Pit Bull
GATOR
Africans be on twitter saying the same shyt when cops kill African Americans.
By that logic...
By that logic...
Last edited:
Ann Coulter's response to Zimmerman verdict "Hallelujah"
- Thread starter get these nets
- Start date
There were militants lining up to worship her for "supporring" AADOS
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
Trump wants to pit black Americans against Latino immigrants. Don’t fall for it.
More population growth actually increases the demand for "low skilled" jobs which black folks generally do. Low wages is due to capitalism, lower % of workers in unions, and oligarchy
Also the entire framing of "illegal immigration" is bullshyt if you don't address the causes of it( American meddling in Latin America and predatory trade deals). They don't particularly want to come here...
NPR Choice page
United States involvement in regime change in Latin America - Wikipedia
A Century of U.S. Intervention Created the Immigration Crisis
Devilinurear
Veteran
Anne Colter is a biggot and racist.
So I guess that means if she supports an agenda for descendants of slaves getting reparations, we should tell her to “keep your racist land and money we don’t want it!!!”
I’m so glad our ancestors didn’t use this same logic against Lyndon Johnson or we may not have ever gotten our civil rights.
Let’s grow up Black people, and take our emotions and feelings out of politics. Please.
Politics are nothing but emotions and feelings.
Anti reparations agents are turning black people getting reparations as a black vs brown thing. These c00ns really tryna sneak an immigration argument into black people getting reparations.
You can't make this shyt up
You can't make this shyt up
HarlemHottie
Uptown Thoroughbred
We're already pit against each other, what does Trump have to do with it?
This Ann Coulter thing is interesting and sort of explains all the push back we get from non ADOS. Immigrants don't hate Repubs because they're racist. Hell, majority of these immigrants are racist, and that includes the black ones.
Immigrants don't like Repubs bc they're nationalist. As are ADOS. Different types of nationalists, to be sure, but, given post- 2008 economic conditions, it makes perfect sense. This is all part of a reaction to the open borders policy of neoliberalism. You can't starve the rightful citizens of first world countries and expect them to idly stand by. Strange times make for strange bedfellows.
Dorian Breh
Veteran
Why so many people pop up in this thread to tell us it was only one poster trolling?
Nobody accused anyone specifically of cosigning Coulter, but lots of folks came in here to defend themselves for doing it :deandreugh:
If the horsefaced bigot's shoe fits, I guess
Seen she had a lot of dumbass supporters in here. shyt is crazy I really think those posters are just CaC trolls
We're already pit against each other, what does Trump have to do with it?
This Ann Coulter thing is interesting and sort of explains all the push back we get from non ADOS. Immigrants don't hate Repubs because they're racist. Hell, majority of these immigrants are racist, and that includes the black ones.
Strange times make for strange bedfellows.
Why would immigrants who are already here care if Republicans were nationalist or not?
If nationalism was a big issue, then wouldn't European immigrants hate Republicans just as much as non-White immigrants? So why don't we see that?
"Given post-2008 economic conditions" - I thought this was the greatest economy for Black people ever right now.Immigrants don't like Repubs bc they're nationalist. As are ADOS. Different types of nationalists, to be sure, but, given post- 2008 economic conditions, it makes perfect sense. This is all part of a reaction to the open borders policy of neoliberalism. You can't starve the rightful citizens of first world countries and expect them to idly stand by.
Strange times make for strange bedfellows.
"You can't starve the rightful citizens of first world countries" - yeah, White people are the rightful citizens and not the Brown people who were here first.
And no one is starving due to immigration.
You want to talk starving, you know what food prices would be like if agribusinesses didn't have millions of immigrants picking crops for poverty-level wages? One study after another has shown that immigration boosts the economy because it adds to the level of working-and-spending working-class people, who make commerce flow faster than any other demographic. That's why places like Germany were begging for more immigrants as their population ages out. Show me any actual studies (outside of those produced by the openly racist orgs) showing that Black people are driven into poverty by Brown people and I'll listen. But the vast majority of the evidence I've seen is that the people in charge are the ones hoarding resources and keeping Black people in poverty.
The issue isn't "why can't we agree with Ann Coulter once in a while."
The issue is why the hell do ya'all need to rush in posting and announcing that you agree with a racist troll?
Can you imagine if people posted a new thread every time any liberal gave lip-service to a pro-Black cause? Liberal politicians say "the right shyt" all the time. But we all know that words mean nothing, so no one posts that shyt unless it's accompanied by an actual call to action. Otherwise it just looks like caping for a party or desperate search for White approval.
But a known racist who is constantly shytting on the Black community says ONE thing vaguely pro-AADOS, obviously with ulterior motives as it openly contradicts other shyt she's said, and people come running in to say how much they agree with her. Then we have dozens of posters talking about how they've been listening to her for years and she's always on point with this. Really fool? What the hell is wrong with your life that YOU'VE SPENT YEARS LISTENING TO ANN COULTER????
- she openly shyts on Black people and talks about their "criminal nature"
- she openly opposes reparations
- she repeatedly praises people who have killed Black people
- she repeatedly shyts on the families of Black victims of violence
- she mocks anyone who protests against violence against Black people
- she opposes the idea that there is any unfairness in the justice system
- she doubts that any innocent Black people are in prison
- she mocks the academic ability of Black people in elite colleges
- she capes for South African Whites and wants to grant them refugee status while opposing all Black and Brown immigrants
- she says that Southern Whites face more discrimination than Black people
- she repeatedly compares White people positively to Black people
And you want approval from her? You're gonna quote ANYTHING that she says and agree with it as if it's a good thing that you have the same position? If some racist a$$hole says something I agree with, then fukk THEM. I ain't quoting shyt from them, I can support my argument without needing to rely on a racist.
Quote people who matter. Don't quote people who society needs to leave behind. If you need them to write your argument for you then you already lawst.
The issue is why the hell do ya'all need to rush in posting and announcing that you agree with a racist troll?
Can you imagine if people posted a new thread every time any liberal gave lip-service to a pro-Black cause? Liberal politicians say "the right shyt" all the time. But we all know that words mean nothing, so no one posts that shyt unless it's accompanied by an actual call to action. Otherwise it just looks like caping for a party or desperate search for White approval.
But a known racist who is constantly shytting on the Black community says ONE thing vaguely pro-AADOS, obviously with ulterior motives as it openly contradicts other shyt she's said, and people come running in to say how much they agree with her. Then we have dozens of posters talking about how they've been listening to her for years and she's always on point with this. Really fool? What the hell is wrong with your life that YOU'VE SPENT YEARS LISTENING TO ANN COULTER????
- she openly shyts on Black people and talks about their "criminal nature"
- she openly opposes reparations
- she repeatedly praises people who have killed Black people
- she repeatedly shyts on the families of Black victims of violence
- she mocks anyone who protests against violence against Black people
- she opposes the idea that there is any unfairness in the justice system
- she doubts that any innocent Black people are in prison
- she mocks the academic ability of Black people in elite colleges
- she capes for South African Whites and wants to grant them refugee status while opposing all Black and Brown immigrants
- she says that Southern Whites face more discrimination than Black people
- she repeatedly compares White people positively to Black people
And you want approval from her? You're gonna quote ANYTHING that she says and agree with it as if it's a good thing that you have the same position? If some racist a$$hole says something I agree with, then fukk THEM. I ain't quoting shyt from them, I can support my argument without needing to rely on a racist.
Quote people who matter. Don't quote people who society needs to leave behind. If you need them to write your argument for you then you already lawst.
HarlemHottie
Uptown Thoroughbred
That's actually a good question. I don't know bc European immigrants don't spend a lot of time differentiating themselves from white Americans. They, unlike immigrants of color, gratefully blend right in politically. Immigrants of color, on the other hand, expend a lot of energy announcing their statusWhy would immigrants who are already here care if Republicans were nationalist or not?
If nationalism was a big issue, then wouldn't European immigrants hate Republicans just as much as non-White immigrants? So why don't we see that?
, essentially forcing a response, whether negative or positive.Tell me I'm wrong.
'Brown' (and black) immigrants are knowingly collaborating with the hoarders. There is no either/ or. When those black temp workers sued the agency in Chicago for racial discrimination, I didn't see no Mexicans step up to call it out. When black dude got fired from that warehouse for filming his Mexican coworkers walking out and subsequently lost his job, I ain't see nobody step up to get homie re-hired. These are facts.
@T'krm, We need studies, fam. I know you started a thread on this...
T'krm
Superstar
On Hispanic immigrants, intentionally displacing Black people, especially in the west, and mid-west. That's w/o question.That's actually a good question. I don't know bc European immigrants don't spend a lot of time differentiating themselves from white Americans. They, unlike immigrants of color, gratefully blend right in politically. Immigrants of color, on the other hand, expend a lot of energy announcing their status
Tell me I'm wrong.
'Brown' (and black) immigrants are knowingly collaborating with the hoarders. There is no either/ or. When those black temp workers sued the agency in Chicago for racial discrimination, I didn't see no Mexicans step up to call it out. When black dude got fired from that warehouse for filming his Mexican coworkers walking out and subsequently lost his job, I ain't see nobody step up to get homie re-hired. These are facts.
@T'krm, We need studies, fam. I know you started a thread on this...
Few places hold as much importance in Los Angeles' black history as Central Avenue, the birthplace of the West Coast jazz scene and a magnet for those leaving the South seeking a better life.
It runs through City Council District 9 in South Los Angeles and ends blocks from City Hall — a pathway that is both symbolic and literal. Voters in the district have elected an African American to the City Council since the early 1960s.
But blacks today are a diminishing presence in District 9, making up just 40% of registered voters. Latinos are the overwhelming majority of the district's residents and 48% of its registered voters, according to city records.
Today, African Americans make up 9% of the city's population, down from 17% in the 1980s, according to census data. Migration from Mexico and Central America has boosted Latinos to almost half the city's population, up from 27% in the 1980s.
A similar shift has taken place in Compton, where about 31% of the population is black, down from 73% in 1980, according to census data. Despite those dwindling numbers, most of Compton's political leadership is black.
latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-blacks-latinos-south-la-20170228-story.htm
First, there is little debate that illegal immigration primarily, though not exclusively, increases the supply of workers at the bottom end of the labor market. Occupational categories such as building cleaning and maintenance, food service and preparation, and construction are the most heavily impacted (See Table 1). If illegal immigration has a negative impact on U.S.-born workers, it will tend to be on those who have the least education because this is the kind of worker who generally does this type of job.
Second, all of the available data show that black men are disproportionately employed at the bottom end of the labor market. Compared to white men, a much larger share of native-born black men have relatively little education. About six out of 10 adult black men have only a high school degree or failed to graduate high school, compared to about four out of 10 white men (see Figure 1). I have estimated, as shown in Table 1, that about half (47 percent) of black men are employed in occupational categories that could be described as illegal-immigrant heavy. And unemployment among black men averages 13 percent in these same occupations. In contrast, only 34 percent of native-born white men are employed in occupations that have a heavy concentration of illegal immigrants; unemployment for white men averages 7 percent.
Third, there is a large body of research showing that less-educated black men, like less-educated workers overall, have generally not fared well in the U.S. labor market in recent years. This is true whether we look at wages, benefits, or labor force attachment. Workers with less than a high school education or those with only a high school education have seen wages decline or stagnate. The share of these workers offered benefits like health insurance by their employers has also declined. And while employment is cyclical, there has been a long-term trend of declining employment and labor force participation for less-educated native-born men, including less-educated black men.1
The overall deterioration in employment rates, wages, and benefits is a strong indication that less-educated labor is not in short supply. If such workers were in short supply, wages and benefits and employment rates would all be rising, as employers try desperately to attract and retain the relatively few workers available. But this seems to be exactly the opposite of what has been happening. The deterioration in the labor market for less-educated black men is particularly problematic because they already tended to make the lowest wages and have the lowest labor force participation rates.
There may be many possible explanations for the problems experienced by less-educated workers. But anyone asserting that labor is in short supply must directly address the declining wages and benefits. For example, if one argues that trade is a key reason for the decline, then it still means that access to foreign labor, through trade, is increasing the effective supply of labor in the United States and exerting downward pressure on wages. If one argues that technological innovation is increasing productivity, which may also increase the effective supply of workers as well as reduce demand for less-skilled workers, then once again the supply of workers is being increased, and this undermines the idea that workers are scarce. Any assertion that less-skilled workers are very scarce must address the overwhelming economic evidence in wages, benefits, and employment to the contrary. Testimonials from employers who understandability wish to keep wages low, is not systematic evidence.
The Impact of Immigration on Black Workers
Several studies have found that immigration has impacted the wages or employment of native-born African Americans. This includes recent studies by Borjas, Grogger, and Hanson that found that immigration reduces labor force participation of the least-educated black men.2 Research by Andrew Sum, Paul Harrington, and Ishwar Khatiwada at Northeastern University has found that immigrants are displacing young native-born men in the labor market and that the largest impact is on blacks and Hispanics.3 In my own research I have found that blacks are more likely to be in competition with immigrants than are whites.4 A 1995 study by Augustine Kposowa concluded that, "non-whites appear to lose jobs to immigrants and their earnings are depressed by immigrants."5 A 1998 study of the New York area by Howell and Mueller found that a 10-percentage-point increase in the immigrant share of an occupation reduced wages of black men about five percentage points. Given the large immigrant share of the occupations they studied, this implies a significant impact on native-born blacks.6
There certainly is a good deal of anecdotal evidence that employers often prefer immigrants, particularly Hispanic and Asian immigrants, over native-born black Americans. A more qualitative study by anthropologist Katherine Newman and Chauncy Lennon of fast food jobs in Harlem, found that immigrants are much more likely to get hired than are native-born black Americans.7
Some studies have not found an impact on blacks from immigration. Most studies that have found little or no impact are based on comparisons of labor market outcomes across cities with different levels of immigrants. Part of the reason it is hard to estimate the effect of immigration in this way is that we live in a national economy. The movement of capital, labor, goods, and services tends to create wage and employment equilibrium between American cities. Moreover, immigrants are attracted to cities with higher wage and employment growth. This will tend to mask the impact of immigration. As a result, comparisons across cities will tend to understate the immigration effect. Studies that have tended to treat the country as one large labor market have found larger effects than have cross city comparisons.
Conclusion
There is no debate that illegal immigration, and even immigration more generally, increases the supply of workers who are employed in lower-skilled, lower-wage sectors of the economy. It is also uncontested that a significant share of native-born black men have education levels that make them more likely to compete with illegal immigrants. Additionally, there is agreement that wages and employment for less-educated men, including black men, have generally stagnated or declined. The lack of wage growth makes it very difficult to argue that less-educated workers are in short supply. There are a number of studies indicating that immigration is harming the labor market prospects of black Americans. However, the debate over whether immigration reduces wages or employment among black Americans is not entirely settled. If one is concerned about less-educated workers in this country, it is difficult to justify continuing high levels of legal and illegal immigration that disproportionately impact the bottom end of the labor market.
It is important to understand that immigration does not simply reduce wages or employment. There is a good deal of agreement among economists that the benefit to more-educated natives that comes from reducing the wages of the least-educated Americans must be very small. A 1997 study by the National Research Council, The New Americans, has a good explanation as to why the gains are so small. There is no body of research showing large economic gains to native-born Americans from immigration. The primary beneficiary of immigration seems to be the immigrants themselves. A central part of the immigration debate is how we weight the benefits that go to immigrants against the losses suffered by the poorest and least-educated Americans. How one answers this question will have a significant impact on what immigration policy makes the most sense.
Immigration and Black Americans: Assessing the Impact
Last edited:
IcemanCometh
Pro
She just said some real shyt on Black Americans (not immigrants!), civil rights and foreigners that is rarely spoken on and needed to be said. But why is nikkas surprised and stuck on "so and so white political figure is racist". Saying a white politician (whether Democrat or Republican)is racist is like saying the sky is blue. shyt is a given. I'm about policies and laws, I don't give a fukk about who these fakkits are. Even Lyndon B got civil rights passed.
The fact a conservative white bytch like Ann Coulter repeatedly pointed out these facts about Native Black Americans on national TV -not any liberals, Democrats, not even any Black politicians - ANN COULTER - speaks volumes!! AAGANG!!! #BAGANG
The fact a conservative white bytch like Ann Coulter repeatedly pointed out these facts about Native Black Americans on national TV -not any liberals, Democrats, not even any Black politicians - ANN COULTER - speaks volumes!! AAGANG!!! #BAGANG
Last edited:
Africans be on twitter saying the same shyt when cops kill African Americans.
By that logic...
I'm sure the 0.1% of total Africans on twitter represent a billion people..glad to see you apply White logic and blanket everyone. You a good student, they taught you well