Lion of the Blogosphere

Archive for the ‘Underclass’ Category

The NEW digital divide

Remember the old days when op-ed writers worried that poor children were being left behind because they didn’t have enough access to computers?

Well now, things are reversed. An op-ed writer frets that poor children are being left being because they spend TOO MUCH TIME using computers (including smartphones) and not enough time doing healthy activities.

Why can’t poor people ever behave the right way? It’s almost like they’re an entirely different social class and can never be reformed.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

February 15, 2018 at 8:58 AM

Abortion and the just-world fallacy, again

Below is something I wrote in 2013:

* * *

To quote Wikipedia, “the just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias (or assumption) that a person’s actions always bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, so that all noble actions are eventually rewarded and all evil actions are eventually punished. “

I see this cognitive bias in many of the comments to anything I post about abortion. Anti-abortion people have this bias that they believe that banning abortion (which is supposed to be evil) will bring better outcomes. But the reality, as I keep pointing out, is that abortion is effective at reducing the birthrate of poor women.

For example, according to the Guttmacher Institute “Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children)” and another “twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100–199% of the federal poverty level.

So we see that the women most likely to have abortions are those who should be having abortions, women who have no way to support their children except by collecting welfare, and children raised by welfare moms are many times more likely to be criminals, so it’s not surprising at all that Steven D. Levitt, author of Freakonomics, found that abortion reduced crime. (And Levitt rigorously rebuts Steve Sailer who tried to argue that it didn’t.)

People who care about the future of our country should be trying to promote abortion rather than trying their damndest to stop women from obtaining them. Abortion lowers welfare payments, lowers crime, and gives single pregnant women an option that significantly increases their chance of achieving a self-supporting career and getting married in the future. Abortion would be even more effective at doing this if Christian nuts weren’t trying so hard to convince women that it’s evil.

* * *

Christians who oppose abortion should at least have the HONESTY to acknowledge that if they got their way, there’d be a big increase in welfare payments and crime. If they said “yeah, we know that will happen, but it’s a price we should pay as a nation to do the moral thing” then I’d have a little bit more respect for them.

Similarly, SJWs who believe that it’s EVIL to restrict immigration and EVIL to deport people who came into this country illegally and live here illegally, they should have the honesty to admit that those illegal immigrants suck up huge amounts government money while putting citizens out of work and lowering wages.

* * *

By the way, I would be 100% behind the idea that non-marital sex leads to unwanted pregnancies (which leads to abortion as well as problem children raised without a father who suck up government welfare payments and commit crime when they become teenagers), and both the government and the elites who control the media should take more responsibility for discouraging non-marital sex (instead of glorifying it as the media currently does and looking down upon virgins as being disgusting losers).

Unfortunately, we probably won’t get such policies from Trump, because he once mocked a participant on The Apprentice for being a virgin. Strangely, the mainstream media which loathes Trump and has taken every opportunity to attack him, never once brought this up as a negative against him.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

November 17, 2016 at 12:57 PM

I wouldn’t want poor people in my backyard. Would you?

There’s an article in The Atlantic about how wealthier people don’t want poor people living next to them.

This indicates to me that America, even the bobo class, had not entirely thrown away all of its common sense. We all know that the problem with poor people is not that they lack money, but that they behave poorly. No one has too much of a problem living next to poor college students, who are technically poor because they lack income and assets. College students occasionally are over-exuberant in their partying, but you don’t have to worry about them mugging you, or that their children will beat up your children.

The writer of the article, however, has the assumption that poor people are just unfairly discriminated against and pose no threat to the community.

I would actually say that to a certain extent, there may even be a basis for that more liberal view. I think when the poor are a very small percentage of the community, they pick up the middle-class values of the larger middle-class population. But once there are too many poor people, a tipping point is reached where they pick up and echo ghetto values from each other.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

June 2, 2015 at 11:15 AM

Posted in Underclass

Basic income vs welfare

A commenter “Jonathan Silber” writes:

There already exists guaranteed income from the government to meet basic needs: it’s called welfare.

Among the underclass that receives it I’m not seeing a lot of self-actualization.

Regarding the welfare argument, that’s not the same thing as a guaranteed income. Welfare comes with many strings attached, primarily that the recipient must have children and not have any savings. This prevents all men, as well as women with future-time orientation who have saved too much money or who choose not to have children until they are married, are not eligible for it. Welfare recipients are also nagged by government social workers to get jobs, so it’s very demeaning.

Regarding the self-actualization of the underclass, people with low IQ are interested in different things. They may self actualize by selling drugs, joining gangs, getting into fights, etc. (Of course I agree that this sort of behavior ruins society for everybody which is why we need a fascist police force to prevent that sort of self-actualization.)

On the other hand, a guaranteed basic income for people with higher IQs could be very liberating and allow for positive self-actualization that’s beneficial to both society and the individual. Who knows what great art or literature was not created because someone was forced to work in a boring job in a cubicle that produces no value?

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

May 6, 2015 at 9:31 AM

Posted in Economics, Underclass

Child support re-examined by the NY Times

I previously blogged against child support. Twice. With a follow-up.

In light of those old posts, read the article in yesterday’s NY Times about the child-support trap which dooms prole men to economic poverty and jail.

* * *

Commenter “Jeff” writes:

I agree with you, Lion. I am a family law attorney, and I’ve witnessed firsthand the kind of problems that child support creates in men and women who are stuck having to deal with it. One effect of child support that you haven’t hit on is that it causes a lot more battles over child custody, and the litigation is costly and very inefficient. Child support is calculated using a formula based on a bunch of factors, but in most states the two most important factors are the incomes of the parents and the amount of time each parent has with the child. A dad who has his kids half of the time will pay much less in child support than one who has his kids only every other weekend. Long, drawn out battles over child custody are the natural result of this. Cases can last forever because the parents can always reopen child custody cases to modify the parenting schedule. I guarantee you that most of these fights will go away if you took away child support, and dads wouldn’t mind having just every other weekend with their kids, which is probably in the best interests of most children.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

April 21, 2015 at 7:06 AM

Posted in Law, News, Underclass

Subprime auto loans

There was an article in yesterday’s NY Times about subprime auto loans. Those are auto loans to poor people at what some would considered to be usurious interest rates.

I think that Wikipedia has a good definition of usury: “Usury is the practice of making unethical or immoral monetary loans that unfairly enrich the lender. A loan may be considered usurious because of excessive or abusive interest rates or other factors.”

Libertarian types would argue that there’s no such thing as usury. They would say that poor people are making wise decisions based on their need for a car to get to work so that they can build a career and a life for themselves, thus the car is an investment in their future that has a higher net present value benefit than the net present value of the future loan repayments.

The reality is that the vast majority of poor people taking out these loans have low intelligence and/or low future-time orientation, and they probably irrationally overvalue having a blingy car. This is demonstrated by one of the poor people mentioned in the article, “a former administrative assistant in the New York Police City Department, has not made a single payment on a $30,770 Santander loan that was taken out to buy a 2011 BMW 328xi. Ms. Payne, who has no driver’s license, said she took out the loan so her daughter, who lives in New Jersey, could have a car.” Even if her daughter needed a car really badly, she could have purchased a car she could afford such as a used Ford Fiesta.

I strongly suspect that most subprime auto borrowers are more like the woman in the story buying cars they don’t need and can’t afford than the wise net-present-value-maximizers envisioned by clueless libertarians.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 28, 2015 at 1:08 PM

Posted in Economics, Underclass

Comment about poverty

Belliavsky’s comment was published at the NY Times:

The words “IQ” or “intelligence” never appear in this article, although The Bell Curve documented the correlation between IQ and income. There are some explanations that the author considers taboo.

Liberals will just say that poverty causes the low IQ.

Someone responded with a comment that says “There are millions of brilliant poor people.” That is wrong. “Poor people” doesn’t just mean people without much money, because that would include college students. “Poor people” really means people without much money who cause problems for their neighbors and for society. “Brilliantly” intelligent people rarely if ever cause problems for anyone unless they are mentally ill. So they are never considered to be “poor people.”

It would be more accurate to say that a strong majority of the brilliantly intelligent are not especially wealthy, and a surprisingly high percentage of them are financially struggling. I would agree with that statement.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 5, 2014 at 1:50 PM

Posted in Biology, Underclass

What makes poor people poor?

What makes poor people poor?

There’s an op-ed in the NY Times, What Makes People Poor?

People are poor for two primary reasons: (1) genetically low IQ; and (2) bad behavior.

Of course the op-ed completely ignores reason #1, so it’s missing half of the story. And the op-ed doesn’t really have anything useful to say about #2.

Some blog readers may think that if poverty is caused by genetically low IQ, then there’s nothing to do. And I say that’s wrong because that’s only half of the problem. Bad behavior can be changed.

However our policies are entirely focused on #1 which is the part we can’t fix. Our educational system is all about trying to make poor people smarter, which just doesn’t work. No matter how hard they try, test scores just won’t go up. All children can’t read at grade level because grade level is what the average child is reasonably capable of, and half of children are less intelligent than average.

If instead, our educational system had much more of a focus on teaching better behavior, many problems of poverty could actually be solved. Many of the problems of poor neighborhoods such as crime, graffiti, gangs, domestic violence, rampant drug abuse, unmarried mothers, etc., could all be fixed with better behavior.

This is such common sense, why isn’t it being done? Because liberals control educational policy, and liberals will not give up their false belief that there is no such thing as genetically determined IQ, and liberals belief that teaching people how to behave better is racist, so they bitterly cling to their belief that everything can be fixed by better teaching so that children can score higher on tests. Even though this has proven to be a failed policy that doesn’t work.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 4, 2014 at 5:43 PM

Posted in Biology, Underclass

Politically incorrect history of Atlantic City

In the news this week, the two-year-old Revel hotel and casino in Atlantic City is completely shutting down because it is too bankrupt to operate.

The only reason anyone ever went to Atlantic City (at least in my lifetime) is because there is gambling there. Otherwise it’s a crime-ridden city and just about any other town along the Jersey shore is a better place to go if you just want to enjoy the beach. Even Seaside Heights where MTV’s Jersey Shore was filmed is a far better destination than Atlantic City if you are looking for a beach town where you don’t have to worry about being killed by gang violence if you walk a block from the beach. Now that there are casinos in Pennsylvania and Connecticut, apparently half of the gamblers who used to frequent Atlantic City prefer the newer alternatives.

From an article that appeared in USA Today in 2013: Millions spent on casinos didn’t help Atlantic City.

But the arrival of casinos has not fixed the deep-seated social problems plaguing a city where nearly 30% of residents live below the poverty line. Unemployment remains high, at nearly 18% last year. Gangs roam in low-income neighborhoods, and the crime rate in 2011 was 107.2 incident per 1,000 residents, compared with 39.3 for Atlantic County.

And the very government agency created to help city residents has since changed its focus — to helping casinos attract more gamblers and visitors.

“In hindsight yes, one of the things that we learned in Atlantic City, whether it’s gambling or other economic development, (is that) economic development in and of itself is not a cure for social problems,” said Jim Whelan, a former Atlantic City mayor who is now a Democratic state senator.

“The hardcore unemployed are a social problem. It’s not an economic problem,” said Whelan, who has taught in Atlantic City’s public schools for 35 years. “The help-wanted sign does not solve that problem. People don’t have the life skills, the job skills, to function in the workplace.”

The excerpt above demonstrates the ironic truth that money doesn’t solve the problems of poverty. Poverty in the United States isn’t caused by lack of money, it’s caused by bad behavior.

It’s worth pondering how Atlantic City came to be such a bad place when the rest of the Jersey Shore is nice enough even though it may not be the Hamptons.

Once upon a time, Atlantic City was the ultimate northeast destination for wealthy summer vacationers. This was a hundred years ago, before plane travel and air conditioning. The rich owners of the big hotels, desiring cheaper labor than white New Jerseyans, encouraged the migration of southern blacks to Atlantic City. According to this website, 95% of hotel workers were black, and Altlantic City had the highest percentage of blacks of any northeastern city at the time.

An article appearing in the Philadelphia Inquirer in 1893 expressed the revulsion felt by Whites:

What are we going to do with our colored people? That is the question. Atlantic City has never before seemed so overrun with the dark skinned race as this season … both the Boardwalk and Atlantic Avenue fairly swarm with them during bathing hours like the fruit in a huckleberry pudding … Of the hundreds of hotels and boardinghouses … it is improbable that not a dozen could be found in which White help is employed. And when to the thousands of waiters and cooks and porters are added the nurse girls, the chambermaids, the barbers and boot blacks and hack drivers and other colored gentry in every walk of life, it will be easily realized what an evil it is that hangs over Atlantic City.

The excerpt above demonstrates what people today would call the common “racism” of the 1890s. However, a White Nationalist would probably argue (and of course White Nationalists are evil, this is just a devil’s advocate type of argument in which I imagine what an evil White Nationalist might say): The person who wrote the article in 1893 was right! By importing black workers, the rich hotel owners sowed the seeds of the city’s destruction, because no one wanted to live in or visit a city full of black people. And just as may have been predicted by racists, the city decayed into violence and poverty.

* * *

Question: If New Jersey legislators give up on Atlantic City and allow a casino to be opened in Seaside Heights, will it be called the guidosino?

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 13, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Posted in Underclass

Employees you wouldn’t want for free

Reported by CBS Atlanta:

Montgomery police have arrested two 19-year-old Taco Bell employees in the slaying of the restaurant’s night manager.

Police say Renauldous Chisolm and Kenneth Temple of Montgomery were arrested Monday and are charged with capital murder in the killing of 43-year-old Vettia Roche.

Some blog commenters like to say that there’s always some useful job people could do instead of collecting government benefits, but here we see an example of the type of employees I’d rather not have working for me even if the government was paying me to employee them.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

March 12, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Posted in Underclass

%d bloggers like this: