Mayor Bloomberg to announce $127 mil. in new program for troubled Black & Latino men

[Urbanfortitude]

You'll have to ask the politicians that question...

 

 

 

They've defined themselves more than enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm interested in your definition of the word.

[RTOMan]

They've defined themselves more than enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm interested in your definition of the word.

 

Word Games Bump...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

They've defined themselves more than enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm interested in your definition of the word.

 

I'm not the one spending 67 million in taxpayer dollars, Bloomberg is, but yeah "troubled"... Problems with the law, burden on society... Some examples of troublesome to me.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You are definitely a Republican. Let's be honest with ourselves here. I know you want you vote to matter more as an Independent, but you're clearly a Republican.

 

And really, seems like a revision since you called for him to be our mayor after he "got things done" etc.

 

Admittedly I assumed that wasn't really your point but I really couldn't resist making that pun.

 

Well that's interesting... I think I've voted for two or three Republicans in all the elections I've voted in so far and not one Republican president. Michael Grimm is one Republican this year, District Attorney Donovan is another... I voted for Bloomberg a so called "Republican" in his second term and withheld my vote for any mayoral candidate last time out of disgust... Yeah, some big Republican I am... :confused: Oh and Republicans are pro-life. I'm pro-choice...

[RTOMan]

I'm not the one spending 67 million in taxpayer dollars, Bloomberg is, but yeah "troubled"... Problems with the law, burden on society... Some examples of troublesome to me.

 

So its your opinion yes or no?

 

Thats the question thats posed here...

 

Again...

[RTOMan]

You are definitely a Republican. Let's be honest with ourselves here. I know you want you vote to matter more as an Independent, but you're clearly a Republican.

 

And really, seems like a revision since you called for him to be our mayor after he "got things done" etc.

 

Admittedly I assumed that wasn't really your point but I really couldn't resist making that pun.

 

The Way people think>>>The way a party thinks..

 

In other words you can be a democrat or an independent or a republican VOTER and still think the way he does..

 

Party affiliation isnt always part of it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So its your opinion yes or no?

 

Thats the question thats posed here...

 

Again...

 

What difference does it make??? The topic of interest here is that taxpayer monies are being spent on so-called troubled black and Latino men.

[Urbanfortitude]

I'm not the one spending 67 million in taxpayer dollars, Bloomberg is, but yeah "troubled"... Problems with the law, burden on society... Some examples of troublesome to me.

 

I didn't ask for your definition of troublesome. I asked for troubled and you clearly just defined troublesome. One can pass to the other but they're not the same thing. I was never in trouble with the law nor a burden on society, or at least I always worked not to be and I definitely was troubled as a young kid.

[RTOMan]

What difference does it make??? The topic of interest here is that taxpayer monies are being spent on so-called troubled black and Latino men.

 

You was asked a question why you cant respond?

 

Im fully aware of the subject.

[RTOMan]

I didn't ask for your definition of troublesome. I asked for troubled and you clearly just defined troublesome. One can pass to the other but they're not the same thing. I was never in trouble with the law nor a burden on society, or at least I always worked not to be and I definitely was troubled as a young kid.

 

 

We are all troubled!!!

[East New York]

I'm not the one spending 67 million in taxpayer dollars, Bloomberg is, but yeah "troubled"... Problems with the law, burden on society... Some examples of troublesome to me.

 

Troubled means a whole lot more than just that! And we aren't even talking about troublesome! So let's just say most of these men are "burdens on society," and have "problems with the law." Creating a program that's supposed to help them is a lot cheaper than hauling them all off to jail. A lot cheaper than paying extra for police, and EMS, court costs and fees, etc.....

 

What difference does it make??? The topic of interest here is that taxpayer monies are being spent on so-called troubled black and Latino men.

 

So what! Get over it! It's for a good cause. What's is the big deal? What do you think the money could be better used for then? I would love to know!

[Tokkemon]

Pay off debts.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Troubled means a whole lot more than just that! And we aren't even talking about troublesome! So let's just say most of these men are "burdens on society," and have "problems with the law." Creating a program that's supposed to help them is a lot cheaper than hauling them all off to jail. A lot cheaper than paying extra for police, and EMS, court costs and fees, etc.....

 

lol... Really??? I'd find a way to make it cost effective...

 

So what! Get over it! It's for a good cause. What's is the big deal? What do you think the money could be better used for then? I would love to know!

 

Well that's grand. Try telling that to the thousands of New Yorkers that are unemployed. 67 million for a good cause and they don't have jobs... That's an outrage and you know it. Oh and this good cause.... where are the jobs at for the folks receiving this good deed??? This whole program is hilarious. No jobs for nobody but this is a good deed? So they'll be a bit more educated and will still be nothing but thugs because there won't be any jobs...

 

 

If this program is so good then tell me why so many of the brothas and Latino men are suspicious of it? Actually it seems like many New Yorkers are skeptical of the program and I'm not talking about Republicans either. I'm talking about your fellow liberal and Democratic voters.

[RTOMan]

Pay off debts.

 

From the "duh" department...

 

Hopefully you are following that advice...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

From the "duh" department...

 

Hopefully you are following that advice...

 

Yeah, apparently NYC could use this advice too....

[RTOMan]

Yeah, apparently NYC could use this advice too....

 

I wouldnt know since i live in Westchester, we got our own issues..

 

You could tell Bloomberg in a email...

 

Lived in NYC for most of my life though when some posters was still in effing diapers i was busting my hump.

 

Are you going to get back to the other question i asked or hope that it dissapears?

[East New York]

Pay off debts.

 

Well that's exactly what they are doing with this money!

 

 

lol... Really??? I'd find a way to make it cost effective...

 

Well that's grand. Try telling that to the thousands of New Yorkers that are unemployed. 67 million for a good cause and they don't have jobs... That's an outrage and you know it. Oh and this good cause.... where are the jobs at for the folks receiving this good deed??? This whole program is hilarious. No jobs for nobody but this is a good deed? So they'll be a bit more educated and will still be nothing but thugs because there won't be any jobs...

 

 

If this program is so good then tell me why so many of the brothas and Latino men are suspicious of it? Actually it seems like many New Yorkers are skeptical of the program and I'm not talking about Republicans either. I'm talking about your fellow liberal and Democratic voters.

 

LMAO! Lets refer to the part in bold... Once again...... Don't you think this money will help some people that WANT the help get jobs???? Or maybe teach them how to go on interviews, and how to learn trades and skills to help a few of their "troubles??"

 

Take your brain out of the box it's in surrounded by all those Mc Graw Hill text books!

 

I wouldnt know since i live in Westchester, we got our own issues..

 

You could tell Bloomberg in a email...

 

Lived in NYC for most of my life though when some posters was still in effing diapers i was busting my hump.

 

Are you going to get back to the other question i asked or hope that it dissapears?

 

He's hoping the question dissapears..... But I'm dying to know as well!

 

So let's have it Professor G!:cool:

[B35 via Church]

Try telling that to the thousands of New Yorkers that are unemployed. 67 million for a good cause and they don't have jobs... That's an outrage and you know it. Oh and this good cause.... where are the jobs at for the folks receiving this good deed??? This whole program is hilarious. No jobs for nobody but this is a good deed? So they'll be a bit more educated and will still be nothing but thugs because there won't be any jobs...

You gotta crawl before you can walk... jobs just don't fall out of the sky..... if this program HANDED out jobs just like that to (now it's "so called", right?) troubled minorities, there would be FAR more outrage from the public - and taxpayer money would be the least of anyone's complaints....

 

What is this whole bit about unemployment anyway? That entire argument you're relying on here is one huge appeal to emotion... you're not fooling anyone with that, and this is the 2nd time you bring it up..... and it simply doesn't dismiss the idea of this program being a good cause....

 

You say you believe in 2nd chances, redemption, rehabilitation.... but all of a sudden the program isn't a good deed anymore.... Why not, b/c you're aggravated with the way this discussion is going... I mean, the "truth" isn't supposed to depend on the way someone feels.... That's another thing, stop passing your opinions off as truth...

 

 

If this program is so good then tell me why so many of the brothas and Latino men are suspicious of it?

Most brothas are skeptical of anything that the white man starts up, and w/e political party he is has f*** all to do with it..... If it doesn't directly hand out money, the white man's word will not be taken wholesale.... That type of mindset is a community problem, and it is what is....

 

Have a progressive, or even an intelligent black man push a troubled black man in the direction of this program & best believe he'll engage in what the program has to offer.... Then the question would be, for how long would said person stick around... which would depend on how serious that person is about turning his/her life around..... But this notion that the program isn't a good cause is downright preposterous....

 

the latino end, I can't speak on...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

LMAO! Lets refer to the part in bold... Once again...... Don't you think this money will help some people that WANT the help get jobs???? Or maybe teach them how to go on interviews, and how to learn trades and skills to help a few of their "troubles??"

 

Take your brain out of the box it's in surrounded by all those Mc Graw Hill text books!

 

Well think about it for a second. You get trained in a skill and you're feeling good about yourself and you start out on the job path and there isn't a thing out there. We're talking about individuals who already probably have poor self-esteem and the prospect of getting help but then having no job opportunities has to be quite disheartening wouldn't you say??

 

 

He's hoping the question dissapears..... But I'm dying to know as well!

 

So let's have it Professor G!:cool:

 

What question was this again? I thought I answered it in another post... :confused:

 

You gotta crawl before you can walk... jobs just don't fall out of the sky..... if this program HANDED out jobs just like that to (now it's "so called", right?) troubled minorities, there would be FAR more outrage from the public - and taxpayer money would be the least of anyone's complaints....

 

I never said anything about handing out jobs, but what is the point of training these people if there are no jobs out there for them???

 

What is this whole bit about unemployment anyway? That entire argument you're relying on here is one huge appeal to emotion... you're not fooling anyone with that, and this is the 2nd time you bring it up..... and it simply doesn't dismiss the idea of this program being a good cause....

 

The whole bit about unemployment is this... We have skilled professionals out there that just need a job to get back on their feet and then we have the "troubled" folks aka thugs in book that have to be retrained AND trained on how to deal in society. Now let's see who is the bigger risk to spend 67 million dollars on? I'd take my chances with the unemployed folks. In sum, I have stated on several occasions that it is a good deed, so long as it is done WITHOUT taxpayer dollars. This is not a priority IMO and the priority should be the unemployed people before these folks when it comes to taxpayer dollars being spent wisely. Without any taxpayer dollars, this program would still have $60 million dollars to use, so why is it necessary to dump an additional $67 million on it when those funds could be used to help another group of folks who are equally suffering???

 

 

You say you believe in 2nd chances, redemption, rehabilitation.... but all of a sudden the program isn't a good deed anymore.... Why not, b/c you're aggravated with the way this discussion is going... I mean, the "truth" isn't supposed to depend on the way someone feels.... That's another thing, stop passing your opinions off as truth...

 

As I stated above, it is certainly a good deed. Hell there are plenty of good deeds done everyday, just not with taxpayer dollars... And where am I passing my opinions off as truth??

 

Most brothas are skeptical of anything that the white man starts up, and w/e political party he is has f*** all to do with it..... If it doesn't directly hand out money, the white man's word will not be taken wholesale.... That type of mindset is a community problem, and it is what is....

 

Have a progressive, or even an intelligent black man push a troubled black man in the direction of this program & best believe he'll engage in what the program has to offer.... Then the question would be, for how long would said person stick around... which would depend on how serious that person is about turning his/her life around..... But this notion that the program isn't a good cause is downright preposterous....

 

the latino end, I can't speak on...

 

Hey don't blame me. It's the brothas who don't believe in it and if the people who the program is targeted at don't believe in it, then that's a big problem and a big waste of money.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Delete

[RTOMan]

What question was this again? I thought I answered it in another post...

 

No you didnt...

 

Its Ok though...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

No you didnt...

 

Its Ok though...

 

lol... Oh I get it... I answered it, but you didn't like my answer. Those are two different things...

[B35 via Church]

Well think about it for a second. You get trained in a skill and you're feeling good about yourself and you start out on the job path and there isn't a thing out there.

 

We're talking about individuals who already probably have poor self-esteem and the prospect of getting help but then having no job opportunities has to be quite disheartening wouldn't you say??

 

The idea is that they actually have that opportunity to get themselves ready to attempt to go out in the workforce, where they wouldn't normally have if they didn't have the people skills, or tangible skills beforehand.....

 

Don't be alarmed at how many employers would take a chance on someone who's taking steps to getting their life on the right path, despite their troubled past.... give them a lil BS minimum wage job & they're happy....

 

 

I never said anything about handing out jobs, but what is the point of training these people if there are no jobs out there for them???

You ask where are the jobs are at... If jobs aren't handed out to these troubled people, you tell me what difference does it make to those that are on unemployment that aren't/weren't troubled, that aren't being given jobs....

 

Joblessness is joblessness across the board... That's what I don't get about you suddenly using unemployment to try to somehow strengthen your point in all this... it's a weak appeal to emotion, full knowin once you bring up the unemployed, ppl. are gonna feel sympathetic... You wasn't bickering about the unemployed from jump.... You're only singling out these jobless folks b/c you dislike the fact that taxpayer money is being spent on them.....

 

 

The whole bit about unemployment is this... We have skilled professionals out there that just need a job to get back on their feet and then we have the "troubled" folks aka thugs in book that have to be retrained AND trained on how to deal in society. Now let's see who is the bigger risk to spend 67 million dollars on? I'd take my chances with the unemployed folks. In sum, I have stated on several occasions that it is a good deed, so long as it is done WITHOUT taxpayer dollars. This is not a priority IMO and the priority should be the unemployed people before these folks when it comes to taxpayer dollars being spent wisely. Without any taxpayer dollars, this program would still have $60 million dollars to use, so why is it necessary to dump an additional $67 million on it when those funds could be used to help another group of folks who are equally suffering???

That whole notion about what's the bigger risk to spend money on, and what is "priority" is most likely true.... However, here I see it as nothin more than a dismissal tactic.... Which can be said by anyone for something they don't believe is a justifiable cause..... Like I said before, we all can think of better ways to spend 67 million....

 

 

As I stated above, it is certainly a good deed. Hell there are plenty of good deeds done everyday, just not with taxpayer dollars... And where am I passing my opinions off as truth??

The whole tone in the second half of post #64 in this thread, which goes:

 

Try telling that to the thousands of New Yorkers that are unemployed. 67 million for a good cause and they don't have jobs... That's an outrage and you know it. Oh and this good cause.... where are the jobs at for the folks receiving this good deed??? This whole program is hilarious. No jobs for nobody but this is a good deed? So they'll be a bit more educated and will still be nothing but thugs because there won't be any jobs...

 

....and what you're simply stating now about it being a good deed, are grossly different.... On one instance you imply that there isn't a good deed or cause, and in another you say it's a good deed.... very conflicting....

 

as for the truth thing, I was reading this thread & that soaking the rich thread concurrently.... I stand corrected that you didn't do it in this particular thread.... But you do have a nact for doing that....

 

 

Hey don't blame me. It's the brothas who don't believe in it and if the people who the program is targeted at don't believe in it, then that's a big problem and a big waste of money.

Aint no was blaming you for those that are skeptical about the program and you know it.... You asked about the suspiciousness of w/e folk that are so, and I shed some type of insight as to why that may be.....

 

....and now that I think about it, where do you get off sayin that many blacks & latinos are suspicious of it anyway? I haven't heard anything about they way they feel about the program either way (feelin good about it or not so good about it)....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

....and what you're simply stating now about it being a good deed, are grossly different.... On one instance you imply that there isn't a good deed or cause, and in another you say it's a good deed.... very conflicting....

 

Nothing conflicting about it all. What you're confusing is the following: I'm saying that it IS a good deed so long as taxpayer dollars aren't funding it. The part that you're referring to where I am slamming the program is when taxpayer dollars are involved.

 

If this was done with private funds and no jobs were created, then I would say well it's nice that they're taking a first step, but to do something like this that is extremely risky when you could be putting unemployed folks back to work is insane. You don't sit go on TV and cry that the city is broke as Bloomberg did and say that the city doesn't have enough taxes coming in and then months later suddenly the city has 67 million dollars to spend on folks that may not be able to get a job simply because they aren't interested enough to do so.

 

That is just a terrible way of prioritizing. If the argument is that we need more tax revenue, then you take that 67 million and get some jobs created so that people can go back to work. I wasn't bringing the whole unemployment thing up for sympathy. I was bringing it up because Bloomberg sat on TV and made this argument about the city being broke and not having enough tax revenue come in. Well you solve that issue by putting people back to work. Worry about good deeds later when the economy is doing better not when the city is in a fiscal crisis. I'm still wondering why now suddenly???

 

as for the truth thing, I was reading this thread & that soaking the rich thread concurrently.... I stand corrected that you didn't do it in this particular thread.... But you do have a nact for doing that....

 

LOL... That's news to me... :confused:

 

 

 

 

Aint no was blaming you for those that are skeptical about the program and you know it.... You asked about the suspiciousness of w/e folk that are so, and I shed some type of insight as to why that may be.....

 

....and now that I think about it, where do you get off sayin that many blacks & latinos are suspicious of it anyway? I haven't heard anything about they way they feel about the program either way (feelin good about it or not so good about it)....

 

Well that's easy to answer. They interviewed some brothas on tv as you would say and they were asking why now do they want to implement this program suddenly? Others said this is a start, but what about jobs??