Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you were born in a culture that placed no value on education, in fact if you tried to become educated you would be constantly insulted, were provided sufficient funds for food, shelter, cigs, and booze, can you honestly say that you would go bust your ass to try and make something of yourself?

Anyone who has worked in various entry level positions can tell you that most employees in said positions are bad. If a paycheck doesn't motivate you to at least attempt to do a decent job, what will?

Nothing short of actually needing to work to survive will motivate a previously "lazy" person, and then lots of people will likely turn to crime instead of honest labor.

Thats the biggest reason we can't just cut benifits to the people on welfare that are just mooching off of society. Crime would likely soar, heck there could even be full blown riots.

Its a real bad situation all around.

Exactly. It is a self perpetuating problem. You can not expect people getting on welfare to be motivated to work harder to get off of it unless they are forced to work just to survive. I've known dealers and a smart one can make a fat amount of cash with minimal risk just selling weed. Why work twice as long for a quarter the reward?

I love it. People born into improvised blighted inner city areas don't fail to get ahead because of a lack of opportunity, inadequate services, dismal educational offerings, systemic discrimination and criminal justice policies that only serve to strengthen the hold of crime over those areas.

Nope.They're lazy welfare fat-cats, who'd get ahead if only they put in the effort to try but don't because the government is off spending your hard earned tax money to give them free booze and cigs. I learn something every day!

I just love it when reality falls in line with a simple narrative that helps reinforce the idea that I earned everything in my life without any kind of extraordinary benefit from the structures and institution around me and those that don't, not only are at fault for their own lack of success but continue in that state in a way that attacks me. It makes it so easy to then frame them as an enemy or a problem, needing punishment or correction rather than as real people who might be deserving of respect, help or consideration.

*phew* I mean for a moment I thought I might have to consider that some people are genuinely held down by their circumstances and I'd have a hard time getting angry over the few meager programs that help them hold on.

 Amaya wrote:

Anyone who has worked in various entry level positions can tell you that most employees in said positions are bad. If a paycheck doesn't motivate you to at least attempt to do a decent job, what will?

The chance for advancement or skill development?

Most entry level positions are gak, and the people that work in them are treated like gak. Why am I going to put effort into a job that offers me nothing but more of the same menial work and a small paycheck?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Its a real bad situation all around.

Its actually quite nice situation. We've managed to create a system in which we can pay people to not commit crime.

You act as if access to trade skills is non existent or prohibitively expensive. Why settle for making $8/hour at some entry level place when showing initiative and effort will increase that amount by 50-100% in the short term and possibly more in the future?

Maybe I'm insane or just benefited from good parenting, but no matter how gakky the job is I have a desire to be the best at it, whether I hate it or not. Half assed effort is unacceptable.

 Henners91 wrote:
Laziness being an inherent trait seems to essentially imply that there's a large section of society that even in the most adverse of conditions would choose to be lazy parasites; it seems like a justification for productive elements of said society to be burdened with forever maintaining said bloodsuckers?

Everyone is lazy that's why we get paid to work.

 Melissia wrote:
Because those born here are born in to a culture that doesn't encourage successful lives.

No, their narrow perception of "success" is being a one in a million pro athlete, some sort of pseudo-criminal rapper, or someone who has successfully worked the system so they "get paid".

Wow thats racist.

I agree that most immigrants that come here are coming from "Rich" families. However, Rich in Africa/Asia is not the same as Rich in North America. When I was younger, I visited a middle-class neighborhood in Indonesia (island of Sumatra). They had power for 3 hours a day (evenings, so mostly for lighting, not AC). That is pretty good, since most people did not have electricity at all. Even our poorest 1% in North America have more than middle-class in most countries.

Middle-Class income in India is not what it is in the USA. An income of 25K Indian Rupees per month is middle-class, and that is about $500 per month. Thesepeople send their sons and daughters to the US to get educated.

I don't think it's a poor/rich statement. I think it's a motivation statement. Those that want to succeed in the USA, can. You have to look at it individually, because motivation is an individual thing. Students whose families scrimp and save to send their first-born to the US for college are very motivated to succeed. They will graduate (since graduating college just takes effort, graduating with an Engineering/Bio-Medical degree may take some skill).

 Amaya wrote:
You act as if access to trade skills is non existent or prohibitively expensive. Why settle for making $8/hour at some entry level place when showing initiative and effort will increase that amount by 50-100% in the short term and possibly more in the future?

The point is that the probability of earning more than $8/hour when all you're doing is working at a job paying that is exceedingly low. Indeed, when I worked minimum wage that job was right about my lowest priority in terms of economic advancement. I put in exactly the amount of effort I needed to in order to not be fired, and often deliberately attempted to avoid doing even that. In essence I was working to maximize my return while minimizing any effort I put forth, this was done out of spite and a desire for personal efficiency.

You can talk about trade skills all you want, but most minimum wage positions don't involve them. Unless following cooking instructions, washing dishes, and stocking shelves count as trade skills.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tye_Informer wrote:

Middle-Class income in India is not what it is in the USA. An income of 25K Indian Rupees per month is middle-class, and that is about $500 per month. Thesepeople send their sons and daughters to the US to get educated.

Not without significant financial aid they don't. Of course, lots of developing nations provide aid to students that want to study abroad, on top of what they'll likely receive from the institution in question. Even then you don't see many international students that are middle class in their country of origin. Speaking only to my experience, every international I knew in undergrad essentially grew up as a member of the jet set.

It's called an apprenticeship Dogma.

Same reason most immigrants do better than most Americans, especially younger ones:

The immigrants are actually willing to work for it, and work hard.


Many Americans (especially the younger ones) feel that they are entitled to being rich, they should be given a good job, and that only a little effort (if any) is all that is required to be successful.

The immigrants are willing to do crappy jobs to move ahead, gain experience, and work their asses off to get ahead. As a professional driver, I see it all the time. Young American salespeople are getting fired for lack of performance (I take their company car from them) because they don't want to put in the hours. But the African cab drivers who take me to them are willing to work 18+ hour days to make more money and get ahead.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Wow thats racist.

No, it is what the culture purports as "successful". Getting good grades, being smart, and working hard are considered laughable.

Are you a member of the culture, or commenting from the outside?

No, their narrow perception of "success" is being a one in a million pro athlete, some sort of pseudo-criminal rapper, or someone who has successfully worked the system so they "get paid".

Actually he kind of stayed in the subject in a off sort of way......

 Jihadin wrote:

No, their narrow perception of "success" is being a one in a million pro athlete, some sort of pseudo-criminal rapper, or someone who has successfully worked the system so they "get paid".

Actually he kind of stayed in the subject in a off sort of way......

Saying that black people stay poor because they believe their only options are to be athletes, 'criminal' rappers, or on welfare and following it up by claiming that the community disdains education is only on topic if the topic is "racist stereotypes I heard about minorities".

Look at this man working on his rap lyrics so he can become somebody.



I would list other black scientists and intellectuals, but I don't really think it would make a difference.

I would bet none of them are of any cultural influence.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I would bet none of them are of any cultural influence.

You make that bet because you don't know what you are talking about. If you had half the knowledge you assume you do, you wouldn't say such silly things.

You also never answered Mannahnin's question either, which came well before mine.

Whew, yeah a whole 3 minutes. I'm dizzy...

Not "inside" but I see it all around me.

Feel free to list off all of those scientists and intellectuals that are an influence on popular culture.

I'm not arguing that there aren't Black intellectuals and scientists. I'm arguing that, for the most part, they don't influence young people's decisions a 100th as much as athletes and rappers do.

Sorta on-topic...

Not a big fan of Newt (he's a pompous arse)... but this was an epic smackdown of Mr. Tingle:

“Why do you assume food stamp refers to black? What kind of racist thinking do you have?” Gingrich said as Matthews tried unsuccessfully to interrupt him. “Wait a second, you’re being a racist because you assume it refers to black... "

“You sit here and chuckle about it as if it’s not a game you’re playing,” Matthews said. “You’ve got that diabolic smile of yours, and you know you think you’re winning here, but everybody out there who’s black or white know exactly the game that’s being played here.”

“No, here’s the game. You have the worst president,” Gingrich said.
”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80224.html#ixzz24nX66Bxg

*snort*

Priceless, Whembly.

I appreciate the idea that somehow non-black teens are obsessed with academics and scientist while black people are only concerned with pop culture, but since now you want to know influences on pop culture that aren't 'criminal' rappers or professional athletes:

Tavis Smiley
Cornell West
Chuck D (a rapper, but not a 'criminal' rapper)
KRS-1 (a rapper, but not a 'criminal' rapper)
Jill Scott
Denzel Washington
Donald Glover
Gabourey Sidibe
CCH Pounder
India Arie
Maya Angelou
Terry McMillian
Aaron McGruder
President Barack Obama
Michael Steele
Quincy Jones
Branford Marsalis
The Hughes Brothers
John Singleton
Spike Lee
Oprah Winfrey
Gabrielle Douglas (an athlete, but not a high paying or professional one)
Levar Burton

SlavetoDorkness wrote:Not "inside"

Who could have guessed?

 Amaya wrote:
Exactly. It is a self perpetuating problem. You can not expect people getting on welfare to be motivated to work harder to get off of it unless they are forced to work just to survive. I've known dealers and a smart one can make a fat amount of cash with minimal risk just selling weed. Why work twice as long for a quarter the reward?

Freakonomics, for all it's problems, actually has a pretty good section on this issue. The first thing they point out is that guys working in drug gangs make crap all money. The guy at the top does great, but the guys underneath him could get paid more working at McDonalds.

This then leads into speculation on why they'd undertake the risk of jail or violence, to earn less money. The biggest answer is that to each person working in the gang they think it is more likely they'll move up the chain than they would at McDonalds, even though this likely isn't true. The other issue is basically pride - there is a sense of power in working for a criminal group, whereas it is quite degrading to work at a fast food store.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chongara wrote:
I love it. People born into improvised blighted inner city areas don't fail to get ahead because of a lack of opportunity, inadequate services, dismal educational offerings, systemic discrimination and criminal justice policies that only serve to strengthen the hold of crime over those areas.

Nope.They're lazy welfare fat-cats, who'd get ahead if only they put in the effort to try but don't because the government is off spending your hard earned tax money to give them free booze and cigs. I learn something every day!

I just love it when reality falls in line with a simple narrative that helps reinforce the idea that I earned everything in my life without any kind of extraordinary benefit from the structures and institution around me and those that don't, not only are at fault for their own lack of success but continue in that state in a way that attacks me. It makes it so easy to then frame them as an enemy or a problem, needing punishment or correction rather than as real people who might be deserving of respect, help or consideration.

*phew* I mean for a moment I thought I might have to consider that some people are genuinely held down by their circumstances and I'd have a hard time getting angry over the few meager programs that help them hold on.

I especially the underlying assumption that people in middle class lives aren't also lazy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tye_Informer wrote:
I agree that most immigrants that come here are coming from "Rich" families. However, Rich in Africa/Asia is not the same as Rich in North America. When I was younger, I visited a middle-class neighborhood in Indonesia (island of Sumatra). They had power for 3 hours a day (evenings, so mostly for lighting, not AC). That is pretty good, since most people did not have electricity at all. Even our poorest 1% in North America have more than middle-class in most countries.

Middle-Class income in India is not what it is in the USA. An income of 25K Indian Rupees per month is middle-class, and that is about $500 per month. Thesepeople send their sons and daughters to the US to get educated.

I don't think it's a poor/rich statement. I think it's a motivation statement. Those that want to succeed in the USA, can. You have to look at it individually, because motivation is an individual thing. Students whose families scrimp and save to send their first-born to the US for college are very motivated to succeed. They will graduate (since graduating college just takes effort, graduating with an Engineering/Bio-Medical degree may take some skill).

I think the problem with the above is that a direct comparison of material wealth is a really superficial view of society and economic structures. The best starting point would be to realise status and expectation matters at least as much as actual property.

A person in US society might have a nice TV and other knicknacks that'd be the envy of a reasonably prosperous business owner in Vietnam, but that's just stuff. What matters at least as much is that everyone in the US sees that guy as poor and because of that most assume he is lazy. Odds are he's been knocked back from plenty of jobs as well, and there's a fair chance his parents had much the same experiences.

And no, the Indian middle class isn't sending their children to be educated in the US. The Indian upper class is doing that, because a $500 a week income does not give you the purchasing power to put your kid through foreign education.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I'm not arguing that there aren't Black intellectuals and scientists. I'm arguing that, for the most part, they don't influence young people's decisions a 100th as much as athletes and rappers do.

I agree, to a large extent. But what you're missing here is that this isn't a black people problem, it's a poor people problem. You think in impoverished rural high schools in Alabama or wherever the white kids are posting pictures of scientists on their walls? Nah, they're looking at pictures of quarterbacks or whatever.

That poverty happens to be more common in black communities is a product of history, but it doesn't make the issues of poverty uniquely black issues. They're still just issues of poverty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Sorta on-topic...

Not a big fan of Newt (he's a pompous arse)... but this was an epic smackdown of Mr. Tingle:

Except, of course, that the Newt knew exactly what he was doing, and what he was doing was race-baiting.

I mean, this stuff has been on record for decades. Here's Lee Atwater from 1981;
"You start out in 1954 by saying, "[see forum posting rules], [see forum posting rules], [see forum posting rules]." By 1968 you can't say "[see forum posting rules]"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "[see forum posting rules], [see forum posting rules]"."

That said, I think it is important to point out that the Republican party has likely more or less moved past the Southern Strategy now. The only real effort at that kind of dog whistling since the mid-90s was from the Newt, and he went down in flames and only polled votes at all because of the general weakness of the Republican field in this last primary.

Ahtman wrote:I appreciate the idea that somehow non-black teens are obsessed with academics and scientist while black people are only concerned with pop culture, but since now you want to know influences on pop culture that aren't 'criminal' rappers or professional athletes:

Tavis Smiley
Cornell West
Chuck D (a rapper, but not a 'criminal' rapper)
KRS-1 (a rapper, but not a 'criminal' rapper)
Jill Scott
Denzel Washington
Donald Glover
Gabourey Sidibe
CCH Pounder
India Arie
Maya Angelou
Terry McMillian
Aaron McGruder
President Barack Obama
Michael Steele
Quincy Jones
Branford Marsalis
The Hughes Brothers
John Singleton
Spike Lee
Oprah Winfrey
Gabrielle Douglas (an athlete, but not a high paying or professional one)
Levar Burton

Nearly everyone on that list is an actor or artist. The vast majority of blacks that you are visible in the media are actors, artists (musical), or athletes. There are only a handful of them that are visible in other pursuits and some of them (Powell, Rice, Thomas) are labeled as racial traitors for their political views.

I can't even name a single contemporary black author of fiction and the only one I can think of is that is remotely recent is the author of Things Fall Apart (which is an amazing novel). Of course I think that part of the problem is that many black authors immediately venture into African-American literature and don't write for a mainstream audience.

 Amaya wrote:
Nearly everyone on that list is an actor or artist.

What part of influencing pop culture was that difficult to understand? The number of living scientists and academics that influence pop culture can be counted on one hand practically, and as sebster pointed out, though I wouldn't even relegate it to the poor, kids in school of all ethnicity and socioeconomic classifications aren't putting up posters of academics and scientists. Slave said they all wanted to be pro athletes, 'criminal' rappers, or living on welfare. This is a list of pop culture celebrities that are none of those things.

 Amaya wrote:
The vast majority of blacks that you are visible in the media are actors, artists (musical), or athletes.

What world are you living in where the pop culture heroes of the white community are tenured professors and published scientists? I'd like to go to the schools where Virginia Apgar and Eric Habswam are the teens choice of discussion at the lunch table. Even in college pop culture still dominates. Celebrities by definition are more visible than other members of society, it is a pretty intrinsic element to being a celebrity. I'm also not sure it is really a bad thing to appreciate someone who is skilled at acting, playing an instrument, or knows their way with the written word.

 Amaya wrote:
I can't even name a single contemporary black author of fiction and the only one I can think of is that is remotely recent is the author of Things Fall Apart (which is an amazing novel). Of course I think that part of the problem is that many black authors immediately venture into African-American literature and don't write for a mainstream audience.

Part of the issue is that you seem to think your limited knowledge on the subject is somehow represents a a comprehensive analysis of the subject. If you actually were a cultured and well read student of the arts and literature you probably wouldn't have as much trouble thinking of any names. Hell, I listed two authors in the above list and it seems you didn't realize it.

Stephen Barnes is a reasonably well-known black sci-fi author. I think you'd like him.

-------

But yeah, most of the people who are influential in popular culture are actors and artists of various kinds. That's what STD said- "influence on popular culture".

StD wrote:I'm not arguing that there aren't Black intellectuals and scientists. I'm arguing that, for the most part, they don't influence young people's decisions a 100th as much as athletes and rappers do.

Yeah, no shocker. How many white or asian (or whatever) intellectuals and scientists can you name who influence ANY teenager's decisions 100th as much as athletes, rappers, and other celebrities and entertainers do?

As far as scientists and intellectuals who are prominent in popular culture go, Neil DeGrasse Tyson is kind of at the top of the heap nowadays.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
I can't even name a single contemporary black author of fiction and the only one I can think of is that is remotely recent is the author of Things Fall Apart (which is an amazing novel). Of course I think that part of the problem is that many black authors immediately venture into African-American literature and don't write for a mainstream audience.

Part of the issue is that you seem to think your limited knowledge on the subject is somehow represents a a comprehensive analysis of the subject. If you actually were a cultured and well read student of the arts and literature you probably wouldn't have as much trouble thinking of any names. Hell, I listed two authors in the above list and it seems you didn't realize it.

Do you know what the words fiction and contemporary mean?


And your little list is great, it really is, you just listed a bunch of people that have a bigger white following or are no longer a major influence.

Lil'Wayne, Jay-Z, 50 Cent, Biggie, Tupac, Nas, and similar artists are all bigger influences on black teenagers then anyone you listed with the possible exception of Denzel Washington. Do you honestly think anyone knows who KRS-1 is anymore?

I would get in arguments with coworkers about hip hop and bring up KRS-1 and none of them under 30 had a clue as to who he was. You think Community is being watched in the 'hood? You think some, to quote Ving Rhames, "hard pipe hitting <brothers>" are bumping Childish Gambino? Maybe someone analogous to Twofer is, but in my experience working with blacks...HELL NO.

Maybe it's just a product of the south, I'd like to think the east coast still has some decent taste, but the blacks down here would listen to crunk and snap over Mos Def and Kweli every time they were given the choice. The last decent rapper to get any airplay in SA was Chamillionaire and that was 6 years ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Stephen Barnes is a reasonably well-known black sci-fi author. I think you'd like him.

Took me forever to find him, it's actually spelled Steven. He wrote a few episodes for the 1995 Outer Limits series, the only one I particularly liked was Music of the Spheres, but I'm pretty sure all the other episodes were fairly decent.

 sebster wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Exactly. It is a self perpetuating problem. You can not expect people getting on welfare to be motivated to work harder to get off of it unless they are forced to work just to survive. I've known dealers and a smart one can make a fat amount of cash with minimal risk just selling weed. Why work twice as long for a quarter the reward?

Freakonomics, for all it's problems, actually has a pretty good section on this issue. The first thing they point out is that guys working in drug gangs make crap all money. The guy at the top does great, but the guys underneath him could get paid more working at McDonalds.

This then leads into speculation on why they'd undertake the risk of jail or violence, to earn less money. The biggest answer is that to each person working in the gang they think it is more likely they'll move up the chain than they would at McDonalds, even though this likely isn't true. The other issue is basically pride - there is a sense of power in working for a criminal group, whereas it is quite degrading to work at a fast food store.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chongara wrote:
I love it. People born into improvised blighted inner city areas don't fail to get ahead because of a lack of opportunity, inadequate services, dismal educational offerings, systemic discrimination and criminal justice policies that only serve to strengthen the hold of crime over those areas.

Nope.They're lazy welfare fat-cats, who'd get ahead if only they put in the effort to try but don't because the government is off spending your hard earned tax money to give them free booze and cigs. I learn something every day!

I just love it when reality falls in line with a simple narrative that helps reinforce the idea that I earned everything in my life without any kind of extraordinary benefit from the structures and institution around me and those that don't, not only are at fault for their own lack of success but continue in that state in a way that attacks me. It makes it so easy to then frame them as an enemy or a problem, needing punishment or correction rather than as real people who might be deserving of respect, help or consideration.

*phew* I mean for a moment I thought I might have to consider that some people are genuinely held down by their circumstances and I'd have a hard time getting angry over the few meager programs that help them hold on.

I especially the underlying assumption that people in middle class lives aren't also lazy.

The difference is that the Middle Class can afford to be lazy, to a point. Thats almost the definition of "middle class", someone who has enough money to set aside for lesure but still has to work the majority of the time. Said work usually requires a college education and usually doesn't involve loads of hard labor. Exceptions exists of course, an industrial welder makes real good money, needs a degree of some sort, and is a laborious job.

The lower class can't improve their lot and move into the middle class by being "lazy"

Its worth pointing out that there are MORE white people in the lower class then there are people of color. Now %s flip this around, but I think this is an issue where %s just don't paint the entire picture, and certaintly don't help racial tensions. A poor white person is much less likely to gain benifits, such as scholarships, then a poor black person due to affirmative action. This is actually hurting far more people then it helps, and I think the whole idea of making amends for dead people's wrong doing is silly. The people directly effected, and that caused the issue, are long since dead. Let the past lie in peace. Time heals wounds, if the wound doesn't keep getting reopened because we're constantly reminding people of it.

Enough time has passed to where the disadvantages caused by Slavery arn't an excuse anymore. Its a crutch that people are riding and mooching off of. I'm sure the ancestors of many of today's african americans would be ashamed of whats happening today.

The very fact there are millions of white people in the lower class says that Slavery is not the cause of someone's poverty. Poverty is an undeniable fact of any society. There will always be poor people, if its not one reason its another. The best you can do is alleviate the suffering, while not allowing free rides. Sure, the government can and should have welfare for those down on their luck. But I think they should work for their handout.

Families on welfare should be required to give so many hours of community service in exchange for their foodstamps or carepackages. The county needs all the municipal buildings painted, have those on welfare come in and paint. Park/building maintainance, minor road repairs, staffing the public library, school repairs/servicing, etc...

Thing can even be organized at the state and federal levels. Able bodied men that are out of work can be bussed places to work on government projects like Highway construction, bridge building, land clearing, etc... The government could hire out these people on welfare to private companies at low prices. For example, say its time for Dole to harvest some produce in California. They could pay the government for Welfare workers to help with the harvest. Cheaper then paying standard laborers, if the labor is of variable quality, the government has an income stream, and the Welfare recipients get their welfare, experience to put on their resume, and possably a foot in the door for gaining a future job.

Such work would be gassigned based on your individual circumstances. Obviously if you can't pick veggies in the hot sun you won't get sent to do it. And if you happen to have a particular skill then you can get sent somewhere that skill can get put to use. An automechanic might get assigned to do some repair on police vehicles for example.

Took me forever to find him, it's actually spelled Steven. He wrote a few episodes for the 1995 Outer Limits series, the only one I particularly liked was Music of the Spheres, but I'm pretty sure all the other episodes were fairly decent.

Sorry, was going from memory and misspelled. I was thinking more of his novels- like the Aubry Knight books, and his collaborations with Larry Niven.