Interesting race topics . . .

[townsend]

So, they didn't give GI bills to black people that served? I'm seriously asking.

During segregation you could only go to black colleges if you were black, so there were much much fewer opportunities for black vets to cash in their GI bill.

 

[townsend]

Uhh, school taxes paid my way through high school. So, in essence, my parents paid for it. Not sure how the two relate.

It isn't just parents that pay school taxes, people without kids, like me, pay them too. If school taxes were only enforced on parents then the budget would be a lot tighter.

See that's how government aid works, people like me and you pay taxes to help others out, then we benefit by having a society full of educated people who may cure cancer, or invent a new way to bitch about the Cowboys on the internet.

 

[Cotton]

It isn't just parents that pay school taxes, people without kids, like me, pay them too. If school taxes were only enforced on parents then the budget would be a lot tighter.

See that's how government aid works, people like me and you pay taxes to help others out, then we benefit by having a society full of educated people who may cure cancer, or invent a new way to bitch about the Cowboys on the internet.

Well, hell, in that case, make college free for everyone. And burden the shit out of the tax payer to make it happen. I mean, that has worked so well in the past, might as well continue it. While we are at it, how the fuck are people going to be able to get to their jobs once they graduate? Make cars free for everyone, as well. Don't want to do it for everyone, you say? Then who gets to decide where that line is? We gonna make it a straight racial thing and give help only to black people? Seems pretty discriminatory for a political side that bolsters itself as inclusive and tolerant. You are sliding towards socialism in a way that terrifies me, to be honest. More government control results in terrible results. Just check out Venezuela if you need examples.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I think education should be affordable it's no secret that a 4 year degree used to be the price of a car, but now it's the price of a mortgage. I don't think anyone owed me my college education, although universities that take tax dollars owe their citizens more than they're offering.

But I should mention that I'm a the second GI Bill recipient in my family. My grandfather got his after WW2. At the same time as some black grandfather was being refused the education he earned, mine was getting a bachelors. When someone was unable to find a good job for lack of a degree, my grandfather got a job as an insurance adjuster that kept him comfortable and sent all his kids to college. When I grew up, my mom, who had a degree in education from Texas Tech, homeschooled me through the 5th grade. By the time I went to public school I was way ahead of my peers and was demolishing standardized tests. Even though my parents couldn't afford to pay for my college, I got waivers granted to enlist despite some breathing problems I had, on the strength of the 96 I scored on the ASVAB.

Without all of that, I may have never made it into the military, and never been able to go to college. All starting with a foundation of my grandfather having a skin color that allowed him to go to college.

Well my point was that you did something and someone else did something to allow you to utilize the benefit. You became entitled as a result of something earned.

Now my question you didn't address. Do you feel you should have been entitled to an education had you not earned it? Is it automatically owed to you?

 

[L.T. Fan]

How were you educated? I assume the government paid your way through high school, did that dependence on the gov't mess you up?

Do you still think the government has money? One of the greatest misnomers is that government has funds to utilize as they see fit or need to. The Government do not have one nickel. They never have since the Central bank was formed. The either tax for revenues or create money by first creating a debt through borrowings which is also owed by the public. Any money they appropriate or spend is on the public tab. There is no one else to raise revenues from. Businesses will not boost revenues because the taxes they pay it passed to their business recipients so is all filters to the public.

The government doesn't furnish funds for anything. They are a pass through system or a manager of the taxpayers debt through taxes or borrowings. The actual taxpayer for the most part resents government giving money to anyone that hasn't earned it or done something to deserve it.

 

[townsend]

Well, hell, in that case, make college free for everyone. And burden the shit out of the tax payer to make it happen. I mean, that has worked so well in the past, might as well continue it. While we are at it, how the fuck are people going to be able to get to their jobs once they graduate? Make cars free for everyone, as well. Don't want to do it for everyone, you say? Then who gets to decide where that line is? We gonna make it a straight racial thing and give help only to black people? Seems pretty discriminatory for a political side that bolsters itself as inclusive and tolerant. You are sliding towards socialism in a way that terrifies me, to be honest. More government control results in terrible results. Just check out Venezuela if you need examples.

Tolerance isn't pretending to be color blind. Helping people from races that have been impacted by generations of discrimination is how we try and even the playing field. Ignoring race would be ignoring discrimination, not fixing it. Did you know that a lot of universities have tuition waivers for Native Americans for the same reason? I bet you do.

BTW Germany has free tuition for everyone without collapsing into socialism, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but just like mass transit, Americans would rather pretend that any other way than the way we're doing it is impossible.

 

[skidadl]

Can we please stop using the phrase "reverse racism"? There is no such thing. It's just racism. No matter the color of the skin of the person doing it.

Thank you, carry on.

I completely reverse agree.

 

[Jiggyfly]

In statement to The News, DeSoto board president explains why no decision has been made yet about Todd Peterman
By Ben Baby , Staff Writer

DESOTO -- One of the reigning state football champions could be looking for a new coach.

The DeSoto ISD school board Monday discussed the status of coach Todd Peterman, who led the Eagles to their first state championship in 2016. After three hours of deliberation in a closed session, the school board took no action.

According to a report from The News earlier in the day, four of the seven board trustees were leaning toward firing Peterman, with Superintendent David Harris in favor of keeping the coach.

Board president Carl Sherman Jr. declined all questions following the meeting, which ended just after 11:30 p.m.

Sherman Jr. did, however, say this in a statement to The News:

"We've received information that warrants further consideration, and we've directed the Superintendent to conduct additional due diligence right away. We will release additional information as quickly as we possibly can."

The team's unofficial chaplain, Abe Cooper, told the board and the audience he hoped race wasn't a factor regarding Peterman's status at DeSoto.

"We pray that that's not the case and he will be renewed," Cooper said.

Peterman is white. In 2015-16, 80.4 percent of DeSoto's 2,440 students identified as African-American, according to a report from the Texas Education Agency.

Peterman was promoted in 2015 after seven seasons as the team's offensive coordinator. Peterman took over after former coach Claude Mathis, who is black, took an assistant position at SMU.

DeSoto went 16-0 last season and won the Class 6A Division II state title.

Former NFL linebacker Zach Orr, a DeSoto and North Texas alumnus, indicated people were originally skeptical of Peterman's hire because of his race. He said that seems to be the reason behind the potential change.

"They act like they can't handle a white man running a predominantly black football team, which is very sad," said Orr, whose three brothers also played for DeSoto. "Me, I want what's best for the kids, our youth and our community. That's what Coach Peterman is."

Orr's father, Terry, was one of the members of the public who spoke during the open session and hoped race wasn't a factor in the current situation.

Former board member Vandous Stripling said six of the board's seven members originally voted to hire Peterman. Stripling, who served from 2010 to 2016 and is running for a vacancy, said the statement regarding the race issue doesn't fit the community.

"To make this that it's a race thing, if it would have been a race thing, we'd have never hired him," Stripling said.

Roughly 30 to 40 football players were at the meeting in support of their head coach, according to senior Xavier Newman, a Baylor signee.

"He's just been a good role model toward me and the rest of my teammates and stuff," Newman said. "Just hearing they were going to fire him and they didn't have a logical reason to fire him, it wasn't right."
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

This is fucking ridiculous.

This stuff happens all the time to black coaches, welcome to reality.

And it is wrong both ways.

 

[Jiggyfly]

So, they didn't give GI bills to black people that served? I'm seriously asking.

 

[2233boys]

Equal rights isn't even the issue with this program mindset. It's more like a consequence reliever. What was done with the Africans who were forced into slavery is completely abhorrent. I think most will agree on that. The question now is are subsequent generations of the nation responsible to try to appease this act by rewarding subsequent generations of the victims? Is there actual justice in reporation to current American citizens?

If this is an acceptable method of redemption for the acts of national ancestors then how are similiar issues such as the treatment to the Native American Indians to be dealt with or has the Native American already been made right by the acts of the Federal Government? Then there is the question of why should succeeding generations of the Africans and Native American benefit at all since the were not victums of the wrongful acts?

The Federal Government has already mandated equal rights as the remedy for all citizens of this country so what is left to do? Am I responsible for the historical acts and are the descendants of the victums entitled to something from me?

You bring up a very good point, how does reparations (monetarily which is what most people think) really helping those enslaved over a century ago or those treated as second class citizens a half century ago, or even to those murdered, their land taken, their heritage stripped. It's a tough topic with mp easy answer.

Some want monetary reparations as I spoke of earlier, but what is fair and how do you determine who gets what? I don't think that is an answer at all, and does nothing to improve anyone's status or position.
Others look at educational advantages or business i.e. grants or aid, business loans etc. set up for those descended from the people mistreated by our government. I find the second solution more palatable, and a way to improve a family's situation or position.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Tolerance isn't pretending to be color blind. Helping people from races that have been impacted by generations of discrimination is how we try and even the playing field. Ignoring race would be ignoring discrimination, not fixing it. Did you know that a lot of universities have tuition waivers for Native Americans for the same reason? I bet you do.

BTW Germany has free tuition for everyone without collapsing into socialism, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but just like mass transit, Americans would rather pretend that any other way than the way we're doing it is impossible.

Fix racism with more racism. That's absolutely ludicrous to me.

And as far as free tuition is concerned, there is a difference between "can have free tuition" and "should have free tuition." Yes it can be done but that doesn't mean it isn't detrimental to our economy or our society.

 

[townsend]

Fix racism with more racism. That's absolutely ludicrous to me.

And as far as free tuition is concerned, there is a difference between "can have free tuition" and "should have free tuition." Yes it can be done but that doesn't mean it isn't detrimental to our economy or our society.

Fixing racism with racism is the most ridiculous simplistic interpretation I could possible think of. That's like saying that setting a bone is fixing a broken bone with a broken bone.
Or returning stolen money is "fixing theft with theft".

An action designed specifically to counteract a negative action is going to operate inside the same parameters. If a race is injured by discrimination it will take acknowledgement of that race to counteract it.

If you accidentally poison a municipality's water supply the people who should be reimbursed are the people in that municipality. You aren't discriminating against people who get their water elsewhere, they just weren't affected, so they aren't entitled to damages.

 

[townsend]

And as far as free tuition is concerned, there is a difference between "can have free tuition" and "should have free tuition." Yes it can be done but that doesn't mean it isn't detrimental to our economy or our society.

I tend to agree. My point was that free tuition doesn't mean that capitalism would die. It's an investment in the workforce that can pay off, but like single payer healthcare, its success depends mostly on execution.(Something I estimate ze Germans are much better at)If the gov't agreed to pay sticker price for college tuition for anyone who wanted to study anything, I think it could be an enormous money pit. Just like with healthcare, we need to address the cause of the ridiculous prices, not just write a blank check.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

If you accidentally poison a municipality's water supply the people who should be reimbursed are the people in that municipality. You aren't discriminating against people who get their water elsewhere, they just weren't affected, so they aren't entitled to damages.

It's because you don't view the government as "taking money" in order to hand it out. You should but you don't. The fact is the money the government hands out came from the hard working tax paying people. So what you're really saying is I'm going to take from one group and give to another based on race. That is like the definition of racism.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I tend to agree. My point was that free tuition doesn't mean that capitalism would die. It's an investment in the workforce that can pay off, but like single payer healthcare, its success depends mostly on execution.(Something I estimate ze Germans are much better at)If the gov't agreed to pay sticker price for college tuition for anyone who wanted to study anything, I think it could be an enormous money pit. Just like with healthcare, we need to address the cause of the ridiculous prices, not just write a blank check.

I think a big reason for the ridiculous college prices is a direct result of government intervention with regards to student loans. If you want to bring down the cost of a college tuition you have to stop giving out unsecured loans with a blank check and then basically saying those loans "are exempt" from the bankruptcy laws like every other loan.

But yeah tuition costs need to come down. Hell when the government stopped giving out student loans to certain "for profit" colleges, those colleges quickly went out of business. But yeah free college wouldn't destroy capitalism. It is just essentially another step away from it. But we see that all the time.

 

[Cotton]

It's because you don't view the government as "taking money" in order to hand it out. You should but you don't. The fact is the money the government hands out came from the hard working tax paying people. So what you're really saying is I'm going to take from one group and give to another based on race. That is like the definition of racism.

Nope, because you can't be racist against white people. It's in the rules.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Nope, because you can't be racist against white people. It's in the rules.

It's crazy to me that people can be so against racism when it hurts blacks but when it comes to racism against every other community it's ok.

 

[Cotton]

It's crazy to me that people can be so against racism when it hurts blacks but when it comes to racism against every other community it's ok.

There aren't enough reparations in the world to make up for slavery 300 years ago for some people. It will never ever be enough. Hence my comments earlier about where do we draw the line. Which, btw, went unanswered. Because you can't answer that question if you are willing to take any amount from one group to give to another. Socialism doesn't work in moderation. It doesn't work period, but you know what I'm saying.

 

[Jiggyfly]

It's crazy to me that people can be so against racism when it hurts blacks but when it comes to racism against every other community it's ok.

Really?

 

[townsend]

It's crazy to me that people can be so against racism when it hurts blacks but when it comes to racism against every other community it's ok.

I think there certainly can be racism against whites. It's pretty difficult to track inside a country where you're considered the default race. But if a group of extremists beat up a white guy because of his race, or if a company specifically fired someone because of their race, I would consider that racism. It's just whites as a race (if you can call them a race since different ethnicities have been considered white or not white depending on the era) haven't endured baked in systemic racism like Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, etc. That's the thing about whiteness it's this made up thing that throughout American history meant "people we aren't discriminating against at this moment"

Are Jewish people white? I bet you the Ku Klux Klan didn't think so.

I'm sure that the Irish could probably claim a certain amoubt of discrimination that this day in England. In the US they weren't considered white for quite a while, until they were allowed to assimilate. That's the point, whiteness is frequently synonymous with acceptance US history. That doesn't mean people with white skin haven't been discriminated against, it means that when they were they had the status of "whiteness" withheld from them.