5 ms·

I'd love to continue this discussion but apparently I've been rate-limited for some reason, and suddenly I'm only allowed one post every 2 hours. I'll close wit

I'd love to continue this discussion but apparently I've been rate-limited for some reason, and suddenly I'm only allowed one post every 2 hours. I'll close with this: We already pay subsidies for all kinds of things. Why not pay one to help the working class? ---- Response to below: I do think any injustice is immoral but subsidies aren't injustice. We pay lots of subsidies. I never said subsidies are immoral. And don't confuse manufacturing with "rural America". There are lots of working class people in the cities who once found employment in manufacturing. Farm subsidies do nothing for them. And if you only want to read a study (and will consider no other facts) here's a study showing men receive much longer prison sentences than women for the same crime: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002 ---- > What should we "believe" other than studies? Statistics? Like the statistics on male victims of domestic violence vs the legal protections and shelters available to men. Or the statistics on boys vs girls expelled from preschool, boys medicated, the number of male vs female teachers, etc. And have you read that study yet? You seemed so insistent to read a study, I thought you might have some comments about it.

scarface74 9y ago
You just argued the opposite side earlier basically implying any injustice is immoral. We pay subsidies to rural America in the form of farm subsidies already. But all you have to do is post a study showing statistical evidence of discrimination against the White Male and I promise I'll read it with an open mind. I have somewhat of a background in statistics and economics and I enjoy reading about those subjects.
scarface74 9y ago
I am all for criminal justice reform - and I said as much in an earlier post. But if "I only want to read a study and consider no other facts". What should we "believe" other than studies? A few anecdotes? If there are some systemic issues caused by government policies - and there are plenty with the criminal justice system - I'm all for reform. Reforming the criminal justice system is about less government not more.
scarface74 9y ago
I'm not doubting your numbers - or your end results and I'm also not arguing about whether certain segments of the population get treated unfairly in the criminal justice system. I'm all for criminal justice reform as I've said repeatedly. But you haven't just been talking about unfairness in the criminal justice system. You have also been arguing that the white male is being discriminated against in other parts of society - including the education system and the labor market. But now you are claiming that there is discrimination against men because there are fewer male teachers? Most of the studies and surveys show women make less men partially because they choose professions that are more conducive to raising a family - like teachers. Most women I know who are teachers cite that as a reason that they became teachers - because their work schedules are aligned with their children's school schedules. Including having summers off. Again, you are pointing to outcome without showing any links to a correlation between discrimination and the outcome. If you really want to change policy based on statistics and outcome, you would be arguing more in favor of wealth being redistributed to minorities and women - no I'm not arguing that.
- leereeves 9y ago
  I said there's a vocal segment of the population that is hostile to white men, not systematic discrimination. This segment includes people at powerful institutions, and they're actively seeking more power. If they take power then you'll see systematic discrimination against white men in employment. Right now, other groups experience discrimination more often, but that doesn't make discrimination against white people acceptable. I'm also arguing that working class men of all races, not only white, are suffering because manufacturing jobs have left America. In fact, whole communities, men and women of all races suffering because of that. Meanwhile we see how much the presence of manufacturing jobs in China is fueling whole communities. I think both of those factors contributed to Trump's success. The conversation also strayed to systematic discrimination against men in education, the justice system, and social support, but I don't think this has much to do with Trump's success.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    There is also a vocal segment of racists, homophobes, sexists and people who want to impose their religious beliefs on America that mostly lean Republican. But no one here is arguing about policy changes based on that.

scarface74 9y ago

You just argued the opposite side earlier basically implying any injustice is immoral. We pay subsidies to rural America in the form of farm subsidies already. But all you have to do is post a study showing statistical evidence of discrimination against the White Male and I promise I'll read it with an open mind. I have somewhat of a background in statistics and economics and I enjoy reading about those subjects.

scarface74 9y ago

I am all for criminal justice reform - and I said as much in an earlier post. But if "I only want to read a study and consider no other facts". What should we "believe" other than studies? A few anecdotes? If there are some systemic issues caused by government policies - and there are plenty with the criminal justice system - I'm all for reform. Reforming the criminal justice system is about less government not more.

scarface74 9y ago

I'm not doubting your numbers - or your end results and I'm also not arguing about whether certain segments of the population get treated unfairly in the criminal justice system. I'm all for criminal justice reform as I've said repeatedly. But you haven't just been talking about unfairness in the criminal justice system. You have also been arguing that the white male is being discriminated against in other parts of society - including the education system and the labor market. But now you are claiming that there is discrimination against men because there are fewer male teachers? Most of the studies and surveys show women make less men partially because they choose professions that are more conducive to raising a family - like teachers. Most women I know who are teachers cite that as a reason that they became teachers - because their work schedules are aligned with their children's school schedules. Including having summers off. Again, you are pointing to outcome without showing any links to a correlation between discrimination and the outcome. If you really want to change policy based on statistics and outcome, you would be arguing more in favor of wealth being redistributed to minorities and women - no I'm not arguing that.

leereeves 9y ago
I said there's a vocal segment of the population that is hostile to white men, not systematic discrimination. This segment includes people at powerful institutions, and they're actively seeking more power. If they take power then you'll see systematic discrimination against white men in employment. Right now, other groups experience discrimination more often, but that doesn't make discrimination against white people acceptable. I'm also arguing that working class men of all races, not only white, are suffering because manufacturing jobs have left America. In fact, whole communities, men and women of all races suffering because of that. Meanwhile we see how much the presence of manufacturing jobs in China is fueling whole communities. I think both of those factors contributed to Trump's success. The conversation also strayed to systematic discrimination against men in education, the justice system, and social support, but I don't think this has much to do with Trump's success.
- scarface74 9y ago
  There is also a vocal segment of racists, homophobes, sexists and people who want to impose their religious beliefs on America that mostly lean Republican. But no one here is arguing about policy changes based on that.