From today's Globe (personal note: Urban Grape is my go-to wine/liquor shop in Boston):
At 6 on Monday morning, Hadley Douglas awoke to a text from a friend. It was the news that she’d been dreading: Urban Grape, the South End storefront that Douglas owns with her husband, TJ, had had its window smashed in as thieves took advantage of the chaos that erupted after Sunday’s peaceful protest.
The hours and days that followed tested the Douglases emotionally and were yet another significant setback after months of financial strain. But the Douglases, and other independent business owners in the city who suffered looting damage, sided with the protesters voicing outrage over police brutality.
When the text message about the looting came, Hadley Douglas, who is white, stayed home with their kids while TJ, who is Black, drove from their home to the South End to check on the store. Then her phone rang: Someone had tripped the store’s alarm, and the representative from the security company needed a password to turn it off. Her mind went blank — they usually called TJ first — and the dispatcher told her she would have to call the police.
She panicked, the fear and frustration that have fueled the protests of the past week forcing a tightening in her chest.
“You can’t call the police," she sobbed. Her husband, she explained, "is Black and in a broken-into liquor store the night after protesting and rioting. I need you to hear me when I say you can’t send the police,” she told the dispatcher. “If you call them, you have to understand what you’re condemning him to.”
The dispatcher was sobbing, too — she was torn, and had to do her job — when suddenly the alarm stopped.
TJ had arrived at the store and typed in the security code to disarm it. But the moment underscored the importance of the protests, Hadley says. And it helped inspire the message that she posted to social media that morning. “[W]indows are not lives. Dreams deferred cause rage. Our window is broken but the roots of this are in 400 years of knees on necks.”
...
“The fact is,” TJ continued, “it’s a broken window, it’s not a life. ... The looting and breaking windows in my store have nothing to do, in my eyes, with the protest and having equal rights.”
I work for a woman owned liqour store. We were told Monday that there was a chance that our small shopping area was being targeted that evening. That same day the city D.A. announced no charges in "a self-defense" killing of a young black man by a white bar owner in the downtown area.
My boss called her insurance agent, took pictures of stock on hand, updated inventory, and told us she was ready for whatever might happen but the loss of a few thousand dollars worth of booze was nothing, and meant nothing, in comparison to the loss of life and rights.
Luckily nothing happened and we are still open and doing business.
People Like T.J. and Hadley is what drives the American engine.
Now get out and #FUCKINGVOTE
Vote for who? Most of these cities are run by Democrats from top to bottom. I can’t fathom Republicans being any better on this. Is this a push to primary incumbent Democrats? Time to look at Libertarians? Who exactly is finally going to shepherd change?
I would say one point of voting that would be a step would be voting out the divider in chief. I’ve never lived through a time this divisive in my life on earth and it all started around the time dickwad announced his presidential ambitions and started drumming up the deplorables. At least he has brought the ugliness to the surface for all to see. Maybe now that everyone has our eyes open we will do something about it.
This has been a persistent issue long before Trump. Biden doesn't exactly have the best record on these matters either. As it relates to this issue specifically, this Presidential election isn't going to make a lick of difference.
JFC. So what about the cops do you think they are Dems? This is a cop out argument (no pun intended) to shift the blame from the militarization of the police that began under Ronald”I started gun control because I was scared of the black panthers” Reagan. The cops are causing the problems.Where was the military gear when the armed para militia white middle aged men with their long guns were trotting around these Democrat cities and states? In general it’s a white person problem, by being silent and ignorant we (Collective we) have allowed a lot of shit to continue. This isn’t Democrat or Republican issue. This isn’t a city issue. Specifically it reference to the presidential elections it’s about sending a strong message that there is no place for Trump and the system he represents (The worst and ugliest underbelly of white culture), the guy isn’t a Republican. The aim of the election is to say this was a fluke and as bad as we are this is where we draw the line. Agreed this stuff existed long before trump but the ugliest stuff and worst parts of white culture have bubbled to the top because of how he has emboldened a certain type of person to feel fearless about making it great like in the good old days when people used to get hauled out on stretchers.
Post edited by static111 on
Scio me nihil scire
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,198
A lot of people may claim these riots and acts of destruction are a terrible response. I’ll be the first to admit that as a white male that was also my first reaction. But who am I to tell someone that their pain is not real? Especially when it is at a boiling point and impossible to hold in anymore. It’s obviously coming from a place of truth. This reaction isn’t coming out of thin air. I’m not condoning or approving the looting, but are we really going to sit here and say that peaceful protesting is the only answer? There has been plenty of time for that, and if it was the answer we would’ve given it our full attention long ago. Listen to these two men debate. They are lost, they are in pain. They strived for a better future but as they get older they realize their efforts may be futile. They don’t know the answer of how to solve this problem for the next generation of black women and men. This breaks my heart. I can’t pretend for a second that I know what it feels like to walk in a black man’s shoes. However, seeing the video of George Floyd’s death and the violent reaction across the country moved me to tears. It has pushed me to think, how much pain are black people and other minorities really feeling? What have Native American people dealt with in both Canada and US? What is it really like to grow up in their world? Where am I ignorant about the privileges that I may have that others don’t? Compassion to me is at least trying to FEEL and UNDERSTAND what someone else is going through. For just a moment maybe I can try to see the world through their eyes. Covid has been rough but it has given us the opportunity to be much less preoccupied with our busy lives. We can no longer distract ourselves from the truth of what is going on. My message isn’t for black people and what they should do going forward. My message is to white people to open our eyes and our hearts. That’s the only choice we have, otherwise this will continue. Let’s choose to fight hate and fear with love and awareness. Ask not what can you do for me, but what can I do for you?Be the one to make the first move. In the end, love conquers all.
Bruins fan here and I most certainly did not like Toews, he's too good of a player especially against the B's. However, after reading this my thoughts of him are quite different after those words he wrote. I only hope others can be moved to open their hearts then speak their minds. RIGHT ON!
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I think there is a big difference between acknowledging that the unheard had to do something to get attention and understanding how it got to where it did in regards to riots and violence and someone that starts to justify and be ok with it. It is not ok. It's understandable, but it's not ok.
And even moreso with looting. There is literally no justification for that. It's just some very low class people taking advantage of the moment. People that don;t care about any of this except how it benefits them.
I certainly agree with a few of the sentiments raised here. Police have been made into the military with their equipment. That is not ok and certainly hasn't helped and likely has hurt. And if white america had listened, we wouldn't have gotten to violence. The vast majority of protesters, even those that engage in the violence, never wanted to get to this point.
Don’t worry folks the baffoon & Barr have their own private army! That will squash any protest come election time mark my words they will get really violent it’s all part of Putin’s plan!
From today's Globe (personal note: Urban Grape is my go-to wine/liquor shop in Boston):
At 6 on Monday morning, Hadley Douglas awoke to a text from a friend. It was the news that she’d been dreading: Urban Grape, the South End storefront that Douglas owns with her husband, TJ, had had its window smashed in as thieves took advantage of the chaos that erupted after Sunday’s peaceful protest.
The hours and days that followed tested the Douglases emotionally and were yet another significant setback after months of financial strain. But the Douglases, and other independent business owners in the city who suffered looting damage, sided with the protesters voicing outrage over police brutality.
When the text message about the looting came, Hadley Douglas, who is white, stayed home with their kids while TJ, who is Black, drove from their home to the South End to check on the store. Then her phone rang: Someone had tripped the store’s alarm, and the representative from the security company needed a password to turn it off. Her mind went blank — they usually called TJ first — and the dispatcher told her she would have to call the police.
She panicked, the fear and frustration that have fueled the protests of the past week forcing a tightening in her chest.
“You can’t call the police," she sobbed. Her husband, she explained, "is Black and in a broken-into liquor store the night after protesting and rioting. I need you to hear me when I say you can’t send the police,” she told the dispatcher. “If you call them, you have to understand what you’re condemning him to.”
The dispatcher was sobbing, too — she was torn, and had to do her job — when suddenly the alarm stopped.
TJ had arrived at the store and typed in the security code to disarm it. But the moment underscored the importance of the protests, Hadley says. And it helped inspire the message that she posted to social media that morning. “[W]indows are not lives. Dreams deferred cause rage. Our window is broken but the roots of this are in 400 years of knees on necks.”
...
“The fact is,” TJ continued, “it’s a broken window, it’s not a life. ... The looting and breaking windows in my store have nothing to do, in my eyes, with the protest and having equal rights.”
I work for a woman owned liqour store. We were told Monday that there was a chance that our small shopping area was being targeted that evening. That same day the city D.A. announced no charges in "a self-defense" killing of a young black man by a white bar owner in the downtown area.
My boss called her insurance agent, took pictures of stock on hand, updated inventory, and told us she was ready for whatever might happen but the loss of a few thousand dollars worth of booze was nothing, and meant nothing, in comparison to the loss of life and rights.
Luckily nothing happened and we are still open and doing business.
People Like T.J. and Hadley is what drives the American engine.
Now get out and #FUCKINGVOTE
Vote for who? Most of these cities are run by Democrats from top to bottom. I can’t fathom Republicans being any better on this. Is this a push to primary incumbent Democrats? Time to look at Libertarians? Who exactly is finally going to shepherd change?
The challenge is policing is usually left to local police on site and its difficult for a politician to have an impact. And social pressure to maintain status quo and “support the men in blue” is enormous in American culture.
I recently read that somewhere, it may have been DC, they are changing the legal requirement to disperse gas for crowd control upwards to the commissioner. Massive protests that have been enlarged because many are stuck at home and have time to focus on this problem. So even with significant protests causing change, it is still up to the police department. But at least having it reside with the commissioner allows for visibility.
Part of the problem with the USA protests is we do not have the time to affect change. We get angry for a few days, blow off steam, then go back to our busy lives. This stay at home covid world allows us opportunity for change, but only if protests become organized and have solutions to offer.
Prior to covid, suppressed Americans could not even protest at nfl games because it was politicizing the problem. Thankfully in this new world, Goodell admitted to their errors and apologized. This points out the false flag that existed that allowed the status quo to remain. That is much stronger force than “democrat vs republican “ Hopefully this temporary new world allows for some real change.
Wondering where you can donate in support of the BLM movement and all sorts of related causes? These two articles have links to a multitude of different organizations, from the NAACP and Campaign Zero to the Louisville Community Bail Fund and Know Your Rights Camp
Protest were held across Canada 🇨🇦 on Friday. Even in the territories...and I saw many 1st nation protesting in support...if any group of people have the need to protest, burn shit and loot it’s our 1st nations people...
Protest were held across Canada 🇨🇦 on Friday. Even in the territories...and I saw many 1st nation protesting in support...if any group of people have the need to protest, burn shit and loot it’s our 1st nations people...
Yes, and the protests are continuing. There is one planned in Victoria tomorrow.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothing
More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
A woman looks Thursday at artwork on plywood covering a window shattered in La Mesa, Calif., during protests over the death of George Floyd. (Gregory Bull/AP)
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,285
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothingMore than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
A woman looks Thursday at artwork on plywood covering a window shattered in La Mesa, Calif., during protests over the death of George Floyd. (Gregory Bull/AP)
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
It's not an abstraction for those who make a modest or even very modest living through their small business. And what, I'm supposed to consider used bookstore or record shop owners as "those at the top"?
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
0
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 31,377
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothing
More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
A woman looks Thursday at artwork on plywood covering a window shattered in La Mesa, Calif., during protests over the death of George Floyd. (Gregory Bull/AP)
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
It's not an abstraction for those who make a modest or even very modest living through their small business. And what, I'm supposed to consider used bookstore or record shop owners as "those at the top"?
No, I would think you would be one of those people whom the article says could sell your property if you found yourself in a bind. I'm assuming you own the building that houses your bookstore. I'm also assuming you have insurance. I'm not entirely comfortable getting into a debate with you about it because I don't think it's personal. Sorry if I offended you.
I happen to be a negative net worth person myself. I have never attachment to material things, cars, clothes, phones, none of it. I just chose to have a different life experience than buying a house or acquiring other assets. I don't go around smashing people's things, but I can understand the conclusion of this article from the perspective of people with an anger that I don't have about being denied access to that pathway. I tend to believe that property and ownership are concepts that divide people, cause them to look on suspicion and jealousy of others, do things that harm the earth, like plowing perfectly beautiful fields and farms to build more condos. So . . . anyway. Have a good evening. I'm going for a walk.
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothing
More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
A woman looks Thursday at artwork on plywood covering a window shattered in La Mesa, Calif., during protests over the death of George Floyd. (Gregory Bull/AP)
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
It's not an abstraction for those who make a modest or even very modest living through their small business. And what, I'm supposed to consider used bookstore or record shop owners as "those at the top"?
No, I would think you would be one of those people whom the article says could sell your property if you found yourself in a bind. I'm assuming you own the building that houses your bookstore. I'm also assuming you have insurance. I'm not entirely comfortable getting into a debate with you about it because I don't think it's personal. Sorry if I offended you.
I happen to be a negative net worth person myself. I have never attachment to material things, cars, clothes, phones, none of it. I just chose to have a different life experience than buying a house or acquiring other assets. I don't go around smashing people's things, but I can understand the conclusion of this article from the perspective of people with an anger that I don't have about being denied access to that pathway. I tend to believe that property and ownership are concepts that divide people, cause them to look on suspicion and jealousy of others, do things that harm the earth, like plowing perfectly beautiful fields and farms to build more condos. So . . . anyway. Have a good evening. I'm going for a walk.
No offense taken from you, what dreams. You have a good evening too and enjoy the walk! ✌️
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothing
More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
A woman looks Thursday at artwork on plywood covering a window shattered in La Mesa, Calif., during protests over the death of George Floyd. (Gregory Bull/AP)
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
It's not an abstraction for those who make a modest or even very modest living through their small business. And what, I'm supposed to consider used bookstore or record shop owners as "those at the top"?
No, I would think you would be one of those people whom the article says could sell your property if you found yourself in a bind. I'm assuming you own the building that houses your bookstore. I'm also assuming you have insurance. I'm not entirely comfortable getting into a debate with you about it because I don't think it's personal. Sorry if I offended you.
I happen to be a negative net worth person myself. I have never attachment to material things, cars, clothes, phones, none of it. I just chose to have a different life experience than buying a house or acquiring other assets. I don't go around smashing people's things, but I can understand the conclusion of this article from the perspective of people with an anger that I don't have about being denied access to that pathway. I tend to believe that property and ownership are concepts that divide people, cause them to look on suspicion and jealousy of others, do things that harm the earth, like plowing perfectly beautiful fields and farms to build more condos. So . . . anyway. Have a good evening. I'm going for a walk.
To be fair, I own my home but don’t possess the qualities associated above ascribed to myself or others in a similar position. And we’re not wealthy, though if we were, I don’t believe it would change our core.
Some of these protestors are really out of control with their ideas.
“Abolish the police, we can protect ourselves”
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
0
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 31,377
Some of these protestors are really out of control with their ideas.
“Abolish the police, we can protect ourselves”
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
I would drive 110mph on the highway for sure if I did not have to worry about the police.
I don’t know what the goal is but it can’t be getting rid of police. Certainly there needs to be a change to how they operate.
Some of these protestors are really out of control with their ideas.
“Abolish the police, we can protect ourselves”
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
Well, since that “lawlessness” took place with the police fully present as they currently operate, I don’t see that as a any sort of argument for what would happen in the absence of police. Almost the contrary, in fact.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Some of these protestors are really out of control with their ideas.
“Abolish the police, we can protect ourselves”
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
Well, since that “lawlessness” took place with the police fully present as they currently operate, I don’t see that as a any sort of argument for what would happen in the absence of police. Almost the contrary, in fact.
Some of these protestors are really out of control with their ideas.
“Abolish the police, we can protect ourselves”
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
Well, since that “lawlessness” took place with the police fully present as they currently operate, I don’t see that as a any sort of argument for what would happen in the absence of police. Almost the contrary, in fact.
So then you are for abolishing the police?
That's quite a leap to make from my statement.
No. Just pointing out the incongruency in the post I responded to.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
To further my point, if you are going to try to prove the necessity of police, don’t use an example when they are at their worst and their least effective.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that the appalling actions of police led directly to these events, and not just the actions of the past two weeks, but the actions of decades.
Post edited by oftenreading on
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
And even moreso with looting. There is literally no justification for that. It's just some very low class people taking advantage of the moment. People that don;t care about any of this except how it benefits them.
I certainly agree with a few of the sentiments raised here. Police have been made into the military with their equipment. That is not ok and certainly hasn't helped and likely has hurt. And if white america had listened, we wouldn't have gotten to violence. The vast majority of protesters, even those that engage in the violence, never wanted to get to this point.
Prior to covid, suppressed Americans could not even protest at nfl games because it was politicizing the problem. Thankfully in this new world, Goodell admitted to their errors and apologized. This points out the false flag that existed that allowed the status quo to remain. That is much stronger force than “democrat vs republican “ Hopefully this temporary new world allows for some real change.
https://www.gq.com/gallery/ways-to-support-black-lives-matter
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/g32730417/george-floyd-blm-how-to-donate-help/
(No, I don't generally read Town and Country or GQ - I was just googling funds to support
Yes, and the protests are continuing. There is one planned in Victoria tomorrow.
Dude's been watching too many "Chainsaw Massacre" movies. Glad he was detained, hope he's convicted.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
‘Protecting property’ is an abstraction to the growing share of Americans who own nothing
More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have zero or negative net worth, and the share is even larger among black and young Americans
Authorities criticizing demonstrations against police brutality in the past week have often cited the need to protect property as one of the justifications for cracking down on protesters.
“Those who threaten innocent life and property will be arrested, detained, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” as President Trump put it Monday in a Rose Garden speech. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) similarly exhorted New York City to “use the police, protect property and people” after a night of looting.
Many national commentators have struck a similar tone. Most notoriously, a headline in the Philadelphia Inquirer made a ham-handed comparison between black lives and buildings to make a case against the destruction of property.
But the people making these appeals often overlook the simple, uncomfortable fact that, for a large and growing share of Americans, “property rights” are just an abstraction: More than 1 in 5 U.S. families have no wealth to speak of. Among black families and young Americans — the core protest demographics — the share is even larger.
The graphic above charts the share of Americans with zero or negative net worth from 1983 to 2016, as measured by the federal Survey of Consumer Finances and analyzed by New York University economist Edward N. Wolff. “Net worth” is a measure of what you own (real estate, stocks, business equity, savings) minus what you owe (student loans, mortgages, credit cards, auto loans). When net worth is negative, it means that an individual or family’s debts are greater than their assets.
Back in 1983, a little more than 15 percent of households had zero or negative net worth. As of 2016, more than 21 percent of households fall into that category, an increase of roughly one-third. Any change since then won’t be known until later this year, when the 2019 survey data is released. And even that data won’t illustrate the effects of shutdowns due to the coronavirus pandemic, which have cost more than 40 million Americans their jobs.
A positive net worth means safety and security. It means you can grow your wealth by investing or starting a business. It means you can make a down payment on large purchases such as homes. It means you have assets to pass on to your children when you die. It means that if you fall on hard times, you have financial reserves to draw on.
Families with zero net worth have none of those things. And families with negative net worth have to worry about paying down debts before they can even think about building a nest egg. If financial hardship strikes, they may be in serious trouble.
It’s worth noting that many families with zero or negative net worth do have financial assets of some sort — savings or 401(k) retirement accounts or perhaps a house on which they have a mortgage. These assets could be liquidated, with varying degrees of difficulty, in the event of a job loss or an unexpected financial burden. But doing so would put them even more in the hole, taking value from the positive side of their ledgers and adding it to their debts.
The 21 percent figure cited above is just a national average. Among key protest demographics, the share is much higher.
Among black families, for instance, the share with zero or negative net worth is 37 percent, according to Wolff’s calculations. In 2011, the Pew Research Center reported that a similar share of households headed by someone younger than 35 fell into this category.
It’s difficult to make an appeal to the sanctity of property ownership when you’re addressing people who don’t own any property to speak of. For many younger Americans, especially nonwhite ones, the traditional American Dream of homeownership and building a nest egg to pass on to your heirs seems increasingly out of reach.
Perhaps most worrying in the Survey of Consumer Finances data is that the percentage of Americans who own nothing is increasing. Couple that trend with the explosion of wealth-hoarding at the top of society and you arrive at a very concerning picture of a society increasingly divided between haves and have-nots.
Asking the people at the bottom of such a hierarchy to respect the property rights of the those at the top is only likely to become more difficult if these trends continue.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Jk, I like this person's style.
I happen to be a negative net worth person myself. I have never attachment to material things, cars, clothes, phones, none of it. I just chose to have a different life experience than buying a house or acquiring other assets. I don't go around smashing people's things, but I can understand the conclusion of this article from the perspective of people with an anger that I don't have about being denied access to that pathway. I tend to believe that property and ownership are concepts that divide people, cause them to look on suspicion and jealousy of others, do things that harm the earth, like plowing perfectly beautiful fields and farms to build more condos. So . . . anyway. Have a good evening. I'm going for a walk.
No offense taken from you, what dreams. You have a good evening too and enjoy the walk! ✌️
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
really?? Am I the only one who is blown away by this? How is this even a solution? The lawlessness that took place over a few nights was very scary to witness. That’s just a tiny look at what would happen with no police.
Nice.
That's quite a leap to make from my statement.
No. Just pointing out the incongruency in the post I responded to.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that the appalling actions of police led directly to these events, and not just the actions of the past two weeks, but the actions of decades.