gatnom

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 30, 2014 -> 04:21 PM) This is from the bill. This is in the text that you quoted. Things can be about more than one thing. This is where you're being weirdly binary. I'm not sure why you keep insisting that the detailed examiniation of racial oppression in the post-Reconstruction era and into modern times that Coates details in this article and others (along with many other writers and scholars) and to which HR40 explicitly refers to alongside slavery is just "smoke and mirrors." I don't even understand your drive to "attack the core" in the first place versus discuss the topic. Not everything is an adversarial court battle. Honestly, whatever form reparations would take and whether or not its actually justified beyond something like HR40 which in my mind would function more like a truth and reconciliation committee than anything is the least interesting part of the article. Even if you don't ultimately agree that reparations are appropriate, the article still gives a background on how we arrived at the present. Even if HR40 was explicitly and exclusively about reparations solely for slavery, arguing why reparations for slavery aren't appropriate fails to engage or discuss the overwhelming bulk of the article. If all you want to do is say that Coates (and HR40) only care about slavery and that there shouldn't be reparations for slavery, then there's not much else to discuss. To speak for badger a bit here, I think what he's trying to say here is that the proposed bill is specifically for African Americans and not just the disadvantaged. And, if I may add in my own two cents, that sort of race-specific type of focus can be something of a hindrance to what we're trying to accomplish. I can see reparations being much more divisive than actually being effective.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 27, 2014 -> 05:17 PM) TBH straight cash transfers would be the easiest with least amount of "waste"but likely the least palatable. For both sides, I would imagine. $7 billion split amongst every African American is less than $200 a person.

Matt Davidson

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 27, 2014 -> 04:59 PM) Let me ask you this: say the American people agree to pay something. Do you honestly think it will help? Say every black person gets $50k over the next 20 years. What will that solve? Anything? I noticed throughout his entire piece he doesn't mention anything about changes within the black community. That's going to be the answer, if there ever is one. It might be worth noting that the figure you're throwing out here far exceeds the $7 billion figure being thrown around. Now, if instead of just paying money out like the article was seemingly suggesting they pooled a smaller amount to try and fix the schooling and other issues that have been mentioned, they might be able to make some headway, IMO. I'm not sure I trust the government to pull off such a plan, but theoretically it could work.

Fair enough, bmags. I don't see anything wrong with debating it as he suggests. I just don't think his position is ever one that will be so easily satisfied, though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 27, 2014 -> 02:55 PM) Isn't that exactly what public education is supposed to be for? The only way you are going to break the multi-generational cycle of poverty is to make people appreciate that an education is step one to a better life. That isn't just a black/slave/African thing either. With the life experiences I have seen the same cycle from many different races. It is sad because you see that influence even in Kindergartners when they aren't doing homework or attending school at 5 years old. The key is to break the mindset, which is way easier said than done. No amount of reparations will change that, IMO. This is the key point to me. Throwing money at it doesn't solve any of the root problems.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 27, 2014 -> 02:35 PM) I don't know how anyone could read that article and come across with "he already thinks I'm guilty". That statement is hilarious to me.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 27, 2014 -> 12:59 PM) What he actually proposes in the article is that the bill that John Conyers puts to the floor every single year (Bill H.R. 40: http://conyers.house.gov/index.cfm/reparations) be passed. What the bill actually does is it would form a committee to study slavery and its after-effects on current Black Americans, and would propose "appropriate remedies". Coates isn't a policy wonk and I don't think an article like his requires the actual solution laid out, his point was to make the case that the idea of reparations should not be considered outside the bounds of social discourse. That bill seems a little too hand-wavy to me (the link provided was broken). Coates doesn't sound like a very reasonable man, and for that his argument isn't very compelling to me. To him, I'm already guilty, and the only matter left to be decided is just how much money I owe him.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 27, 2014 -> 11:17 AM) Bump for a new article from TNC documenting this country's legacy of legal white supremacy and black impoverishment, both public and private policy. Even if you don't agree with his conclusion (reparations), it's an interesting read of this country's racial history and often racist public policy, especially when it comes to housing. I might have just missed it because I didn't really have time to do anything but give it a quick glancing over while at work, but It doesn't seem to me that he really ever puts forth a legitimate plan for how reparations would work. Where would the money come from? How would it be used? Furthermore, I don't think that just throwing money at the problem will actually solve it the way he thinks it would.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 25, 2014 -> 01:12 AM) It felt pretty great to me. I'm with you.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 05:02 PM) I just don't understand though - what is it about Trey that makes you think he can and Hawkins can't? In 405 career plate appearances, Michalczewski's at a career 25.7% K rate. Hawkins was awful last year, but even with a 37.2% K rate for the year last year, his career percentage is down 6 points from that, so his contact has been worse overall but not as much as people think. Meanwhile, he's shown incredible power on top of it. I like Trey, but he's not doing anything special right now. Don't get me wrong, Hawkins is definitely the better prospect based on his tools; there's no question about that. However, Trey has shown a consistent ability to draw walks and has managed to improve without completely hitting a wall due to his mechanics and/or pitch recognition. Hopefully, as he gets older he'll start to develop a more pronounced power tool and become a bigger prospect.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 23, 2014 -> 02:41 PM) They're both walking at an acceptable rate and both striking out too much. Don't get me wrong, I like both of them, and I'm admittedly biased because, while I want him striking out less, I absolutely love Hawkins. Hawkins also has top of the line talent while I'm not sure Michalczewski is there on a talent level. For me, I'm more confident in Michalczewski's ability to cut sown on strike outs than I am of Hawkins being able to fix his swing/eye enough to succeed at a higher level. To be fair, part of this is probably due to the fact that it seems like we've done this song and dance before with [insert toolsy outfielder that has completely bombed in our system here], but I'm still not entirely convinced that Hawkins can translate to a higher level from what some reports have said.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 6, 2014 -> 10:00 AM) FWIW, I think I would have Danish around #5 as well. Danish at ~5 seems about right, pre-draft.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 5, 2014 -> 04:17 PM) Isn't a wipeout pitch? Work in progress? Seems to fit what I've heard about the pitch.

QUOTE (Brian @ May 3, 2014 -> 01:30 PM) Brunson final 8. Illinois, Michigan, Michigan st, Kansas, Purdue, nova, temple, uconn I really like Illinois' chances in this one!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 3, 2014 -> 12:35 PM) Trying to save a few bucks hasn't worked for this team in the past and it most likely won't if they try cheap with their first pick. Just take the best player. There's so much middle ground between being cheap and being careless with their money.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 3, 2014 -> 11:48 AM) If you look at the 2009 draft, if the White Sox sat out the entire draft with what they took it wouldn't have hurt the organization at all. Or if they spent the extra $50k it took to sign Trout and passed every other pick they would be in a much better place right now. There are always players available to fill minor league rosters. Guys who might develop into 4th OFs are fine but they are readily available every year for a song. The object at #3 should be to get the guy that will help you win the most games not save money for guys like Walker and Barnum and May and Thompson. Spending 1-1 money on Rodon is nowhere near close to spending an extra $50k on Trout. Going over slot for Rodon isn't a bad idea at all. Sacrificing your entire draft for one player isn't wise because there's no guarantee that he stays healthy or effective for any period of time. Similarly, there's no guarantee that the every single one of the picks they would have gotten with the rest of their draft are bad to mediocre.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 2, 2014 -> 02:28 PM) If the Sox signed Rodon, and failed to sign everyone else they drafted, and Rodon was David Price like, the only draft they would have had up until this point of this century which would be as good or better is 2010 when Sale fell into their laps. Take the best player available at #3. Don't worry about saving money for your other picks. There's no guarantee that Rodon will be David Price like. Who's to say he doesn't get injured or just outright bust?

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 30, 2014 -> 07:50 AM) Better not be Boykin. Rumors are Oseland or Edwards with Nagel looking positive as well.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Apr 29, 2014 -> 10:09 AM) I'm probably the furthest thing from a homer with all of my teams. I like to think of myself as a pretty realistic poster myself. I'm not sure what you guys think of me. I wouldn't be surprised if everybody thought I was a homer because I'm one of the like 10 people in the world willing to defend Beckman (on some things).

QUOTE (farmteam @ Apr 28, 2014 -> 10:05 PM) For the record, I think B>W is the most reasonable (read: realistic) Illini fan here. He just doesn't let the fan part of his brain block what the realistic part is telling him. LittleHurt is in that category too. Then comes Jenks and Russ, who sometimes put the orange-and-blue glasses on but are mostly level-headed. Well, I guess that leaves me and krush as the homers haha.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 28, 2014 -> 11:01 AM) Saw the Captain America movie this past weekend. It was fun, snappy, had some good moments. But overall it was pretty empty - just popcorn fun and little else. Which is fine, but nothing specatcular. I agree. Most Marvel movies are this way (to a person who doesn't read comics, anyways), but they are almost always worth going to see.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 28, 2014 -> 11:40 AM) it's gotten to the point where there are fans (even in this thread) that are ok with not ever being at the top level of the conference. You're right. One coaching hire and two years can put Illinois right there at the top of the Big Ten. I absolutely want to be at the top, but firing a coach every 2 years is exactly how you ensure that you never reach it.

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 26, 2014 -> 11:44 AM) Rock brings up a valid point. Beckmann is obviously in a make or break year. Does Brown and Gabe stick with Illinois if he's canned? My apologies if that was the point he was trying to make; it didn't seem like it. You never really know until it happens, but given that it's Illinois you'd have to think they wouldn't.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 26, 2014 -> 08:47 AM) The players will care And what exactly did he "do" right that you wanted to give him so much credit for? Are you happy with his recruiting results since he's been hired? How about his on field results When he actually gets a recruit with a reported offer list, people still want to bash him, and that annoys me. His first recruiting class was decent, last year's was bad, and this year's could be pretty good. Not everybody is Ohio State. I'll let his wins and losses this year determine if he should be fired, though it sounds like the AD won't fire him unless he wins 3 games or less, unfortunately.