4 ms·

There was an extreme amount of empathy for black America leading up to the election in the majority of the cities and America. Black lives matter. I think that'

by jbhatab 10y ago

There was an extreme amount of empathy for black America leading up to the election in the majority of the cities and America. Black lives matter. I think that's great and Black america absolutely has it's own issues. Not taking away from that. Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive? Which is over 40% of America!!! That's a lot of people!! I care about every single American including rural America.

jamesthesnake12 10y ago
The Trump Campaign Literally called Black Lives Matter a Terrorist group . Every poltician caters out the ass for rural voters ( see Iowa) .
- jbhatab 10y ago
  You are reaffirming my original point that I can not even bring up these points in public. "There was an extreme amount of empathy for black America leading up to the election in the majority of the cities and America. Black lives matter. I think that's great and Black america absolutely has it's own issues. Not taking away from that. Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive? Which is over 40% of America!!! That's a lot of people!! I care about every single American including rural America." What part of that supported Trump? What part of that even brought up Trump at all? All I was saying was there was a large public outcry for black people who were treated poorly, which is a serious issue. Now me bringing up rural America and there problems makes me a racist? I beg you to look into your own views and really ask yourself if what I said was trying to protect people I know in rural America or attack black lives matter. I care so deeply for every American, but that includes rural America.
  - jamesthesnake12 10y ago
    I'm not saying you supported Trump, I'm saying people who do even if they do it for whatever reason promotes that viewpoint which is the EXACT opposite of empathy for Black People. For all this empathy they have for some odd reason a ton of times they seem to vote for policies that hurt the people they empathize with. And Actions>>>words.
  - jamesthesnake12 10y ago
    and the movement to help rural communities is literally in every politicians platform from subsidies and increased funding ( in no small part due to the EC). BLM had to work their ass off just to get on the Dem Platform.
  - ojbyrne 10y ago
    15% not 40%. And as others have commented, already grossly subsidized and over-represented politically.
pmoriarty 10y ago
"Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive?" You mean things like farm subsidies? Or the rise to power of those champions of rural America: the Republicans, who now control the Executive branch, both houses of Congress, and arguably the Supreme Court as well. I'm sure rural America has only the brightest prospects with them in charge.
- analog31 10y ago
  Something I didn't really think about until recently is that subsidized farming may very well favor the consolidation of farms into larger business units that are also more highly automated, resulting in an overall decline in employment.
  - patrickg_zill 10y ago
    Yes, thus the term agribusiness. Go big or get out... per https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz
- jbhatab 10y ago
  I don't think republicans have the best plan, but they were the only group that truly cared about their issues. Just like black people felt Trump didn't care about their issues. Rural America didn't think democrats cared about them. PS. I am not a republican. I'm just basing this on what the parties chose to support in their campaigns.
  - azemetre 10y ago
    Saying you care and actually trying to implement policy to help who you care about are two entirely different things. Seeing what the GOP healthcare plan and proposed budgets are, they do not care about rural communities. They say they do, but their voting patterns are entirely at odds of what they preach.
thex10 10y ago
> "Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive?" Why don't you ask your friends in Rural America? Why hasn't there been an organized movement starting there? It's perhaps not optimal, but it's not like white people started BLM or straight people started the campaign for gay marriage or colonizers started #NoDAPL. Minorities have had to fight for GENERATIONS to make progress towards getting their needs heard. Why aren't rural folk doing the same? Why aren't you asking for rural folk to step up? Or if they are stepping up, why aren't you tell us about that / promoting them / actively helping them?
hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
Sorry, but I think this is bullshit. As a child of the 80s, the difference between the societal response to the 80s crack epidemic (mostly inner cities) and the current opioid epidemic (mostly rural areas) is stark. The response to the crack epidemic was to treat users as "junkies" and criminals, and to impose draconian sentencing laws (much harsher for crack than more expensive powder cocaine, mind you). In the current heroin epidemic, you see even hardcore conservative politicians like Christie advocate for compassion and treatment. In fact, I don't think the re-evaluation of mandatory sentencing laws for drug crimes would even be up for debate if white areas weren't also hit hard now. This is what is meant by "Black Lives Matter", because for a very long time they quite frankly didn't, at least judging by larger government responses to their problems.
- tropo 10y ago
  The crack/opiate empathy difference isn't about race. The opiate users mostly got addicted under the care of a doctor. Doctors don't normally prescribe anything like crack. So there is a sense that crack users sought reckless fun, while opiate users were just trying to get medical treatment.
  - hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
    OK, that is complete bullshit. Yes, many people got addicted to opiates originally through actual episodes of physical pain, but many didn't. And trying to pretend that that's the reason we treated black inner-city addicts like complete shit, but white folks get compassion and empathy, is absurd. It also doesn't explain why powder cocaine, which only rich people could afford, was criminalized much more heavily than crack, which was for poor people.
    - tropo 10y ago
      I'm not seeing sympathy for meth, and that's largely white people. It's seldom prescribed in ways that addict people, unlike opiates. There exist white crack addicts. They also don't get sympathy. The key question: can we reliably assume that an addiction started for recreational reasons? If yes: no sympathy.
pnathan 10y ago
> Rural America. The United States has many rural areas. Seventy-two percent of United States' land area belongs to rural counties, but in 2014, just 46.2 million Americans (roughly 15% of the population of the country at the time) lived in these areas. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America 15% of America is rural. Note that you're grotesquely overrepresented in politics. Consider this: > Trump took 2,584 counties that together account for 36 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Clinton won just 472 counties — less than 20 percent of Trump’s take — but those counties account for 64 percent of GDP. --- https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/17/why-does-donald-trump-demonize-cities/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/17/... The urban areas are financially funding the rural areas. Essentially, the structure of the rural economy is not one conducive to significant economic success in modern society. I would suggest the single most reliably effective way for someone graduating in 2017 in rural America to financially succeed in life (and to have the most cultural opportunity) would be to get a STEM/business-oriented degree and move to NYC for work - or move and then go to college, then work in NYC.
- tropo 10y ago
  There are at least two problems with this idea that "The urban areas are financially funding the rural areas." First, in terms of taxes and benefits, urban areas vote for that stuff. It's only fair that they pay. The rural areas are trying to cut costs. Second, one could argue that the economic activity in urban areas is sort of stolen from rural areas. There was a time when many more businesses were in non-urban areas. Activity was moved to urban areas, and often then overseas while perhaps retaining some corporate leadership and marketing in our urban areas. This, or the laws that allowed and encouraged it, is essentially a brutal attack on rural America.
ojbyrne 10y ago
Rural America has 15% of the country's population: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America

by jbhatab 10y ago

jamesthesnake12 10y ago

The Trump Campaign Literally called Black Lives Matter a Terrorist group . Every poltician caters out the ass for rural voters ( see Iowa) .

jbhatab 10y ago
You are reaffirming my original point that I can not even bring up these points in public. "There was an extreme amount of empathy for black America leading up to the election in the majority of the cities and America. Black lives matter. I think that's great and Black america absolutely has it's own issues. Not taking away from that. Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive? Which is over 40% of America!!! That's a lot of people!! I care about every single American including rural America." What part of that supported Trump? What part of that even brought up Trump at all? All I was saying was there was a large public outcry for black people who were treated poorly, which is a serious issue. Now me bringing up rural America and there problems makes me a racist? I beg you to look into your own views and really ask yourself if what I said was trying to protect people I know in rural America or attack black lives matter. I care so deeply for every American, but that includes rural America.
- jamesthesnake12 10y ago
  I'm not saying you supported Trump, I'm saying people who do even if they do it for whatever reason promotes that viewpoint which is the EXACT opposite of empathy for Black People. For all this empathy they have for some odd reason a ton of times they seem to vote for policies that hurt the people they empathize with. And Actions>>>words.
- jamesthesnake12 10y ago
  and the movement to help rural communities is literally in every politicians platform from subsidies and increased funding ( in no small part due to the EC). BLM had to work their ass off just to get on the Dem Platform.
- ojbyrne 10y ago
  15% not 40%. And as others have commented, already grossly subsidized and over-represented politically.

pmoriarty 10y ago

"Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive?" You mean things like farm subsidies? Or the rise to power of those champions of rural America: the Republicans, who now control the Executive branch, both houses of Congress, and arguably the Supreme Court as well. I'm sure rural America has only the brightest prospects with them in charge.

analog31 10y ago
Something I didn't really think about until recently is that subsidized farming may very well favor the consolidation of farms into larger business units that are also more highly automated, resulting in an overall decline in employment.
- patrickg_zill 10y ago
  Yes, thus the term agribusiness. Go big or get out... per https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz
jbhatab 10y ago
I don't think republicans have the best plan, but they were the only group that truly cared about their issues. Just like black people felt Trump didn't care about their issues. Rural America didn't think democrats cared about them. PS. I am not a republican. I'm just basing this on what the parties chose to support in their campaigns.
- azemetre 10y ago
  Saying you care and actually trying to implement policy to help who you care about are two entirely different things. Seeing what the GOP healthcare plan and proposed budgets are, they do not care about rural communities. They say they do, but their voting patterns are entirely at odds of what they preach.

thex10 10y ago

> "Where was the movement fighting to enable Rural America to thrive?" Why don't you ask your friends in Rural America? Why hasn't there been an organized movement starting there? It's perhaps not optimal, but it's not like white people started BLM or straight people started the campaign for gay marriage or colonizers started #NoDAPL. Minorities have had to fight for GENERATIONS to make progress towards getting their needs heard. Why aren't rural folk doing the same? Why aren't you asking for rural folk to step up? Or if they are stepping up, why aren't you tell us about that / promoting them / actively helping them?

hn_throwaway_99 10y ago

Sorry, but I think this is bullshit. As a child of the 80s, the difference between the societal response to the 80s crack epidemic (mostly inner cities) and the current opioid epidemic (mostly rural areas) is stark. The response to the crack epidemic was to treat users as "junkies" and criminals, and to impose draconian sentencing laws (much harsher for crack than more expensive powder cocaine, mind you). In the current heroin epidemic, you see even hardcore conservative politicians like Christie advocate for compassion and treatment. In fact, I don't think the re-evaluation of mandatory sentencing laws for drug crimes would even be up for debate if white areas weren't also hit hard now. This is what is meant by "Black Lives Matter", because for a very long time they quite frankly didn't, at least judging by larger government responses to their problems.

tropo 10y ago
The crack/opiate empathy difference isn't about race. The opiate users mostly got addicted under the care of a doctor. Doctors don't normally prescribe anything like crack. So there is a sense that crack users sought reckless fun, while opiate users were just trying to get medical treatment.
- hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
  OK, that is complete bullshit. Yes, many people got addicted to opiates originally through actual episodes of physical pain, but many didn't. And trying to pretend that that's the reason we treated black inner-city addicts like complete shit, but white folks get compassion and empathy, is absurd. It also doesn't explain why powder cocaine, which only rich people could afford, was criminalized much more heavily than crack, which was for poor people.
  - tropo 10y ago
    I'm not seeing sympathy for meth, and that's largely white people. It's seldom prescribed in ways that addict people, unlike opiates. There exist white crack addicts. They also don't get sympathy. The key question: can we reliably assume that an addiction started for recreational reasons? If yes: no sympathy.

pnathan 10y ago

> Rural America. The United States has many rural areas. Seventy-two percent of United States' land area belongs to rural counties, but in 2014, just 46.2 million Americans (roughly 15% of the population of the country at the time) lived in these areas. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America 15% of America is rural. Note that you're grotesquely overrepresented in politics. Consider this: > Trump took 2,584 counties that together account for 36 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Clinton won just 472 counties — less than 20 percent of Trump’s take — but those counties account for 64 percent of GDP. --- https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/17/why-does-donald-trump-demonize-cities/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/17/... The urban areas are financially funding the rural areas. Essentially, the structure of the rural economy is not one conducive to significant economic success in modern society. I would suggest the single most reliably effective way for someone graduating in 2017 in rural America to financially succeed in life (and to have the most cultural opportunity) would be to get a STEM/business-oriented degree and move to NYC for work - or move and then go to college, then work in NYC.

tropo 10y ago
There are at least two problems with this idea that "The urban areas are financially funding the rural areas." First, in terms of taxes and benefits, urban areas vote for that stuff. It's only fair that they pay. The rural areas are trying to cut costs. Second, one could argue that the economic activity in urban areas is sort of stolen from rural areas. There was a time when many more businesses were in non-urban areas. Activity was moved to urban areas, and often then overseas while perhaps retaining some corporate leadership and marketing in our urban areas. This, or the laws that allowed and encouraged it, is essentially a brutal attack on rural America.

ojbyrne 10y ago

Rural America has 15% of the country's population: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_America