Well raw numbers certainly un dercuts the whole “welfare is a form of reparations” idea.
I’m pretty sure that’s not how debates work.
I think I see the problem.
Your statements prior to this one (“welfare programs were originally created with poor blacks in mind”) makes it sound like you think the welfare system was created to disproportionately advantage black folks (and considering the title of the thread, it isn’t tough to see why people would read your coment that way). Now you seem to be clarifying your position to say that the welfare system was reformed in the 60’s to stop discrimination in the welfare system.
“Fixing a system to stop discrimination” strikes a different tone than "creating a system to “welfare programs were originally created with poor blacks in mind”
I don’t think very many people read your initial statement that “welfare programs were originally created with poor blacks in mind” to eman taht the welfare system created in the 1930’s was reformed in the 1960’s to eliminate discrimination (against blacks and others). It almost sounds like youa re saying something entirely different. Probably just a misunderstanding.
I think single mothers account for a large percentage of welfare recipients.
There’s at least some discretion in who gets aid and who doesn’t. When I was young, my mom, by the numbers, should have been eligible for food stamps. She had a job, but it was teaching at a Catholic elementary school, and the Catholic schools don’t pay teachers much at all. But she was repeatedly turned down, because they refused to believe that someone with a Master’s degree could possibly be making that little.
Just to back Chicagojeff here, John McWhorter’s academic training is in linguistics, not sociology, anthropology, or public policy. He’s just a conservative smart guy trading on his academic credentials which have no bearing on the issues he opines on.
As a professor with a doctorate, I find it distasteful when people leverage their academic credentials in areas in which they do not have expertise or training. McWhorter does this a lot, and I find that more problematic than what he actually says. I have tons of opinions about economics and politics, but I’m just a smart ordinary joe on those topics, and I would never insinuate, nor let the perception linger, that my opinions are based on an analysis of data or the literature unless I had given serious study to it.
It’s kind of wild to see McWhorter’s name in this thread. From my erstwhile academic studies, I know McWhorter as first, second, and third a linguist.
As long as it’s not a musty old claptrap you’re good.
In order to feed his/her family and children and/or to obtain medical care that that person can not otherwise purchase due to lack of money.
Do you really have trouble understanding that?
That Bordelond is the juicy irony… McWhorter is a linguist which we know… and from what I remember he grew up middle class in New Jersey I believe. Yet Abgail Thernstrom trots him out to talk about welfare when his training isn’t in public policy. So why do you think he’s brought out to address this issue? Unlike Clarence Thomas McWhorter can’t even claim a sister on public assistance. He’s brought out to put a black face on their argument. Ahhh the irony… social conservatives using a negro to arm themselves against cries of bigotry. Ward Connerly… Shelby Steele… etc… theirs plenty of work for these jackals…