“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#56359 Mar 13, 2014
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text> I usually disagree with Paul Ryan on almost everything....but, not this topic....Does Rep. Barbara Lee dispute this problem, within black culture?
No, I think she disputes the ludicrous, inaccurate and damaging notion that the problem exists only within "black culture" (whatever that is).

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#56360 Mar 13, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I think she disputes the ludicrous, inaccurate and damaging notion that the problem exists only within "black culture" (whatever that is).
I would say, it predominates in black society...more than any other i can think of....
BO STINKS

Louisville, KY

#56361 Mar 13, 2014
Truth strike a nerve with ya Homestad ? Sounds like Ryan talking about you. LMAO !!!!
J McCain wrote:
Rep. Barbara Lee Hits Back at Paul Ryan’s Dog-Whistle Politics
California Representative Barbara Lee responded to Representative Paul Ryan’s Wednesday remarks lambasting “inner city” men for not “learning the value or culture of work.” Her message: we know whom you’re talking about, Mr. Ryan.
In a statement, Representative Lee called out the Wisconsin congressman for invoking dog-whistle politics to support work requirements for benefits. She did not hold back.
“My colleague Congressman Ryan’s comments about ‘inner city’ poverty are a thinly veiled racial attack and cannot be tolerated,” Lee said.“Let’s be clear, when Mr. Ryan says ‘inner city,’ when he says,‘culture,’ these are simply code words for what he really means:‘black.’”
Representative Lee added,“Instead of demonizing ‘culture,’ and blaming black men for their poverty, Mr. Ryan should step up and produce some legitimate proposals on how to tackle poverty and racial discrimination in America. His uninformed policy proposals continue to increase poverty, not solve it.”
Representative Ryan made his controversial remarks on Bill Bennett’s Morning in America radio show. Responding to a question about the “fatherless problem” in poor neighborhoods, Ryan said,“We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work.”
Read more here:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/178824/rep-barb... #
and here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Qkuu0Lwb5EMXX
BO STINKS

Louisville, KY

#56363 Mar 13, 2014
“For a lot of young boys and young men in particular, they don’t see an example of fathers or grandfathers, uncles, who are in a position to support families and be held up in respect,” Obama said.

“Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” Mr. Obama said, to a chorus of approving murmurs from the audience.“They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”

"whatever that is"
Al Sharpton

West Mifflin, PA

#56364 Mar 13, 2014
The amazing thing--or rather, one amazing thing--to me is if you pressed Ryan on this and pointed out how racist it is, he would deny it. He would deny any dog-whistle connection between "inner city" men and "blacks". It is just a coincidence, and you seeing anything more in it is PC mongering or some such.

And of course, this has been the playbook for the GOP since Nixon. Reagan did it pretty blatantly with his "welfare queen" epithet, along with giving a big speech on "state's rights" at the Neshoba County Fair in 1980. Bush with Willie Horton. Jesse Helms with the "hands" ad. And on and on. But oh, no; now that we have an African American President, racism is dead, right?

What a pile of horse manure.
BO STINKS

Louisville, KY

#56365 Mar 13, 2014
To anyone who believes a solid family structure is NOT the keystone to emotional and financial stability has been used and duped.

Stop listening to the sandal wearing Sociology 101 professors.
R Perry

West Mifflin, PA

#56366 Mar 13, 2014
BO STINKS wrote:
To anyone who believes a solid family structure is NOT the keystone to emotional and financial stability has been used and duped.
Stop listening to the sandal wearing Sociology 101 professors.
So you agree that white marriages that end up in divorce have an impact on families also ?
Concerned Erie Native

Baltimore, MD

#56367 Mar 13, 2014
R Perry wrote:
<quoted text> So you agree that white marriages that end up in divorce have an impact on families also ?
Do you ever get that feeling in the pit of your stomach that you're trying to reason with a stooge?

Just curious....

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#56368 Mar 13, 2014
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text> I would say, it predominates in black society...more than any other i can think of....
It doesn't. Poverty and unemployment (along with crime and drug abuse) are located wherever educational opportunities are insufficient. They are always the most insufficient in urban areas, which is where most black people live. Skin color isn't a determining factor for success. Education is. Come to West Virginia and I will show you terrible school districts full of white people. It isn't a coincidence that poverty is rampant there as well.

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#56369 Mar 13, 2014
BO STINKS wrote:
“For a lot of young boys and young men in particular, they don’t see an example of fathers or grandfathers, uncles, who are in a position to support families and be held up in respect,” Obama said.
“Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” Mr. Obama said, to a chorus of approving murmurs from the audience.“They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”
"whatever that is"
All true. Was he talking about the back community? Nope. He was talking about all communities.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#56370 Mar 13, 2014
bacon hater wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't. Poverty and unemployment (along with crime and drug abuse) are located wherever educational opportunities are insufficient. They are always the most insufficient in urban areas, which is where most black people live. Skin color isn't a determining factor for success. Education is. Come to West Virginia and I will show you terrible school districts full of white people. It isn't a coincidence that poverty is rampant there as well.
Sure you can find specific pockets, but among blacks it is a national situation....most states offer very good public educations.....the denial of it, is the dishonor of it.....

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#56372 Mar 13, 2014
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text> Sure you can find specific pockets, but among blacks it is a national situation....most states offer very good public educations.....the denial of it, is the dishonor of it.....
Are you seriously claiming that schools in black neighborhoods are equal to those in rural areas or white neighborhoods? Why do the black kids in the white neighborhoods do so well? Another coincidence?

“Comfort the afflicted”

Since: May 13

Afflict the comfortable

#56373 Mar 13, 2014
Go Blue Forever wrote:
<quoted text> Sure you can find specific pockets, but among blacks it is a national situation....most states offer very good public educations.....the denial of it, is the dishonor of it.....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/stat...

Until we invest equally in all students, expecting equal results is an ignorant pursuit.
Obamanomics Folly

Scranton, PA

#56374 Mar 13, 2014
Over 500 economists against federal minimum wage increase
03/13/2014

Over 500 economists signed an open letter to the White House and Congress urging them to reject a federal minimum wage increase.

The list, which included three Nobel laureates and several veterans of past administrations, warned the minimum wage hike would cause economic damage.

“One of the serious consequences of raising the minimum wage is that business owners saddled with a higher cost of labor will need to cut costs, or pass the increase to their consumers in order to make ends meet. Many of the businesses that pay their workers minimum wage operate on extremely tight profit margins, with any increase in the cost of labor threatening this delicate balance,” read the letter.

It also cited the recent report by the Congressional Budget Office, which found that minimum wage increases would lead to lost jobs.

The Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) most recent report underscores the damage that a federal minimum wage increase would have. According to CBO, raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would cost the economy 500,000 jobs by 2016,” the letter staged.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/13/over-500-ec...
Winkonomics

Erie, PA

#56375 Mar 13, 2014
Obamanomics Folly wrote:
Over 500 economists against federal minimum wage increase
03/13/2014
Over 500 economists signed an open letter to the White House and Congress urging them to reject a federal minimum wage increase.
The list, which included three Nobel laureates and several veterans of past administrations, warned the minimum wage hike would cause economic damage.
“One of the serious consequences of raising the minimum wage is that business owners saddled with a higher cost of labor will need to cut costs, or pass the increase to their consumers in order to make ends meet. Many of the businesses that pay their workers minimum wage operate on extremely tight profit margins, with any increase in the cost of labor threatening this delicate balance,” read the letter.
It also cited the recent report by the Congressional Budget Office, which found that minimum wage increases would lead to lost jobs.
The Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) most recent report underscores the damage that a federal minimum wage increase would have. According to CBO, raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would cost the economy 500,000 jobs by 2016,” the letter staged.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/13/over-500-ec...
Let's throw a Republican wrench at the problem. If small business's "will need to cut costs" that means there's cuts to be made now that they are not making. That coupled with their "tight profit margin" means they may have to fail. Hey, we need both winners and losers in the economy don't we?*wink*

Tell the business owners to get a second or third job if they need to.*wink* Nobody's responsible for them going into a business the fails but them. They should take some personal responsibility.*wink*
Snitch McConnell

West Mifflin, PA

#56376 Mar 13, 2014
Minimum Wage Job-Loss Report Is Cause for Republican Punt

The report also showed that raising the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour may lift about 900,000 Americans out of poverty, supporting Democrats’ arguments in favor of the legislation.

Still, Republicans said the potential job losses outweighed those findings. Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, said the CBO report “confirms what we’ve long known.”

“The Republicans must not be viewed as the party that killed it,” Greenberg said today in a Bloomberg Television interview.“If they do that, they’re going to have a tough time in the forthcoming elections. So from a practical point of view I’d hope they’d get it done.”

Still, their average family income would be increased by about 3 percent, and about 900,000 people would be moved out of poverty, among about 45 million people who would be below that threshold under current law, according to CBO.

Read more here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-18/cbo-...
G Bush

West Mifflin, PA

#56377 Mar 13, 2014
For many decades, economic textbooks–following the orthodox view enunciated by, among others, the Chicago-school Nobel prizewinner George Stigler in 1946–said that raising the minimum wage would always cost the economy a significant number of jobs. The New York Times editorial page, in a mad moment, went so far as to propose in 1987 that the minimum wage be eliminated! But starting in the early 1990s, economists began noticing that those big predicted job losses weren’t actually, um, happening.

The most influential of these studies, by economists David Card (Berkeley) and Alan Krueger (Princeton, and until recently chairman of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers), appeared in 1994. Card and Krueger surveyed 410 fast-food restaurants in New Jersey, which raised its minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.05, and eastern Pennsylvania, which kept its state minimum wage at $4.25. The Gospel according to Stigler dictated that New Jersey’s 19% minimum-wage hike ought to have put fast food employees out of work. But no job loss was observed. Indeed, relative to eastern Pennsylvania, fast-food jobs increased slightly.

This bolstered earlier research by Card, Krueger, and Harvard’s Lawrence Katz that similarly found no job loss among teenage and fast food workers in California and Texas after the federal government raised the minimum wage 25%, from $3.80 to $4.75, in 1990 and 1991.

Why didn’t these minimum wage increases kill jobs? Partly because fast food joints raised prices to cover the increased cost of hiring; partly because a higher minimum wage meant less turnover, and therefore fewer resources diverted to hiring; and partly because a higher minimum attracted better employees (or perhaps motivated the same employees to become better).

Does that mean a minimum-wage increase will never eliminate jobs? Of course not, says Katz. If the minimum were raised as high as $15 per hour–as fast food protesters are currently demanding–“I would very strongly worry that there would be really large displacement effects.”(Not that these workers can be faulted for seeking $15; in politics, ask for $15 and you’ll maybe get $10 or $12.)

The CBO’s calculation that a minimum-wage increase would cost 500,000 jobs is based on a proposal by Sen. Tom Harkin, D.-Iowa, and Rep. George Miller, D.-Calif, to raise the minimum wage from the current $7.25 to $10.10. That’s a 39% increase, which is fairly big. Moreover, inflation hasn’t eroded the buying power of the current minimum wage, last increased in 2009, as much as it had when the federal minimum was raised in the early 1990s or in 2007. In those earlier instances, a decade had passed since the previous increase, and the economy had expanded much more than it’s been doing lately. The impact of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would therefore be greater (especially considering that it would henceforth increase with the cost of living—a proposition so dangerously socialistic that it’s been endorsed by Mitt Romney).

Read more here:

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/whos-right-minimum...
G Bush

West Mifflin, PA

#56378 Mar 13, 2014
1.) No politician or government official is free to say this, but—shhh!–even CBO’s projection of 500,000 jobs lost is not very high. During 2013, the economy added 194,000 jobs per month, a rate of increase that everybody agreed was bad. If the economy were to lose 500,000 jobs, that would equal the number of jobs created during less than three months of distressingly weak economic growth.“Relative to a stronger macro economy that is nothing,” says Katz.“A tight labor market would overwhelm [that] in terms of what it would do for disadvantaged workers.”

2.) Even CBO concedes that the number of jobs lost could be as low as zero. Less reassuringly, CBO puts its upper-range estimate at one million (but that really is outside mainstream calculations).

3.) The CBO did not conclude that raising the minimum wage is inherently a job-killer. When it considered the option of raising it to $9 without indexing future increases—as Obama proposed in last year’s State of the Union address, whittling down ever so slightly a campaign pledge from 2008–it calculated a best-case scenario in which the result would be a slight increase in employment, much like the one observed in New Jersey by Card and Krueger. CBO’s worst-case scenario was 200,000 jobs lost, and its actual estimate was 100,000 jobs lost—i.e., the equivalent of the number of jobs gained over two to six weeks during last year’s anemic expansion.

Read more here:

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/whos-right-minimum...
That Likeable Doofus

Scranton, PA

#56379 Mar 13, 2014
The persistent and sympathetic failings of Wile E. Obama
03/13/2014

Americans seem to think that President Obama is generally a nice guy, but not particularly capable. A January Associated Press Poll reported the president’s personal image to be positive with almost 60 percent of people seeing him as very or somewhat likable. Yet, his job approval has ticked down to almost 40 percent.

His recent announcement to work outside of Congress, foreign policy floundering and rather embarrassing public appearances (Between the Ferns is just painful to watch) have resulted less in scorn for the president, than a fairly sympathetic embarrassment for the man.

Mr. Obama’s dogged yet inept efforts bring to mind the similar persistent and sympathetic failings of Wile E. Coyote, the lovable cartoon character that continually applied absurdly complex and elaborate plans, without success. Both act with a dignified and implicit acknowledgement of their own genius.

There is a common audacity which instills a confidence — later proven to be less than fully justified – that makes the audience like them, even when the ultimate goal of the efforts – eating the Road Runner or the ACA – are unpleasant.

The plans of both are drawn out in elaborate detail and there is a certain initial, common acceptance that this idea seems to make sense. The rocket powered roller skates could – like affordable care – conceivably work as planned, if every single predicate assumption was correct and there were no other external factors that could otherwise influence the brilliance of the plan.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/13/the-persist...
Condi Rice

West Mifflin, PA

#56380 Mar 13, 2014
WOW almost 40% for Obama

Lets look at past Republican President low approval ratings:

Nixon 24%
Ford 37%
Reagan 35%
G H W Bush 29%
G W Bush 25%

Not a good average at all...

Looks like Obama's 40% beats out the last Republican Presidents in the last 40 years !!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hanover Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Half Pint Creamery plans second ice cream shop Tue Davenport 4
Snyder's of Hanover (Aug '09) Mar 30 Norman Greenbaum 5,720
Snyder lance Mar 25 Nelson 1
Second eagle Mar 22 Vlossak 1
Rachel Caltrider????? Mar 18 Just looking 1
Bald Eagle Live Stream, Hanover Mar 5 Birder1810 1
News Carl's Creations: A once-blooming business says... Feb '15 Steve Gratman 2
More from around the web

Hanover People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]