Quote:Welfare: A White Secret


The numbers go like this: 61% of the population receiving welfare, listed as "means-tested cash assistance" by the Census Bureau, is identified as white, while only 33% is identified as black. 
These numbers notwithstanding, the Republican version of "political correctness" has given us "welfare cheat" as a new term for African American since the early days of Ronald Reagan. Yet if the Lakers were 61% white and on a winning streak, would we be calling them a "black team"?



Wait a minute, I can hear my neighbors say, we're not as slow at math as the Asian Americans like to think. There's still a glaring disproportion there. African Americans are only 12% of the population as a whole, at least according to the census count, yet they're 33% of the welfare population -- surely evidence of a shocking addiction to the dole.



But we're forgetting something. Welfare is a program for poor people, very poor people. 
African Americans are three times as likely as whites to fall below the poverty level and hence to have a chance of qualifying for welfare benefits. If we look at the kind of persons most likely to be eligible -- single mothers living in poverty with children under 18 to support -- we find little difference in welfare participation by race: 74.6% of African Americans in such dire straits are on welfare, compared with 64.5% of the poor white single moms.



That's still a difference, but not enough to imply some congenital appetite for a free lunch on the part of the African-derived. In fact, two explanations readily suggest themselves: First, just as blacks are disproportionately likely to be poor, they are disproportionately likely to find themselves among the poorest of the poor, where welfare eligibility arises. Second, the black poor are more likely than their white counterparts to live in cities, and hence to have a chance of making their way to the welfare office. Correct for those two differences, and you won't find an excess of African Americans fitting the stereotype of the sluttish welfare queen who breeds for profit.



So why are they so poor? I can see my neighbor asking as visions of feckless idlers dance before his narrowed eyes. Ah, that is a question white folks would do well to ponder. Consider, for a start, that African Americans are more likely to be disabled (illness being a famous consequence of poverty) or unemployed (in the sense of actively seeking work) and far less likely to earn wages that would lift them out of the welfare-eligibility range.




As for the high proportion of black families headed by single women (44%, compared with 13% for whites): many deep sociohistoric reasons could be adduced, but none of them is welfare. A number of respected studies refute the Reagan-era myth that a few hundred a month in welfare payments is a sufficient incentive to chuck one's husband or get pregnant while in high school. If it were, states with relatively high welfare payments -- say, about $500 a month per family -- would have higher rates of out-of-wedlock births than states like Louisiana and Mississippi, which expect a welfare family to get by on $200 a month or less.

But this is not the case.

(08-16-2016, 07:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no idea what you mean.

I made very clear what my intent was.  I even highlighted it in your quote.  I "looked to the intent and motivation" just like you told me to do.

But now you tell me that no one can tell what another person's intent is.

So which is it?  Do we look a person's intent or is it impossible to know what another person's intent is?

(08-16-2016, 08:17 PM)GMDino Wrote: These numbers notwithstanding, the Republican version of "political correctness" has given us "welfare cheat" as a new term for African American since the early days of Ronald Reagan.[url=http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,156084,00.html][/url]

(08-16-2016, 08:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Wait, what? After just stating that only 33% of people receiving welfare are blacks, your article immediately states this bullshit? I've heard the term "welfare cheat" but NEVER have I heard it as another name for blacks EVER in my life and I actually work with welfare recipients on a daily basis.

And, FYI, it seems to ME, that it's the DEMOCRATS that think only blacks are on welfare considering that anytime a Republican has mentioned any kind of welfare reform, there's always a cry of racism thrown in amongst all the criticisms towards said suggested changes. Why would Dems say welfare reform is racist if it's because they think only blacks are on welfare?

(08-16-2016, 08:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Wait, what? After just stating that only 33% of people receiving welfare are blacks, your article immediately states this bullshit? I've heard the term "welfare cheat" but NEVER have I heard it as another name for blacks EVER in my life and I actually work with welfare recipients on a daily basis.

And, FYI, it seems to ME, that it's the DEMOCRATS that think only blacks are on welfare considering that anytime a Republican has mentioned any kind of welfare reform, there's always a cry of racism thrown in amongst all the criticisms towards said suggested changes. Why would Dems say welfare reform is racist if it's because they think only blacks are on welfare?

(08-16-2016, 08:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  We can definitely make informed decisions on the intent of others, but only the person making the statement truly knows his or her intent.  

(08-16-2016, 08:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But back to the OP if that is possible. 

(08-16-2016, 08:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I've heard the term "welfare cheat" but NEVER have I heard it as another name for blacks EVER in my life and I actually work with welfare recipients on a daily basis.

(08-16-2016, 07:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote:  
This has worked out to be a major downfall of the African Americans. The majority of the kids have no idea who their daddy is. The problem is that he Penalized the mother's income if they married, so this led to many women not marrying in order to maximize their benefits and become Welfare Queens.

(08-16-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Two things:

Is that article 15 years old?

It was definitely slanted to slam conservatives (read whitey). Not only did the article assert they consider African Americans "welfare cheats"

(08-16-2016, 08:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: Someone is touchy.

Did you read beyond that or just go into "DEMOCRATS" mode?

(08-16-2016, 08:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Oh really? 

(08-16-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Two things:

Is that article 15 years old?

It was definitely slanted to slam conservatives (read whitey). Not only did the article assert they consider African Americans "welfare cheats" it also tries to imply that they stereotype Asians as good at math. 

(08-16-2016, 08:55 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Well, by golly, you found 1, sort of. I guess that makes it completely true.

(08-16-2016, 09:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Funny thing is that you had read his post before you denied ever hearing anything like that.

And there is no way in hell you had never heard anything like that before.  You don't live under a rock.

(08-16-2016, 08:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Were Mike M's comments from 15 years ago?

(08-16-2016, 07:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Lyndon Johnson thought it was a wonderful Idea to give Single moms free welfare if they didn't know who the baby daddy was.....
 
This has worked out to be a major downfall of the African Americans. The majority of the kids have no idea who their daddy is. The problem is that he Penalized the mother's income if they married, so this led to many women not marrying in order to maximize their benefits and become Welfare Queens.

So yes, there is proof that a social program helped destroy their family unit. is it the sole reason? No, but a pretty big one.

(08-16-2016, 09:19 PM)PhilHos Wrote:  I've not heard the average Republican nor the average white person say such a thing. If YOU have, then my question to you is why are you hanging around racists?

(08-16-2016, 09:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I cannot tell as you didn't link the source.

(08-16-2016, 09:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: To be fair, you do have a propensity of quoting only parts of a post, For instance you didn't even quote my whole post and it was quite short. 

(08-16-2016, 10:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Silly me for thinking that you actually read any post in a thread that you post in.  I quoted it in the post right before the one of mine that you quoted.  And there is a time stamp on his post.  Let me know if you have any problem finding it.



Why should I have to quote an entire post when  I am only responding to part of it?

Even more important why do you think this is a bad thing for me to do when you do the exact same thing?

What is your point?

fredtoast Wrote:Silly me

(08-16-2016, 10:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't let guys like Mike M run me away from this forum.

(08-16-2016, 08:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 1.  Lyndon Johnson never felt is was a good idea to give welfare to single mother only if they did not know who the father was.  That is a complete lie.

2.  Single black mothers did not plan and aspire to be welfare queens.  That is another complete lie.

3.  The payments to single mothers were the same for both white women and African Americans.  It just happened that black men were so far behind white men in average wages that they were not as able to support children as white men.

You can't blame a social program for creating poverty when the poverty was there before the social program.  The fact is that these social programs have greatly improved the economic condition of many African Americans.  They moved out of poverty at a much higher rate than poor white people from 1940 through 1970.  But since the 70's middle class wages have been stagnate for both blacks and whites.

I wonder what Bfine would say about the "intent and motivation" of Mike M's comments?