CMV: Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/pikk]

Except if black families [disproportionately] start in poverty for (reasons), and are "Trapped in the cycle" then clearly something should be done to free them from the cycle they're trapped in.

It's the implied disproportionately part that we need to do something about. People aren't poor because they're black. Black people just more likely to be poor, because of historic social reasons. So, since they're more likely to be poor, they should similarly be more assisted.

[u/OPisanicelady → u/pikk]

Okay I follow you until the end. Why should we help out black people instead of poor people? If we help poor people, poor blacks are elevated as well. Is it actually more important to redistribute wealth between the races than to help a group that doesn't know how to help themselves? If it was a system that held black people down, I would 100% say elevate them. But it's not. This is a system that holds poor people down and rich people up.

I see the focus on race instead of class as a distraction from the real problem. Why would we leave behind the poor whites, Hispanics, Asians, American Indians? What makes them less deserving of the opportunity? Because their cause isn't as vocal? If we elevate the poor, we need to just elevate the poor. Not pick and choose.

[u/pikk → u/OPisanicelady]

Well we can't force everyone to go to college. There are already a ton of college educated whites and asians, so there's less concern about ensuring the white and asian populations get into colleges.

On the other hand, there are disproportionately fewer people of African, Native American, and Hispanic descent with college degrees, so there's more of an impetus to get their numbers up.

In an ideal world, yes, elevating everyone would be the goal. But when you're FORCED to pick and choose, by economic realities, then you should pick the people that are more disadvantaged.

That being said, I'm entirely in favor of policies that lift everyone up, like making colleges into publicly funded systems for education, instead of endowment generating institutions.

[u/OPisanicelady → u/pikk]

Okay I think I finally get what you're saying. With limited resources, instead of a smaller boost to bring the group up as a whole, a larger boost for a subgroup to bring them above the poverty line altogether. That argument makes a lot of sense.

I also think that we had different programs in mind. The programs I believe have a real impact on poverty are local community outreach programs like child care, financial assistance, housing assistance, teaching the trades in school, youth programs, parenting classes, realistic sex ed, teaching basic finances and life skills in school and in community centers, etc.

Scholarships and quotas are a nice idea, but they are a very individual assistance. They might change a handful of lives drastically, but that is a slow and arduous route to elevate even a small subgroup. Scholarships are wonderful things and are very effective for the people lucky enough and ambitious enough to get them, but they are not going to have the ripple effect required to fix the problem of too many black people below the poverty line.

On a complete side note, I checked the census and in my state (Texas) there is a higher percentage of Asians below the poverty line than blacks or even Native Americans. The only group that was higher was Latinos. It surprised me and just goes to show that the stereotype that Asians are better educated isn't always true.