Ok let’s say we are 13% of the population like they say. Take 2-3% due to mass incarceration that leaves to 10. That’s roughly 40% the remaining are split between renters and buys and buyers is a minuscule amount in comparison to renters so what other shyt do you have to say
Can a "both sider" please tell me how Kamala Harris' plan to expand refundable tax credits isn't tangibles?
- Thread starter Voice of Reason
- Start date
how does it support your point? what do you mean Black people purchasing homes? That data is out there. 44% of black folks are homeowners (19 million ppl) and 2.4 million (4-5% of blk Americans) of that number live in a inherited home so that means 17 million Black people buy their homes
New Report Looks at How Obama's Housing Policies Destroyed Black Wealth
A new report looks at how black wealth was demolished under the Obama presidency due to flawed housing policies.
theintercept.com
Kamala announced a plan to get it from overturning Trump's tax cut for the rich and putting a new tax on unrealized capital gains for the ultra-wealthy.
Kamala Harris has finally promised to tax the rich
A new policy book lays out her plan to reverse Trump's tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy.
www.motherjones.com
This is why the Trump economic plans would actually increase the debt over twice as much as Kamala's plans would.
The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.
"Under our central estimate, Vice President Harris’s plan would increase the debt by $3.50 trillion through 2035, while President Trump’s plan would increase the debt by $7.50 trillion."
Last edited:
Which is funny because that’s the exact same reason poor whites vote against programs that would help them too.
They give exclusive benefits to others. Why can’t a brother ask for the same? DACA before you ask for an example. Wet foot, dry foot. Israel.Anything that benefits anybody outside of the black community is not worth voting for
Only policies that exclusively benefit the black community count to #bothsides
Even if the policies will help blacks it doesn’t matter to them. They want exclusive benefits
Israel policies benefit black, white, Arab etc Israelis.
DACA policies benefit Asian, Arab, African etc immigrants
What policy only affects a specific race?
Marc Spector
the 4'11 Cuban
47.9 million blk ppl in america..,
Let’s say 3% are incarcerated thats 1.5 million ppl.
so so now we are at 46.4 million people.
17 million of us are buyers, 2.4 million inherit, so that leaves almost 27 million Black people who are in some sort of rental situation..,,
Since it's purely financial, the Democrats can pass it through reconciliation just like Trump passed his tax cut with only 50 votes. If the only Senator they lose is Manchin (who wouldn't have voted for it anyway) and Sinema gets replaced by a real Democrat, then the Democrats would likely have the 50 votes they need to pass it.
Both sides promise lots of things they can't enact, but this complaint is bizarre in a thread where multiple posters are begging for Democrats to promise Black-only policies, which the Republican Supreme Court has said EXPLICITLY is unconstitutional and can't be enacted.
I don't understand how those posters can understand that Supreme Court ruling and not turn around and say, "Okay, so policies like this are the next best thing that can actually be done now until Democrats get a majority on the Supreme Court."
Sir Richard Spirit
Superstar
can republicans claim the same as tangibles?
Supreme Court has explicitly declared it unConstitutional in the Affirmative Action ruling. Even private race-specific programs were blocked by the courts:
Court blocks grants to Black women entrepreneurs in case that could restrict DEI efforts by companies and charities
A scholar of nonprofits explains why she’s concerned that the decision in the Fearless Fund case could discourage all efforts focused on diversity, equity and inclusion.
theconversation.com
"Venture capital fund Fearless Fund cannot resume making grants to Black women-owned businesses, a divided U.S. appeals court ruled on Monday, siding with an anti-affirmative action group that sued over the program. The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the group's discrimination lawsuit was likely to succeed, reversing, opens new tab a judge’s decision that the program should be allowed to continue while the case moves forward.
The ruling is a victory for Edward Blum, the conservative activist behind the successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to race-conscious college admissions policies. Blum’s group American Alliance for Equal Rights last year alleged the Fearless Fund was violating a 19th century federal law that bars racial bias in private contracts.
The lawsuit targeted a Fearless Fund program that awards Black women who own small businesses $20,000 in grants and other resources to grow their businesses. Businesses owned by Black women in 2022 received less than 1% of the $288 billion that venture capital firms deployed, according to the Fearless Fund.
The 11th Circuit panel, led by Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom, an appointee of former Republican U.S. President Donald Trump, concluded that Fearless Fund’s program did not warrant speech protections under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Another Trump appointee, Robert Luck, joined Newsom’s order. Circuit Judge Robin Rosenbaum, an Obama-era appointee, dissented, accusing the plaintiffs of pretending to be harmed by the program. The grant initiative had been on hold following an earlier decision from the appeals court."
Obama judge said the program can continue, but the two Trump judges said no. Just like 6 Bush/Trump judges blocked AA while 3 Obama/Biden judges tried to uphold it. It can't get any clearer than that.
Literally every part of your math is wrong breh.
You seriously took the Black population down from 13% to 10% due to mass incarceration. You think 1/4 of America's black population is in prison?
And 4% of Black Americans living in inherited homes is 4% of the BLACK population, not 4% of the US population.
Approximately 40% of Black people bought their home, 4% inherited, and 56% rent or otherwise live in a place they don't own.
Anything that benefits anybody outside of the black community is not worth voting for
Only policies that exclusively benefit the black community count to #bothsides
Even if the policies will help blacks it doesn’t matter to them. They want exclusive benefits
Yep
They don't want a lift all boats type of deal
Supreme Court has explicitly declared it unConstitutional in the Affirmative Action ruling. Even private race-specific programs were blocked by the courts:
Court blocks grants to Black women entrepreneurs in case that could restrict DEI efforts by companies and charities
A scholar of nonprofits explains why she’s concerned that the decision in the Fearless Fund case could discourage all efforts focused on diversity, equity and inclusion.
"Venture capital fund Fearless Fund cannot resume making grants to Black women-owned businesses, a divided U.S. appeals court ruled on Monday, siding with an anti-affirmative action group that sued over the program. The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the group's discrimination lawsuit was likely to succeed, reversing, opens new tab a judge’s decision that the program should be allowed to continue while the case moves forward.
The ruling is a victory for Edward Blum, the conservative activist behind the successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to race-conscious college admissions policies. Blum’s group American Alliance for Equal Rights last year alleged the Fearless Fund was violating a 19th century federal law that bars racial bias in private contracts.
The lawsuit targeted a Fearless Fund program that awards Black women who own small businesses $20,000 in grants and other resources to grow their businesses. Businesses owned by Black women in 2022 received less than 1% of the $288 billion that venture capital firms deployed, according to the Fearless Fund.
The 11th Circuit panel, led by Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom, an appointee of former Republican U.S. President Donald Trump, concluded that Fearless Fund’s program did not warrant speech protections under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Another Trump appointee, Robert Luck, joined Newsom’s order. Circuit Judge Robin Rosenbaum, an Obama-era appointee, dissented, accusing the plaintiffs of pretending to be harmed by the program. The grant initiative had been on hold following an earlier decision from the appeals court."
Obama judge said the program can continue, but the two Trump judges said no. Just like 6 Bush/Trump judges blocked AA while 3 Obama/Biden judges tried to uphold it. It can't get any clearer than that.
Hence the push for lineage based legislation
Who is naive enough to believe Trump's Supreme Court will sit there and go, "Oh, man, we said race-based laws were illegal but you're saying lineage-based now? I guess we have to throw our hands up, can't do anything about that!"
Why the fukk would they not block lineage-based reparations too?
Who is naive enough to believe Trump's Supreme Court will sit there and go, "Oh, man, we said race-based laws were illegal but you're saying lineage-based now? I guess we have to throw our hands up, can't do anything about that!"
Why the fukk would they not block lineage-based reparations too?
Because it would step on the toes of other lineages that they simply can't touch. Ie jews, native Americans etc.
