I think there should be a recognition of male chauvinism that was rampant, particularly in NY financial culture during that time, and not weigh on it too much. I'm sure you said some things in the 80's and 90's that if published, might not reflect well on you today. I know that's true for me.
Doubt Bernie was a "male chauvinist" telling women things like the quoted in 1990.
No... he was just professing his love for the Soviet Union on countless hours of video that the republicans will play on an endless loop from the moment he wins the nomination all the way up to the moment he ensures Trump gets another four years in office, thus ensuring the end of this democracy.
Vote for Mike or Die.
Well, Trump being able to attack Bloomberg from the left in the race and standing up for workers rights and minorities rights against Bloomberg will really help you.
Do you have any receipts of this claim of the countless hours of video of Bernie professing his love for the soviet union? Or did the Fox News morning show tell you that will happen?
haha...oh, my little Swedish chef. The videos are out there. They are plentiful. Google them...or not, as they will be played ad nauseam in the summer/fall, should the democrats nominate that guy.
The fact that you don't know about them speaks to how poorly Bernie has been vetted .
you should rewatch those videos....what I'm hearing is that they aren't as bad as they are made out to be
How will he have the time to watch COUNTLESS OF HOURS of this?
Are we talking millions of hours of Bernie just praising the Soviet Union?
HOW MANY TAPES ARE THERE?! One tape is what 120-240 minutes or something? HOW MANY TAPES DOES COUNTLESS OF HOURS MEAN?!!
You only need one 15 second clip to paint the portrait. Plus, he's a self-described socialist, so why wouldn't a clip where he praises USSR, Cuba (even if out of context or disingenuous) resonate with independents? When you call yourself something, then a clip reinforcing it is going to be compelling.
I think there should be a recognition of male chauvinism that was rampant, particularly in NY financial culture during that time, and not weigh on it too much. I'm sure you said some things in the 80's and 90's that if published, might not reflect well on you today. I know that's true for me.
Doubt Bernie was a "male chauvinist" telling women things like the quoted in 1990.
No... he was just professing his love for the Soviet Union on countless hours of video that the republicans will play on an endless loop from the moment he wins the nomination all the way up to the moment he ensures Trump gets another four years in office, thus ensuring the end of this democracy.
Vote for Mike or Die.
Well, Trump being able to attack Bloomberg from the left in the race and standing up for workers rights and minorities rights against Bloomberg will really help you.
Do you have any receipts of this claim of the countless hours of video of Bernie professing his love for the soviet union? Or did the Fox News morning show tell you that will happen?
haha...oh, my little Swedish chef. The videos are out there. They are plentiful. Google them...or not, as they will be played ad nauseam in the summer/fall, should the democrats nominate that guy.
The fact that you don't know about them speaks to how poorly Bernie has been vetted .
you should rewatch those videos....what I'm hearing is that they aren't as bad as they are made out to be
How will he have the time to watch COUNTLESS OF HOURS of this?
Are we talking millions of hours of Bernie just praising the Soviet Union?
HOW MANY TAPES ARE THERE?! One tape is what 120-240 minutes or something? HOW MANY TAPES DOES COUNTLESS OF HOURS MEAN?!!
You only need one 15 second clip to paint the portrait. Plus, he's a self-described socialist, so why wouldn't a clip where he praises USSR, Cuba (even if out of context or disingenuous) resonate with independents? When you call yourself something, then a clip reinforcing it is going to be compelling.
There is a funny joke here to be made. Not sure if it should be just posting "1980s?" or posting "I don't think it's right, but I also don't think what someone said in 1988 is reflective of who they are as a person today. I weigh what someone says today much more heavily than what they said 30 years ago. "
:P
I get what you are saying
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
I think there should be a recognition of male chauvinism that was rampant, particularly in NY financial culture during that time, and not weigh on it too much. I'm sure you said some things in the 80's and 90's that if published, might not reflect well on you today. I know that's true for me.
Doubt Bernie was a "male chauvinist" telling women things like the quoted in 1990.
No... he was just professing his love for the Soviet Union on countless hours of video that the republicans will play on an endless loop from the moment he wins the nomination all the way up to the moment he ensures Trump gets another four years in office, thus ensuring the end of this democracy.
Vote for Mike or Die.
Well, Trump being able to attack Bloomberg from the left in the race and standing up for workers rights and minorities rights against Bloomberg will really help you.
Do you have any receipts of this claim of the countless hours of video of Bernie professing his love for the soviet union? Or did the Fox News morning show tell you that will happen?
haha...oh, my little Swedish chef. The videos are out there. They are plentiful. Google them...or not, as they will be played ad nauseam in the summer/fall, should the democrats nominate that guy.
The fact that you don't know about them speaks to how poorly Bernie has been vetted .
you should rewatch those videos....what I'm hearing is that they aren't as bad as they are made out to be
How will he have the time to watch COUNTLESS OF HOURS of this?
Are we talking millions of hours of Bernie just praising the Soviet Union?
HOW MANY TAPES ARE THERE?! One tape is what 120-240 minutes or something? HOW MANY TAPES DOES COUNTLESS OF HOURS MEAN?!!
You only need one 15 second clip to paint the portrait. Plus, he's a self-described socialist, so why wouldn't a clip where he praises USSR, Cuba (even if out of context or disingenuous) resonate with independents? When you call yourself something, then a clip reinforcing it is going to be compelling.
There is a funny joke here to be made. Not sure if it should be just posting "1980s?" or posting "I don't think it's right, but I also don't think what someone said in 1988 is reflective of who they are as a person today. I weigh what someone says today much more heavily than what they said 30 years ago. "
:P
I get what you are saying
Listen, I know that. But...I'm not the person trying to be convinced. I don't think he's a communist nor do I think he romanticizes the USSR. He's further left than me, but I'm talking about what I think will happen. And yes I know you know that. The one policy that I really don't like, which ironically would help me out personally the most, is the waiving of student debts and free college. I think that's a terrible idea, much worse than M4A. And you'll notice that I've never taken real shots at Bernie, only his supporters. Nor have I said that I wouldn't vote for him. I would. I just don't want to be in that position though, plus I do think he'll lose. I hope I'm wrong about that.
I think there should be a recognition of male chauvinism that was rampant, particularly in NY financial culture during that time, and not weigh on it too much. I'm sure you said some things in the 80's and 90's that if published, might not reflect well on you today. I know that's true for me.
Doubt Bernie was a "male chauvinist" telling women things like the quoted in 1990.
No... he was just professing his love for the Soviet Union on countless hours of video that the republicans will play on an endless loop from the moment he wins the nomination all the way up to the moment he ensures Trump gets another four years in office, thus ensuring the end of this democracy.
Instead of seizing on some out of context audio, what do you think of what he actually did? By all accounts it looks like spent $130,000,000 of his own money to help those folks succeed in life. This is the guy you are saying is as bad as Donald Trump? You see, this is why your party excels at losing elections.
Vote Mike or Die.
But what do you think about his comments on the video we can all watch? Do you agree with them? What context are we missing? Is what he said ok as long as it is accompanied by giving away money?
Call me old fashioned but I put more stock in what he's actually doing for these folks, than a slip of the tongue.
They don't look great without any context. But if one takes literally a second to click on those links, that are actually in the Vice article, they will see that what he's talking about is actually a great things for those kids.
So again, you guys are trying to scare people into believing he's the same as Donald Trump based on some out of context clips....or based on just the headline of an article or something....yet the actual article shows that the man is spending hundreds of millions of his own money to help these disadvantage kids get by in life. Donald Trump has literally never thought of doing such a thing (and doesn't have the money lying around to do it anyway).
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
Further, if he was truly racist then presumably he would think blacks and hispanics are predisposed to a life of crime or vagrancy. If that were the case, why would he put millions to work to address it?
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
I don't think he is interested in the whole discussion. He is only interested in little snippets that fits his narrative.
Bloomberg to Use Own Funds in Plan to Aid Minority Youth
The administration of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, in a blunt acknowledgment that thousands of young black and Latino men are cut off from New York’s civic, educational and economic life, plans to spend nearly $130 million on far-reaching measures to improve their circumstances.
The program, the most ambitious policy push of Mr. Bloomberg’s third term, would overhaul how the government interacts with a population of about 315,000 New Yorkers who are disproportionately undereducated, incarcerated and unemployed.
To pay for the endeavor in a time of fiscal austerity, the city is relying on an unusual source: Mr. Bloomberg himself, who intends to use his personal fortune to cover about a quarter of the cost, city officials said. A $30 million contribution from Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation would be matched by that of a fellow billionaire, George Soros, a hedge fund manager, with the remainder being paid for by the city.
Starting this fall, the administration said it would place job-recruitment centers in public-housing complexes where many young black and Latino men live, retrain probation officers in an effort to reduce recidivism, establish new fatherhood classes and assess schools on the academic progress of male black and Latino students.
Mr. Bloomberg plans to announce the three-year program in a speech on Thursday morning in Manhattan, in which he will declare that “blacks and Latinos are not fully sharing in the promise of American freedom.”
Even as crime has fallen and graduation rates have risen in New York over the past decade, city officials said that black and Latino men, especially those between ages 16 and 24, remained in crisis by nearly every measure, including rates of arrest, school suspension and poverty.
Although the populations of young white, black and Latino men in New York are roughly the same size, 84 percent of those in the city’s detention facilities and nearly all of those admitted to children’s and family services facilities are black and Latino youth, according to data from the Bloomberg administration. “The magnitude of the disparities is stunning,” said Linda I. Gibbs, the deputy mayor for health and human services. “It’s tragic.”
Mr. Bloomberg has put the weight of city government behind large-scale social change before, with public-health campaigns against smoking, sugary beverages and fatty foods.
But now, he is confronting a problem whose intractability and deep-seated causes have bedeviled policy makers for decades. And by focusing so heavily on a subset of city residents, he risks angering those unlikely to be helped by the new resources.
“The success rate, in general, is not that promising,” said Elijah Anderson, a professor of sociology at Yale, who has written extensively about urban issues.
The challenge, Professor Anderson said, will be persuading New York’s businesses to embrace these young men and offer them permanent employment after the city’s work is completed. “Companies have to be much more receptive to these young people and meet people like Bloomberg halfway,” he said.
The administration’s plan, developed after a year of study and debate, spans much of the city’s bureaucracy and multiple stages in the lives of the men it is trying to reach, beginning in middle school and ending with career counseling.
Robert Antioco, left, and Louis Green-Gonzalez look for jobs at the program office.Credit...Tina Fineberg for The New York Times
In interviews, aides to the mayor said the new measures emphasized the practical needs of the city’s most impoverished black and Latino men, many of whom are unable or unwilling to enroll in time-consuming education and training programs unless they are compensated, according to the officials.
So to promote remedial math and literacy classes in the morning, for example, the city would link them with paid internships in the afternoon. The internships would pay $7.25 an hour, but students would be paid only if they participated in the class.
“Working is a big motivator for these kids,” said Kristin Morse, the director of programs and evaluation at the city’s Center for Economic Opportunity.
For the first time, the Education Department would specifically tie the success of black and Latino boys — measured in part by test scores and graduation rates — to the grades the city gives schools each year. Those grades can determine whether a school remains open.
Much of the program is intended to prevent young men from entering or returning to the criminal justice system, which has long been a revolving door for many black and Latino youth.
Under the plan, the city’s Probation Department would open five satellite probation offices in neighborhoods with the highest crime rates — like East New York, Brooklyn; Jamaica, Queens; and the South Bronx — and inside community organizations that offer services from which the young men might benefit, like computer classes to help them prepare for a job or yoga classes to help them control anger. Currently, the city’s 524 probation officers work out of central offices in the five boroughs, often disconnected from the communities where the men whom they monitor spend most of their time.
To provide role models for the men on probation, the city said it would recruit from those neighborhoods 900 paid mentors, many of whom used to be troubled themselves, and promote a range of community service programs, like cleaning parks, removing graffiti and painting community centers, said Vincent N. Schiraldi, the city’s probation commissioner. He said the goal was to help New Yorkers see these young men “not as the scary guy in a North Face jacket hanging at the corner, but as men who can have a positive impact in their neighborhoods.”
Aides to the mayor described several of the measures as common-sense solutions that would cost little, if anything, to put in place. The city will try to reduce the barriers to employment for men with criminal convictions by instructing managers not to ask job applicants about those records in the first stage of the interview process.
The city would also encourage men to obtain driver’s licenses or state identification cards, after focus groups suggested that a large number of young black and Latino men did not have them, making it difficult for them to apply for jobs. “They didn’t know why they should have it or how to get it,” said Andrea Batista Schlesinger, a special adviser to the mayor, who organized the program.
Now the city plans to promote such identification in the paperwork given to high-school graduates and during interviews for summer jobs with city agencies.
Mr. Bloomberg urged his aides to study the experiences of black and Latino men in 2010. The aides said he was especially surprised and unsettled by statistics showing how frequently many of the men returned to the city’s prisons — an issue that became personal for the mayor after a stranger pulled him aside on the subway and told him his story: he was 45, black, a convict and unemployed. Mr. Bloomberg asked Dennis M. Walcott, now the schools chancellor, to check in periodically with the man, who was later arrested again.
A few weeks ago, Mr. Bloomberg called Mr. Soros, who has spent millions of dollars on programs to help black men in Baltimore and other cities, and invited him to lunch. The mayor asked the financier to match his donation for a program in New York, and Mr. Soros quickly agreed.
“When the mayor approached us,” Mr. Soros said, “he was knocking on an open door.”
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
When you know he feels that way about an "enormous cohort" of young black and Latino males, I don't know how that doesn't reflect on the rest of what he says.
Also, did you read from The Juggler's own link about some of these programs being funded? "Retraining probation officers" and "establishing fatherhood classes." Cooooooooome ooooooooooon.
The Totally Not Racist guy has a plan to heal the inner city by retraining probation officers and allowing cops to randomly search minorities on the street
Guy cites a problem with young minorities. Guy puts forth $130 million dollars of his own money to fund a program to help said minorities get ahead. Guy gets labeled a racist for citing the problem.
The Totally Not Racist guy has a plan to heal the inner city by retraining probation officers and allowing cops to randomly search minorities on the street
Hey look! More random things out of context! America!
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
When you know he feels that way about an "enormous cohort" of young black and Latino males, I don't know how that doesn't reflect on the rest of what he says.
Also, did you read from The Juggler's own link about some of these programs being funded? "Retraining probation officers" and "establishing fatherhood classes." Cooooooooome ooooooooooon.
See that phrase doesn't give me pause. "Cohort" is common term used in the data analytics world and does not carry a negative history. Bloomberg was essentially a software developer of analytical market products, so "cohort" would be very commonly used when discussing groupings of data. The closest thing to racism I see in there is the assumption that they can't work collaboratively, and that's because it's a statement that cannot be proven empirically, whereas everything else he says can.
Regarding fatherhood classes, if you have generations of absent fathers, then why not have the classes to encourage young men to stay in their children's lives and help those children? It's possible they've never had a mentor and don't know how a father should be. I don't think that's racist by definition.
Look, I haven't studied Bloomberg in depth, but many of these cut outs that are being shown are clearly out of context. I'm not saying all of them are, I just dont' know at this point. But this particular paragraph does not put him in the same category as Trump by any stretch.
The Totally Not Racist guy has a plan to heal the inner city by retraining probation officers and allowing cops to randomly search minorities on the street
Hey look! More random things out of context! America!
What would you do if Bloomberg shot someone in the middle of 5th avenue?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
When you know he feels that way about an "enormous cohort" of young black and Latino males, I don't know how that doesn't reflect on the rest of what he says.
Also, did you read from The Juggler's own link about some of these programs being funded? "Retraining probation officers" and "establishing fatherhood classes." Cooooooooome ooooooooooon.
See that phrase doesn't give me pause. "Cohort" is common term used in the data analytics world and does not carry a negative history. Bloomberg was essentially a software developer of analytical market products, so "cohort" would be very commonly used when discussing groupings of data. The closest thing to racism I see in there is the assumption that they can't work collaboratively, and that's because it's a statement that cannot be proven empirically, whereas everything else he says can.
Regarding fatherhood classes, if you have generations of absent fathers, then why not have the classes to encourage young men to stay in their children's lives and help those children? It's possible they've never had a mentor and don't know how a father should be. I don't think that's racist by definition.
Look, I haven't studied Bloomberg in depth, but many of these cut outs that are being shown are clearly out of context. I'm not saying all of them are, I just dont' know at this point. But this particular paragraph does not put him in the same category as Trump by any stretch.
I cannot believe that on an ostensibly liberal message board in 2020 that the statement "This enormous cohort of black and Latino males that don't know how to behave in the workplace where they have to work collaboratively and collectively" has to be parsed based on the use of "cohort"
So in full context, considering he's funding programs to help them, is it racist? There's certainly no argument that minorities are over represented in jails and under represented in the productive work force. Is that racist to point out if you are contributing millions of your own money to try to solve that problem?
If we can't agree that the last paragraph is racist then I don't know what is. This is also the same guy who said they were overpolicing whites and underpolicing minorities in regards to stop-and-frisk. You then read his other quotes through that lens.
The sentence around behaving in the workplace certainly walks the line. But what do you think about the entire discussion? Is it racist when evaluated in the whole, rather than parsed at the sentence? Certainly many of those sentences would be considered racist individually, and without the knowledge of the money he was donating.
When you know he feels that way about an "enormous cohort" of young black and Latino males, I don't know how that doesn't reflect on the rest of what he says.
Also, did you read from The Juggler's own link about some of these programs being funded? "Retraining probation officers" and "establishing fatherhood classes." Cooooooooome ooooooooooon.
See that phrase doesn't give me pause. "Cohort" is common term used in the data analytics world and does not carry a negative history. Bloomberg was essentially a software developer of analytical market products, so "cohort" would be very commonly used when discussing groupings of data. The closest thing to racism I see in there is the assumption that they can't work collaboratively, and that's because it's a statement that cannot be proven empirically, whereas everything else he says can.
Regarding fatherhood classes, if you have generations of absent fathers, then why not have the classes to encourage young men to stay in their children's lives and help those children? It's possible they've never had a mentor and don't know how a father should be. I don't think that's racist by definition.
Look, I haven't studied Bloomberg in depth, but many of these cut outs that are being shown are clearly out of context. I'm not saying all of them are, I just dont' know at this point. But this particular paragraph does not put him in the same category as Trump by any stretch.
Agreed....these things pop out (kind of like the "grab them by the pussy" stuff) and everyone freaks out prior to the accused being able to explain themselves.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Also, "hey it's not racist, I'm just quoting crime stats" is quite literally a Breitbart move
Except he's using them to define a problem that he's trying to solve. There's a difference. Do you think Soros is racist? He was in partnership and presumably agreed with the problem statement.
Also, "hey it's not racist, I'm just quoting crime stats" is quite literally a Breitbart move
Except he's using them to define a problem that he's trying to solve. There's a difference. Do you think Soros is racist? He was in partnership and presumably agreed with the problem statement.
I can sorta get to what you were saying about fatherhood classes if you look at it in a generous light. If a program is aiming to lift up the inner city, what do you think about "retraining parole officers" as one of the planks?
Also, "hey it's not racist, I'm just quoting crime stats" is quite literally a Breitbart move
Except he's using them to define a problem that he's trying to solve. There's a difference. Do you think Soros is racist? He was in partnership and presumably agreed with the problem statement.
I can sorta get to what you were saying about fatherhood classes if you look at it in a generous light. If a program is aiming to lift up the inner city, what do you think about "retraining parole officers" as one of the planks?
Without knowing anything, but assuming it is a positive training, then it would be training the officers to be more advocates for their personal growth and mentors. So you're not there to just check in and be sure they aren't committing crimes, you're training them to be mentors, not an extension of the prison system.
There's a big issue that is being missed here that is leading to people arguing in circles. There seems to be an assumption on the part of some posters that if someone is in some way "trying to help" that means by definition they are not racist, but simply put, that's hogwash. History is rife with racist do-gooders who were "trying to help". It's quite possible that Bloomberg was both genuinely trying to help Black and Latino individuals and still harboured significantly racist ideas.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I would also hope your hiring strategies target members of the community that walked in those shoes, not some white kids from Long Island who don't know how they lived.
I’m starting to think the whole Bloomberg as a savior idea might not work. Couple reasons....
1) Voters already know the good stuff about him. More and more negative things that either are or can be construed as racist/sexist/elitist will come out. Trump weathered that storm in 2016, but I’m blot sure Bloomberg will.
2) He seems very boring. The constant ads are one thing, but holding rallies and participating in debates is another.
3) His late entry might piss off the supporters of the currant candidates. Are the supporters of Biden, Amy, and Pete going to get behind him if he vanquishes them? From the perspective of those supporters, they’ve been in the fight with their candidates for months now. Now some rich asshole is basically buying the primary?
4) Nobody is going to be passionate about Bloomberg in a way they’re passionate about Sanders (or on the other side, Trump). Most people that support Bloomberg will do it under the notion of “Trump is bad, I want Trump gone, Bloomberg can do it.” That’s fine, and it might beat Sanders in the primary (probably via shady superdelegates lol). But Trump? As we saw with Hillary, just being the better option than Trump might not be enough. The winning candidate needs excitement and passion surrounding him (as Obama did, or as Sanders and Trump do) and I don’t see that happening with Bloomberg.
There's a big issue that is being missed here that is leading to people arguing in circles. There seems to be an assumption on the part of some posters that if someone is in some way "trying to help" that means by definition they are not racist, but simply put, that's hogwash. History is rife with racist do-gooders who were "trying to help". It's quite possible that Bloomberg was both genuinely trying to help Black and Latino individuals and still harboured significantly racist ideas.
Waingro in Heat had sex with a black prostitute. So he can't be a nazi scumbag.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Comments
:P
I get what you are saying
They don't look great without any context. But if one takes literally a second to click on those links, that are actually in the Vice article, they will see that what he's talking about is actually a great things for those kids.
So again, you guys are trying to scare people into believing he's the same as Donald Trump based on some out of context clips....or based on just the headline of an article or something....yet the actual article shows that the man is spending hundreds of millions of his own money to help these disadvantage kids get by in life. Donald Trump has literally never thought of doing such a thing (and doesn't have the money lying around to do it anyway).
Bloomberg to Use Own Funds in Plan to Aid Minority Youth
The administration of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, in a blunt acknowledgment that thousands of young black and Latino men are cut off from New York’s civic, educational and economic life, plans to spend nearly $130 million on far-reaching measures to improve their circumstances.
The program, the most ambitious policy push of Mr. Bloomberg’s third term, would overhaul how the government interacts with a population of about 315,000 New Yorkers who are disproportionately undereducated, incarcerated and unemployed.
To pay for the endeavor in a time of fiscal austerity, the city is relying on an unusual source: Mr. Bloomberg himself, who intends to use his personal fortune to cover about a quarter of the cost, city officials said. A $30 million contribution from Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation would be matched by that of a fellow billionaire, George Soros, a hedge fund manager, with the remainder being paid for by the city.
Starting this fall, the administration said it would place job-recruitment centers in public-housing complexes where many young black and Latino men live, retrain probation officers in an effort to reduce recidivism, establish new fatherhood classes and assess schools on the academic progress of male black and Latino students.
Mr. Bloomberg plans to announce the three-year program in a speech on Thursday morning in Manhattan, in which he will declare that “blacks and Latinos are not fully sharing in the promise of American freedom.”
Even as crime has fallen and graduation rates have risen in New York over the past decade, city officials said that black and Latino men, especially those between ages 16 and 24, remained in crisis by nearly every measure, including rates of arrest, school suspension and poverty.
Although the populations of young white, black and Latino men in New York are roughly the same size, 84 percent of those in the city’s detention facilities and nearly all of those admitted to children’s and family services facilities are black and Latino youth, according to data from the Bloomberg administration. “The magnitude of the disparities is stunning,” said Linda I. Gibbs, the deputy mayor for health and human services. “It’s tragic.”
Mr. Bloomberg has put the weight of city government behind large-scale social change before, with public-health campaigns against smoking, sugary beverages and fatty foods.
But now, he is confronting a problem whose intractability and deep-seated causes have bedeviled policy makers for decades. And by focusing so heavily on a subset of city residents, he risks angering those unlikely to be helped by the new resources.
“The success rate, in general, is not that promising,” said Elijah Anderson, a professor of sociology at Yale, who has written extensively about urban issues.
The challenge, Professor Anderson said, will be persuading New York’s businesses to embrace these young men and offer them permanent employment after the city’s work is completed. “Companies have to be much more receptive to these young people and meet people like Bloomberg halfway,” he said.
The administration’s plan, developed after a year of study and debate, spans much of the city’s bureaucracy and multiple stages in the lives of the men it is trying to reach, beginning in middle school and ending with career counseling.
In interviews, aides to the mayor said the new measures emphasized the practical needs of the city’s most impoverished black and Latino men, many of whom are unable or unwilling to enroll in time-consuming education and training programs unless they are compensated, according to the officials.
So to promote remedial math and literacy classes in the morning, for example, the city would link them with paid internships in the afternoon. The internships would pay $7.25 an hour, but students would be paid only if they participated in the class.
“Working is a big motivator for these kids,” said Kristin Morse, the director of programs and evaluation at the city’s Center for Economic Opportunity.
For the first time, the Education Department would specifically tie the success of black and Latino boys — measured in part by test scores and graduation rates — to the grades the city gives schools each year. Those grades can determine whether a school remains open.
Much of the program is intended to prevent young men from entering or returning to the criminal justice system, which has long been a revolving door for many black and Latino youth.
Under the plan, the city’s Probation Department would open five satellite probation offices in neighborhoods with the highest crime rates — like East New York, Brooklyn; Jamaica, Queens; and the South Bronx — and inside community organizations that offer services from which the young men might benefit, like computer classes to help them prepare for a job or yoga classes to help them control anger. Currently, the city’s 524 probation officers work out of central offices in the five boroughs, often disconnected from the communities where the men whom they monitor spend most of their time.
To provide role models for the men on probation, the city said it would recruit from those neighborhoods 900 paid mentors, many of whom used to be troubled themselves, and promote a range of community service programs, like cleaning parks, removing graffiti and painting community centers, said Vincent N. Schiraldi, the city’s probation commissioner. He said the goal was to help New Yorkers see these young men “not as the scary guy in a North Face jacket hanging at the corner, but as men who can have a positive impact in their neighborhoods.”
Aides to the mayor described several of the measures as common-sense solutions that would cost little, if anything, to put in place. The city will try to reduce the barriers to employment for men with criminal convictions by instructing managers not to ask job applicants about those records in the first stage of the interview process.
The city would also encourage men to obtain driver’s licenses or state identification cards, after focus groups suggested that a large number of young black and Latino men did not have them, making it difficult for them to apply for jobs. “They didn’t know why they should have it or how to get it,” said Andrea Batista Schlesinger, a special adviser to the mayor, who organized the program.
Now the city plans to promote such identification in the paperwork given to high-school graduates and during interviews for summer jobs with city agencies.
Mr. Bloomberg urged his aides to study the experiences of black and Latino men in 2010. The aides said he was especially surprised and unsettled by statistics showing how frequently many of the men returned to the city’s prisons — an issue that became personal for the mayor after a stranger pulled him aside on the subway and told him his story: he was 45, black, a convict and unemployed. Mr. Bloomberg asked Dennis M. Walcott, now the schools chancellor, to check in periodically with the man, who was later arrested again.
A few weeks ago, Mr. Bloomberg called Mr. Soros, who has spent millions of dollars on programs to help black men in Baltimore and other cities, and invited him to lunch. The mayor asked the financier to match his donation for a program in New York, and Mr. Soros quickly agreed.
“When the mayor approached us,” Mr. Soros said, “he was knocking on an open door.”
Also, did you read from The Juggler's own link about some of these programs being funded? "Retraining probation officers" and "establishing fatherhood classes." Cooooooooome ooooooooooon.
Guy puts forth $130 million dollars of his own money to fund a program to help said minorities get ahead.
Guy gets labeled a racist for citing the problem.
America 2020 in a nutshell.
America!
Regarding fatherhood classes, if you have generations of absent fathers, then why not have the classes to encourage young men to stay in their children's lives and help those children? It's possible they've never had a mentor and don't know how a father should be. I don't think that's racist by definition.
Look, I haven't studied Bloomberg in depth, but many of these cut outs that are being shown are clearly out of context. I'm not saying all of them are, I just dont' know at this point. But this particular paragraph does not put him in the same category as Trump by any stretch.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
1) Voters already know the good stuff about him. More and more negative things that either are or can be construed as racist/sexist/elitist will come out. Trump weathered that storm in 2016, but I’m blot sure Bloomberg will.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com