dagblog - Comments for "Thomas Sowell Retired: Bye Felicia"

How much do you know about

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 17:44:55 +0000

How much do you know about him to have become "not a huge fan."

Not pushing him, but just curious.

I read him as saying that he

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 17:42:30 +0000

I read him as saying that he's willing to work with anyone who has a bright idea about how to help his people move forward. He's not a Trump supporter, but he's not going to reject a Trump idea out of hand, simply because it comes from Trump. He probably would say that neither he, nor his people, have that luxury.

It's sort of a pragmatic view within a limited sphere.

Golden,

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 17:39:27 +0000

In reply to Peter... About Loury?

Golden,

Don't understand what you're saying or your apparent (at least) hostility to federal action. Can you explain?

Not sure I'd get too hung up on the word "government," or which level of government (city, state, or federal) should act.

Basically, as I read him, he's saying that we, as a society, can't just sit back and do nothing and expect the market to work things out.**

Anyway, if you could explain what you mean, I'd appreciate it.

** In saying this, he's responding to conservative bromides about what can be done about the plight of the inner city.

Yes and yes.

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 17:33:01 +0000

In reply to And also, there's the

Yes and yes.

Agree with you 100%, my

Anonymous — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 01:18:26 +0000

In reply to Thomas Sowell Retired: Bye Felicia

Agree with you 100%, my friend!!

Never liked this man...the way he comports himself with his own Black community is deplorable!

And not just the Blacks, but every Ethnic Group and Beliefs not apt to his definition of "American Exceptionalism" and "Exclusivity".

He would fit great with Trump's Administration!

Agree with you 100%, my

Anonymous — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 01:18:23 +0000

In reply to Thomas Sowell Retired: Bye Felicia

Agree with you 100%, my friend!!

Never liked this man...the way he comports himself with his own Black community is deplorable!

And not just the Blacks, but every Ethnic Group and Beliefs not apt to his definition of "American Exceptionalism" and "Exclusivity".

He would fit great with Trump's Administration!

Not a huge Loury fan, but

jollyroger — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 21:09:12 +0000

In reply to Peter... About Loury?

Not a huge Loury fan, but does "government" as a repository of responsibility necessarily implicate Washington dc

Surely you would not hold Rahm Emmanuel harmless for the carnage?

Peter... About Loury?

oldenGoldenDecoy — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:55:35 +0000

In reply to I can't claim to a complete

Peter... About Loury?

He thinks that we, as a society, and therefore the government, have a duty to DO something to help inner city youth escape their dire circumstances. We can't just leave it up to invisible market forces to do the job. The question is what.

Anyone such as Loury who writes such tripe supporting the myth that the federal level has the solutions to what goes down in a local area such as in Chicago and the outrageously high death rates of Blacks on Blacks is full of crap. See, "#GiveTrumpAChance to ‘fix it.’" at Instapundit.

Passing the buck! Easy for Loury him to say.

~OGD~

And also, there's the

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:22:18 +0000

In reply to One of the things that Glenn

And also, there's the opportunity to *fix* mistakes in the ensuing 20 years, rather than simply blaming the culprit. There's more hostility towards Clinton in the 90's than Bush in the 2000's. If Glass-Steagal was the obvious economy killer, how come no protests in 2000 or 2004? How come Kerry's wealth wasn't a campaign issue in 2004? We're rather quixotic and arbitrary about our outrage - almost as if someone were pulling our strings.

One of the things that Glenn

Peter Schwartz — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:10:48 +0000

In reply to Yeah, complexity is one of

One of the things that Glenn Loury points out is that the Black Caucus was in FAVOR of the crime bill (largely) because THEIR people were getting killed in that crime wave. And, maybe uniquely for a politician, Bill Clinton actually apologized in THIS election cycle for the consequences that bill had on the black community. I don't know that Hillary did, but I remember Bill apologizing, and HE was the one responsible for it, not her.

And yet Anderson (?) who wrote the New Jim Crow advocated that black people vote for Bernie at least in large part because of that bill.

The whole presentness argument is tricky. On the one hand, you don't want to excuse evil acts, or acts that are now labeled as evil, because "who could've known," or "that's what we thought back then," but it's ridiculous to think that people can see the consequences of their positions that far into the future or come to an understanding that even most critics have only recently come to. (Of course, there's always the stray oracle who can point to a document where he predicted the Crash, etc., but so what?) And on the third hand, we don't want to see, exactly, that as long as the intentions are good, any action or bill should be excused.