Curiously, my GF showed me the application she got today, to get a mail in ballot. She did not ask for it, it just came. She got two of them.

(08-29-2020 10:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Not sure. Is there a number that would satisfy you that this isn't tokenism?

Not attempting to speak for OO, but for me the answer is no, there isn't.

And here's why. IMO they're trying to solve the wrong problem, so there is no number that is satisfactory.

To me the answer is not any sort of widespread institutional racism. The numbers just don't support that. What the numbers do support is that there are huge economic differences in how our legal system works. Poor Whites don't fare much, if any, better in the system than poor Blacks or Browns, and rich Blacks or Browns don't fare much, if any, worse in the system than rich Whites.

We have a system that creates a poor victim underclass, in order to create reliable votes for one political party. They tend to congregate together in less desirable physical areas, because real estate prices are driven by location, location, location. Like poor people who congregate anywhere, they resort to a lot of petty crime, leading in many cases to bigger crimes, in order to try to better their lot. Stealing a loaf of bread makes a lot more sense when you have no bread at home. And if you get caught, you can't afford top notch counsel. That leads to higher crime rates, and that in turn leads to more violent crime, and that leads to more intense confrontations with law enforcement. You get disproportionately higher crime rates and that leads to greater instances of "police brutality."

A liberal friend of mine commented that white privilege is that when he gets pulled over by a policeman, he worries about what he did and what the fine might be, whereas when a Black man gets pulled over by a policeman, he worries about whether he is going to die. Well, one big reason for that is if he gets pulled over, he isn't worried about three warrants that he has outstanding, so he doesn't need to try to resist in order to avoid going in for them.

I can't find any statistics, but I'd be willing to wager a considerable amount that the biggest disparity in how officer-citizen interactions end is not whether the citizen is White or Black, but whether the citizen resists or cooperates. Whenever a citizen resists, the officer immediately has to consider the risk that his life may be in danger. I'm not inclined to hold soldiers, or law enforcement officers, or anyone else, to the same standard of behavior when his/her life is immediately threatened as when it isn't.

If someone threatens my life, I am going to try to kill that person. I would never consider such action otherwise, but if my life is threatened the calculus moves.

So, if they are trying to solve the wrong problem, then what is the right problem and how do we solve it? I'd say end the welfare plantation that causes the permanent underclass. Truly create opportunity for all. Some won't take it, and that's on them. But the system should never hold anyone down. As the "Party of Lincoln," republicans should be leading the charge to emancipate the welfare plantation, but they seem content to let democrats continue to get away with, "Keep 'em dumb, keep 'em poor, keep 'em dependent on handouts, and you'll keep 'em voting democrat."

(08-30-2020 05:52 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-29-2020 10:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Not sure. Is there a number that would satisfy you that this isn't tokenism?

Not attempting to speak for OO, but for me the answer is no, there isn't.

And here's why. IMO they're trying to solve the wrong problem, so there is no number that is satisfactory.

To me the answer is not any sort of widespread institutional racism. The numbers just don't support that. What the numbers do support is that there are huge economic differences in how our legal system works. Poor Whites don't fare much, if any, better in the system than poor Blacks or Browns, and rich Blacks or Browns don't fare much, if any, worse in the system than rich Whites.

We have a system that creates a poor victim underclass, in order to create reliable votes for one political party. They tend to congregate together in less desirable physical areas, because real estate prices are driven by location, location, location. Like poor people who congregate anywhere, they resort to a lot of petty crime, leading in many cases to bigger crimes, in order to try to better their lot. Stealing a loaf of bread makes a lot more sense when you have no bread at home. And if you get caught, you can't afford top notch counsel. That leads to higher crime rates, and that in turn leads to more violent crime, and that leads to more intense confrontations with law enforcement. You get disproportionately higher crime rates and that leads to greater instances of "police brutality."

A liberal friend of mine commented that white privilege is that when he gets pulled over by a policeman, he worries about what he did and what the fine might be, whereas when a Black man gets pulled over by a policeman, he worries about whether he is going to die. Well, one big reason for that is if he gets pulled over, he isn't worried about three warrants that he has outstanding, so he doesn't need to try to resist in order to avoid going in for them.

I can't find any statistics, but I'd be willing to wager a considerable amount that the biggest disparity in how officer-citizen interactions end is not whether the citizen is White or Black, but whether the citizen resists or cooperates. Whenever a citizen resists, the officer immediately has to consider the risk that his life may be in danger. I'm not inclined to hold soldiers, or law enforcement officers, or anyone else, to the same standard of behavior when his/her life is immediately threatened as when it isn't.

If someone threatens my life, I am going to try to kill that person. I would never consider such action otherwise, but if my life is threatened the calculus moves.

So, if they are trying to solve the wrong problem, then what is the right problem and how do we solve it? I'd say end the welfare plantation that causes the permanent underclass. Truly create opportunity for all. Some won't take it, and that's on them. But the system should never hold anyone down. As the "Party of Lincoln," republicans should be leading the charge to emancipate the welfare plantation, but they seem content to let democrats continue to get away with, "Keep 'em dumb, keep 'em poor, keep 'em dependent on handouts, and you'll keep 'em voting democrat."

Nailed it.

It was a warrant, followed by noncompliance, that led to the Blake shooting, not his skin color. But the mob wants “justice”, which is NOT justice under the law, but vengeance.

My viewpoint is that Democarats/liberals keep trying to solve problems that don’t really exist, except in their own minds or in the deep recesses of history. Maybe this is just self-delusion, maybe it is for electoral advantage by blowing dog whistles to their base.

Police brutality? Not a big problem. Sure the rubber hoses used to come out, especially for poor and/or black people. I grew up pre-Miranda. Getting beat up by cops was a real concern those days, regardless of your race. These days,the “brutality mostly consists of being called “sir”in a flat tone of voice.

Systemic racism? Nice catch all explanation for any bad result, but although I have asked the following questions 1,000 times, I have yet to get even one answer. How come the PD is the only department of city, county, state,or national government to display this? Not the DMV, not zoning, not water and power. Second question. Why is it supposedly present in every department, coast to coast? Only in the PD, but in every PD? You guys sure come with a lot of conspiracy theories.

Voter suppression? Whoisbeing suppressed and how? Nobody will give poor Aunt Donna a ride to the DMV to get her free ID? Nobody will put a polling station within walking distance of Cousin Joe? Give me specifics of the problem LeBron and friends want to fix, and how they will fix it.

(08-30-2020 08:41 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  My viewpoint is that Democarats/liberals keep trying to solve problems that don’t really exist, except in their own minds or in the deep recesses of history. Maybe this is just self-delusion, maybe it is for electoral advantage by blowing dog whistles to their base.

I think many people like LeBron are 'useful tools' of those who seek to gain power through the argument, not the solutions.

You mention some things as 'not problems', and I might temper that somewhat. They are problems, but they are not problems that warrant 'outrage'. Outrage is necessary to enact 'solutions' without proper vetting or analysis.

(09-01-2020 01:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  those who seek to gain power through the argument, not the solutions.

Best description of the Democratic Party I have ever seen.

(09-01-2020 02:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-01-2020 01:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  those who seek to gain power through the argument, not the solutions.

Best description of the Democratic Party I have ever seen.

In fairness, Trump was elected on a similar outrage against fake news and being taken advantage of by our international 'friends'...

but the difference is, this outrage didn't seem to so easily turn to generic violence.

(09-01-2020 02:19 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-01-2020 02:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-01-2020 01:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  those who seek to gain power through the argument, not the solutions.

Best description of the Democratic Party I have ever seen.

In fairness, Trump was elected on a similar outrage against fake news and being taken advantage of by our international 'friends'...

but the difference is, this outrage didn't seem to so easily turn to generic violence.

Well, there WAS that one old coot who punched a demonstater at a rally...

Is the difference that Trump has taken action against our "international friends"?

I see fake news all the time on CNN and to a lesser extent, ABC.
For example

Now this...The NBA's swagger and joy of playing defies white supremacy

I normally just follow the NBA during the playoffs or 'second season'.

The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  Now this...The NBA's swagger and joy of playing defies white supremacy

I normally just follow the NBA during the playoffs or 'second season'.

The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

Not sure what that opinion piece has to do with watching the NBA. You don’t like Jamal Murray? Or do you not like that players held out?

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

That's been my normal for several years. Not because of BLM or protests or any of that, but because their product has become boring. Five guys throwing the ball around the perimeter until somebody jacks up a three is not basketball. It's like watching a game of H-O-R-S-E.

I prefer the days of Magic and Bird, when the ball moved into the post and back out, and driving the paint and moving without the ball meant something. Now nobody moves, with or without the ball.

(09-09-2020 05:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  Now this...The NBA's swagger and joy of playing defies white supremacy

I normally just follow the NBA during the playoffs or 'second season'.

The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

Not sure what that opinion piece has to do with watching the NBA. You don’t like Jamal Murray? Or do you not like that players held out?

Aren't there still white players in the NBA? That piece seems to assume there are not.

I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 05:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  Now this...The NBA's swagger and joy of playing defies white supremacy

I normally just follow the NBA during the playoffs or 'second season'.

The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

Not sure what that opinion piece has to do with watching the NBA. You don’t like Jamal Murray? Or do you not like that players held out?

Aren't there still white players in the NBA? That piece seems to assume there are not.

I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

Let’s assume that the piece does do that, I don’t get how the opinion of a writer who assumes all NBA players are black matters to whether or not the NBA is watchable, unless one has a disdain for Murray’s swagger or labor strikes.

(09-09-2020 08:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 05:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  Now this...The NBA's swagger and joy of playing defies white supremacy

I normally just follow the NBA during the playoffs or 'second season'.

The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

Not sure what that opinion piece has to do with watching the NBA. You don’t like Jamal Murray? Or do you not like that players held out?

Aren't there still white players in the NBA? That piece seems to assume there are not.

I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

Let’s assume that the piece does do that, I don’t get how the opinion of a writer who assumes all NBA players are black matters to whether or not the NBA is watchable, unless one has a disdain for Murray’s swagger or labor strikes.

Well, I have a bit of disdain for anybody's swagger, even Trump's. I don't have much use for labor strikes, although I can see the benefit for hourly workers.

It's an attitude thing. Did you read the piece before you decided to quarrel with me?

It's a piece by the author of "In Defense of Uncle Tom, Why Blacks Must Police Racial Loyalty:".

Racial loyalty? What's that called when a white person says it?

"We locate the true wickedness of white supremacy in its capacity to depress our smiles. Sap our joy. Distract our focus. Sometimes stop our beating hearts. We would live better, longer, more fulfilling lives if not for the actions of those who seek to oppress us."

it is all about being black, fighting for black things, being united with other blacks. I may have missed the part about uniting with their white brothers, like you and 93 and their teammates. It comes from a very biased viewpoint. do you disagree?

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

This. Talk about 'privilege'.

Working hard isn't enough to get you to that level, you have to be born with something... You have to inherit from your parents.

(09-09-2020 06:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

That's been my normal for several years. Not because of BLM or protests or any of that, but because their product has become boring. Five guys throwing the ball around the perimeter until somebody jacks up a three is not basketball. It's like watching a game of H-O-R-S-E.

I prefer the days of Magic and Bird, when the ball moved into the post and back out, and driving the paint and moving without the ball meant something. Now nobody moves, with or without the ball.

The marginal benefit of making a 3 versus a 2 point bucket causes this, and yes it is unwatchable at times. I would like to somebody try this: make free throws 2 points, field goals 3 points, and 3-pointers become 4-pointers. I think you would see a lot more driving to the basket and midrange jumpers. Actual centers again...fewer 35 foot jump shots.

(09-09-2020 09:21 AM)Baconator Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 06:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 04:13 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  The new normal will be I won't follow them at all.

That's been my normal for several years. Not because of BLM or protests or any of that, but because their product has become boring. Five guys throwing the ball around the perimeter until somebody jacks up a three is not basketball. It's like watching a game of H-O-R-S-E.

I prefer the days of Magic and Bird, when the ball moved into the post and back out, and driving the paint and moving without the ball meant something. Now nobody moves, with or without the ball.

The marginal benefit of making a 3 versus a 2 point bucket causes this, and yes it is unwatchable at times. I would like to somebody try this: make free throws 2 points, field goals 3 points, and 3-pointers become 4-pointers. I think you would see a lot more driving to the basket and midrange jumpers. Actual centers again...fewer 35 foot jump shots.

I like this idea. You are right... once the analytics guys figured out the relative value of 2 versus 3-pointers it has become a bunch of jab-step 3 pointers. Not every team and not every night. Certainly watching a lot of Rockets basketball will skew your view on the league.

While I also prefer the days of Magic and Bird, I still like the NBA and have found these playoffs to be a pretty fun ride. The Heat's dismantling of the Bucks was interesting and this Lakers-Rockets series has been a good one. The Lakers won last night not based on isolation plays but on a ridiculously effective defensive performance in the 2nd half. The conference finals should be great on both sides.

(09-09-2020 09:19 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

This. Talk about 'privilege'.

Working hard isn't enough to get you to that level, you have to be born with something... You have to inherit from your parents.

That could probably said for most millionaires...

(09-09-2020 09:30 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 09:19 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

This. Talk about 'privilege'.

Working hard isn't enough to get you to that level, you have to be born with something... You have to inherit from your parents.

That could probably said for most millionaires...

And the stereotypes raise their ugly heads.

Neither my mother(1989) nor my father(1999) left enough of an estate to be taxable, even though the thresholds then were much lower.

So, yes, I inherited a little something, probably less than your kids would inherit if a Mack truck hit you today.

What I did inherit from my parents were a work ethic, a desire to succeed in some way, and an inclination not to depend on the government to make my life right. I learned about honesty and fairness, and respecting other people's abilities and accomplishments. I learned not to hate. I learned not to blame others for my failings.

My grandmother taught these values to her kids. Her estate was probably less than $50K,mostly her house, but she left us a wealth of values.

Funny how Democrats sneer at the self made people, but idolize the Kerrys and the Pelosis, and the Kennedys.

(09-09-2020 09:41 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 09:30 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 09:19 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't like watching millionaires kneel for the national anthem.

This. Talk about 'privilege'.

Working hard isn't enough to get you to that level, you have to be born with something... You have to inherit from your parents.

That could probably said for most millionaires...

And the stereotypes raise their ugly heads.

Neither my mother(1989) nor my father(1999) left enough of an estate to be taxable, even though the thresholds then were much lower.

So, yes, I inherited a little something, probably less than your kids would inherit if a Mack truck hit you today.

What I did inherit from my parents were a work ethic, a desire to succeed in some way, and an inclination not to depend on the government to make my life right. I learned about honesty and fairness, and respecting other people's abilities and accomplishments. I learned not to hate. I learned not to blame others for my failings.

My grandmother taught these values to her kids. Her estate was probably less than $50K,mostly her house, but she left us a wealth of values.

Funny how Democrats sneer at the self made people, but idolize the Kerrys and the Pelosis, and the Kennedys.

Jesus... nobody is sneering.

I celebrate self-made people... I don't sneer at them.

My parents weren't in the 1% but my siblings and I are. It's not because what they have passed down in terms of $$$, but what they passed down in terms of genetics, an emphasis on education, and a work ethic.

This was the statement on NBA millionaires: Working hard isn't enough to get you to that level, you have to be born with something... You have to inherit from your parents.

I am relating that to the millionaires in non-NBA occupations including the ones here. Most of us inherited things from our parents that provided our pathways to success. NBA players might have inherited height/quick-twitch muscles/smarts. The rest of us successful people likely inherited a different set of traits.