Being White in Philly (1 Viewer)

I mean,its philly.they threw snowballs at Santa. I don't think it matters what race you are to be hated in philly.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
 
When it said he went to Temple, I thought he was Jewish as well.....
 
Well white ppl just tend to turn a blind eye for what's taken place. If something happens to you and you're white, it's ok. But if a white person says something that can be interpreted as racist all hell breaks loose.

In Philly, it seems quite disturbing. Those ppl are basically turning the blind eye. While some may speak up about it, last thing you want is to ruffle the feathers and create problems. I can assure you, I wouldn't be staying in the neighborhood very long. Although if you've just moved in and did no research on where you're moving to, you have no voice IMO.

Dennis the teacher calling the AA student a boy had no racial significance whatsoever. He or his family may have interpreted it that way but so what? He should've stuck to his words and apologize for not calling him by his name but not bow down and let the child become problematic. The woman Anna from Moscow rose good questions. Many ppl from other countries are often surprised about how things go in this country. The BIG question is: what are you going to do?
 
This is an interesting article about race relations in Philly that, apparently, has ignited a bit of a firestorm.

I'm all for open dialog, but (As the article points out) how do you start a frank discussion?

Being White in Philly | Philadelphia magazine

Interesting article. I think the author makes a mistake by (seemingly) treating poverty as a symptom, instead of the principle reason, for the high crime rates in inner city black neighborhoods in Philly.

He even mentions that he lives in a racially mixed, middle-class neighborhood and everyone gets along great. They have block parties etc.

I don't disagree that inner city violence, and race, are valid discussions and we do need those. But it's important to remember how horrid those living conditions are and that maybe the violence is the symptom of generational poverty.
 
Interesting article. I think the author makes a mistake by (seemingly) treating poverty as a symptom, instead of the principle reason, for the high crime rates in inner city black neighborhoods in Philly.

He even mentions that he lives in a racially mixed, middle-class neighborhood and everyone gets along great. They have block parties etc.

I don't disagree that inner city violence, and race, are valid discussions and we do need those. But it's important to remember how horrid those living conditions are and that maybe the violence is the symptom of generational poverty.

Or part of a feedback loop.
 
Interesting article. I think the author makes a mistake by (seemingly) treating poverty as a symptom, instead of the principle reason, for the high crime rates in inner city black neighborhoods in Philly.

He even mentions that he lives in a racially mixed, middle-class neighborhood and everyone gets along great. They have block parties etc.

I don't disagree that inner city violence, and race, are valid discussions and we do need those. But it's important to remember how horrid those living conditions are and that maybe the violence is the symptom of generational poverty.

I am not sure why you would criticize the author on this point.

Regardless - I think its a weak point. Poverty may play some role is crime, but it seems unlikely that it is a principle factor.
I mean there are certainly rural areas (take Appalachia) with far higher poverty rates than many inner cities yet the urban areas have exponentially higher crime rates.
Comparing urban environments themselves can produce wildly different crime rates even when poverty rates are similar. I think its even true that you can get different crime results by neighborhood within the same cities/areas with similar levels of poverty.

I wonder what correlates more neatly with high crime areas : poverty or numbers of black males under 30?

What about: poverty or fatherless households?
 
I am not sure why you would criticize the author on this point.

Regardless - I think its a weak point. Poverty may play some role is crime, but it seems unlikely that it is a principle factor.
I mean there are certainly rural areas (take Appalachia) with far higher poverty rates than many inner cities yet the urban areas have exponentially higher crime rates.
Comparing urban environments themselves can produce wildly different crime rates even when poverty rates are similar. I think its even true that you can get different crime results by neighborhood within the same cities/areas with similar levels of poverty.

I wonder what correlates more neatly with high crime areas : poverty or numbers of black males under 30?

What about: poverty or fatherless households?

Comparing poverty in rural areas where items of material value (and general population for that matter) are far more scarce to poverty in urban areas where items of material value (and people are stacked like sardines) are far more abundant makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, if you are going to say different urban areas of similar poverty produce "wildly" different crime rates, that is something you will have to back up with objectively produced, standardized data (population, unemployment rate, education levels, etc.).
 
Comparing poverty in rural areas where items of material value (and general population for that matter) are far more scarce to poverty in urban areas where items of material value (and people are stacked like sardines) are far more abundant makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, if you are going to say different urban areas of similar poverty produce "wildly" different crime rates, that is something you will have to back up with objectively produced, standardized data (population, unemployment rate, education levels, etc.).

I will be glad to get into specifics comparing areas, but I am not sure what your point is.

It cannot be that poverty is the principal cause of crime - can it? Because you are already talking about various attributes that have nothing to do with poverty. Either its poverty as THE cause (which was the statement I was responding to) or its not.

I am not asserting a principal cause of crime, merely responding to such assertion. So you tell me what you are arguing for.
 
I am not sure why you would criticize the author on this point.

Regardless - I think its a weak point. Poverty may play some role is crime, but it seems unlikely that it is a principle factor.
I mean there are certainly rural areas (take Appalachia) with far higher poverty rates than many inner cities yet the urban areas have exponentially higher crime rates.
Comparing urban environments themselves can produce wildly different crime rates even when poverty rates are similar. I think its even true that you can get different crime results by neighborhood within the same cities/areas with similar levels of poverty.

I wonder what correlates more neatly with high crime areas : poverty or numbers of black males under 30?

What about: poverty or fatherless households?

I think you were being asked to prove the statement I bolded. Is there evidence to back this as a fact, or is this your opinion.
 
Is there evidence to back this as a fact

well, I don't know what type of crime is intended. It's a pretty broad term. But the crime rate in Toronto, for example, is considerably lower than cities with comparable percentages of poverty or other big cities like Detroit, Chicago, Boston, New York, Atlanta.

Just as an example.

I think JE is saying that poverty is not the primary cause for crime because there are areas in the US and outside the US that have higher poverty rates but lower crime and even among comparable urban centers in industrialized nations, the incidence of crime is lower.

So what's the function or impact of poverty in the scheme of crime?
 
Comparing poverty in rural areas where items of material value (and general population for that matter) are far more scarce to poverty in urban areas where items of material value (and people are stacked like sardines) are far more abundant makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, if you are going to say different urban areas of similar poverty produce "wildly" different crime rates, that is something you will have to back up with objectively produced, standardized data (population, unemployment rate, education levels, etc.).

I mean, it's not like there aren't rural, poor black areas for us to compare crime rates too. That is, rather than comparing inner city Philly with Appalachia, compare Appalachia with Tensas or East Carroll Parish, or the Delta in Mississippi.
 
I mean, it's not like there aren't rural, poor black areas for us to compare crime rates too. That is, rather than comparing inner city Philly with Appalachia, compare Appalachia with Tensas or East Carroll Parish, or the Delta in Mississippi.
Posts like these are a major reason the race 'THING' will never be solved, much less understood everybody has their own red herrings in this, and not about to give them up
 
Well white ppl just tend to turn a blind eye for what's taken place. If something happens to you and you're white, it's ok. But if a white person says something that can be interpreted as racist all hell breaks loose.

In Philly, it seems quite disturbing. Those ppl are basically turning the blind eye. While some may speak up about it, last thing you want is to ruffle the feathers and create problems. I can assure you, I wouldn't be staying in the neighborhood very long. Although if you've just moved in and did no research on where you're moving to, you have no voice IMO.

Dennis the teacher calling the AA student a boy had no racial significance whatsoever. He or his family may have interpreted it that way but so what? He should've stuck to his words and apologize for not calling him by his name but not bow down and let the child become problematic. The woman Anna from Moscow rose good questions. Many ppl from other countries are often surprised about how things go in this country. The BIG question is: what are you going to do?

This is going to be really hard for you to relate to because you haven't experienced it for years on end. As a child, you didn't watch your mom get followed around a grocery story like a petty thief. Never saw the pain in her face when you asked her the first time you noticed it and she tried to explain that they think we're trying to steal. As you grew older, you never had to accept that you WERE going to get followed around the store...and it was normal. Probably never been thrown on the ground, frisked by the police, and just left their like nothing happened. You never had that happen to you multiple times. As a freshmen, when you scored the highest grade by far on a test, you probably never had the teacher accuse you of cheating...although you were and had always been an honor student. That one hurt. Never been the only minority in a class full of kids when the slightest thing goes missing. Never felt the anticipatory ping of dread if the missing item didn't reappear because you know if it doesn't, you're going to get blamed. Think about that, you haven't done anything wrong but always having fingers pointed at you. Sadly, I could go on.

It's impossible to evaluate any situation based solely on the final outcome. There are years of experiences that shape how someone responds or what shapes their behavior. Poverty is only one variable in the equation. Race and experience is another.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom