The total population of blacks who've played professional ice hockey is pretty small. I don't think we can conclude from that that they're intrinsically bad athletes though if you look at all the sports they seem to dominate.
Printable View
The total population of blacks who've played professional ice hockey is pretty small. I don't think we can conclude from that that they're intrinsically bad athletes though if you look at all the sports they seem to dominate.
Don't know. The brain probably is affected by oppression but whether that changes reward circuits or not is beyond my expertise.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Indeed, black people do seem to thrive in physical sports. Some people might say that it's racist to point this out. I think those people are idiots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Chess is a different beast. It's not a physical sport, it's a mental one. It's also very easy to play, there's a reason it's popular in countries like India. You don't need specialist equipment or training, all you need is a chess board and a brain.
And whether that oppression is real or simply perceived is also open to debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Jesus man....sample size? How many sets of twins, that are raised apart even exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
You're presuming that the longer sentences can only be caused by racism. I don't see how that's possibleQuote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Can you think of some other reasons?
Getting back to IQ. This is the argument Charles Murray makes and he's been branded an alt-right nazi white nationalist white supremacist bigot for it. But I see only compassion in this argument. That shows just how deranged the social justice left is, and anything that they say will help black people, is likely to have the opposite effect.
Poop just said he believes that IQ is 75% biological and 25% environmental. Or something close to that. Fine. Let's go with that. Even if you can equalize all of the environmental factors (you can't), there would still be a a noticeable difference in IQ between the races. Maybe not a whole standard deviation then, but maybe 75% of one, or something close to that.
That's still going to produce huge disparities in outcomes. So what do we do then? Do we just say "Sorry black people....can't help you anymore. All of our differences are biological now. You're on your own."
That kind of society would disintegrate into hell in about fifteen minutes.
So the solution here, is that we DON'T organize our society around IQ. More and more our society uses IQ as a proxy for someone's value. That's the problem. If that doesn't change then black people have no hope for equality, ever.
For example, if I were president, the first thing I would do is march into the Secretary of Transportation's office and I would say "You know those driver-less cars. We're not letting them on the road. Ever. Put an end to it today"
Next, I'd go tot he secretary of Treasury and I would say "If we're spending any money on funding research into robotics, or AI, that shit is over right now. Stop payment on those grant checks by end of business, or you're fired"
Bringing manufacturing back will also go along way to solve this problem.
here's the silver lining on IQ....it doesn't actually correlate to your ability to do a job. It just correlates to how fast you learn that job. So if you have a really simple job, it doesn't matter if you have a low IQ. Once you learn the job, you're set. However, if you have a complex job, and do many different things all the time. Then you're toast if you don't have a high IQ.
There are fewer and fewer simple jobs. Those are all automated now. That leaves people dispossessed. And the people with the lowest IQ's will get hit first, and get hit hardest. 1 in 9 men drive for a living right now. What happens to them when trucks can drive themselves?
The scam is so apparent, I'm surprised more black people don't see it. The political donors in Big Tech (almost all democrats) fund the DNC. The DNC then goes and advocates for other social justice reforms that don't bother Big Tech. Those social justice reforms don't work. Big Tech gets richer. More DNC funding, more advocating for other social justice reforms.
That's what got Donald Trump elected. Don't be blind. The same thing that happens to inner city black people happens to rural white people. Automation takes their jobs. property values dip. Unemployment skyrockets. Alcoholism. Drugs. Crime. It's not just black people. The middle class became a minority in 2015. That's never happened before in history.
That's what "Make America Great Again" means. It means we need to go back to a time when most of the country was bourgeoisie. When a man with an IQ of 100 could support a family on one income, work, have dignity, provide for his children's education, and most importantly *save*
People like that are two paychecks from oblivion right now.
White supremacists didn't do that. The elite political class did that.
As a tangent to the above, and as proof that it's true, I'll connect this to the other ongoing discussion in here about Native Americans.
The Reserveations on which they live is a perfect example of a society where the government plans and provides everything, and the result is that everyone's life is shit. They're basically mini-venezuela's
If you ever want an argument AGAINST Universal Basic Income, go to an NA reservation.
There's nothing wrong with NA's biologically that would pre-dispose them to alcoholism. Alcoholism is just a symptom of their depression. And their depression is caused by a government that "compassionately" robbed them of their human dignity by giving them free stuff.
Yeah great except the economy wasn't having all those disastrous consequences you suggested in 2016. Maybe in a few places, but not in the entirety of rural America. Certainly not enough to explain 'arrrrggh MAGA!'.
Rural people have always been poorer than city folk.
The country as a whole is better off now than it was 1950 or whenever America was great in terms of overall wealth. Much better off. It's how the wealth is distributed that's the problem. What, 95% is concentrated in 1% of the population (or summat) - that's ridiculous.
And Trump's solution to this, might I remnd you, was to provide a tax cut for the wealthy.
Try again.
They don't all live on reservations getting handouts from the gov't. Plenty of them live off reservations. And they're just as fucked. Explain that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
They don't necessarily have to be raised apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
And apparently there's lots. Like in the hundreds.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Young_Children
And yea, it's certainly bad for your IQ to raised in a poor family.
Quote:
The models suggest that in impoverished families, 60% of the variance in IQ is accounted for by the shared environment, and the contribution of genes is close to zero; in affluent families, the result is almost exactly the reverse.
You'll have to elaborate on a specific situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Most of the NA tribes in this area own casinos. And while they may not live on a formal reservation, they get a check every month. It's not directly from the government, it's from the Tribe's profit sharing. But the Tribe makes money because the government let's it have a reservation, so it's the same thing, just more convoluted. The result is the same, when you kill someone's incentive and motivation to work, it causes them to become depressed, and dispossessed, and substance abuse usually works it's way in there eventually.
Then why do they have to study twins?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Sorry, I"m not reading that. Give me the cliffs.
But the government doesn't let it have its reservation; the government still owns the land and everything that happens on it has to get government approval. You wanna open a convenience store? Needs government approval, might take years. You want to mortgage your house to get money to start a business? Too bad it's not your house.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Oh you want to build a casino that white people can go to? Sure we'll approve that, send all our degens to go to the reservation, and you can deal with them; that's one way we're happy to let you make money.
The government should either say 'ok it's your land, sink or swim' or 'it's not your land, sink or swim', not 'you live here on our land, and we'll make it impossible for you to swim'
Because they know how much of their genetics are similar. With non-twins you can only guess it's around 50%.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
If you're rich, most of your IQ is due to genes. If you're poor, most of your IQ is due to environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Still not following. If the Twins have the same genes, then their genetic component of IQ should be the same. To see how much is environmental, you need to raise them in different environments. No?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
But you're saying they didn't do that. So how's it work?
Isn't that the same thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Nope. The casino is effectively in another country for all intents and purposes. It has it's own sworn police force, it's own court, it's own post office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Yes, but even if they're raised in the same environment they won't always end up with the same IQ. This is what you would call 'unexplained variance' .Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Yes, and some of them are, and usually end up with different IQs. This is explainable variance as it can mostly be attributed to aspects of the environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
It would take a long time to explain the fancy schmancy stats, but basically, you look at the overall variance between identical twins as a function of whether they were raised in similar or different environments. You add in a factor of socioeconomic status (SES) to see whether the explainable variance is different when they are raised separately in lower or higher-SES environments.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
The answer (Figure 2) is when both are raised in a higher SES environment (right side of each panel under 'C' [shared evironment] and 'E' [non-shared environment]), their IQ doesn't vary much (lines go down from low SES [left side of each panel] to high SES [right side of each panel], and not much grey around each line), and is relatively unaffected by whatever differences might exist in the environment (not much grey), but IS affected by genetics (leftmost panels under 'A', lines go up). When both are raised in a lower SES environment (left side of each panel under C and E), their IQ varies a lot (lines start high and go lower, and more grey around each line), but not regarding genetics 'A'.
So something about being in a low SES environment makes you sensitive to other parts of that environment. It's not clear what parts those are, as they didn't measure that. Could be eductation, parenting, etc.
ehhh, i'm not up on all the details, but i'm pretty sure it's only in 'another country' as a legal exercise so as to allow gambling. The gov't still owns the land, doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Also regarding your earlier point about how to MAGA by bringing back undemanding jobs, might it not be better to just provide better education?
And I know Ong wants to MUKGA by saving menial and dangerous fishing jobs, but what if we instead gave all those people some training so they could do something else that paid better?
I know for sure that the Tribe owns the land. That much I'm super sure about. I had to do a project on it in college.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The gov't has some say over stuff, but I don't know what the criteria are. I suspect the gov't only has a say when something the Tribe does impacts the surrounding area. Like, I know of two casinos that are only about 7 miles apart, and in the same State. One of them has a 10,000 seat arena. The other one would cut off it's right ball to have a 10,000 seat arena. However the latter casino exists on a highway that could not handle the traffic that such a venue would bring. Hence, they aren't allowed to build an arena.
though if they gave the state the money to build a bigger highway....maybe they could get an arena. But since highways don't generate revenue, I think the payback on that project would be prohibitively long.
No. More/better education probably wouldn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
It's currently illegal in the United States to induct a person into the military with an IQ below 83. If that doesn't shock and horrify you, then you didn't read it right. Let me rephrase. 10% of the population cannot be trained to do any task without it being definitively counter-productive. The resources spent to train you and fix your mistakes exceed the value you might produce with your labor.
As more and more tasks are automated, that bar just gets higher and higher. Everyone under the bar is completely fucked. And no amount of education and training would save them. It would be cheaper, and more efficient from the government's perspective to just give them some money.
But that saps away their souls. Then you get drugs, crime, broken families, and all that shit.
This is why Charles Murray is NOT a racist. He's concerned about exactly this. The more our society arranges itself along IQ, then the more the folks with low IQ's will suffer. And if there IS in fact a genetic component to IQ, and black people lost that lottery, then black people will suffer first, and suffer the most.
Ignoring this, and seeking to enact a solution through wealth redistribution actually makes the problem WORSE.
I'm at the point where I'm scanning your conversations for my name on the off chance it's relevant to me. I saw it.Quote:
And I know Ong wants to MUKGA by saving menial and dangerous fishing jobs, but what if we instead gave all those people some training so they could do something else that paid better?
Fishing is not a menial job, it's a very important one. Stop insulting people like fishermen and farmers, the very people who put food on your plate. Even with globalism, it's farmers and fishermen who feed you and your family.
Menail means lacking in skill and prestige. Good luck if you think you can walk on to a fishing boat and perform to the same standard as these guys you're insulting. And lacking prestige? Again that shows your lack of respect. You think it lacks prestige? Well I don't.
Ok you have a hard on for fishermen. I get it. And fine it's not unskilled labor, it's semi-skilled. My apologies to any fishermen who might be reading this.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
And I'm sure they feel better knowing you hold them in such high esteem.
And lol that they are 'putting food on my plate', as if they're doing their job for my personal benefit. Don't they get paid? Would I starve if some guy in Grimsby didn't go fishing one day? lolololol That's like me saying there'd be no universities if it weren't for me.
The question remains, if their industry is unable to sustain them, is it better to try to revive a dying industry (which I don't think it is, but w/e) or to retrain them on something that is less likely to kill them and pays better?
I wonder if you'll be saying this when the universities dieQuote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Spoiler:youtube will replace education in 20 years
I'll be retired by then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
You think so?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
There would be no universities if it wasn't for people like you.Quote:
That's like me saying there'd be no universities if it weren't for me.
I don't have a hard on for fishermen. I just respect the fact they take daily risks to feed people. Yes they get paid, of course they do. But not as much as, say, a fireman. And no you wouldn't starve if a fisherman in Grimsby thought "fuck this shit". But if ALL fishermen stopped working, and ALL farmers, then you'd better get yourself a hunting rifle.
The industry would be able to support them if they were allowed unrestricted access to territorial waters.Quote:
The question remains, if their industry is unable to sustain them, is it better to try to revive a dying industry (which I don't think it is, but w/e) or to retrain them on something that is less likely to kill them and pays better?
So you don't give a fuck about your younger colleagues?Quote:
I'll be retired by then.
I don't know why you're romanticising them this way. They're not going out there thinking 'holy fuck if i dont do this the country will starve.' They're probably thinking 'i wish there was a better way to make a living than risking my life and going home smelling like fish every day.'Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
More likely scenario is they overfish and in 20 years there's none left.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Remember that report that I cited showing they've been catching more fish the last few years than before then? They're hardly suffering from fish theft.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Sure I do. I just accept that times change and if your job becomes obsolete you need to find a new job, not ask for your obsolete job to be propped up for your sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
^Message for educators. Your job is 95% karaoke already. Learn to code!Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Sure. Meanwhile, there's probably tons of policemen who think they could be doing something less stressful, or doctors who wish they were Premier League footballers. This is no reason to not respect the job they do.Quote:
I don't know why you're romanticising them this way. They're not going out there thinking 'holy fuck if i dont do this the country will starve.' They're probably thinking 'i wish there was a better way to make a living than risking my life and going home smelling like fish every day.'
It's like you think fish remain in the same waters, and don't fuck.Quote:
More likely scenario is they overfish and in 20 years there's none left.
If people stop eating fish, this idea you have about "obsolete jobs" might be valid.Quote:
Sure I do. I just accept that times change and if your job becomes obsolete you need to find a new job, not ask for your obsolete job to be propped up for your sake.
This is wide of the mark. It amuses me to imagine you thinking that fish don't fuck, but what you're actually suggesting is that we're stupid enough to hunt fish to extinction. Clearly we are not.Quote:
It's like you think fish remain in the same waters, and don't fuck.
lol, what do you think I do - just teach? I do research mostly, and that includes my own coding, my own stats, my own writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
That's kinda what the quota system is about.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
But anyways, you clearly can't be bothered to learn even the basics of the issue so there's no point discussing it further.
We're off topic anyway. Since you seem to be the only one unequivocally in support of reparations, can you answer the question in the OP?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Who pays? And who gets paid?
Amusing. We've already been through this. That is not what the quotas are about, if they were you don't allow someone else to fish the waters. It's funny how you accuse me of being unwilling to learn while continuing to make the same incorrect argument despite being told it's wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Also, even if it were about sustainability, which it's not, but let's say it is... quotas are there to enforce a limit on fishing until stocks replenish, not stop fishing forever in an area.
The German taxpayer; me.Quote:
Who pays? And who gets paid?
Just because you can't single out one cause doesn't mean there isn't discrimination. You don't go from counterintelpro, Jim Crow laws and the migrant worker crisis to a post racial utopia in less than 50 years. Where do you get 150 years from?Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
A lot of people directly affected by those are still alive. Just because it's not happening currently, doesn't mean it has no lasting effect. If you start from a lower socioeconomic standing you're going to have less chances in life.
I get sick to my stomach every time someone points out what a success Trump is. He inherited 500 million. He could afford to fail over and over again, and still he defaulted on hundreds of millions more in loans, quite possibly being worth less today than what his father left him. If you come from a wealthier background you can fail a lot more often. The average white kid is backed by a family with 15x the wealth of the average black family. So if you're white you're more likely to be able to afford a better education, pay for a wedding, afford birth control, pay for tuition, take a risk on a business idea etc...
If you think the much lower socioeconomic standing of blacks in the US has nothing to do with the very recent history of systemic racial discrimination in the US I'd love for you to tell me why you don't think those are factors, and what your alternative explanation for such an enormous discrepancy in wealth is.
And while there is no federal discrimination, there is a clear discrimination in the courts. If you adjust for wealth these numbers would probably a lot closer since your net worth is directly tied to the sentence you can expect to get, but this is why I think reparations of a magnitude that would shock you are justified. You'd probably do that with a negative tax or something like that, but I think it's laughable that you can bail out billionaires for trillions out of the federal budget, but you can't spend money to fix shocking racial disparities in a post apartheid society.
https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...on-race-booker
85% of those born into the bottom quintile of wealth in America move out of that quintile within 1 generation. 15% of those at the top move all the way to the bottom. And there is shitloads of movement in between. What you just said there is only kinda-maybe true. "less chances", maybe. less than enough chances....noQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Lots of people inherit 500 million. Only one of them is President. If you're telling me that Trump is not successful....you're out of your mind.Quote:
I get sick to my stomach every time someone points out what a success Trump is. He inherited 500 million
Condoms are less than a buck. Everything else on that list is not necessary for prosperity.Quote:
you're white you're more likely to be able to afford a better education, pay for a wedding, afford birth control, pay for tuition, take a risk on a business idea etc...
See post #25. Some science for ya. Teenage pregnancy, high school dropouts, and unmarried parents having babies. There is nothing systemic about that. None of those things are the result of racial discrimination. They're personal choices.Quote:
If you think the much lower socioeconomic standing of blacks in the US has nothing to do with the very recent history of systemic racial discrimination in the US I'd love for you to tell me why you don't think those are factors, and what your alternative explanation for such an enormous discrepancy in wealth is.
So just so we understand each other here, tell me if I understand this right. What you're saying here has no relevance or importance to anyone, black or white, who has not committed a crime, right? This only matters to criminals, right? So to avoid this problem...what must a young black man do, hmm? Hint: OBEY THE LAWQuote:
And while there is no federal discrimination, there is a clear discrimination in the courts. If you adjust for wealth these numbers would probably a lot closer since your net worth is directly tied to the sentence you can expect to get,
Do you think the Judges are racist? Or do you just think that poor people can't afford good lawyers? Is that the courts fault? Or the lawyers? Is that systemic? Or the market?
Who pays? And who gets paid?Quote:
but this is why I think reparations of a magnitude that would shock you are justified
Would spending money actually fix racial disparities? Are you telling me that if we institute reparations....then overnight black people will be completely equal across all dimensions and we can declare once and for all that we have a society free of racism?Quote:
but you can't spend money to fix shocking racial disparities in a post apartheid society.
No? No that probably wouldn't happen?
Then what's the point of reparations? if it won't help things....why do it?
How would you measure success? And if reparations are not successful.....do black people have to give the money back?
Could it be that the the DNC actually has no message for black people in 2020. Could it be that Trump's economy has actually helped the working class? Could it be that black people are actually doing alot better today than they were under a black president? How is that gonna win votes in 2020?
Could it be that the DNC is just pandering and fear-mongering? "Grrrr, the evil white man wants to hold you down...but we're gonna make him give you money, mwah ha ha ha!"
It's insincere. And it's a total power grab, just like their new push to get inmates to vote. The dems don't actually care about these things. They just see an untapped resource of votes, and will say anything to accumulate power.
I was really just looking for the Chapelle skit, but I accidentally came across this version. Someone cut it up and spliced it with some rantings from an angry black dude.
Angry black dude makes some decent points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W234NiTkBO4
So how do you suggest everyone starts life with equal socioeconomic status? Redistribution of wealth?Quote:
If you start from a lower socioeconomic standing you're going to have less chances in life.
If I were a drug dealer in USA, I'd be excited by that prospect.
... because if you eliminate poverty, the poor will have more money to buy drugs?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Yup, I think what the Warren is running on is probably the most sensible proposal that could realistically happen in the next 10 years. - A wealth tax which would be a comprehensive way to eliminate the ways in which large corporations, through lobbying and elaborate tax evasion schemes get away with paying zero or negative income tax while making billions in profits - and you turn that system on its head. Lower or negative tax for working class people - it would be pretty easy to work proactive reparations into something like this.
The current tax system in the US and EU is a utopian welfare state for billionaires that the working class pays for. God bless the french for having the clarity of mind to freak the fuck out over this. Even after decades of talking to muricans it still makes me dizzy how they can live with the cognitive dissonance of: virtually no tax on the super rich cause capitalism, but tax the fuck out of the working class because not struggling to make ends meet while working a 50h job would be communism!
Pretty much, yeah.Quote:
... because if you eliminate poverty, the poor will have more money to buy drugs?
I dunno about USA, but here in the UK (we're still EU), tax is pretty low for low income earners. I've just applied for an 18 hour a week job, if I get it I'll pay £0 tax and £0 National Insurance. I've also applied for another job at 8 hours a week. Let's say I get both... now I'm paying £0 tax and £410 NI.
I want a tax break dammit! I'm poor!
If you can't figure it out after decades, then maybe there is something wrong with your premise.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Exactly how much tax does the working class pay?
I'm skeptical of the "virtually no tax on the super rich" part. I keep hearing that Amazon paid no tax despite 11B in profits. Do you believe that? It was on Fox News, so I'm guessing you don't
HOLY SHIT the pound tanked, wtf did you guys do lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Wait, you won't pay NI, but I assume you're still insured and it will count towards your unemployment/retirement?
banana, I'm not going to google for you. They pay no federal income tax. No federal income tax is different from "no tax."
Yup, which some might call "negative tax".Quote:
Wait, you won't pay NI, but I assume you're still insured and it will count towards your unemployment/retirement?
The pound tanked? Awesome, my pokerstars balance just increased without me playing a hand.
Making lemonade!Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I got a polish coworker who commutes from poland every week who told me last year he's shopping for bicycle frames in the UK because it's cheaper than poland. I just remembered that. I knew it tanked, I didn't know it's almost 1:1 to the euro now. yikes!
Weaker pound is good for tourism, and good for exports. It's bad for imports and holidays abroad.
I'd rather see a weak pound than a strong one. We want tourism, and we want people to buy our stuff. We want to encourage business to make things ourselves rather than import things. And it's better if British people go on holiday to Cornwall or the Lake District, rather than Ibiza and Turkey.
Who? The working class? Or Amazon?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
So you think making poor people even poorer and rich people even richer is going to make a better society? How's that work?
I make an above-average wage and I pay a greater percentage of taxes than someone who is poor. Yet I'm ok with that cause I'm not a selfish cunt.
You are selfish. You want us to have another vote because YOU didn't like the result, while mocking and patronising me for showing solidarity and respect for people like fishermen, people who I don't actually have any contact with. I made my vote based on what I thought was best for the UK, not me as an individual.
Besides, I don't know how you got that from my post. My point was that we have a reasonable tax regime already, that supports poor people at the expense of high earners. Can you please explain to me how you think I support the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer from my comments about me paying no tax? Did I imply that I want to pay more tax?
I'm paying taxes so you don't have to work. Which one of us is selfish?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Is that really what's happening?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
If you want to play that game, I work for a charity, giving up my time for nothing. Hand over a day's wages every week to charity and then I'll apologise for calling you selfish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Oh, and explain how I'm selfish based on my comments in the post that triggered that claim.
Paying taxes isn't a choice you make. If someone said to you "would you like to pay zero tax" you would snap their hand off. You wouldn't give a second thought to how that impacts on those who rely on the taxpayer to survive.
It's amusing, because two years ago or so I'd have agreed that I'm selfish. I didn't want to work and was happy to accept taxpayer's money. But times change. I'm 40 and don't particularly want to spend the next 25 years being supported by others. That's why I'm working for a charity, that's why I'm applying for jobs. I enjoy my charity work enough that I would like to continue, even if I get work elsewhere. That will depend on my hours and commitments, but the will is there.
Calling me selfish at this moment in time is incorrect. It's even more so based on the post I made, I mean you somehow managed to assume that I want poor people to be poorer, simply from me pointing out I'd pay no tax if I got both the jobs I've applied for. That's pretty fucking creative.
Reparations is one of those things that always gets brought up before elections to get votes from a bunch of dumb motherfuckers and that nobody gives a shit about otherwise because it's clear that it's completely unworkable.