Jump to content

SCOTUS and whatnot


pfife

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, oblong said:

but the displaced white people could move to other nicer neighborhoods.  The displaced black people couldn't.  Not because they weren't capable.  They weren't allowed to.

Again, i'm not saying black people haven't had it harder.  But in the last 50 years, they were allowed to, but many, just like the poor white people that still live in Detroit, couldn't afford too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, oblong said:

They had choices where to build and they almost always picked the black  neighborhoods.

right. and that is where the basic problem is majoritarian democracy. A minority that is segregated into a small number of legislative districts will never have enough political leverage to reverse these kinds of decisions and is in fact the recipe for attracting them.

I'm not saying the answer to America's race problems is to throw out democracy, but that we first at least have to understand the basics of what is going on under the hood before we can figure out how to make the system work better for everyone. The weaknesses inherent in the system have to on the table for discussion instead of wrapped in a gauzy shroud of Founder worship, secured by American flag lapel pins. Otherwise we waste our time and energy arguing peripheral issues that never change anything anyway.

But it goes back to my basic contention about almost all of human existence: Humans build conceptual models of how things work but they are never more than approximations of the underlying reality. So the trick is not to fall so much in love with your models that you fail to see that every model  breaks down, requries constant tweaking, exceptions, regulation. In the US we have become really bad at this. We over commit to or cannonize models when most things are only good ideas up to a point: 'Free' markets being one easy example but the list is long and hits things at both ends of the political spectrum. And yes the current Constitution is even one. There is a reason they made it amendable, but you woudn't know it anymore.

Edited by gehringer_2
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Alright, you folks got me.  **** poor people of any other color but black.  We can't do two things at once, let's just focus on blacks and once we have that corrected we can see if anyone else was left behind.

Nobody is leaving anybody behind.  

Just because you try to address one action doesn't mean you are ignoring the other thing.  Supporting Breast Cancer research doesn't mean you don't give a **** about prostate cancer.  Or black lives for that matter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Alright, you folks got me.  **** poor people of any other color but black.  We can't do two things at once, let's just focus on blacks and once we have that corrected we can see if anyone else was left behind.

Conversely to your prior statement (not this one)...

Helping poor black people can also help poor white people, depending on the policy.

IE: Eliminate salary caps on SS deductions and that will allow the SS % withdrawn to drop for everyone. Which reduces tax burden for everybody except for those that get above the reduced SS % at the appropriate salary level. Helping the middle class and poor disproportionately to versus the impact on the higher middle & upper classes that still draw salary.

Of course, it requires employment to benefit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oblong said:

Nobody is leaving anybody behind.  

Just because you try to address one action doesn't mean you are ignoring the other thing.  Supporting Breast Cancer research doesn't mean you don't give a **** about prostate cancer.  Or black lives for that matter.

 

Actually my argument has been, using this analogy, let's focus on cancer.  But the response has been that breast cancer disappropriately affects people that have always been left behind on medical issues.  Additionally, people with ball cancer have never had to move because the city wanted to put in a freeway and even if they did, statistically speaking, they could afford anyway.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCOTUS cleaning house today! Gotta pay that student loan YOU signed up for.

The 6-3 decision, with conservative justices in the majority, effectively killed the $400 billion plan, announced by President Joe Biden last year, and left borrowers on the hook for repayments that are expected to resume by late summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't denying a marginal student college admission actually doing them somewhat of a favor since they are the ones most likely to be swimming in debt afterward? Less because they grow up poor, but more because they seem more likely to not make the grade and be left with tuition bills without a degree to show for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Also, if people paid as much attention on mobilizing for state legislature elections as they did complaining about the Supreme Court every June, a lot of this would be moot.

What do state legislatures have to do with the Supreme Court?  

If we're going to place blame anywhere, that belongs to all those people who decided to vote third party after their guy didn't win the nomination back in 2016.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Isn't denying a marginal student college admission actually doing them somewhat of a favor since they are the ones most likely to be swimming in debt afterward? Less because they grow up poor, but more because they seem more likely to not make the grade and be left with tuition bills without a degree to show for it.

the standard needs to be that a year of college at a state university should not cost any more than a student can reasonably be expected to earn in a summer job. In any society interested in participating in the future of civilization there needs to be at least that level of support for higher ed. That's the correct compromise between free - which would waste resources on the unserious, and still allowing any student with reasonable desire the chance at a degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jz68 said:

What do state legislatures have to do with the Supreme Court?  

If we're going to place blame anywhere, that belongs to all those people who decided to vote third party after their guy didn't win the nomination back in 2016.    

The Supreme Court, by and large, is sending stuff back to the states and empowering those legislatures. Dobbs, in particular...

Those legislatures have extreme Republican advantages, in part due to proactive gerrymandering, and in part because Dems just don't try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

The Supreme Court, by and large, is sending stuff back to the states and empowering those legislatures. Dobbs, in particular...

Those legislatures have extreme Republican advantages, in part due to proactive gerrymandering, and in part because Dems just don't try.

Ahhhh okay, I understand the point you were making.  Yeah, it would be nice if people were consistent with their voting habits.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about the poor or working class white kids that get the shaft because of AA.    It sucks.  It truly does.   But does it suck as much as slavery?  Does it suck as much as Jim Crow laws that were in effect in my lifetime?    If they want to blame someone, maybe ask some of their grandparents why they let this happen as long as they did.    I don't know, I think we owe a hell of a lot more than an easier path to college.   Historically in this country what White people have done to Black people is a crime against humanity itself.  AA is the least we can do.   And really the actual least.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

I wonder if this isn't a result Biden is happy to live with. He gets the props from the progressive wing, doesn't have to live with the results, which could be questionable. And he can further energize young voters on Supreme Court oppostion.

Edited by gehringer_2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard from several different commentators that the web designer and gay couple aren't even real people, it was all fake/hypothetical.   Like the supreme court deciding on an Esweig thread.  WTAF

Edited by pfife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...