The Goat Pen

That's why you should never even try reconciling with someone willing to put a charge on you unfairly. Those people aren't ones who have any real care about you. That is just as bad as the guy who actually strikes his partner.

I had to basically beg a buddy of mine to cut a girl off that he was dating because she accused him of "basically" raping her one night after they came back to his house wasted and had sex. She did not say it to authorities, but if she could say that to him (they had been having sex prior, there was no tension in the relationship and she didn't say no or stop that night) then he should never trust her emotional judgement going forward.

Bklyn wrote:That's why you should never even try reconciling with someone willing to put a charge on you unfairly. Those people aren't ones who have any real care about you.

Precisely right.

A sociopath is a sociopath. A BPD sociopath is the worst kind, they are simply untreatable, wrought with evil Dr Peck referred to these people as "Person's of the Lie."

hedge wrote:I'm sure a bunch of Rules girls were chastened by IB's lecture, and humbly accepted his food and hospitality immediately after he told them that the only purpose of restraining orders was to shut them up. They love being talked to like that. Yeah, right...

No they absolutely, positively, did NOT love what I was saying to them. Afterwards, a few of them talked to me in private about their own personal DV experiences, each one saying that theirs was a special set of circumstances, that they tried to work it out, they really did. Apparently, what I said to a few of them really stung. I don't think it would have hurt so bad if there wasn't a bit of truth and reality in my evaluation of restraining orders.

That's not really the part I was doubting the truth and reality of.

$68k for high school...but this is what I always say about China. Yes, they outscore us in tests, but they do not create versatile leaders and innovators. These parents in China have identified that defect...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/nyreg ... hools.html

IB downloads video of people changing their 9 month old twins diapers. He's sick

27% of houses in Detroit are vacant, 35% of the households receive food stamps.

The backbone of American manufacturing given the deathknell in little over 50 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What happened to Detroit? It is achieving socialism in one city.

Traditional two-parent families and the productive taxpaying citizens they produce have fled. In 1950, according the U.S. Census Bureau, Detroit had 1,849,568 people and was the fifth-largest city in the nation. By 2000, its population had dropped to 951,270; by 2010, to 713,777; and by 2011, to 706,585.

What has happened to the people who remain? The Census Bureau estimates there are 563,055 people age 16 or older in the city who could potentially work and be part of the labor force. But only 54.3 percent of these — or 305,479 individuals — actually do participate in the labor force, meaning they either have a job or are looking for one.
Another 257,576 of Detroit residents age 16 or older — 45.7 percent of that demographic — do not participate in the labor force. They do not have a job, and they are not looking for one.

In fact, these 257,576 people in Detroit who do not have a job and are not looking for one outnumber the 224,846 residents who do have jobs. But of the 224,846 residents who do have jobs, 34,500 — or 15.3 percent — have jobs with the government. Thus, this city that boasted 1,849,568 residents in 1950 has only 190,346 private-sector workers today.

There are 264,209 households in Detroit, and 91,204 of them — or 34.5 percent — get food stamps.

Very few of the people who are staying out of the labor force in Detroit are staying out because they are stay-at-home moms with working husbands. Of the 264,209 households in Detroit, only 24,275 — or 9.2 percent — are married couple families with children under 18. Another 78,438 households — or 29.7 percent of the total — are "families" headed by women with no husband present. Of these, 43,742 have children under 18.

There were 12,103 babies born in Detroit in the 12 months prior to the Census Bureau survey, and 9,124 of them — or 75.4 percent — were born to unmarried women.

Of the 363,281 housing units in Detroit, 99,072 are vacant. Indeed, vacant houses have become a powerful visual symbol of what advancing socialism has done to the city. Traditional family life is nearing extinction in this once vibrant corner of America.

eCat wrote:Traditional family life is nearing extinction in this once vibrant corner of America.

this is entirely true, but traditional family life is nearing extinction in pretty much every single inner city in America. it is not just Detroit, marriage is pretty much kaput in the inner city. Megan McArdle blames the death of marriage (in the inner city) on giving welfare benefits to single mothers....

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index. ... 410.0;wap2

Megan McArdle wrote:Of course, change didn't happen overnight. But the marginal cases did have children out of wedlock, which made it more acceptable for the next marginal case to do so. Meanwhile, women who wanted to get married essentially found themselves in competition for young men with women who were willing to have sex, and bear children, without forcing the men to take any responsibility. This is a pretty attractive proposition for most young men. So despite the fact that the sixties brought us the biggest advance in birth control ever, illegitimacy exploded. In the early 1960s, a black illegitimacy rate of roughly 25 percent caused Daniel Patrick Moynihan to write a tract warning of a crisis in "the negro family" (a tract for which he was eviscerated by many of those selfsame activists.)

By 1990, that rate was over 70 percent. This, despite the fact that the inner city, where the illegitimacy problem was biggest, only accounts for a fraction of the black population.

But in that inner city, marriage had been destroyed. It had literally ceased to exist in any meaningful way. Possibly one of the most moving moments in Jason de Parle's absolutely wonderful book, American Dream, which follows three welfare mothers through welfare reform, is when he reveals that none of these three women, all in their late thirties, had ever been to a wedding.

Marriage matters. It is better for the kids; it is better for the adults raising those kids; and it is better for the childless people in the communities where those kids and adults live. Marriage reduces poverty, improves kids outcomes in all measurable ways, makes men live longer and both spouses happier. Marriage, it turns out, is an incredibly important institution. It also turns out to be a lot more fragile than we thought back then. It looked, to those extremely smart and well-meaning welfare reformers, practically unshakeable; the idea that it could be undone by something as simple as enabling women to have children without husbands, seemed ludicrous. Its cultural underpinnings were far too firm. Why would a woman choose such a hard road? It seemed self-evident that the only unwed mothers claiming benefits would be the ones pushed there by terrible circumstance.

80% of Chicago pupliuc school students get free lunch. think about that for a moment

In 1950 it was probably acceptable to live in Detroit if you had a little money.

The metropolitan area growth is probably similar in growth to cities like St Louis and Cleveland. People just live outside the city now. Except the ones too poor to get away from themselves.

Yep.

Most of Detroit should be bulldozed and farmed.

I wonder what it would take to get them back? I think there is a bunch of people in the suburbs that are sick of it - give them safe, good schools, bike lanes and abundant public transportation, tax breaks for living in the city, low cost housing loans....

In certain cities a lot of the jobs moved to the suburbs as well. Most of the biggest employers in Detroit are government or healthcare or are located in more middle class suburbs. Ford is in Dearborn. Chrysler is in Auburn Hills, as is the majority of Comerica. Ann Arbor has economic development surrounding the University of Michigan, etc.

Yep.

For Detroit to get in on this, they need to structure some corporate tax sweetners to lore business inside the city. Then, they need to gentrify starting out with hipsters and gays, one nabe at a time. That's what they did in Brooklyn. The Notorious BIG's childhood home is a 3 bedroom walk-up on St. James Place in Brookyn...about 3 blocks away from me. Last year it sold for $725,000. It's hard to write tracks about the "Everyday Struggle" if your home is 3/4 of milli.

eCat wrote:I wonder what it would take to get them back? I think there is a bunch of people in the suburbs that are sick of it - give them safe, good schools, bike lanes and abundant public transportation, tax breaks for living in the city, low cost housing loans....

That's where Brook is right. Bulldoze it and start over with exactly what you are saying to give them.

Detroit really is going to turn into the Robocop vision.

"Marriage matters. It is better for the kids; it is better for the adults raising those kids; and it is better for the childless people in the communities where those kids and adults live. Marriage reduces poverty, improves kids outcomes in all measurable ways, makes men live longer and both spouses happier."

And yet I'd bet this writer is virulently against gay marriage. Why do you think that is, IB?

E. Honestly, I like the job Chief Craig has done here in Cincy. That being said, he'd be a great fit for Detroit. Plus, he's from there and his folks still live there. I wouldn't fault the guy a bit. It's home.

Please don't ask IB any more questions. Lets just hope he drinks the wrong kool-aid.

hedge wrote:"Marriage matters. It is better for the kids; it is better for the adults raising those kids; and it is better for the childless people in the communities where those kids and adults live. Marriage reduces poverty, improves kids outcomes in all measurable ways, makes men live longer and both spouses happier."

And yet I'd bet this writer is virulently against gay marriage. Why do you think that is, IB?

Megan didn't take a position on same-sex marriage.

She only took a position on reforming laws without first understanding why those laws (that reformers want to reform) were created in the first place. True libertarians are supposed to understand this and make a distinction.

Bklyn wrote:Yep.

Most of Detroit should be bulldozed and farmed.

Much of the foreclosed property in downtown Detroit has been "gobbled up" (for pennies on the dollar) by real estate investment companies and those same companies are simply paying the property taxes and holding them until they can either flip them for a profit or rent them out to someone (anyone.) Until they want those homes demolished, they are not going anywhere.