Why do you want to Harm people? Why are you such a hateful racist?

titsay
AnasAbdin
Cosmic Funnies
Mike Driver
Sweet Seals For You, Always
d e v o n

★

roma★

izzy's playlists!
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
i don't do bad sauce passes
NASA
almost home
art blog(derogatory)
we're not kids anymore.
todays bird
Monterey Bay Aquarium

Kiana Khansmith

@theartofmadeline
$LAYYYTER

seen from Italy
seen from Malaysia
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States

seen from Algeria

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Algeria
seen from Canada
seen from Pakistan

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Singapore

seen from Türkiye

seen from Spain

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
@winjerone
Why do you want to Harm people? Why are you such a hateful racist?
TED talks promoting pedophile acceptance. This is how it begins. First they talk about “changing perceptions and tolerance”, then it’s acceptance, then it’s rights, and next thing you know, it’s normalized.
This is exactly how it starts
Your future self is watching you right now through memories.
not if i drink enough alcohol! take that you prying creep
I thought segregation was a bad thing. People were beaten and killed fighting against it. People should be ashamed of themselves. Was the fight for civil rights for nothing? This is a huge step backwards.
All about Disarm We The People !!
Ironically, school shootings HAVE been stopped by armed people in schools…
To be fair, 9/11 was a false flag attack planned by Israeli Zionists - who currently control the White House, by the way - and carried out with help from Saudi Arabia, the Bush family, Dick Cheney, and a slew of Zionists within the American government and deep state. To be fair, most of the mass shootings have, similarly, been deep state false flags.
Therefore the correct response is go after the deep state, and America’s fake as fuck allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
That’s a special kind of stupid bro…
This is what happens when you eat a lot of paint chips as a child.
To be fair, let's say for arguments sake that this idiots conspiracy theories are all true. What difference does any of it make to the subject of the OP? Even if 911 was a "false flag", that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. It also doesn't mean that we didn't start arming pilots and air marshals. OP is still correct. Your conspiracy theories added nothing to the conversation, besides giving the rest of us a laugh.
This is a different perspective. I like it.
Lunch ideas
@magicalmissb I thought of you!
Needed this!
This could be the most useful post on tumblr I’ve ever seen. Ping @samiholloway
Where was this post all my life?
I needed this so bad
No thanks. I'll have a sammich.
IMPEACH 45! He’s destroying everything we’ve built!
Scientists have discovered a species of mutant all-female crayfish that reproduce asexually in massive numbers.
Y’all: -make this a gender issue-
Southerners: Never fucking ending crayfish boil
crawdad crawmom
I'll eat those bitches!
im tapping out
https://medium.com/@SharonZellman/the-racist-origin-of-the-t-pose-why-it-needs-to-be-stopped-2d1f04fcdfa2
Good thing literally anyone can publish something to medium and this isn’t just low quality bait ha ha right everyone????? Anyone here smoke toes
this is either really good satire or the next evolution of wokeness.
I saw some people doing a variation of this racist pose. They were alternating between four different poses. A Y, followed by a M, followed by a C, and concluding with an A. I wonder what sinister, racist meaning was behind that?
“I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history.
If you remember the plot of the Sound of Music, the Von Trapp family escaped over the Alps rather than submit to the Nazis. Kitty wasn’t so lucky. Her family chose to stay in her native Austria. She was 10 years old, but bright and aware. And she was watching.
“We elected him by a landslide – 98 percent of the vote,” she recalls.
She wasn’t old enough to vote in 1938 – approaching her 11th birthday. But she remembers.
“Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.”
No so.
Hitler is welcomed to Austria
“In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25 percent inflation and 25 percent bank loan interest rates.
Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs.
“My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.’
“We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933.” she recalls. “We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living.
“Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group – Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone in Germany was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.
“Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.
“We were overjoyed,” remembers Kitty, “and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.
“After the election, German officials were appointed, and, like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.
“Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.
“Then we lost religious education for kids
“Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang ‘Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,’ and had physical education.
“Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.”
And then things got worse.
“The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free.
“We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.
“My mother was very unhappy,” remembers Kitty. “When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination.
“I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing.
“Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time, unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler.
“It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.
“In 1939, the war started, and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and, if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death.
“Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.
“Soon after this, the draft was implemented.
“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.
“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.
“When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat.
“Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.
“When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers.
“You could take your children ages four weeks old to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, seven days a week, under the total care of the government.
“The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.
“Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna..
“After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything.
“When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full.
“If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.
“As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80 percent of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families.
“All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.
“We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables.
“Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands.
“Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.
“We had consumer protection, too
“We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the livestock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.
“In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated.
“So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work.
“I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van.
“I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months.
“They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.
“As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.
“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law-abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.
“No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.
“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”
“This is my eyewitness account.
“It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.
“America is truly is the greatest country in the world. “Don’t let freedom slip away.
“After America, there is no place to go.”
Kitty Werthmann
***Re-read the part where she says “everything was free” - healthcare and so on. Very much worth reading twice.****
4 notes ? should be 4 million
Only 13 notes =/ Please even if you don’t read it now because of reasons, repost it for others to read <3
NEVER forget.
READ THIS NOW
If we don’t learn from history, we WILL repeat it.
Do not let this happen again. And don’t you dare say it can’t.
not the exact speech, but a similar more detailed one here.
Her name is Kitty Werthmann.
Reblogging every time.
History is important to listen to so we don’t make the same mistakes.
Does any of this sounds familiar to you progressives out there. You are destroying our country in the same way Hitler ruined Germany and you have the nerve to call conservatives Nazis.
Have been trying to teach my grandkids about the history of the progressive and socialist/communist ways to get into their lives and this is a new tool to do that.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”
— Ayn Rand (via think-critically)
lmao😂/smh🙄
Eli Bosnick had the best response to this ridiculousness.
“If I gave you a bowl of skittles and three of them were poison would you still eat them?”
“Are the other skittles human lives?”
“What?”
“Like. Is there a good chance. A really good chance. I would be saving someone from a war zone and probably their life if I ate a skittle?”
“Well sure. But the point-”
“I would eat the skittles.”
“Ok-well the point is-”
“I would GORGE myself on skittles. I would eat every single fucking skittle I could find. I would STUFF myself with skittles. And when I found the poison skittle and died I would make sure to leave behind a legacy of children and of friends who also ate skittle after skittle until there were no skittles to be eaten. And each person who found the poison skittle we would weep for. We would weep for their loss, for their sacrifice, and for the fact that they did not let themselves succumb to fear but made the world a better place by eating skittles.
Because your REAL question…the one you hid behind a shitty little inaccurate, insensitive, dehumanizing racist little candy metaphor is, IS MY LIFE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF MEN, WOMEN, AND TERRIFIED CHILDREN…
… and what kind of monster would think the answer to that question… is yes?”
and then all of society has collapsed and theres no safe haven left for these refugees to go to any more. you fucking idiot. the poison skittle doesn’t just kill one person, it negatively affects everyone in your society. its not you consenting to eating poison skittles, its you consenting to putting poison skittles into circulation. look at the fucking romaine lettuce recall, OH BUT NOT ALL THE LETTUCE IS CONTAMINATED #NOTALLROMAINE thats irrelevent, we didn’t take the risk, because we couldn’t seperate the good from the bad. immigrant vetting is important because it prevents further harm happening to many innocents, not just you, you sad pathetic mentally disturbed suicidal martyr.
Rape in many european counteries who shipped in mass amounts of these ‘refugees’ (most of which are adult aged men, mind you) jumped to as high as 80% after they came in. It isn’t a “I HATE BROWN PEOPLE!!!” stance, it’s “wow, we don’t know who these people are, and all of them are coming from nations where women’s rights and gay rights are non-existent, maybe we don’t want to cause harm to our citizens by shipping these people in by the thousands. We should take a step back and come up with a safer plan as to secure our citizens safety first. After all, our citizens should come before any other foriegn citizens.”
Remember, when feminists use the Skittles analogy, it’s good and righteous and holy.
When a Trump uses it, it’s stupid.
Hey, @freedomjusticewarrior, how many refugees has this Eli person invited to live in his home?
None?
Well, then. He sure is generous with other people’s homes, isn’t he?
was getting into my car and two black/hispanic women were walking through a park when they realized one of their toddler had fallen on the ground and was crying about 50ft back, the mother yelled at her in a more annoyed tone "GET UP. GET THE FUCK UP" and went back and picked the toddler up by the arm and basically dragged the kid, still crying. Didn't ask if she was okay or anything, no comforting, no empathy, just seemingly annoyed at the child's existence.
the lack of empathy and compassion in minorities also extends to animals and pets, they just seemingly don’t care, and will walk right on by an animal in pain or distress. If they do this to pets and their own children, what will they do when they are the majority population?
Blacks lack the ability to properly empathize with other beings. This is why they can never coexist with other groups peacefully. Pretending that a society in which they exist will be anything other than violent is the ultimate form of delusion.
is it wise to make such conclusions based solely on people’s race? to claim that a whole group of people lacks empathy solely because of their race? needs more evidence
Nope. I can tell you that anytime I fell down my parents made sure I was okay and didn’t curse or tell at me.
Do you know what the term “anecdotal evidence” is and what it means?
Do you understand “not everyone acts that way” and “generalizations arent correct because people are individuals”
Listen, I’m not going to sit here explaining the facts to you about how blacks are scientifically and statistically more psychopathic than whites on every level. If you actually care to learn, you can paste this link: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00029-0
Into the field on this site: https://sci-hub.tw
And you can read the full study yourself that way. I will leave you with the conclusions from that study:
“The general patterns of the racial and ethnic differences in the 16 measures and expressions of psychopathic personality for which data have been presented show a considerable degree of consistency. Blacks and Native Americans almost invariably show higher levels of psychopathic personality than whites. East Asians, principally Chinese and Japanese, almost invariably show lower levels of psychopathic personality than whites. South Asians from the Indian sub-Continent who are resident in Britain, Canada and South Africa typically show about the same levels of psychopathic personality as whites. Hispanics typically appear intermediate between high scoring blacks and Native Americans and lower scoring whites.”
You dont need to explain anything I just literally said thats not true for everyone
Which is a fact 🤷🏾
It’s irrelevant, my statement is true far more often than not.
You’re what’s called an outlier, which means you don’t really count.
I don’t really count? I guess you might as well say im not black anymore while you’re at it
I’m sure I wouldn’t be the first person to say it to you.
I don’t understand this automatic defense of “generalizations arent correct because people are individuals” as if that means fuck all
individuals are individuals. Groups are groups. Black people, the group, are more psychopathic than white people, the group.
While I’m absolutely sure you could point at jeffrey dahmer as a psychopathic white and ben carson as a sane black, neither is a representative of the whole.
THE WHOLE IS ITS OWN REPRESENTATIVE.
If you ask 5 million black people what their favorite color is, and 4.5 million answer “yellow”, you pointing at a black person that likes the color blue doesn’t change shit. Black PEOPLE like yellow. Yeah, outliers exist. They’re called outliers for a reason. The general trend remains the same. Can you judge the mental condition of someone based on race? Absolutely. Is that a 100% effective and flawless system? Fuck no, no such system ever has or will exist. But it works well enough. Or it did, for the entirety of human existance, until about 200 years ago or so.
Further viewing:
I was talking about myself but ok
And you think that changes anything?
I literally cannot relate. And you can’t automatically assume every black person does. That’s all
Okay I need you to try real hard on this. This is the crux of the entire argument.
A person is not a group.
One entitity. Is different. From. A collection. Of entities.
One. Is not. Many.
One black guy that killed 4 children every weekend for the last 50 years is not indicative of the whole. Do you understand that? One black guy that saved the lives of 5 children every day for the last 70 years is not indicative of the whole either. Can you understand that?
The group is the group. I do not need even a single black PERSON(one), to relate to the idea that black PEOPLE(many) have distinct trends in behavior.
The trend exists regardless of how you feel about it. Regardless of your place within it.
Yeah. Do you get my point though?
Your point is you are an aberration. Your point is while some 4 out of 5 black homes are fatherless, your daddy loved you very much. That while theft and robbery are commonplace and encouraged in black communities, you’ve never stolen a thing in your life.
Your point is “I’m different”
It’s a shallow, hollow point. Exceptions happen. Exceptions do not disprove trends.
I never claimed that it disprove trends i just said u can’t point at a black person n automatically say “that person right there? Psychopath”
No, but what I can do is point at a black person and say “That person right there? Statistically more likely to be a psychopath. Statistically has the highest chance of committing crimes or violence against me.”
What you can do is say “People from that group are statistically more likely to be a threat to my safety, and I should separate myself from that group.”
you can have that. but we know you don’t like black people anyways so thats relevant
Yes, I don’t like them because having black people in my country makes my country worse off than if they were not here.
Your kind are a burden on society, and on my country. I have every reason not to like them.
quick question: do you think that America is or is not my country
No. The founders did not intend for America to be a multiracial or multicultural society. This country was founded to be a home for white European people. Up until 1965 people who were not white largely could not immigrate to the US and policy explicitly stated that only “free white men of good character” could immigrate to the US.
You are here because the only man who would’ve had the willpower to send your ancestors back to Africa got assassinated, not because this country belongs to you in any way.
And for the most part, America is white. I dont think badly of that. But tragically for you, I am a US citizen, born and raised, so this is my country :’( ! I have no business in Africa.
I guess if it was only intended for white people, they should never have brought slaves
America is better off with people who put America first, not people who want to eject American citizens for not looking right.
And putting America first means making sure our population is composed of the best populations, which blacks are decidedly not. Putting America First means getting rid of people, or groups of people, who represent a net burden on society, such as blacks and latinos.
Putting America First means not letting your fear of being called “racist” get in the way of making America what it was intended to be from the beginning.
Latino and Black population have positives and negatives, as do Swedish, Italians, and many others, I am not afraid of being called racist, ignorant however, that is something I prefer not be called, but assuming there is no benefit to races other than white Europeans is ignorance.
I mean, good luck getting most white people on board with your fascist bullshit. You want to talk about outliers? That’s what you are, OP. White people, as a whole, have shunned you racist shitheads. It’s not blacks that aren’t welcome here, it’s you.
You have a lot of nerve acting like this is a “white man’s country” when Native Americans were here for millennia before Columbus ever stepped one pompous, murderous foot onto this continent. This country is no more yours than it is anyone else’s. Die mad about it.
I definitely remember him saying that africans should be “eradicated” for the resources available in africa to advance tech for white people so this is nothing new.
If Africans ain’t gonna use the damn resources somebody should.
If Africans were just as capable as whites they never would have gotten colonized, they would have been the colonizers. They had better access to natural resources, a vast amount of arable land, and everything necessary to become the most advanced continent on Earth.
But they didn’t. They continue to live in mud huts, suffering mass starvation and eating mud cookies in between raping babies to try and cure AIDS.
Those are the kind of people you come from.
you: despises people from 3rd world countries immigrating into white countries, replacing the population, changing their culture, essentially colonizing europe…etc
also you: we should invade africa, colonize it, eradicate the people, and take some delicious resources!!!
?????????????????????????????????????????
I come from a hardworking housewife and father that works in IT! While we are at it
Yes, I have a sense of self-preservation but also want to expand the reach of my race and culture. You mistake my dislike of the immigrants as believing that their motivations are somehow unjust or unfair.
In reality, I understand why the migrants do what they do. They seek what I seek: More land and resources for their people, to see their people and families thrive, and they are willing to destroy those in their way to achieve those goals.
This is a war. It is only natural that I would want to preserve my own people against the invasion of our enemies.
Why are you saying those motivations are just? When you just said you want to preserve your race, yet accept the motivations that are threatening it?
Protecting from invasion is not the same as invading someone else like clearly there is an aggressor. You are being ironic
how about: everyone leave each other alone
Because there is nothing morally wrong with wanting to see your people prosper. It is the natural inclination of every human being.
Our motivations are the same, but we are at odds with each other because neither they nor us want to give up that which we have, but we both want more so that our people can prosper.
“Everyone leave each other alone”
An idealistic fantasy. So long as scarcity exists, there will be conflict. Even when scarcity does not exist, there will still be conflict.
Nothing morally wrong with colonization, killing people, etc? Wow
You severely lack empathy
Ever notice how white supremacists fail the humanity tests they judge other races on?
white supremacist: other races lack empathy and appreciation of human worth
white supremacist: we should totally kill them all
It’s one thing to lack empathy for those who are not of your race or who are not related to you.
It is a very different thing to lack empathy towards your very own children.
white supremacist: but its okay when WE do it
Two posts in and I’m already bored with you. Bye.
Really? I’ve been bored with white supremacist bullshit for years now.
Go play, boy.
The one take away from this... And I need the liberal idiots to pay attention... This is why we need free speech. Even if it is hate speech. So that the public can see what awful pieces of garbage these racists truly are. If you continue to shut them down or drown them out, the public will only see you in a bad light. They become the victims. Let them speak and expose themselves for the human waste that they are.
Michigan has a new plan that could disadvantage poor black beneficiaries while providing relief for poor whites.
“In Michigan, as the Detroit Free Press’s Nancy Kaffer noted, state lawmakers are pushing a plan that would require Medicaid recipients (with exceptions for the disabled, elderly, and a few other selected populations) to work or search for work at least 29 hours each week. If they fail to meet the work requirement, they could lose Medicaid coverage for a full year.
But the Michigan plan comes with a twist: People who live in counties with higher unemployment rates — above 8.5 percent — are exempted from the requirement. That is likely to lead in practice, as Kaffer observes, to rural whiter counties, where unemployment is higher, getting a break from these work requirements while urban areas with a higher share of black residents would still be subjected to them. Which means that black Medicaid enrollees would be more likely to lose their health insurance.”
Is this article really suggesting that areas that need more help shouldn’t recieve said help based solely on the color of skin of the people in that area? That sounds a bit racist. What if it were reversed? What if it were the urban areas that were exempt? I doubt we’d see an article from any of these cretinous sites about it.
What quote are you talking about?
Apart from that question–I really wish there was a norm of publically showing you checked how certain allocation constraints in laws distributing resources affected certain demographics to argue they were being allocated as evenly as possible.
If an area needs more assistance (due to higher unemployment) the that area should recurrence said help. Regardless of the color of the people’s skin.
But that area would already recieve more help if the requirements for everyone are the same. Like by percentage–if a higher percentage of people in one area qualify, then the population percentage receiving help is higher by default–they don’t need to skew it by geographical area. Skewing it by factors outside the requirements people need to preform in a requirements based system is what makes it unfair.
Like sometimes if you are unemployed and want to recieve a state benifit–you are required to fullfill a work requirement–like the article is saying to recieve a benifit in Michigan, someone has to work or look for work for at least 29.5 hours.
–an exemption like in the article means living in certain areas you don’t have to fullfill the requirements. So this article is covering that being white (because you are more likely to live in the specified location) means you are more likely to get the assistance for no work, while being black you more likely have to have to work for the assistance–that is what is unfair.
I’m on the Medicare for all bandwagon so none of this is my ideal–but still If the rules are the same for everyone, an area that needs more help (by population percentage) will still get more help. The geographical exemption is unneeded to do what you are implying (‘if an area needs more assistance then that area should recurrence said help’) because it already happens by default.
I think everyone should be exempt from needing to work for healthcare, but if the exemption is more likely for white people that still shows instatutionalized racism.
In the more rural areas, there are less places to look for work. If I lived in a town with only 10 businesses and they all have all the employees they can afford, then it makes sense to have this exemption as it would be harder for the rural resident to find not just employment, but employment opportunities. Where as the urban resident has more employment opportunities.
If they had numbers that showed they measured the amount of employment opportunities in an area verus the population, and based it on that–I would be more inclined to agree with you. But I faithfully assume they didn’t do that because resources isn’t what the exemption is based on–we already know it is based on how high the umemployment rate is.
Also this is Michigan–there are a lot of urban areas in Michigan that are extremely depressed by Enviormental Racism (i.e. Flint) that might go against the norm for what you would expect for employment opertunities verus population density. //And// we know they didn’t base it off a correlation like that–because again–it’s based just on the regional unemployment rate–not the amount of buiness in that area.
And the government can figure out how many employees per population there are in an area because they have that tax information from buisnesses. Also certain areas might have a higher percentage of employed citizens but lower business employment because people in that area are more likely to commute, telecommunte, etc. Or an area might have higher employment but more minimum wage paying jobs, or less jobs that offer enough hours———basically there are a lot of factors that can really mess with how these statistics present. (If a jack off like me can figure this much out, the officals can’t expect to get away with playing dumb.)
Also it’s not just work–it’s /looking/ for work as well. Like in my state (not michigan just to clarify) some benifits have requirements like this and ‘looking for work’ is logging hours looking at a government website that has a bunch of job listing and you have to apply for like two a month (I know because I had a friend who was unemployed).
This is hypothetical because I don’t actually know how it works–but if they have a system like that–where there are listings in your area, and you have to apply for two a month–there should hopefully already be an exemption in the system if and when there is no work avalible. But again that is not how the law is writen.
If this system is anything like the systems I’m familar with–and black people are more expected to be submitting employment applications, and white people less–it’s still racist. Even if there are less job listings, and you are less likely to be employed by submitting those applications because there is more competition–on an individual level you still have to do the same amount of work if you have the same (completely bogus) 29.5 hour requirment.
Like you are right to be thinking about the lack of resources in certain areas–but that is //not// what the law is based on. And either perspective–population umemployment versus resources–is over simplifed–because people communte, the average wage in an area varries, etc. And in this case the over-simplification has racist implications–something I am biased to think is purposeful because I have been following a lot of state corruption stories in Michigan.
Also the most complicated solution–looking at each case individually (“Do you have a car?”, “Do you have kids?”, etc.)–doesn’t have to be a huge consumption of human resources because a lot of that surveying can be automated with computer systems, (and already is partially automated if they are verifying they are searching for work in some way), and you can add additional considerations to the survey as they arise (“Did you already apply for all the oppurtunities in your area?”). That is what I would advocate for—if I had to define a disgusting system that tries to exclude people from healthcare.
I have been through the unemployment system. And in California they do take all variables into consideration. They even keep track of any bank accounts you may have so that you can prove that you don't have income you aren't declaring to them.
i made a post abt how i hated this trope being in media and got some god awful replies on the post, so again: its manipulative and toxic as fuck to demand your partner to come out to their family abt their sexuality/your relationship because you feel like theyre “hiding you from their family..” or something.
if you genuinely cannot handle the fact that ur significant other cant come out due to many, many reasons - some of which can lead them to being harmed or disowned by their family, btw - u dont need to be in a relationship w/ that person, or any closested person, or anyone tbh.
This is often an issue of people thinking that their experience is everyone else’s. I’ve actually seen this a lot, people who came from loving, accepting homes that tell closeted folk “just come out! It’s hard, but your parents will love and accept you trust me!” Without realizing that their experience isn’t everyone else’s.
Some parents will not accept it right away.
Some will never accept it.
Some will treat their kids differently.
Some will be emotionally abusive to their kids.
Some will disown their kids.
Some will physically harm their kids.
Some will throw their kids out on the streets.
Some, in extreme cases, will even kill their kids.
They know their parents better than an outsider does. Only they have any real ground to stand on when it comes to how they think their parents will react. NEVER PRESSURE ANYONE TO COME OUT.
Ok, but conversely aren’t you then demanding that your significant other lie? And pretend to be something that they aren’t?
No, you’re not “demanding” anything. If someone needs to lie to their family for their own safety, then it is your job to simply let them. It’s no one’s place to out anyone else.
So, what if my boyfriend and I are still not out, and we live together but our families think we are just roommates. He wants to come out but I don't. Can he come out our no? If he does, chances are that people will put two and two together. So he has to keep up the charade right? Otherwise he'll out me as well.