3 ms·

>This is an attempt at undoing institutional racism. "We're achieving peace by expanding our global war." You're using scary 1984 logic here. >The average bla

>This is an attempt at undoing institutional racism. "We're achieving peace by expanding our global war." You're using scary 1984 logic here. >The average black family is 10x poorer then the average white family. Not sure what the actual numbers are but they don't matter. We'll assume it's true. >I'm sure you would agree that is also systemic racism Not necessarily. The existence of inequity does not mean the system is inherently unequal. This is the fatal flaw in your logic. >The quickest/most simple way to fix that systemic racism is to directly give wealth to black families like this. This is illogic based on a falsehood. Race should NEVER be a factor here, it should only be poverty level or class. The simplest way to get rid of systemic racism is... to get rid of systemic racism (enact legislation to remove Jim Crow as an example) which we have. Introducing systemic racism by definition does not fix the problem it only makes it worse. If we want to combat poverty (inequity), then the UBI should go to the poorest among us. If the bottom 10% of society ends up being 80% Black, that's okay.

Miner49er 6y ago
> "We're achieving peace by expanding our global war." You're using scary 1984 logic here. Funny, I feel like you are the one doing that. "Ending systemic racism is racism" is basically what you are saying. Except your argument is that wealth inequality by race somehow isn't systemic racism? > Not necessarily. The existence of inequity does not mean the system is inherently unequal. This is the fatal flaw in your logic. Okay, so let's follow this. The system is equal meaning that it's a meritocracy you mean? Or what do you mean? If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? Is it because black people are inherently worse at earning wealth?
- throwaway210402 6y ago
  >Funny, I feel like you are the one doing that. Stop projecting. You're the one literally calling for systemic racism. >"Ending systemic racism is racism" is basically what you are saying. Complete opposite. I'm saying "ending systemic racism is ending racism that's systemic." >Except your argument is that wealth inequality by race somehow isn't systemic racism? My argument is, find examples of systemic racism and we can both ally against it. Correlation != Causation. >The system is equal meaning that it's a meritocracy you mean? Point to specific laws that are systemically racist and we can say yes, the system is racist. Implementing UBI and discriminating by race is by definition introducing institutional racism into the system. >If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? If the system is white supremacist, why do Asians, Jews, Nigerians, etc. out perform whites?
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    I mostly wanted an answer to this question: >If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? A straightforward answer to that would help me follow your logic. If you can't give me that, I don't think I'll be able to understand where you are coming from.
    - throwaway210402 6y ago
      I answered it above: If the system is white supremacist, why do Asians, Jews, Nigerians, etc. out perform whites? Why are there any variations in weath between anyone, or intra-race? The fact of the matter is, this is all immaterial. The most logical and least racist way to combat the inequality is to give assistance to the less fortunate, regardless of their race, gender, religion, etc. Otherwise, you're just being racist.
  - filoeleven 6y ago
    > Point to specific laws that are systemically racist and we can say yes, the system is racist. This is an incomplete view of “the system.” You’re leaving out biases in enforcement of the laws and prosecution and conviction rates, and other practices that are not prohibited by law but effectively reinforce racism. Redlining is an example of what I mean by the last one. There are laws against it now that were put into place because it was a social problem, not a legal one.
    - throwaway210402 6y ago
      Those disproportionately affected by "the system" in the past will be disproportionately poor. Those who are disproportionately poor will be disproportionately helped by a UBI system that does not discriminate. QED.
      - filoeleven 6y ago
        > My argument is, find examples of systemic racism and we can both ally against it. That’s all I was doing. I’m all for UBI with the “U” intact.
- zo1 6y ago
  > "If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people?" A perfectly logical and unbiased reason for this could be that it takes time to equalize (a lot of wealth is passed on between generations). Just because "discrimination" and other things ended, doesn't mean the next generation magically does the same as other groups. And this has nothing to do with racism in the present.
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    Well, this is a fine answer, but by definition, that means that the system is still racist while it is equalizing. The whole idea of things like this UBI is to speed it up. It's also very questionable that it will equalize without some sort of outside force acting on it (like this type of thing).

Miner49er 6y ago

> "We're achieving peace by expanding our global war." You're using scary 1984 logic here. Funny, I feel like you are the one doing that. "Ending systemic racism is racism" is basically what you are saying. Except your argument is that wealth inequality by race somehow isn't systemic racism? > Not necessarily. The existence of inequity does not mean the system is inherently unequal. This is the fatal flaw in your logic. Okay, so let's follow this. The system is equal meaning that it's a meritocracy you mean? Or what do you mean? If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? Is it because black people are inherently worse at earning wealth?

throwaway210402 6y ago
>Funny, I feel like you are the one doing that. Stop projecting. You're the one literally calling for systemic racism. >"Ending systemic racism is racism" is basically what you are saying. Complete opposite. I'm saying "ending systemic racism is ending racism that's systemic." >Except your argument is that wealth inequality by race somehow isn't systemic racism? My argument is, find examples of systemic racism and we can both ally against it. Correlation != Causation. >The system is equal meaning that it's a meritocracy you mean? Point to specific laws that are systemically racist and we can say yes, the system is racist. Implementing UBI and discriminating by race is by definition introducing institutional racism into the system. >If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? If the system is white supremacist, why do Asians, Jews, Nigerians, etc. out perform whites?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  I mostly wanted an answer to this question: >If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people? A straightforward answer to that would help me follow your logic. If you can't give me that, I don't think I'll be able to understand where you are coming from.
  - throwaway210402 6y ago
    I answered it above: If the system is white supremacist, why do Asians, Jews, Nigerians, etc. out perform whites? Why are there any variations in weath between anyone, or intra-race? The fact of the matter is, this is all immaterial. The most logical and least racist way to combat the inequality is to give assistance to the less fortunate, regardless of their race, gender, religion, etc. Otherwise, you're just being racist.
- filoeleven 6y ago
  > Point to specific laws that are systemically racist and we can say yes, the system is racist. This is an incomplete view of “the system.” You’re leaving out biases in enforcement of the laws and prosecution and conviction rates, and other practices that are not prohibited by law but effectively reinforce racism. Redlining is an example of what I mean by the last one. There are laws against it now that were put into place because it was a social problem, not a legal one.
  - throwaway210402 6y ago
    Those disproportionately affected by "the system" in the past will be disproportionately poor. Those who are disproportionately poor will be disproportionately helped by a UBI system that does not discriminate. QED.
    - filoeleven 6y ago
      > My argument is, find examples of systemic racism and we can both ally against it. That’s all I was doing. I’m all for UBI with the “U” intact.
zo1 6y ago
> "If the system is equal, why is there a wealth gap between black people and white people?" A perfectly logical and unbiased reason for this could be that it takes time to equalize (a lot of wealth is passed on between generations). Just because "discrimination" and other things ended, doesn't mean the next generation magically does the same as other groups. And this has nothing to do with racism in the present.
- Miner49er 6y ago
  Well, this is a fine answer, but by definition, that means that the system is still racist while it is equalizing. The whole idea of things like this UBI is to speed it up. It's also very questionable that it will equalize without some sort of outside force acting on it (like this type of thing).