Jerry Jones and the entire Cowboys team take the knee
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
wait.....wasn't black support for demmycrats waaaay down in 2016?.....
no jones is a sell out,solidarity for what ,disrespecting the fallen,jerry jones has screw up.
you prove you have no clue.
the good old race card ,the same old tired race card,no hell no this is not about race,this is about pissing on the graves of the fallen,yes i know what they mean this is all about the poor black man. the taxpayers have spent over 22 trillion on the war on poverty ,most of that money came from white tax payers.
yet we are a nation of racist,come on man.
Althea
Althea told me...
I've been giving my old buddy Cosmic a chance as his new persona. He's trying to temper his delusions, but in the end he's still unwilling to admit the obvious.
Shame really. Hillary has gotten into his head, and he can't get her out.
Althea
Althea told me...
I'm sure he'd be asked about it, and we'd get to hear what he believes the shirt is all about. The interesting question would be how the fan base reacted to whichever side he came down on.
I always consider you a friend ****. I argue politics like a dog on a bone-but it's never personal with you
cawacko
Well-known member
Quote Originally Posted by TTQ64 View Post
Remember sundown towns
Redlining
Blockbusting
Federal housing administration
Never mind.........too many racist real estate laws to count.
And this fool wants to blame "liberal policies'.........GTFOH
Yes, TTQ64. How many more articles do I need to post referencing historical racism in housing? Yet what you and BAC choose to ignore is the same land use and zoning policies used back then are being used in liberal cities today, thus driving up prices and forcing POC out.
Again, I can only post so many articles and examples of this. For some reason you two choose to ignore it or it's possible just don't understand how it works.
Remember sundown towns
Redlining
Blockbusting
Federal housing administration
Never mind.........too many racist real estate laws to count.
And this fool wants to blame "liberal policies'.........GTFOH
Yes, TTQ64. How many more articles do I need to post referencing historical racism in housing? Yet what you and BAC choose to ignore is the same land use and zoning policies used back then are being used in liberal cities today, thus driving up prices and forcing POC out.
Again, I can only post so many articles and examples of this. For some reason you two choose to ignore it or it's possible just don't understand how it works.
Getin the ring
Verified User
I have a question,
Is it not fact that almost every major urban populace in this country, the very places these housing policies you are citing as having impact on minorities are legislated by overwhelmingly Democrat politicians?
Almost without exception.
And the same goes with gun violence, drugs, crime ridden inner cities run by (((drum roll)))) Democrats
So are you kind of protesting yourself really?
cawacko
Well-known member
who are you responding to?
cawacko
Well-known member
Why has there been an exodus of black residents from West Coast liberal hubs?
The Black Lives Matter movement has brought the challenges facing black America to the fore, and introduced racially conscious quality-of-life questions into the national debate. How are black residents in America's cities faring? And how are those cities doing in meeting the aspirations of their black residents, judged especially by the ultimate barometer: whether blacks choose to move to these cities, or stay in them?
Though results vary to some extent, the broad trend is clear: West Coast progressive enclaves are either seeing an exodus of blacks or are failing to attract them. Midwestern and Northeastern urban areas are attracting blacks to the extent that they are affordable or providing middle class economic opportunities. And Southern cities are now experiencing the most significant gains.
Portland is part of the fifth-whitest major metropolitan area in America. Almost 75% of the region is white, and it has the third-lowest percentage of blacks, at only 3.1%. (America as a whole is 13.2% black.) Portland proper is often portrayed as a boomtown, but the city's shrinking black population doesn't seem to think so. The city has lost more than 11.5% of its black residents in just four years. It's similar to Seattle, where the central city's black population has fallen as the overall region's has grown.
Lower down the coast, the San Francisco Bay area has lost black residents since 2000, though recent estimates suggest that it may have halted the exodus since 2010. San Francisco proper is only 5.4% black, and the rate is falling. The Los Angeles metro area, too, has fewer black residents today than in 2000.
If these figures merely reflected black consumer choice, they wouldn't necessarily matter; but the evidence suggests that specific public policies in these cities are to blame. Primary among them are restrictive planning regulations, common along the West Coast, that make it hard to expand the supply of housing. In a market with rising demand and static supply, prices go up.
As a rule, a household should spend no more than three times its annual income on a home. But in West Coast markets, housing-price levels far exceed that benchmark — a hardship that more severely affects blacks than whites because blacks start from further behind economically. Black median household income is only $35,481 a year, compared with $57,355 for whites. The wealth gap is even wider, with median black household wealth at only $7,133, compared with $111,146 for whites.
According to the Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey, the “median multiple” — the median home price divided by the median household income — should average about 3.0. But the median multiple is 5.1 in Portland, 5.2 in Seattle, 9.4 in San Francisco and 8.1 in Los Angeles.
Even some on the left recognize how development restrictions hurt lower- and middle-income people. Liberal commentator Matt Yglesias has called housing affordability “Blue America's greatest failing.” Yglesias and others criticize zoning policies that mandate single-family homes, or approval processes, like that in San Francisco, that prohibit as-of-right development and allow NIMBYism to keep out unwanted construction — and, by implication, unwanted people.
These commentators, however, ignore the role of environmental policy in creating these high housing prices. Portland, for example, has drawn a so-called urban-growth boundary that severely restricts land development and drives up prices inside the approved perimeter. The development-stifling effects of the California Environmental Quality Act are notorious. California also imposes some of the nation's toughest energy regulations, putting a financial burden on lower-income (and disproportionately black) households. Nearly 1 million households in the state spend 10% or more of their income on energy bills, according to a Manhattan Institute report by Jonathan Lesser.
It's not just liberal Western cities that are losing their black residents — many economically struggling Midwestern cities have the same problem. Detroit, Cleveland, Flint, and Youngstown all have declining black populations.
The greatest demographic transition is taking place in Chicago. A black population loss of 177,000 accounted for the lion's share of the city's total shrinkage during the 2000s. Another 53,000 blacks have fled the city since 2010. In fact, the entire metro Chicago area lost nearly 23,000 blacks in aggregate, the biggest decline in the United States.
But in northern cities with more robust middle-class economies, black populations are expanding. Since 2010, for example, metro Indianapolis added more than 19,000 blacks (6.9% growth), Columbus more than 25,000 (9%), and Boston nearly 40,000 (10.2%). New York's and Philadelphia's black population growth rates are low but positive, in line with slow overall regional growth.
The somewhat unlikely champion for northern black population growth is Minneapolis-St. Paul. Since 2010, the black population in the city has grown by 15,000 people, or 23%. The region added 30,400 black residents, growing by 12.1%.
Like Portland and Seattle, Minneapolis is considered a liberal stronghold. But, unlike those West Coast cities, it has cultivated a development environment that keeps housing affordable, with a home-price median multiple of only 3.2.
Similarly, in Columbus (with a median multiple of 2.9) and Indianapolis (also 2.9), black families can afford the American dream. (Boston, with its high housings costs, is an outlier.)
::
Where else are black Americans moving? One destination dominates: the South. A century ago, blacks were leaving the South to go north and west; today, they are reversing that journey, in what the Manhattan Institute's Daniel DiSalvo dubbed “The Great Remigration.” DiSalvo found that black Americans now choose the South in pursuit of jobs, lower costs and taxes, better public services (notably, schools) and sunny weather for retirement.
Historically, Southern blacks lived in rural areas. A large rural black population remains in the South today, often living in the same types of conditions as rural whites, which is to say, under significant economic strain. But the new black migrants to the South are increasingly flocking to the same metro areas that white people are — especially Atlanta, the new cultural and economic capital of black America, with a black population of nearly 2 million. The Atlanta metro area, one-third black, continues to add more black residents (150,000 since 2010) than any other region.
In Texas, Dallas has drawn 110,000 black residents (11.3% growth) and Houston just under 100,000 (9.2%) since 2010. Miami, with its powerful Latino presence that includes Afro-Latinos, also added about 100,000 blacks (8.3%). Today, Dallas, Houston, and Miami are all home to more than 1 million black residents.
Many smaller southern cities — including Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa, and Nashville — are seeing robust black population growth as well.
Not surprisingly, these southern cities are extremely affordable. A combination of pro-business policies combined with a development regime that permits housing supply to expand as needed has proved a winner. (Among these southern cities, only Miami, with its massive influx of Latin American wealth, is rated as unaffordable, with a median multiple of 5.6.)
::
When it comes to how state and local policies affect black residents' choices about where to live, cities with the West Coast model of liberalism are the worst performing.
These results should be troubling to progressives touting West Coast planning, economic, and energy policies as models for the nation. If wealthy cities like San Francisco and Portland — where progressives have near-total political control — can't produce positive outcomes for working-class and middle-class blacks, why should we expect their approach to succeed anywhere else?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0501-renn-reverse-great-migration-20160501-story.html
The Black Lives Matter movement has brought the challenges facing black America to the fore, and introduced racially conscious quality-of-life questions into the national debate. How are black residents in America's cities faring? And how are those cities doing in meeting the aspirations of their black residents, judged especially by the ultimate barometer: whether blacks choose to move to these cities, or stay in them?
Though results vary to some extent, the broad trend is clear: West Coast progressive enclaves are either seeing an exodus of blacks or are failing to attract them. Midwestern and Northeastern urban areas are attracting blacks to the extent that they are affordable or providing middle class economic opportunities. And Southern cities are now experiencing the most significant gains.
Portland is part of the fifth-whitest major metropolitan area in America. Almost 75% of the region is white, and it has the third-lowest percentage of blacks, at only 3.1%. (America as a whole is 13.2% black.) Portland proper is often portrayed as a boomtown, but the city's shrinking black population doesn't seem to think so. The city has lost more than 11.5% of its black residents in just four years. It's similar to Seattle, where the central city's black population has fallen as the overall region's has grown.
Lower down the coast, the San Francisco Bay area has lost black residents since 2000, though recent estimates suggest that it may have halted the exodus since 2010. San Francisco proper is only 5.4% black, and the rate is falling. The Los Angeles metro area, too, has fewer black residents today than in 2000.
If these figures merely reflected black consumer choice, they wouldn't necessarily matter; but the evidence suggests that specific public policies in these cities are to blame. Primary among them are restrictive planning regulations, common along the West Coast, that make it hard to expand the supply of housing. In a market with rising demand and static supply, prices go up.
As a rule, a household should spend no more than three times its annual income on a home. But in West Coast markets, housing-price levels far exceed that benchmark — a hardship that more severely affects blacks than whites because blacks start from further behind economically. Black median household income is only $35,481 a year, compared with $57,355 for whites. The wealth gap is even wider, with median black household wealth at only $7,133, compared with $111,146 for whites.
According to the Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey, the “median multiple” — the median home price divided by the median household income — should average about 3.0. But the median multiple is 5.1 in Portland, 5.2 in Seattle, 9.4 in San Francisco and 8.1 in Los Angeles.
Even some on the left recognize how development restrictions hurt lower- and middle-income people. Liberal commentator Matt Yglesias has called housing affordability “Blue America's greatest failing.” Yglesias and others criticize zoning policies that mandate single-family homes, or approval processes, like that in San Francisco, that prohibit as-of-right development and allow NIMBYism to keep out unwanted construction — and, by implication, unwanted people.
These commentators, however, ignore the role of environmental policy in creating these high housing prices. Portland, for example, has drawn a so-called urban-growth boundary that severely restricts land development and drives up prices inside the approved perimeter. The development-stifling effects of the California Environmental Quality Act are notorious. California also imposes some of the nation's toughest energy regulations, putting a financial burden on lower-income (and disproportionately black) households. Nearly 1 million households in the state spend 10% or more of their income on energy bills, according to a Manhattan Institute report by Jonathan Lesser.
It's not just liberal Western cities that are losing their black residents — many economically struggling Midwestern cities have the same problem. Detroit, Cleveland, Flint, and Youngstown all have declining black populations.
The greatest demographic transition is taking place in Chicago. A black population loss of 177,000 accounted for the lion's share of the city's total shrinkage during the 2000s. Another 53,000 blacks have fled the city since 2010. In fact, the entire metro Chicago area lost nearly 23,000 blacks in aggregate, the biggest decline in the United States.
But in northern cities with more robust middle-class economies, black populations are expanding. Since 2010, for example, metro Indianapolis added more than 19,000 blacks (6.9% growth), Columbus more than 25,000 (9%), and Boston nearly 40,000 (10.2%). New York's and Philadelphia's black population growth rates are low but positive, in line with slow overall regional growth.
The somewhat unlikely champion for northern black population growth is Minneapolis-St. Paul. Since 2010, the black population in the city has grown by 15,000 people, or 23%. The region added 30,400 black residents, growing by 12.1%.
Like Portland and Seattle, Minneapolis is considered a liberal stronghold. But, unlike those West Coast cities, it has cultivated a development environment that keeps housing affordable, with a home-price median multiple of only 3.2.
Similarly, in Columbus (with a median multiple of 2.9) and Indianapolis (also 2.9), black families can afford the American dream. (Boston, with its high housings costs, is an outlier.)
::
Where else are black Americans moving? One destination dominates: the South. A century ago, blacks were leaving the South to go north and west; today, they are reversing that journey, in what the Manhattan Institute's Daniel DiSalvo dubbed “The Great Remigration.” DiSalvo found that black Americans now choose the South in pursuit of jobs, lower costs and taxes, better public services (notably, schools) and sunny weather for retirement.
Historically, Southern blacks lived in rural areas. A large rural black population remains in the South today, often living in the same types of conditions as rural whites, which is to say, under significant economic strain. But the new black migrants to the South are increasingly flocking to the same metro areas that white people are — especially Atlanta, the new cultural and economic capital of black America, with a black population of nearly 2 million. The Atlanta metro area, one-third black, continues to add more black residents (150,000 since 2010) than any other region.
In Texas, Dallas has drawn 110,000 black residents (11.3% growth) and Houston just under 100,000 (9.2%) since 2010. Miami, with its powerful Latino presence that includes Afro-Latinos, also added about 100,000 blacks (8.3%). Today, Dallas, Houston, and Miami are all home to more than 1 million black residents.
Many smaller southern cities — including Charlotte, Orlando, Tampa, and Nashville — are seeing robust black population growth as well.
Not surprisingly, these southern cities are extremely affordable. A combination of pro-business policies combined with a development regime that permits housing supply to expand as needed has proved a winner. (Among these southern cities, only Miami, with its massive influx of Latin American wealth, is rated as unaffordable, with a median multiple of 5.6.)
::
When it comes to how state and local policies affect black residents' choices about where to live, cities with the West Coast model of liberalism are the worst performing.
These results should be troubling to progressives touting West Coast planning, economic, and energy policies as models for the nation. If wealthy cities like San Francisco and Portland — where progressives have near-total political control — can't produce positive outcomes for working-class and middle-class blacks, why should we expect their approach to succeed anywhere else?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0501-renn-reverse-great-migration-20160501-story.html
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
One really does have to dumb-down and become impervious to truth, logic, and common sense to support Trump.
MAGA my ass .. you also have to ignore the best interests of America and instead worship the interests of some obscene loud-mouth rich guy with a cloud of failure following him .. and who has never put America first in his entire life.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I have a boatload of answers to that article .. but since this isn't really a conversation .. I won't bother you with them.
Thanks
cawacko
Well-known member
I'd love to hear your responses if you have the time to type them out
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Let me repeat, this isn't really a conversation. You don't answer questions, you just ask them.
That's not how conversation works.
Thanks again.
cawacko
Well-known member
Because you were trying to move the conversation somewhere else. I was speaking about liberal policies in west coast cities and how those policies affect the cost of living and as such force out POC. You want to talk about a picture of Paul Ryan and Republican interns being white.
Althea
Althea told me...
My position is simple, and has been since day one. trump ran for POTUS for one reason...self promotion, and the hope of increasing the value of his brand. He never wanted to, nor expected to win. Everything trump does now, is aimed at increasing the revenue stream of other people's money into his pocket.
He pocketed $50million from his inauguration funds...all within the legal limits of such. His sleazy hotels are now charging more than before the election, often renting rooms to foreign dignitaries looking for something in return.
I told Cosmic back in January to watch for Paul Manafort when the truth comes out. That is finally coming to fruition.
Forget the fact that trump is an embarrassment. Forget that he's not qualified to occupy the White House. Forget the fact that he is clinically troubled, and is ultimately a danger to national security.
He's a walking, talking conflict of interest, and the entire Republican party is in consort to perpetrate this hoax.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I agree with every word of that.blackascoal
The Force is With Me
That's not how conversation works either. You don't get to frame the conversation by yourself.
You asked why republicans are always branded as racist, then you refused to acknowledge the obvious.
You presume to know more about what people of color think then actual people of color .. dismissing our experience for whatever supports your right-wing implanted beliefs.
Why talk about people of color when ALL races of people are leaving California for the same plethora of reasons?
You refuse to address why if liberal policies are such failures, why then won't Californians vote for republicans .. your team.
I'm not at all suggesting that you have to agree with me .. you're a republican. But if you actually wanted to have a conversation, you should figure out how that's done.