Response and Comments to Amicus and his dislike of all minorities:

[Boxlicker101]

I'll snip a few little things that will put a hole in Amicus' theory that Blacks make up the largest population on welfare and food-stamps. I would assume that most will take the Census Bureau as a reliable and accredited source of information.


Data is referring to 2008

Whites: Total number below poverty level: 240,548
White (Non-Hispanic): Total number below poverty level :196,940
Blacks: Total number below poverty level: 37,966
Asian: Total number below poverty level: 13,310
Hispanic (any race) Total number below poverty level: 47,398

Between 1994-2003 the percentage of Whites on Food Stamp Assistance was 70.9% The percentage of blacks was 58.2%
Information from the 2008 Indicators of Welfare Dependence by the US Dept. of Health and Human Services.

What Amicus left out of his statement about 70% of black babies being born out of wedlock is that over the last 20 years, that has been declining whereas, the number of white babies born out of wedlock has increased by approximately 38%


The claim by Amicus that all the ones who stayed behind in NOLA were black is blatantly false. Yes, I am certain that a large number who stayed behind were, but it was not EVERYONE who stayed behind was black. A large number of those who stayed behind were very poor, had no transportation or had medical issues that made it difficult to leave. Yet, some chose to stay behind because they did not think it would be as bad as it was. There were school buses that could have been used by the Mayor of NOLA but were not, there was an Amtrak train that pulled out on the morning of August 9, before Katrina hit. It was empty. They had offered to take as many as could fit on their train, but Nagin (Nola's Mayor) refused. Two weeks after the fact, he claims the offer was not made. Therefore, Amicus' statement that ALL were black in a bold faced lie. He has NOTHING to back up that claim. I challenge him to find it and to provide it from a legitimate source. (Census Bureau or Government statistics would be my preferred source)


I wonder why it is that Amicus demanded proof of all this, yet he posted a whole bunch of statistics without ANY proof to back it up, save his own word that he found the information on the internet and/or library. Perhaps Amicus should do as he demands of others and provide the proof to his statements that Elizabetht quoted. Otherwise, I see all his words as only that and not any kind of statistics to be believed.

They aren't to be believed, as I have already refuted the most blatant lies among them.

I'm not taking up the cudgels for Amicus, but I find your figures EXTREMELY hard to believe. You are saying there are about 300,000 persons in the US below the poverty level. That's about .1% of the population. I'm sure it's at least ten times that high, and maybe as much as 100 times. You also say that 70.9% of the white population was on food stamps in the time period given. That would be about 100,000,000 persons. I can't believe that either.

 

[sadangel]

So, does this mean Amicus...that you are not going to find the sources for all your claims?

I really am not surprised at all. It would be beneath you to actually back up that which you say with reputable sources as I did. Oh well.

At least now there are more reasons for people to know to not "listen" to you or your opinion. When faced with facts, you only whine about how the post was made years ago, but you stay steadfast in your conviction, no matter how wrong that it is.

I would expect nothing less from you. Sad to say.

 

[sadangel]

I'm not taking up the cudgels for Amicus, but I find your figures EXTREMELY hard to believe. You are saying there are about 300,000 persons in the US below the poverty level. That's about .1% of the population. I'm sure it's at least ten times that high, and maybe as much as 100 times. You also say that 70.9% of the white population was on food stamps in the time period given. That would be about 100,000,000 persons. I can't believe that either.

Well, lets see. It came from the Census Bureau. I tend to think the figures are actually higher than that, because having been a Census taker in 1990, I know that a large number of people refuse to answer many of the questions. Oh, and if you read the link I posted, you would see that not all races were included in the specific numbers, but under the general numbers. I posted to the specific of what Amicus claimed rather than the entire ethnicity versus welfare crap that Amicus was spouting.

ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Assistance_for_Needy_Families
2007 Average Monthly recipients on TANF (Food Stamps) 3,895,407 Poverty Rate (%) 9.8

Also, remember that much of the TANF program requires participants to work unless they can prove disability. I do not work and am on TANF/Medicaid. I am disabled.

(I am not a fan of Wikipedia as a source as a rule, but in this case, their sources were reputable and Wikipedia presented it in an unbiased format with links to back their statements up.)

Again. The food-stamps number was taken from a reputable, albeit government site. Again, I think the numbers are higher. Think about how many people live in the US all together. The number is not unbelievable at all.

*shrugs*

 

[lance gt]

Another year old thread rejuvenated? The purpose being?

Perhaps someone would go back even more, to 2003, when I first posted on this forum?

You will be delighted to see that my stand on issues has remained stable over the years.

Can you say the same for your opinions? Do they remain stable or wax and wane in the situational circumstances you find yourself in?

Thanks again for bringing back to public notice some of my thoughts.

Amicus

Once an asshole, always an asshole. If I could have found more of your bullshit to re-hash I would have. Every day I come in the room and see another slanderous, self opinionated bunch of shit from you. You have nothing of import to say and nothing to back it up. And yes, your opinions are just as fucked up today as they were then. Thanks for being consistent, hate to see you have a change of mind in mid-stride

 

[Dragonlipz]

So, does this mean Amicus...that you are not going to find the sources for all your claims?

I really am not surprised at all. It would be beneath you to actually back up that which you say with reputable sources as I did. Oh well.

At least now there are more reasons for people to know to not "listen" to you or your opinion. When faced with facts, you only whine about how the post was made years ago, but you stay steadfast in your conviction, no matter how wrong that it is.

I would expect nothing less from you. Sad to say.

How dare you! Amicus (or Mon Ami, as I refer to him) can cite references from 'Father Knows Best' and 'Leave it to Beaver' with a smidge of 'The Donna Reed Show' and 'Deputy Dawg' for good measure........that should be enough reputable sources for anyone......
he has the right to say 'You Lie!' whenever confronted with the facts.......
See, Mon Ami, I got yer back......

 

[sadangel]

Can you say the same for your opinions? Do they remain stable or wax and wane in the situational circumstances you find yourself in?

As a matter of fact Ami, mine do remain stable. However, if and when I am presented with facts that can be verified from outside sources, I consider them and have in fact changed my opinon on some matters, based on FACTS. Not whim. Not cirsumstances. Can you say that you consider facts, and are willing to back those facts up? I wonder. I really do.

 

[sr71plt]

My opinions can certainly change with changing information and circumstances. I don't see stubborn dogmatism to be anything to take pride in.

 

[amicus]

SadAngel...



http://www.cbpp.org/files/4-19-07fa-fact1.pdf

African Americans Benefit Disproportionately from the Food Stamp Program

• One in three food stamp households is headed by an African American. More than a third of food stamp benefits — over $10 billion per year — are issued to African-Americans.

~~~

Quoted, with references, as I always do for factual posts that depend on statistics.

It is your posts that lack links and documentation and express only your opinions that should be in question, not mine.

Every statement I have made in any post or thread can be verified. It is not my function to educate you, merely to wake you up to reality.

Amicus

 

[Dragonlipz]

SadAngel...



http://www.cbpp.org/files/4-19-07fa-fact1.pdf


Every statement I have made in any post or thread can be verified. It is not my function to educate you, merely to wake you up to reality.

Amicus

He's right and the rest of you are morons for doubting him......

 

[DeeZire]

Amicus' posts bring to mind the story called The Emperor Wears No Clothes. A more recent comparison would be Bagdad Bob, Saddam's press spokesman, who calmly asserted that Bagdad was not under attack while bombs exploded behind him.

I used to find entertainment value in Amicus' posts, but how entertaining is stepping in dog shit? It gets old after a while, and the stink follows you around for days.

 

[amicus]

I exact no great pleasure from disrupting your particular dogmatic, Pavlovian response to my thoughts.

As a matter of fact, I could not care less concerning your opinion as you offer absolutely nothing of value in your posts.

You are a bit less able than 'Pure' to express your hatred of individuality and rejection of human nature, and you revert to name calling at the drop of a hat to cover your inability to either defend your point of view or attack mine.

Happy 9/11

Amicus

 

[Dragonlipz]

I exact no great pleasure from disrupting your particular dogmatic, Pavlovian response to my thoughts.

As a matter of fact, I could not care less concerning your opinion as you offer absolutely nothing of value in your posts.

You are a bit less able than 'Pure' to express your hatred of individuality and rejection of human nature, and you revert to name calling at the drop of a hat to cover your inability to either defend your point of view or attack mine.

Happy 9/11

Amicus

I do exact a great, immeasurable pleasure in Amicus' adroit putdowns on you morons.....It thrills me to no end to read his posts.....opening a can of literary whoopass on you twits is just icing on the cake......

 

[DeeZire]

Dammit! Now I have to go change my shoes.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Well, lets see. It came from the Census Bureau. I tend to think the figures are actually higher than that, because having been a Census taker in 1990, I know that a large number of people refuse to answer many of the questions. Oh, and if you read the link I posted, you would see that not all races were included in the specific numbers, but under the general numbers. I posted to the specific of what Amicus claimed rather than the entire ethnicity versus welfare crap that Amicus was spouting.

ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_Assistance_for_Needy_Families
2007 Average Monthly recipients on TANF (Food Stamps) 3,895,407 Poverty Rate (%) 9.8

Also, remember that much of the TANF program requires participants to work unless they can prove disability. I do not work and am on TANF/Medicaid. I am disabled.

(I am not a fan of Wikipedia as a source as a rule, but in this case, their sources were reputable and Wikipedia presented it in an unbiased format with links to back their statements up.)

Again. The food-stamps number was taken from a reputable, albeit government site. Again, I think the numbers are higher. Think about how many people live in the US all together. The number is not unbelievable at all.

*shrugs*

I do consider the census bureau to be a reasonably reliable source. However, you might well have made transcribing errors, because your figures just do not add up.

White (Non-Hispanic): Total number below poverty level :196,940 17,024,000
Blacks: Total number below poverty level: 37,966 9,379,000
Asian: Total number below poverty level: 13,310 1,576,000
Hispanic (any race) Total number below poverty level: 47,398 10,987,000

This is a total of 295,614 Americans below the poverty level.

Okay, I found your error. You took info from Table 4 in the linked site. The figures you copied are the total population by racial breakdown, in the thousands. In other word, add three zeroes to the right of those numbers and you will have the total population by race. The next column in the table is the number of people by those races who are below the poverty level. The number is also in the thousands, but I added the zeroes to give a better idea. This means there were 38,966,000 persons of those specific races below the poverty level in 2008, which is about 13.1%. Apparently some relatively small groups, such as Native American and Pacific Islander are not listed, although I don't know why.

Later, I will try to figure what happened with the other percentages I pointed out.

 

[amicus]

It seems you folks will spare no effort to uphold your belief's, I can understand that, but you cannot deny statistics:

~~~~~

http://www.cbpp.org/files/4-19-07fa-fact1.pdf

African Americans Benefit Disproportionately from the Food Stamp Program


Quote:
• One in three food stamp households is headed by an African American. More than a third of food stamp benefits — over $10 billion per year — are issued to African-Americans.

~~~

Reposted for the benefit of those shortsighted readers. You may also be well advised to check your premises as to why you insist on the absolute equality of all ethnic groups and gender.

What is it you really want?

Amicus

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BOX

1% of Americans is 3,000,000 NOT 300,000.

ET ALL

Sociobiologists believe that minorities have created a survival niche for themselves with poverty and antisocial conduct. Around here 70% of blacks leave school before graduation, 2/3rds of black girls are pregnant before marriage. Both activities are 100% voluntary.

 

[vrosej10]

This place has more racists per square inch than anywhere else on earth ?!Has it every occurred to any of you who express a dislike for minorities, that hating a person based on their race etc is about the stupidest reason for hating someone on earth? Being an arsehole is an equal opportunity pursuit, as is evidenced by some of you. If a black guy cuts you off in traffic, he's a jerk for cutting you off, not because he's black.

I find that most racists etc are doing it because of a deep seated need to feel better about themselves by putting other people down, ie to make sure your not on the bottom, you stand on someone elses head. If you hate high school drop outs, hate high school drop out, not black high school drop outs. Hate the behaviour, not the generalised racial group.

 

[Boxlicker101]

BOX

1% of Americans is 3,000,000 NOT 300,000.

ET ALL

Sociobiologists believe that minorities have created a survival niche for themselves with poverty and antisocial conduct. Around here 70% of blacks leave school before graduation, 2/3rds of black girls are pregnant before marriage. Both activities are 100% voluntary.

I know. I said it was .1%, which would be one tenth of one percent. This is obviously way too low.

It would be worse if they were pregnant and didn't get married.

 

[Boxlicker101]

This place has more racists per square inch than anywhere else on earth ?!Has it every occurred to any of you who express a dislike for minorities, that hating a person based on their race etc is about the stupidest reason for hating someone on earth? Being an arsehole is an equal opportunity pursuit, as is evidenced by some of you. If a black guy cuts you off in traffic, he's a jerk for cutting you off, not because he's black.

I find that most racists etc are doing it because of a deep seated need to feel better about themselves by putting other people down, ie to make sure your not on the bottom, you stand on someone elses head. If you hate high school drop outs, hate high school drop out, not black high school drop outs. Hate the behaviour, not the generalised racial group.

Your first paragraph is a silly statement. You can't possibly know that to be so, and it certainly isn't. Have you checked Romania, where they hate The Romany, or Japan, where they hate Koreans, or Turkey, where they hate Armenians and Kurds?

I agree with the rest of what you say, though.

 

[vrosej10]

Your first paragraph is a silly statement. You can't possibly know that to be so, and it certainly isn't. Have you checked Romania, where they hate The Romany, or Japan, where they hate Koreans, or Turkey, where they hate Armenians and Kurds?

I agree with the rest of what you say, though.

It is a ridiculous statement. I am prone to hyperbole; I tend to exaggerate for affect. There are, however, a lot more of these people here than I have ever met in one place before. Maybe Aussies are just a bit more reserved in expressing bigotry...

 

[Dragonlipz]

It seems you folks will spare no effort to uphold your belief's, I can understand that, but you cannot deny statistics:

~~~~~

http://www.cbpp.org/files/4-19-07fa-fact1.pdf

African Americans Benefit Disproportionately from the Food Stamp Program


Quote:
• One in three food stamp households is headed by an African American. More than a third of food stamp benefits — over $10 billion per year — are issued to African-Americans.

~~~

Reposted for the benefit of those shortsighted readers. You may also be well advised to check your premises as to why you insist on the absolute equality of all ethnic groups and gender.

What is it you really want?

Amicus

Mon Ami is right! We need to provide guidance for the minorities via a benevolent institution (aka: slavery) so that we can teach them what they need to know to be productive citizens....It's what we as white people need to do for these unfortunates....
Right, Mon Ami?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by sadangel
Well, lets see. It came from the Census Bureau. I tend to think the figures are actually higher than that, because having been a Census taker in 1990, I know that a large number of people refuse to answer many of the questions. Oh, and if you read the link I posted, you would see that not all races were included in the specific numbers, but under the general numbers. I posted to the specific of what Amicus claimed rather than the entire ethnicity versus welfare crap that Amicus was spouting.

ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempora...Needy_Families
2007 Average Monthly recipients on TANF (Food Stamps) 3,895,407 Poverty Rate (%) 9.8

Also, remember that much of the TANF program requires participants to work unless they can prove disability. I do not work and am on TANF/Medicaid. I am disabled.

(I am not a fan of Wikipedia as a source as a rule, but in this case, their sources were reputable and Wikipedia presented it in an unbiased format with links to back their statements up.)

Again. The food-stamps number was taken from a reputable, albeit government site. Again, I think the numbers are higher. Think about how many people live in the US all together. The number is not unbelievable at all.

*shrugs*

I do consider the census bureau to be a reasonably reliable source. However, you might well have made transcribing errors, because your figures just do not add up.

White (Non-Hispanic): Total number below poverty level :196,940 17,024,000
Blacks: Total number below poverty level: 37,966 9,379,000
Asian: Total number below poverty level: 13,310 1,576,000
Hispanic (any race) Total number below poverty level: 47,398 10,987,000

This is a total of 295,614 Americans below the poverty level.

Okay, I found your error. You took info from Table 4 in the linked site. The figures you copied are the total population by racial breakdown, in the thousands. In other word, add three zeroes to the right of those numbers and you will have the total population by race. The next column in the table is the number of people by those races who are below the poverty level. The number is also in the thousands, but I added the zeroes to give a better idea. This means there were 38,966,000 persons of those specific races below the poverty level in 2008, which is about 13.1%. Apparently some relatively small groups, such as Native American and Pacific Islander are not listed, although I don't know why.

Later, I will try to figure what happened with the other percentages I pointed out.

I don't know where you got your percentages regarding food stamp recipients, but they are obviously too high. They would mean that 138 million non-Hispanic white people are receiving food stamp aid and that 22 million black people are. We do not have 160 million non-Asian and non-Hispanic people receiving food stamp aid. I don't know what the actual figures are, but I do know they are not anywhere near that high. The TANF figures you showed are less than one tenth that high.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

http://patterico.com/files/2009/08/Guy-with-Assault-Rifle-2.jpg

AMICUS (in red hat): "I'm sorry, I know yer a good lookin', Ivy-Leeg edjumacated, tax-payin', clean-cut colored fella whut gots more smarts an' talent an' lez savvy fair than me an' muh three generations o' fambly afore me...but in MAH unyielding, absolute, binary world, yer just a stinkin' no-good, crime-causin', real-estate-value-depreciatin', rap-music blastin', corner liquor store-supportin', Obama-lovin', out-of-wedlock-pregnancy-causin', always-chasin'-after-my-trashy-milky-white-skinned-redneck-daughter-with-the-Daisy-Duke-shorts-an'-no-bra-titties n****r!!!"

*insert Jack Paar show laugh track here*

 

[vrosej10]

I can't believe how many of you are seriously okay with the world seeing them as inbred, knuckledragging hillbillies. Aren't any of you embarassed by your small minds?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I can't believe how many of you are seriously okay with the world seeing them as inbred, knuckledragging hillbillies. Aren't any of you embarassed by your small minds?

Vrosej -

To slightly paraphrase an immensely larger and more high-roaded mind than mine: "I will extend a hand if they are willing to unclench their fist."

My "hand" being a metaphor for my forgiving nature and goodwill. Which has its limitations, me not being a Buddha.

Their "fist" being a metaphor for their boxed, air-tight, reverse-tesseracts of a mind.

"They" being an allusion to Amicus and his ilk.

Outside of that, there's no embarrassment or loss of credit for making fun of them on their dime.