Quantum Loop Gravity Be For Whitey

[Tim May]

On Jan 2, 2004, at 12:03 AM, Tim May wrote:

> So Kennedy's liberals scratched their heads and came up with a new 
> plan. "Relief" would be converted to a series of state and national 
> programs, no longer handled locally. And the bad connotations of 
> "relief" would be changed by the new and positive name "entitlement."
>
> Money handed out to various folks would be their "entitlement," 
> something they were _owed_. Other related names would be "social 
> services" and, of course, liberal mention of "children" and 
> "nutrition." Ergo programs like WIC ("Women, Infants, and Children"). 
> Ergo, "Head Start."

And I should have elaborated on the family system effects of the new 
welfare system:  since the "entitlements" were not given to families 
with husbands in the household, this made marriage a bad idea for those 
wanting to get welfare.

A young girl could go from the bottom of the pecking order in her 
household to the top in her own apartment, with an income from welfare 
that increased with each baby she had. So we had the spectacle of 
14-year-old girls being given their own apartments by Big Brother, paid 
for with taxes taken from working suckers.

The effects of this are so corrosive as to practically be unexplainable 
to normal people: households solely dependent on handouts from 
government, fathers completely absent (except in sneak visits), a 
disrespect for those who work, the boys in the household anxious to 
hang out on the streets below rather than be with Momma, the crime that 
comes from this kind of hanging out, self-loathing (it seems likely) 
that leads to lashing out at "whitey," and a perpetuating cycle as the 
young girls seek to get their own "cribs" so the process can repeat and 
expand.

This is why so many black families today are into their third or even 
fourth generation of welfare life.

By the way, part of the reason Kennedy wanted to "remove the stigma of 
relief" was because the decade of the 1950s had been especially bad for 
the urban poor. Many blacks had moved from farms in the south to cities 
like Washington, New York, Cincinnati, Oakland, Chicago, etc. Partly 
they had moved to work in factories during the war, partly because 
automation on the farms had displaced manual laborers, partly because 
they heard of the success of other blacks who had moved north.

But they were moving into the cities just as the whites were leaving. 
(And the whites were not leaving because the blacks were coming 
in...rather, the new jobs were increasingly in the suburbs, and as 
highways and freeways and ring roads were built around cities, and as 
cars became plentiful, and as families grew, many of the city-born 
whites were moving into the massive new subdivisions being built out in 
the suburbs.)

So the blacks got to the inner cities with mostly only manual labor 
skills, just as such jobs were vanishing under automation and through a 
shift to the suburbs.

Now what government _should have done_ circa the early 1960s is this: 
Nothing. Except to cut taxes to encourage even more business, and to 
maybe point out to blacks that they should slow down their move to the 
cities. (By the way, the same move to the cities was happening in other 
countries, which is why Mexico City now has something like 20 million 
residents, most of them very poor.)

But instead of letting the dice fall where they may, letting the bad 
effects discourage other blacks from moving to the cities, Kennedy set 
his advisors to the problem of solving "urban poverty." They expanded 
welfare and entitlements, ostensibly because America "could afford it" 
(the 1950s having been a prosperous period).

Precisely the wrong thing to do. It encouraged even more blacks to 
flock to the cities, and once started, once established, the welfare 
spigot could not be turned off, could not be denied to the newcomers. 
Whoops.

And none of the planners, I expect, saw the effects of the law of 
unintended consequences, that they would disincentive blacks from 
seeking hard jobs, that multigenerational welfare would become the 
norm, and that blacks would be seen by those doing so well in the 
rapidly-expanding, prosperous suburbs as some kind of throwback to 
plantation life. The various "demands" by black leaders, the reverse 
racism ("honkie mofo"), the whole hatred for learning ("reading be for 
whitey") all combined with the welfare state in these cities to create 
this gutterization of the negro.

Even when the full magnitude of this developing train wreck was obvious 
even to the liberals, they didn't pull back from the brink and say 
"Let's stop this train wreck." Nope, they said the problem was "not 
enough money." So benefits were expanded in the 1970s, with more 
Medicare, Medical, larger payments...the idea was to pay enough to get 
people "back on their feet." But of course, human nature being what it 
is, most took the higher payments and bought nicer stuff, hence the 
color televisions found in every "crib."

And the huge influxes of Mexicans during the 70s and 80s magnified the 
problem (to turn down Mexicans for the same "entitlements" that blacks 
were getting would not have been kosher, would it?). The effect was 
that large chunks of cities now had urbanized Mexican ghettoes, paid 
for with dollars coming from the taxed suckers out in the suburbs.

Whoops. Another train wreck.

And it continues. Finally, even Bill Clinton, a Democrat, tried to put 
the brakes on welfare. It's worked in some ways, but not in other ways. 
Just too many "entitlements" to stop the hemorrhaging of money.

(To those who claim the biggest recipients of "welfare" are 
corporations, review again what I wrote about "sources and sinks." And 
look at the $40 billion hole California is in. It isn't because of any 
"welfare to corporations." The "services" sector is a black hole 
sucking in nearly all of the tax monies collected in California.)

The problem is that some well-meaning social planners thought they 
could fix a fundamental problem (poor people moving into cities) by 
giving money to the poor people in cities. It not only didn't work, it 
worsened the problem in multiple ways and largely caused the "racial" 
divisions of today.


--Tim May
"Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and
strangled with her panty hose,  is somehow morally superior to a woman 
explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound"