***Official Political Discussion Thread***

aepps20 said:
Crooked Abe or Delk as I call him had an economy that was clearly booming with da free labor B. Most African Americans loved da conditions in da south until liberal conjecture and innuendo fooled them.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of something I heard when I foolishly dabbled in libertarianism for those few months. One thing that knocked me to my senses was meeting committed hardcore libertarians; the another was some Milton Friedman clips.

He was arguing that the minimum wage should be abolished, partly because it was racist against African Americans; that the minimum wage is responsible for higher unemployment in the black community. His argument: The country sends black kids to failings school that doesn't prepare them for the labor market. So when employers are forced to pay black people a wage they don't deserve, the employers choose not to hire them.

Now I was young and naive, but that came off as bull**** to me. But because I am black, so in even my ignorance of economics, I had experiences and knowledge past down to me that made me realize dude might be mistaken. However, he was not just mistaken; he was intentionally finessing and peddling nonsense.

He then proceeds to say that proof the minimum wage is discriminatory is that there was a period in America when the black community was at full employment in the United States. That's right, when black people were slaves and earning no compensation for their labor; they were all gainfully employed. :smh: :lol:

To this day, this still stands as one of the most racist arguments in regards to economic conditions facing the black community I have ever heard someone utter. As time goes one and I learned more I learned and experienced, the more racist I found it.

Ole boy found a way to make advocates of having a respectable minimum wage the enemy of the black community. And weaved a narrative that lets racist and neoliberals of the hook, and tops it off my implicitly making slave owners good actors.

I can only imagine the amount of young white males and Karens that heard that argument and thought, "Wow, that makes so much sense.." And believe that it is in no way racist because Milty said slavery was wrong during the hot take.

This is the type of **** the Justin Amashs of the world think is insightful.
 
Last edited:
RustyShackleford said:
This reminds me of something I heard when I foolishly dabbled in libertarian for those few months. One thing that knocked me to my senses was meeting committed hardcore libertarians; another was some Milton Friedman clips.

He was arguing that the minimum wage should be abolished, partly because it was racist against African Americans; that the minimum wage is responsible for higher unemployment in the black community. The country sends black kids to failings school that doesn't prepare them for the labor market. So when employers are forced to pay black people a wage they don't deserve, the employers choose not to hire them.

Now I was young and naive, but that came off as bull**** to me. But because I was black, so in even my ignorance of economics, I had experiences and knowledge past down to me that had me realize dude might be mistaken. However, he was not mistaken; he was finessing.

He then proceeds to say that proof the minimum wage is discriminatory is that there was a period in America when the black community was a t full employment in the United States. That's right when black people were slaves and earning no compensation for their labor; they were all gainfully employed. :smh: :lol:

To this day, this still stands as one of the most racist arguments in regards to economic conditions facing the black community I have ever heard someone utter. As time goes one and I learned more I learned and experienced, the more racist I found it.

Ole boy found a way to make advocates of having a respectable minimum wage, the enemy of the black community. And weaved a narrative that lets racist and neoliberals of the hook, and top it off my implicitly making slave owners good actors.

I can only imagine the amount of young white males and Karens that heard that argument and thought, "Wow, that makes so much sense.." And believe that it is in no way racist because he said slavery was wrong during the hot take.

This is the type of **** the Justin Amashs of the world think is insightful.
Click to expand...


It's a thing where; If you assumed that nothing else can be changed, maybe* you could make the case that lower or no minimum wage floor is better for marginalized communities than the alternative of no wages via unemployment.

The problem is all those people, who sing the praises of not giving black people minimum wage protection, don't operate with the assumption that nothing else can change. Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Donald Boudreaux, Megan McCardle, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Justin Amash etc are either journalists, economists-turned-pundit or politicians who do offer up opinions on a range of public policy items and they, reliably, offer nothing that would close any black-white skill**, education, proximity to capital, social power gaps that can make a limited in scope argument against the minimum wage viable.


* Even then, there are good micro economics based arguments for raising the minimum wage, chiefly that you could simulate what the equilibrium wage would be under conditions of higher rates of public sector unionization.

** I'm reluctant to even mention "skill" because it's used as a cudgel to justify income inequality. skill does matter but it's just part of several factors that determine wages. Also, skills are jobs specific and the way you develop those skills is by doing a similar jobs or doing the same job for a different employer. It also means that for a time, your skills at that job are going to be relatively low and a firm may be paying you,for a while, a wage that is less than your contributions to a firm's profits.

Eventually your contribution will be greater than your wage but firms do have to take a chance hiring people and living with a period of essentially losing money. So they rely on signals like employment history and/or education which would suggest that a new hire will catch up quickly and bring their marginal contributions above their wage quickly.

The other signals to firms are being white, being male, being able bodied etc. If you consider that a problem and if you consider that unjust, you'd have to advocate for private sector affirmative action and/or a comprehensive public option for jobs. None of the people mentioned above advocate for either of those things. In fact they want to roll back or eliminate most Federal employment which acts as a limited but important ersatz public job option for non white, non male workers.

All the people I named want lots of white workers to be part of a desperate, precarious reserve army of labor and they want most black people to make up an even more desperate and precarious second line reserve army of labor.
 
RustyShackleford said:
This reminds me of something I heard when I foolishly dabbled in libertarianism for those few months. One thing that knocked me to my senses was meeting committed hardcore libertarians; the another was some Milton Friedman clips.

He was arguing that the minimum wage should be abolished, partly because it was racist against African Americans; that the minimum wage is responsible for higher unemployment in the black community. His argument: The country sends black kids to failings school that doesn't prepare them for the labor market. So when employers are forced to pay black people a wage they don't deserve, the employers choose not to hire them.

Now I was young and naive, but that came off as bull**** to me. But because I am black, so in even my ignorance of economics, I had experiences and knowledge past down to me that made me realize dude might be mistaken. However, he was not just mistaken; he was intentionally finessing and peddling nonsense.

He then proceeds to say that proof the minimum wage is discriminatory is that there was a period in America when the black community was at full employment in the United States. That's right, when black people were slaves and earning no compensation for their labor; they were all gainfully employed. :smh: :lol:

To this day, this still stands as one of the most racist arguments in regards to economic conditions facing the black community I have ever heard someone utter. As time goes one and I learned more I learned and experienced, the more racist I found it.

Ole boy found a way to make advocates of having a respectable minimum wage the enemy of the black community. And weaved a narrative that lets racist and neoliberals of the hook, and tops it off my implicitly making slave owners good actors.

I can only imagine the amount of young white males and Karens that heard that argument and thought, "Wow, that makes so much sense.." And believe that it is in no way racist because Milty said slavery was wrong during the hot take.

This is the type of **** the Justin Amashs of the world think is insightful.
Click to expand...
rexanglorum said:
It's a thing where; If you assumed that nothing else can be changed, maybe* you could make the case that lower or no minimum wage floor is better for marginalized communities than the alternative of no wages via unemployment.

The problem is all those people, who sing the praises of not giving black people minimum wage protection, don't operate with the assumption that nothing else can change. Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Donald Boudreaux, Megan McCardle, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Justin Amash etc are either journalists, economists-turned-pundit or politicians who do offer up opinions on a range of public policy items and they, reliably, offer nothing that would close any black-white skill**, education, proximity to capital, social power gaps that can make a limited in scope argument against the minimum wage viable.


* Even then, there are good micro economics based arguments for raising the minimum wage, chiefly that you could simulate what the equilibrium wage would be under conditions of higher rates of public sector unionization.

** I'm reluctant to even mention "skill" because it's used as a cudgel to justify income inequality. skill does matter but it's just part of several factors that determine wages. Also, skills are jobs specific and the way you develop those skills is by doing a similar jobs or doing the same job for a different employer. It also means that for a time, your skills at that job are going to be relatively low and a firm may be paying you,for a while, a wage that is less than your contributions to a firm's profits.

Eventually your contribution will be greater than your wage but firms do have to take a chance hiring people and living with a period of essentially losing money. So they rely on signals like employment history and/or education which would suggest that a new hire will catch up quickly and bring their marginal contributions above their wage quickly.

The other signals to firms are being white, being male, being able bodied etc. If you consider that a problem and if you consider that unjust, you'd have to advocate for private sector affirmative action and/or a comprehensive public option for jobs. None of the people mentioned above advocate for either of those things. In fact they want to roll back or eliminate most Federal employment which acts as a limited but important ersatz public job option for non white, non male workers.

All the people I named want lots of white workers to be part of a desperate, precarious reserve army of labor and they want most black people to make up an even more desperate and precarious second line reserve army of labor.
Click to expand...
All of this.

And one way they get away with this is that they begin with the wrong questions and goals in mind. The most fundamental question and concern seems to be “What will help markets function more ‘efficiently’?” The embedded assumption is obviously that markets are the unassailable cornerstone of political economy and also that “efficiency” can be reduced to something along the lines of “distributing goods and services and attendant rewards and burdens appropriately according to market principles.” When things get more specific the question looks like “What effect does minimum wage have on levels of unemployment?” Again, the entire premise upon which this question and any assessment of evidence is rooted brings us back to markets and efficiency.

But these are the wrong questions we should be concerning ourselves with. The questions we should be starting with is “How do we create a society that ensures everyone’s needs are taken care of? How do we create a society that effectively maximizes everyone’s self-determination and self-actualization?” Then our analysis should follow from that foundation. Economic principles should be put to use in service of those concerns, not as a ****ing end in themselves.
 
Based Jesus said:
This man is a hero
Click to expand...


Snowflakes protesting but have protective coverings/masks on??? :rofl: :rofl:

39CCBC6B-A4AB-42E9-A3BF-2C2B0C169FE6.png
 
aepps20 said:
Dude is extremely high risk with his extra weight. Dude looks 345 easy.
Click to expand...
05fordgt said:
He'll live forever for breaking a chair and falling to the floor, when he was coming on the Philly Sports Radio 94 WIP morning show several years ago. Sat down and that chair didn't stand a chance!! And down he went!! And it was all on air!!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Click to expand...
A handsome 345, easy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

shaboozy
What's your NT routine?
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
ogbobbyjohnson773
ogbobbyjohnson773
chezzer10
***MLB FEET, EQUIPMENT, AND UNIFORMS 2024***NEW THREAD
2 3
Replies
74
Views
7K
mp23
mp23
datznasty
Official Niketalk Custom Basketball Shorts Thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
MakeNTGreatAgain
MakeNTGreatAgain

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom