that means that from zero to about thirty thousand dollars of wages, you actually lose in terms of total income and that obviously incentivizes people on welfare (not to be confused with temporary unemployment insurance benefit payouts, which some conservatives have come to believe is the primary cause of high unemployment) to not work because it harms themselves or their themselves and their children.

It is also terrible that welfare currently discourages marriage for single women on welfare. If there were negative income tax a poor women with or without kids could be married to the children's father, he could make a living and be a part of the household and the children would have more parental attention (which is a factor in brain development in very young children) and you would have government helping the working poor instead of creating a dependant underclass who live in conditions that all but guarantee that the next generation will be a part of that underclass.

In short, give poo people some money and remove the incentives that encourage work and family, two key components of removing, if not staving it off in the first place, persistent poverty. 

 

[rexanglorum]

The political classes, especially those on the left, want more and more people to rely on government for more and more things, it expands their power. If we only had welfare for people who were poor, we could give them enough money to lift everyone above the poverty line and do so at a fraction of the cost for what we spend on programs that ostensibly exist to help the poor.

Helping poor people is a very good thing and this is where I diverge with my libertarian friends, who want to help the poor entirely through private charity. The World is a very random and capricious place and good people fall on bad times caused by things such as massive layoffs, natural disaster, illness, illness in the family and perhaps the most common cause of poverty, beyond the poor person's control, being born to and being the child of irresponsible and/or unlucky parents, who are poor. I am all for helping the poor with public money but we should do so differently then how it is done now.

We need a negative income tax, where people who make less then a certain amount of money (let us settle for the mean of the median income and the poverty line with 3,000 added per child, this number, about 30k for a single person) would get a subsidy of 50% of the difference between his or her wages and this target number so someone who is unemployed all year and makes no money would get 15k per year. If that person works and makes 20k per year, there is a 10k difference between his or her wages and the target number so he or she would get a 5k subsidy. After you surpass the traget number you would not be taxed 50%, you would be taxed nothing until you get to souble the target number, so 60k, and for every 30k above that your marginal tax rate would increase by 5 percentage points and cap out at 25% (so every dollar over 180k and up to infinity would be taxed at 25%).

This setup removes the welfare "poverty trap." Right now, people on welfare lose many benefits if they work because if they take a part time, minimum wage job they get certain non cash benefits removed and that means that from zero to about thirty thousand dollars of wages, you actually lose in terms of total income and that obviously incentivizes people on welfare (not to be confused with temporary unemployment insurance benefit payouts, which some conservatives have come to believe is the primary cause of high unemployment) to not work because it harms themselves or their themselves and their children.

It is also terrible that welfare currently discourages marriage for single women on welfare. If there were negative income tax a poor women with or without kids could be married to the children's father, he could make a living and be a part of the household and the children would have more parental attention (which is a factor in brain development in very young children) and you would have government helping the working poor instead of creating a dependant underclass who live in conditions that all but guarantee that the next generation will be a part of that underclass.

In short, give poo people some money and remove the incentives that encourage work and family, two key components of removing, if not staving it off in the first place, persistent poverty. 

 

[38816]

sup rex?

thanks for blessing NT, as usual.

 

[38816]

sup rex?

thanks for blessing NT, as usual.

 

[rexanglorum]

Originally Posted by Cedric Ceballos 1995 Lakers

ninjahood wrote:

---

let's put it like this.....

do really want da return of da 70's poverty? if we don't support da poor (who gonna find ways to floss regardless) da streets gonna look like mad max and FAST...

i can remember time square when it looked like a smutt summit and grindhouse films ALL over, and porn and drugs ALLLL over da place.....

ill tell you this, you start messing with entitlements and social programs, ya betta let cats hold hammers, cuz there's NO WAY im steppin out my house lookin

icy without a burner....wolves would be would be out here starving.

ill put it like this.  i know a ton of people who abuse the system.  my take is this if their content with whatever handouts their getting and not trying to do better then let them have that and stay where they are.   i'd rather people go after corporate crooks and the people doing the big fraud rather then the people milking the government off of foodstamps and section 8.   i'm way more pissed off about companies screwing up getting tons of bailout money then spending that bailout money to go on corporate vacations and to throw big partys then i am about little jamal deciding to sell his food stamps to get some cool grey xi's


That is some real talk. In addition to disgusting bailouts for banks, much of the Federal Budget goes to medicare and social security, which any means testing so well off seniors get the taxes paid by even the lowest wage worker. Medicare and Social security should be a hedge for old people with no savings and it should be means tested. Much of the Stimulus spending went to benefit politically connted firms and contractors in States and regions and sectors of the economy with the smallest amount of recession induced hardship and pain. Very wealthy farmers get money not to grow crops, as part of a eight decade old effort on the part of government to keep up food prices. Well connected farmers and industry get tarriff protection against lower cost foreign grown or manufactured goods, which increases their profits while making poor people pay more for food, clothes and other basics that comprise most of their household budgets. We have some public employees who have pensions that are at or near six figures and they will get them for many more years than they actually worked.

There are so many instances of government taxing the poor and working class and redistributing wealth to middle class people, upper income people and wealthy people, that even with the money spent on Section 8, welfare, food stamps, pell grants and other forms of welfare like that, public finance increases the gap between rich and poor.

Free markets are criticized because they increase the gap between rich and poor in terms of income but in most cases every group gains but the top five or two or one percent expand at the fastest pace making the poor poorer in relative terms but richer in absolute terms. When it comes to government action, despite all of its populist bluster, it actually make the richer, the poorer (in absolute terms) and unlike in a market system, the gains by the rich do come directly at the expense of the poor.


When one makes any statement that draws upon well established and empirically demonstrated economic ideas it is usually dismissed as mere theory that does not hold up in the "real world" and yet so many people, otherwise smart and educated people, have not moved beyond an elementary school civics level of sophistication when it comes to thinking about politics and how political ideas and theory will hold up in "the real world." Too many people think that the outcome of a law will be what its sponsors say it will be instead of stopping to consider the incentives it creates and how it could be interpreted and bastardized by earmarks, riders, secret provisions, conference committee judges and then by lawyers and bureaucrats and over time by changing realities that out grow the language of the legislation and dilute, if not pervert it intentions.

Perhaps if people looked at how proposed and existing laws actually worked "in real life," things might not be so bad, especially with regard to so much redistribution of wealth away from the poor.

 

[rexanglorum]

Originally Posted by Cedric Ceballos 1995 Lakers

ninjahood wrote:

---

let's put it like this.....

do really want da return of da 70's poverty? if we don't support da poor (who gonna find ways to floss regardless) da streets gonna look like mad max and FAST...

i can remember time square when it looked like a smutt summit and grindhouse films ALL over, and porn and drugs ALLLL over da place.....

ill tell you this, you start messing with entitlements and social programs, ya betta let cats hold hammers, cuz there's NO WAY im steppin out my house lookin

icy without a burner....wolves would be would be out here starving.

ill put it like this.  i know a ton of people who abuse the system.  my take is this if their content with whatever handouts their getting and not trying to do better then let them have that and stay where they are.   i'd rather people go after corporate crooks and the people doing the big fraud rather then the people milking the government off of foodstamps and section 8.   i'm way more pissed off about companies screwing up getting tons of bailout money then spending that bailout money to go on corporate vacations and to throw big partys then i am about little jamal deciding to sell his food stamps to get some cool grey xi's


That is some real talk. In addition to disgusting bailouts for banks, much of the Federal Budget goes to medicare and social security, which any means testing so well off seniors get the taxes paid by even the lowest wage worker. Medicare and Social security should be a hedge for old people with no savings and it should be means tested. Much of the Stimulus spending went to benefit politically connted firms and contractors in States and regions and sectors of the economy with the smallest amount of recession induced hardship and pain. Very wealthy farmers get money not to grow crops, as part of a eight decade old effort on the part of government to keep up food prices. Well connected farmers and industry get tarriff protection against lower cost foreign grown or manufactured goods, which increases their profits while making poor people pay more for food, clothes and other basics that comprise most of their household budgets. We have some public employees who have pensions that are at or near six figures and they will get them for many more years than they actually worked.

There are so many instances of government taxing the poor and working class and redistributing wealth to middle class people, upper income people and wealthy people, that even with the money spent on Section 8, welfare, food stamps, pell grants and other forms of welfare like that, public finance increases the gap between rich and poor.

Free markets are criticized because they increase the gap between rich and poor in terms of income but in most cases every group gains but the top five or two or one percent expand at the fastest pace making the poor poorer in relative terms but richer in absolute terms. When it comes to government action, despite all of its populist bluster, it actually make the richer, the poorer (in absolute terms) and unlike in a market system, the gains by the rich do come directly at the expense of the poor.


When one makes any statement that draws upon well established and empirically demonstrated economic ideas it is usually dismissed as mere theory that does not hold up in the "real world" and yet so many people, otherwise smart and educated people, have not moved beyond an elementary school civics level of sophistication when it comes to thinking about politics and how political ideas and theory will hold up in "the real world." Too many people think that the outcome of a law will be what its sponsors say it will be instead of stopping to consider the incentives it creates and how it could be interpreted and bastardized by earmarks, riders, secret provisions, conference committee judges and then by lawyers and bureaucrats and over time by changing realities that out grow the language of the legislation and dilute, if not pervert it intentions.

Perhaps if people looked at how proposed and existing laws actually worked "in real life," things might not be so bad, especially with regard to so much redistribution of wealth away from the poor.

 

[doeboifreshsince88]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by Diego

Originally Posted by mondaynightraw

Kennedy Fried Chicken at 2AM SWAG. FLOW

  

fixed, thats what da kiddies say now

IM SUPRISED AT THE RACISM IN THIS THREAD, HOW DO YOU RACIALY PROFILE AND STEROTYPE THIS KIDS AS BEING ON WELFARE?????? BASED UPON THEM BEING FLY IN THE  HOOD, IM ASSUMING THERE IN THE HOOD BECAUSE THATS WHERE KENNEDY FRIED'S ARE FOUND IN NYC.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORK WHERE YOU GUYS ARE FROM, BUT THERE ARE MANY LOCAL HOOD SPOTS IN BROOKLYN, HARLEM ETC , WHERE YOU CAN GET PELLE PELLE'S FOR ALMOST HALF PRICE AND OTHER NAME BRANDS AS WELL.
IT IS DISGUSTING THAT SOME OF YOU GUESS ASSUME BECAUSE A PERSON IS "FLY " IN THE HOOD THE ARE HUSTLING THE SYSYTEM
THE MAJORITY OF THESE PEOPLE, ARE JUST BLOWING THEIR PAY CHECKS ON CLOTHES, AND USING THEIR CREDIT CARD

STOP BUYING INTO THESE RACIAL STEROTYPES, YOU GUY SHOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT
THE REAL CRIME IS HOW THESE JEWS IN BRROKLYN, WHO LIVE IN HUGE CRIBS AND ARE RICH, HAVE THEIR WIFE GET WELFARE WHEN THEY CAN AFFORD 2.
THERE ARE WAY MORE WHITE ABUSING/ USING THE SYSTEM THAN BLACKS THE FACTS ARE THERE, COME ON SON!

  

 

[doeboifreshsince88]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by Diego

Originally Posted by mondaynightraw

Kennedy Fried Chicken at 2AM SWAG. FLOW

  

fixed, thats what da kiddies say now

IM SUPRISED AT THE RACISM IN THIS THREAD, HOW DO YOU RACIALY PROFILE AND STEROTYPE THIS KIDS AS BEING ON WELFARE?????? BASED UPON THEM BEING FLY IN THE  HOOD, IM ASSUMING THERE IN THE HOOD BECAUSE THATS WHERE KENNEDY FRIED'S ARE FOUND IN NYC.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORK WHERE YOU GUYS ARE FROM, BUT THERE ARE MANY LOCAL HOOD SPOTS IN BROOKLYN, HARLEM ETC , WHERE YOU CAN GET PELLE PELLE'S FOR ALMOST HALF PRICE AND OTHER NAME BRANDS AS WELL.
IT IS DISGUSTING THAT SOME OF YOU GUESS ASSUME BECAUSE A PERSON IS "FLY " IN THE HOOD THE ARE HUSTLING THE SYSYTEM
THE MAJORITY OF THESE PEOPLE, ARE JUST BLOWING THEIR PAY CHECKS ON CLOTHES, AND USING THEIR CREDIT CARD

STOP BUYING INTO THESE RACIAL STEROTYPES, YOU GUY SHOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT
THE REAL CRIME IS HOW THESE JEWS IN BRROKLYN, WHO LIVE IN HUGE CRIBS AND ARE RICH, HAVE THEIR WIFE GET WELFARE WHEN THEY CAN AFFORD 2.
THERE ARE WAY MORE WHITE ABUSING/ USING THE SYSTEM THAN BLACKS THE FACTS ARE THERE, COME ON SON!

  

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by DoEBoiFreshsince88

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by Diego

Originally Posted by mondaynightraw

Kennedy Fried Chicken at 2AM SWAG. FLOW

  

fixed, thats what da kiddies say now

IM SUPRISED AT THE RACISM IN THIS THREAD, HOW DO YOU RACIALY PROFILE AND STEROTYPE THIS KIDS AS BEING ON WELFARE?????? BASED UPON THEM BEING FLY IN THE  HOOD, IM ASSUMING THERE IN THE HOOD BECAUSE THATS WHERE KENNEDY FRIED'S ARE FOUND IN NYC.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORK WHERE YOU GUYS ARE FROM, BUT THERE ARE MANY LOCAL HOOD SPOTS IN BROOKLYN, HARLEM ETC , WHERE YOU CAN GET PELLE PELLE'S FOR ALMOST HALF PRICE AND OTHER NAME BRANDS AS WELL.
IT IS DISGUSTING THAT SOME OF YOU GUESS ASSUME BECAUSE A PERSON IS "FLY " IN THE HOOD THE ARE HUSTLING THE SYSYTEM
THE MAJORITY OF THESE PEOPLE, ARE JUST BLOWING THEIR PAY CHECKS ON CLOTHES, AND USING THEIR CREDIT CARD

STOP BUYING INTO THESE RACIAL STEROTYPES, YOU GUY SHOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT
THE REAL CRIME IS HOW THESE JEWS IN BRROKLYN, WHO LIVE IN HUGE CRIBS AND ARE RICH, HAVE THEIR WIFE GET WELFARE WHEN THEY CAN AFFORD 2.
THERE ARE WAY MORE WHITE ABUSING/ USING THE SYSTEM THAN BLACKS THE FACTS ARE THERE, COME ON SON!

  

You got to understand NT is filled with spoiled dumb kids and have these people arent even black but will pretend to be black and bite our entire culture and say little slick +$%*. Yeah I know there isnt a specific way to be black but when you are on a forum basically dedicated to a black man (MJ) you kind of wonder how so many of these dudes get a pass with the racist +$%* they say.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by DoEBoiFreshsince88

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by Diego

Originally Posted by mondaynightraw

Kennedy Fried Chicken at 2AM SWAG. FLOW

  

fixed, thats what da kiddies say now

IM SUPRISED AT THE RACISM IN THIS THREAD, HOW DO YOU RACIALY PROFILE AND STEROTYPE THIS KIDS AS BEING ON WELFARE?????? BASED UPON THEM BEING FLY IN THE  HOOD, IM ASSUMING THERE IN THE HOOD BECAUSE THATS WHERE KENNEDY FRIED'S ARE FOUND IN NYC.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORK WHERE YOU GUYS ARE FROM, BUT THERE ARE MANY LOCAL HOOD SPOTS IN BROOKLYN, HARLEM ETC , WHERE YOU CAN GET PELLE PELLE'S FOR ALMOST HALF PRICE AND OTHER NAME BRANDS AS WELL.
IT IS DISGUSTING THAT SOME OF YOU GUESS ASSUME BECAUSE A PERSON IS "FLY " IN THE HOOD THE ARE HUSTLING THE SYSYTEM
THE MAJORITY OF THESE PEOPLE, ARE JUST BLOWING THEIR PAY CHECKS ON CLOTHES, AND USING THEIR CREDIT CARD

STOP BUYING INTO THESE RACIAL STEROTYPES, YOU GUY SHOULD BE SMARTER THAN THAT
THE REAL CRIME IS HOW THESE JEWS IN BRROKLYN, WHO LIVE IN HUGE CRIBS AND ARE RICH, HAVE THEIR WIFE GET WELFARE WHEN THEY CAN AFFORD 2.
THERE ARE WAY MORE WHITE ABUSING/ USING THE SYSTEM THAN BLACKS THE FACTS ARE THERE, COME ON SON!

  

You got to understand NT is filled with spoiled dumb kids and have these people arent even black but will pretend to be black and bite our entire culture and say little slick +$%*. Yeah I know there isnt a specific way to be black but when you are on a forum basically dedicated to a black man (MJ) you kind of wonder how so many of these dudes get a pass with the racist +$%* they say.

 

[38816]

cut it out.

nike > MJ

 

[38816]

cut it out.

nike > MJ

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

cut it out.

nike > MJ

yeah right because you guys would wear the shoes without MJ, Griffey, Penny, Bo Jackson, Charles Barkley, Pippen, Lebron, Kobe, and the rest of them.

 

[usainboltisfast]

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

cut it out.

nike > MJ

yeah right because you guys would wear the shoes without MJ, Griffey, Penny, Bo Jackson, Charles Barkley, Pippen, Lebron, Kobe, and the rest of them.

 

[38816]

you guys?

besides, nike dunks are my favorite shoe....

i like the shoes based on the shoes.

jordan brand is a subsidiary of nike...

this is a pointless argument and im not even gonna respond after this post...

you just sounding real upset over some idiot's comments on niketalk, bruh

and you letting it make you sound ignorant...you and ole boy you quoted and agreed with...

crying about prejudice and racist comments, in the same breath condemning "THOSE OLD JEWS IN BROOKLYN"

smarten up, nas