DNA analysis, pictures, and everything. It's like it was all finished before the act. Maybe the CEO just had to be removed for some reason?
This was my suspicion when I first heard of the murders; that it was a black bag job. But who knows? It could be legit. We'll have to see how things shape up.
If black criminal is killed, blacks come out and start rioting and destroying property. Who is going to riot now?
I would say rich people, but they'd just hire a Mexican to do it for less than minimum wage.
The victims were white. What a surprise. Funny how it's almost always that way, isn't it...
Just imagine if white people had their own countries. That would be just awful and 'racist', wouldn't it...
Historically, white people have shown up in other people's countries, attacked them and taken their land. So it seems white people are not content in their own countries.
Because apparently, white people have got something special that non-whites are being deprived of by not getting to live around us, right?
Yep, it's called societal power and agency.
"After we found out he is a black man that allegedly killed a white family - oh, and their maid, I guess."
Well, sure. Because the SJWs are insisting that police do less to hunt down black guys who are responsible for the plague of murders the commit within their own demographic. Since, you know, it's racist and oppressive to attempt to arrest those guys.
I don't understand why the fact that Black people kill Black people negates the fact that law enforcement is often racist. Can't both be true?
Now, when I read stuff like this.. a little bird whispers in my ear: parallel construction.
What's more likely, Wint's DNA was recovered from a pizza crust in a burning home, or law enforcement just happens to know where Wint's cellphone was during the time in question?
I'm glad I'm not the only one to think that recovering DNA off of a pizza crust that was in a burning house and then drenched by the fire department is a little thin. It's not impossible, but it raises my antenna.
" Daron Dylon Wint, who is described as 5'7 and 155 lbs and might also go by the name "Steffon."" He's BLACK. But it would be racist to describe his skin color.
Do they always specify when someone is white, or is that just the assumed default color of a person?
I have to LMAO when you see those "black lives matter" and screams about "racism" when the #1 cause of death of black males is other black males beating the next four causes of death combined. Sure black lives matter....only when they are killed by white people as that supports the permanent victim class political narrative, but when black men like David Carroll and Tommy Sotomayor point out the biggest threat to the lives of black males is other black males? The black community attacks them as "coons" and "Uncle Toms"....I guess supporting an end to thugs preying on their own neighborhoods means they aren't "keepin it real".
Oh and just a little food for thought......if the plight of the American black was racism, why is it a black man from Africa, fresh off the boat, is something like 300% more likely to become middle class in 1 generation, and something like 3000% more likely to become middle class in 2 generations than an American black, despite the language and culture handicaps from not being a native? I'd say the answer is obvious, its nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture and in the USA the black culture has become toxic, glorifying violence, abusing women and not being fathers to their children, while actively condemning education as "acting white".
As for TFA this kind of shit DOES affect Americans heavily even if they do not know it, as it gets them used to living in a police state where laws protecting against the ever watching eye only apply to the wealthy and the rule of law is whatever they say it is this week.
Your last paragraph describes what it is like to be Black in relationship to the System. And you seem to think it's not good. I agree!
"Black Lives Matter" isn't simply about the lives of Black people. It is specifically about how Black people are treated by law enforcement and the System in general. It is different from how White people are treated. I don't think that's really controversial. I'm not sure where your statistic about the fresh-off-the-boat African comes from, but he did not grow up in the same environment as the African American. It is about culture, as you say. But you can't critique that culture divorced from the context within which it formed.
The echoes of slavery, Jim Crow and other hardships for the Black community take their toll. Like any person, if you are treated badly as a child you have a better chance of growing up to be an angry, maladjusted person. It's the same for the Black community. You can't expect them to put up with the hundreds of years of supreme bullshit they have, and come out fresh faced and positive. And that bullshit isn't all in the past; they still put up with some of it.
So you can talk about their culture, but you can't blame it for their predicament. It was born from centuries of abuse at the hands of White people. And that's something White people need to recognize and work to end. We can't fix the past and we in the present are not to blame for it. But we should do what we can to be compassionate and understanding so as to not perpetuate the problem.
That's because somebody doing a good job an the executive level vs a bad job is significantly different in the impact it has on the entire company. It's not chopping wood.
Yet the ones that do a bad job still get huge severance packages. Sign me up for the job where I get $Texas even if I don't do a good job.
That's like saying that if the minimum wage is too high, and it hurts employers, we should just not pay anyone anything at all. and we'd all be wealthy
No, the amount that should be paid is the amount that an employer and an employee agree upon. Which is better, that an employer willing to pay $6 an hour not hire anybody while jobless people willing to work for $6 an hour continue to not find jobs, or that the employer actually hire those people for $6 an hour even though it is less than minimum wage?
That might be true if the power dynamic were the same on both sides of the table. But it's not. Generally speaking the employee needs a job more than an employer needs the employee. The business probably has 50 applicants for the job, while the applicant isn't entertaining 50 job offers.
So if I have a friend, lets call him "Bob", Bob and I are both the same age and from the same family. Bob can be my brother.
I finish high school, Bob sits at home playing video games. I stay with one job that starts at $8/hr and get promoted while Bob just moves job to job every 6 months after they realize he's a slacker.
Eventually after suffering through working extra hard to get promoted rather than fired in 6 months, I'm now starting to realize that Bob's way was wrong... after all he keeps moving from job to job all making $8/hr, but I've now been promoted up from $11/hr to lets say $15/hr.
Then this law passes and suddenly Bob and I make the same money..... Is this really "right" to you? Shouldn't my harder-than-bob's-work actually get me something tangible? Is it really fair to now watch Bob just get bumped to $15/hr like me despite the large difference in work ethics and education?
According to everything schooling and society has taught me, I should be doing much better than Bob yet he's right at my level! How is that possibly fair to me?
You have shown that hypothetical scenarios can be tailored to illustrate any point. The answer to your question is that your industriousness will continue to benefit you as you continue to climb up in your career, while Bob will still be stuck at minimum wage. So five years from now, when you are making $25 an hour, Bob will still be making $15. Does that seem fairer now?
Maybe fucktards who can't get an order of two big macs, fries and a happy meal don't deserve a living wage? That's just my guess.
Your compassion and empathy for your fellow man knows no bounds. Since they don't deserve enough to live on, why are we even tolerating their existence?
You might consider a third option. Reducing executive compensation.
That's the thing that needs to happen throughout the economy.
It's funny how top executive compensation doesn't seem to be subject to the same downward pressure that lower wages are subject to. I wonder why that is. Surely you could find someone to take those jobs for less money. Yet we somehow don't hear that argument.
Easy. Because his products are not priced for minimum wage makers. The poor guy who makes the Ferrari likely doesn't get paid an income which would allow him to buy one. Even by doubling his pay.
The profit margin on such goods is high. As such they will take option two from above an reduce their net revenue.
"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll
