Knicks Morning News (2018.08.07)

Not as funny as jowles giving money to the Koch brothers, but still a good laugh for a miserable morning in the city

re @100
Z-Man
Kudos to you for going against the tsunami-like tide of segregation in the NYCDoE. The new chancellor is trying to take that on. Over the past 3 years, I have visited 15 of the top performing (based on impact/performance) elementary schools in the DoE and found another interesting element of segregation. Though my sample size is small and somewhat self-selective, there is an almost direct correlation between the percentile of children of color and teachers of color. I have often been the first white male teacher my students have ever had. (An apropos anecdote- When I went to the orientation at my new school in Harlem, along with my ICT co-teacher, who is also white, the parent coordinator mistook us for parents looking at the school and advised us, ” I don’t think you want your kids going here.”)

When I went to the orientation at my new school in Harlem, along with my ICT co-teacher, who is also white, the parent coordinator“

There’s a major problem with the public schools right there. NYC spends, what, 20k per year per student? We always hear about how underfunded the public schools are, but like most government programs, there is too much bureaucratic waste. Instead of parent coordinators, diversity coordinators, crisis counselors, assistant teachers, teacher auditors, vice principals for every grade, and god knows what else, that money should be going towards the kids.
When I was in school, there was a principal, one VP, maybe a dean, a nurse, teachers, and a few back-office staff. Now it’s just beyond ridiculous how many non-teachers are employed by public schools.

I’m a teacher at a public middle school in Miami that, to my knowledge, does not have a single student who would identify as white. The reality is schools in this country are effectively segregated again, but the political will to do something about it doesn’t exist because white parents who consider themselves nice liberals freak out about any and all efforts to diversify their kids’ schools, and conservatives obviously couldn’t give less of a shit.

It’s such an enormous problem that ropes in so many other problems (e.g. housing segregation, mass incarceration, etc.) that it’s difficult to even know where to begin addressing it. Personally I’d start by re-instituting busing and by giving high-achieving schools diversity quotas, but even those things won’t come close to solving the problem if they’re not accompanied with drastic reforms in other areas.

If you really think that means prejudice never informed their decisions, or that those people don’t harbor biases that negatively effect marginalized people they come into contact with, I simply don’t know what to tell you.

I know exactly what it means and I stand my my comment.

The hiring was always based on the merit of the applicant.

That’s a good point that maybe needed to be made re: libertarians. We have our opinions; we just don’t want the State to impose them on others. You can be a libertarian who thinks drugs are bad, but still want the State out of the picture. You can be a libertarian who is against racism, homophobia, etc, but doesn’t think it should be illegal to be a racist, homophobe etc. You have a right to be an asshole, as long as you don’t act on your assholishness to infringe on someone’s rights – ie. initiate violence against someone, steal from someone, etc.

“Thanks for building this country via uncompensated labor, now would you kindly fuck off?”

Even if that were true, what do you realistically expect at this point? A check? An apology? A free hamburger? Land for ‘everyone’?

Education in black communities is the only way out. Along with accepting some unpleasant truths, of course. Until then, it’s nothing but complaints that lead nowhere.

Good morning jowles! Have a nice day!

@10 in public education circles, the word “merit” is incredibly loaded. For example, in my immediate school vicinity, there is a citywide “gifted and talented” K-8 school that accepts students based on a quasi-IQ test that they take when they are 4-5 years old. Lo and behold, the school serves nearly entirely upper middle-class and upper-class white and Asian children. Tell me, what did the children who are a year or two out of diapers accomplish to “merit” being segregated from their less-advantaged peers?

One of the great things about this forum is that there is no “merit” requirement for engaging in dialogue about the Knicks or anything else. If there were, e.g. if you had to have certain test scores, or had to have attended certain schools, or had to have met a set of criteria that almost guarantees that the result would be a forum for the 1%, would the conversation be nearly as rich?

Legit question that I’m curious to get your opinion on. In the broadest sense, libertarians are supposed to be economically conservative and socially liberal. Yet almost every libertarian I’ve ever met is a Republican voter.

This goes with what I said the other day about Libertarians really being Republicans who don’t want to be associated with the word “Republican.” The social liberal stuff is just window dressing for them, they don’t really vote based on those issues. They vote for the one thing they truly care about more than anything else: low taxes.

I have a number of “Libertarian” friends and every single one of them votes straight ticket Republican in every single election. Well, some of them don’t vote, so there’s that.

@19
I read the book and it is indeed great. I agree that the issue is more complex and nuanced. While my sample size is small ( maybe 400 students), the home/family issues are as much a factor in outcomes, as any.

Legit question that I’m curious to get your opinion on. In the broadest sense, libertarians are supposed to be economically conservative and socially liberal. Yet almost every libertarian I’ve ever met is a Republican voter.

Mainstream Libertarianism simultaneously takes a stand and punts on certain social issues, as their tacit support never has to be tested because of the extremeness of their solutions.

Abortion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evictionism

1) The woman has the right to “evict” a fetus–
2) –wait, only if someone else can “homestead” it and bring it to term.

So “we support abortion, but only if this currently-medically-impossible thing happens.” This may change as artificial wombs become present in the NICU, which is on the horizon.

So abortion: we support it in principle, but not right now.

Gay marriage: gay marriage shouldn’t be a political issue because marriage shouldn’t be regulated by the state.

Again, there’s no chance of the government suddenly withdrawing their interests in regulating relationships, so this is merely a philosophical point with no practical implications.

That said, I think even taking a glance at the “schools” section of the Wiki entry for libertarianism shows how varied the lines of thought can be. “Libertarian,” a liberal philosophy, has become as much a boogeyman as “liberal” has in common parlance. Liberalism is, for obvious reasons, one of the richest and broadest political philosophies because of its few unchanging axioms — so rich, that many “conservatives” don’t realize how stridently liberal they are on certain positions (the absolute right to gun ownership is a profoundly liberal idea).

I am not defending the Libertarian Party here. Just noting that libertarianism has many forms, including those that promote a blend of social justice and individual rights.

@14

That’s exactly why so many people on both sides misunderstand libertarians. Most people are in favor of the government using it’s power to move the country in whatever they perceive to be the positive direction. The libertarian will put the principles of private property and personal liberty ahead of what they believe is in the nest interests of individuals or the country because so many things are subjective and people have different priorities, values, etc…. Where it gets tricky is when the issue under discussion is so heinous most people are against it. There is no rule for when the libertarian will say “I am opposed to government getting involved in general, but this is so obviously wrong or immoral, we can make a law to make it illegal”.

Should the standard be 99%, 95%, 90%, lower? Who knows. We just all agree it shouldn’t be 51% or 55% or 60% etc… That’s another reason why libertarians will differ on some issues. The standard they set may be different.

Many libertarians are “personally” fiscally conservative and socially conservative, but they don’t want their own social conservatism imposed on other people via government. They separate what they believe in personally from what what they believe the role of the government should be.

It’s a kind of balancing act where as long as the republicans don’t overshoot on the “imposition” part of the equation, they are comfortable being among social conservatives and way prefer being among pro business, small government types on fiscal matters.

By aligning almost universally with Republicans, aren’t libertarians effectively abandoning any claims to laissez-faire social policy? The majority of traditional Republicans want to impose conservative social values on everyone. It seems like libertarians are saying: “I don’t think the government should be doing that, but I’m not willing to fight about it, so as long as Republicans demand low taxes I’m willing to consistently vote Republican.” In that case, the GOP has no incentive to moderate its social policy. Libertarians are effectively endorsing conservative social values, whether they hold them personally or not.

“and likes the 2017 tax cut but thinks it was done at the worst possible time and likely to eventually lead to an economic disaster.”

This cracks me up, because the left is NEVER in favor of a tax cut, and predicts the end of the world every time there is one.

The 2017 tax cuts are also an example of the lies told by the media and the Democratic party prior to it’s enactment. Without exception, everybody I talked to believed they were going to get a tax increase, while only the rich would get a tax cut, because they all watched CNN and listened to NPR and this is what they were told. To this day, I still can’t get a progressive to admit they got a tax cut.

Regarding immigration and libertarians, Jowles’ favorite libertarian web site, Reason, despises Trump and runs several articles a week destroying Trump based on his immigration policies.

i once tried teaching…it was one of the biggest failures i’ve experienced in life…

i was in a transitional stage of employment (i had quit a previous job due to a rough patch of health, which unfortunately went mis-diagnosed for almost a decade)…i had moved from california back to florida to stay with a good buddy of mine…i was still years away from finally being correctly diagnosed – which is to say, i wasn’t exactly at my best – but, i really don’t think it would have made a difference even if i was at my best…

my buddy was a teacher at the time…although i’ve never had children – after being in the military for so many years i figured my background in training would help me be successful in that environment…

i got certified, and, found a position at a middle school in a lower income section of orlando…

i only lasted about a month…six classes a day with about 25 students per class…i just wasn’t emotionally equipped for it…i lost my cool more in a month than i did the entire time in the military…

after pulling a child out of the classroom and “bracing” him (his back against the wall with myself leaning in trying “intimidate”) for eating chips in the class – i realized i was way over my head, and, not emotionally equipped for the job…

i still remember the principal telling me that she knew she had made a mistake hiring me…i still remember some of the kids dejected faces when i told them i was leaving…

those memories will never go away…

i really appreciate all the stories and input those of you whom are (or have) worked so hard to try to do one of the most important jobs in the whole world…i have a great deal of respect for the work you do…

“Dude, if your takeaway from the tax cuts is that the Democratic Party lied, you are fucking delusional.”

But they did lie. Shamelessly and constantly. Am I wrong? Should I link you to all of the lies Nancy Pelosi alone said?

And my main takeaway is that I like tax cuts, so I liked the tax cut.

“If a Bernie type were to get the Democratic nomination in 2020…”

I think this is a lock. I think the party will go full socialist with either Kmele Haris or Liz Warren. Either that or go with a celebrity death match vs Trump – somebody like Oprah or Alec Baldwin, with maybe a 3rd party run by a zillionaire like Bloomberg or Mark Cuban.

@35

1) paying taxes does not equal generosity. I don’t have much, and prefer to choose to spend what I do have in the ways I want. You seem to have the mindset that paying taxes is altruistic. If that’s the case, I’ll provide you with the address to the US Treasury and you can cut them a check as large as you can afford.

2a. Your quote doesn’t dispute my true claim that the Dem party and the media lied their asses off about the tax cut
2b. The deficit and the debt are spending problems, not tax revenue problems. The Fed took in about 3 TRILLION in revenue last year. How much freakin more do you want people to pay?

focusing on discussion & feelings on what & how a group of people were put in a systemicslly difficult & disadvantaged situation is valuable, if the discussion ends on what do we do about it now?

Just like Knicks, have to built systematically via draft to have a strong foundation & culture of excellence. Poor communities must be rebuilt the same way. Culture is key. It will eat any political strategy for breakfast.

Look at Cubans & Haitians as Hispanic & Black communities as models of excellence. As a percentage of whole, Haitians attend Ivy League schools at higher percentage that whites; Indian as an ethnicity is the highest income group in America today. They even out earn the Jewish community now. Why? – family cultural environment conducive to excellence with foundation pillars of integrity, honor, pride, hard work & grit coupled by education & entrepreneurship. Or maybe it’s because they have good hair.

Must be due to Indian and Nigerian privilege.

By aligning almost universally with Republicans, aren’t libertarians effectively abandoning any claims to laissez-faire social policy? The majority of traditional Republicans want to impose conservative social values on everyone. ”

I think it’s more like “I don’t think the republicans are actually going to impose anything beyond what I am totally comfortable with. The rest is mostly wishful thinking from the religious right and fear mongering by democrats about what the republicans are going to do’.

For example, I’m on the fence about abortion. I’m constantly changing my mind about what I think the government’s role should theoretically be. The libertarian part of me thinks this is a no brainer. There is no strong consensus on this so therefore I am pro choice. However, in the deepest parts of my soul, I am very uncomfortable with people aborting babies because the pregnancy was unintended and is inconvenient (the later it occurs the worse I feel). What to do? I’m not smart enough for this one. I’m just NOT. However, I think the chances of the republicans actually rolling back Roe vs. Wade any time soon are close to 0%. What they might do is throw more power to the states to regulate it. As a libertarian I can live with that. When issues are still controversial, I’m fine with throwing it down to the states. When a broader consensus forms, then I’m OK with rules at the federal level overriding the rogues.

@17

In other words: racism is bad, but we have no obligation to actually do anything about it. It’s an easy position to have when you’re not personally affected and the issues are more theoretical/philosophical than real.

Ok. So, what do you say should be done about it? Do you expect financial compensation? Free college degree for victims? A simple “sorry!”? Jail time for millions of people with racist feelings?

Once again, I hear blacks complain a lot. Their grievances are real. There *is* racism (not only toward them, though). There is a clear negative impact of slavery felt on black communities several generations after the fact. So, the question is a legitimate one:

What do blacks expect?

Monetary compensation? Apologies? Preferential treatment?

I have yet to see a clear answer to the question. Because the answer is “tighten your belt, go out, get an education and earn your rightful place in society. It will be harder for you than it is for other people, but that’s the only way.”

Black people’s real enemy is not the white man, but their own leadership that, to this day, refuses to address the very difficult topic of what role blacks want to play in their own destiny.

However, I think the chances of the republicans actually rolling back Roe vs. Wade any time soon are close to 0%. What they might do is throw more power to the states to regulate it. As a libertarian I can live with that.

What you don’t seem to understand is that for the privileged, this policy change means nothing, as they will always have the means to get a safe, legal abortion. It is the poor, disadvantaged person who will either have to go to back-alley providers or have to endure an unwanted pregnancy to bring an unwanted child into their life.

Whatever the policy is, it should fall equally hard on the rich and the poor, the advantaged and disadvantaged. It should be equally unfair to everybody. And the only way to do that is to make abortion legal, safe and available. If you want to cut down on the number of abortions, figure out another way to accomplish that (education, advocacy, etc.)

Ok, I’ll try it again because this conversation is taking a big turn to the worse.

@47
The last sentence you wrote basically explains every problem I have with your argument. You assume minorities are monolithic groups that are homogenous or all share the same experiences, and that couldn’t be further from the truth. There is no leadership because it’s a gigantic group of people, all with their own experiences and world views and traumas and there’s no possible way to unite those people no matter how much they suffer from the same systemic issues.

There are transphobic people within the LGBT community, there’s racism, there’s fatphobia , ageism, self-hatred, hatred for femme performances, misogyny, classicism, well, everything you can possibly think of. Sharing similar experiences of homophobia leads to a recognition process that is faster and more effective, but in no means leads to a unity or possible leadership situation. There are specific leadership roles assumed by some people / organizations that are localized.

So no, there’s no magical plan. We all fight for what we believe in, and I know a lot of my peers are against my way of fighting.

I could literally do this all day.

What, cherry pick articles from GOP.com to serve up some fresh copypasta to pwn those libruls? Get the fuck out of here.

https://www.gop.com/after-6-months-of-tax-reform-here-are-the-top-6-dem-lies-about-the-bill-rsr/

Curious as to what search terms you used to get here.

Asymmetry of bullshit is in full effect today.

Come on man, can’t we even agree about the existence of quotes and those quotes were lies? If we can’t even do that then there’s no hope.
Give me some libertarian politician quotes that are lies and I’ll be happy to agree they’re lies. Stop being such a partisan hack for a second.

This is what happens when the knickerblogger news algorithm goes haywire.

On the flip side, close to 50% of the people think abortion is murder.

This is simply not true, it’s rhetoric spread to add emotion to the argument.

If a sane, rational person were to go into a maternity ward and willfully stab a newborn child to death, that person would have committed a capital crime and would be subject to the most harsh sentence the law has to offer; in many states, the death penalty. Suppose it was a doctor who did the stabbing because he was paid by the mother of the child. Then both would have been complicit in committing a first-degree murder. Nearly everyone would agree on that.

If what you say is true, then not only would those 50% of people want to make abortion a capital crime, they would advocate rounding up everyone who has been complicit in performing an abortion and holding them accountable via the equivalent of a war crimes tribunal.

My guess is that most people who are pro-life have friends and relatives who have either had an abortion or have been complicit in arranging or performing one. Do 50% of people believe that those people should be held accountable for murdering a child?

To my knowledge, only a tiny radical fringe feels that way. And if that’s the case, then the rhetoric is false. More correctly, a large minority of people (but a minority just the same) believe that abortion is immoral or unethical, and even that opinion is nuanced (ok but shouldn’t be funded by taxpayer money, or not after 12 weeks, or not without a 3-day waiting period, or that businesses should not be forced to cover it, only in cases of rape or incest, etc.)

There are always winners and losers. That’s partly why I want government out of my business as much as possible. Smart people USE government and its institutions to advance their own self interest and agendas at the expense of others. It’s all dressed up as doing good all while the smartest dirt bags among us are raping and pillaging society. I’m way more in favor of what guys like Gates and Buffett are doing leaving their enormous wealth to society and using in efficient ways that reflect their values and the needs of society. Unfortunately, there’s just not enough wealth even at the top to address all we need. So we have to set priorities.

But so much of what protects us from the (often lethal) side effects of unmitigated corporate (and personal) greed is due to government regulation. From OSHA the Clean Water Act to Smoke-Free laws to Nuisance laws to Drug Safety laws, etc., the quality of life we enjoy is largely contingent on holding both corporations and private citizens accountable for actions that work to their benefit but harm others or the environment.

Sure, things go overboard at times and the Republican vs. Democratic debate is often self-serving and shallow, but painting government and regulations with a broad brush, e.g. your use of the phrase “as much as possible” is woefully simplistic. Go back to the pre-The Jungle days, and tell me if you really want government out of the business of making your breakfast sausage (it’s certainly possible!) or to do away with the regulations that were put into place after the Triangle Shirtwaist fire (it’s certainly possible!)

On another note, Zhaire Smith has a Jones fracture. Knowing what we know now, how many folks here would trade Knox for Smith plus Miami’s unprotected #1 first? (I’m assuming that if we drafted Mikal, everyone here would have made that trade…)

Two assets for one is hard to turn down, but Knox’s strong showing (potential-wise) in summer league and Smith’s bad foot have to narrow the gap a little bit at least, no?

This is a really good question.

I’m bullish on Kevin Knox, while admitting that it may be irrational to be so. I think there was a dropoff in the draft after him, SGA, and the Bridges. I would take being able to select from a higher tier of players now over the payoff of an extra pick down the road.

OK, how about a mixtape of 2019 NY Knick draft pick Zion Williamson?

Oh shit!

So it really amuses me when I hear that the tax cut is a “give away to the rich” and “only the rich are making out under the new law”- this is flat out incorrect and is spouted by news casters, friends, and associates who don’t really know what they are talking about.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651

K

Both parties are bought and paid for. No really one cares. No one.

People who accept this reality, tend to be better at life because they focus on what they can achieve and things they control.

Jowles why do you keep talking about the debt and deficit when the topic is lying about tax cuts. If you’re rightfully worried about the debt and deficit, then we need to cut spending. Which will never happen, so we’re all gomna be fucked eventually. No amount of tax increases will put a dent in the debt.
Again, the Feds took in over 3 trillion dollars last year.

two assets for one is hard to turn down, but Knox’s strong showing (potential-wise) in summer league and Smith’s bad foot have to narrow the gap a little bit at least, no?

I still would have picked SGA. With Mikal a close second. But Knox did give reason to hope there is an upside in several years…

owles why do you keep talking about the debt and deficit when the topic is lying about tax cuts.

And this is where I end my “argument” with the brilliant minds in this thread.

Because — I know this may come as a shock to you — but the deficit has to do with revenue vs. expenditure. The GOP slashed revenue so expenditure cuts would appear “responsible.” Do you not get that? Or do you think that the moral imperative to cut spending is so strong that we’ll just ignore the fact that corporations saw their tax rate decrease by mother fucking THIRTY THREE percent?

Yeah if the tax cut ultimately “forces” Republicans (and democrats) to cut benefits to social security, medicaid, etc…then the little bump we’re getting on our paychecks now won’t matter much in a few decades when people are retiring and getting a fraction back in SS than what they paid in for.

Also, those middle class tax cuts are set to expire after a few years. The corporate tax cuts do not expire.

@76 again, my point re: this topic is that there aren’t enough potential taxes available to have a real effect unless spending is cut. You can take everything all of “the rich” have, apply it to the debt, and we’d still be fucked unless you do something about entitlements, which no one will touch. The chickens are coming home to roost due to the short sightedness of decades of kicking the can down the road (more and more $ going out, less and less coming in, due to an aging population and declining birthrates – this is why Germany has opened its borders, to pay for its aging welfare state)

I am a CPA and we prepare over 400 personal tax returns per year so I know a little about how the tax cuts are shaking out. My software calculates a schedule comparing each tax return for 2018 under the new law assuming the same income and deductions as 2017. Almost every client is projected to get a reduction from 6 – 15%, more in some cases, on their overall tax based on this comparison. The Only clients I’ve seen an increase on are those making more than 1,000,000, principally because they lose so much in their state tax and property tax deductions (limited to a max of 10k in 2018) which far outweighs the incremental decrease in the top tax rate (37% down from 39.6%) .

JB,

Could you read this and see if it jibes with your “eye test” experience…. I read it from a fairly impartial (they try to present both sides) news aggregator Real Clear Politics:

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/report/tax-cuts-every-congressional-district-every-state

Speaking as someone who is not libertarian, I can see why Libertarians typically vote Republican. The overall image of Democrats is basically as anti-libertarian as it could be, which leaves little choice. Personally, I am in favor of smart government instead of as little government or as much government as possible, but neither of the major parties cares about that. I’m so disgusted with both parties, that I actually looked for other ones. Out of all the many really minor parties in the US, only the Whigs seemed sort of reasonable, but then they changed their platform to avoid any mentions of principle or vision, and just talk about obviously nice to haves. So I am stumped.

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/report/tax-cuts-every-congressional-district-every-state

There is nothing impartial about a Heritage Foundation analysis, no matter which aggregator you found it on. They’re a trickle-down, supply-side think tank that will sing the praises of cutting corporate tax.

@83 I am literally lol that you, who thinks you’re the smartest, most woke person in the room, is so blindly beholden to the Democratic party. You’re a hack who hasn’t had an original thought since I’ve been on here.

@92

That’s a very good point.

Maybe it affects more a country outside the center like Brazil, but we had the same thing for 14 years here with PT and Lula / Dilma. Fantastic social ideas, fantastic execution of them, pretty good on the economics side, but they failed to recognize the changes needed to keep the improvements they made permanent and everything is quickly being torn apart to go back to the same old 90s philosophy.

It is really mindblowing to me how much the parties polarize debate in the US since parties have little to no role in terms of executive power around here. I generally just stick with the idea that I gravitate towards the least fascist side, which I guess would make me a Democrat in the end of the day.

@94

There’s definitely correlation but I would say no causation, primarily because we can’t forget geography is a political matter.

Quick example from my reality: Brasil is about the same, you’re inherently behind if you’re born in the northeast or north of the country. However, ever since the country got invaded by the Portuguese, since the north part is the richest in the primitive resources they were looking after (and just hot as hell itself must feel), the region was colonized for the purposes of raw materials like wood and sugar, where the southern part, closest to Portugal climate, was colonized with the idea of creating the “center” of the country with the most developed cities, much less slaves (as they were mostly assigned to the plantations in the northeast) and a much more diverse range of economic activities.

So while the statement that geography matters is certainly true, the why it matters is a historical and political reason. I won’t say I understand the intricacies of spatial development in the US but I’m pretty sure the same applies.

@85,

Someone has to be the first one to build the foundation; it was your grandpa; your parents built the first floor and you’re now working towards penthouse…

No one is saying that you started at the same place that an inner city black American kid. I reject the narrative of equality, with respect to equal starting point. Bet your Dad and grandparents lived the right way; no children out of wedlock; multiple marriages; no prisons; no gambling; no drugs; etc…mom cooked at home; was financially responsible if not thrift; definitively lived below their means so that you and your siblings have every advantage and minimized the risk of you being a failure. Their success and happiness was tied to your success and happiness. You should be PROUD of that and try to do the same for your kids; you should love your parents and grandparents for it; they have foregone luxurious consumption derived from their own hard labor to pass it down to you; this is why you should never feel guilty that other parents CHOSE not to do that for their kids;

While you should never feel bad about your success because it was paid with generational hard work and good decisions, you should have empathy and try to teach others about how it’s done. There are no shortcuts; someone has to be the first one to dig deep and built a foundation for their kids. Every first generation immigrant did this so that 2nd generation lives better.

Giving a poor person $5M without changing their culture and teaching them how to make better decisions, only ensures that they will be broke again in just a few years.

This year is the test case for Williamson. Last year’s highlights show that he is a total bully against everyone he played. He had a .780 TS% without a jumper!

If he can put up .600+ TS% on decent usage during ACC play, he’s a future star. In terms of raw athleticism, I don’t think there’s been a better prospect since AD. And you know how I feel about “raw athleticism.”

I’m a bit on the fence with Williamson since what he does best is what shows up in highlights a lot, but he undeniably looks amazing.

I always find it hard to evaluate prospects on major programs like Duke and Kentucky and this year will be extra hard with Duke having Reddish, Williamson and Barrett. They’re gonna be super entertaining to watch at the very least.

@68 If you bothered to read to the end of my post I said that the worst part of new bill was the forecast of gigantic deficits. That is a different point than the fact that everyone’s taxes are reduced not just the wealthy as the talking heads seem to repeat over and over. The link you posted discusses the deficit increase under the new law which I already agreed with.

But as usual you have to cherry pick some piece and argue just to argue as has been suggested previously by other posters.

K

If I were Williamson getting ready for today’s NBA, I’d model my game after Draymond Green. He seems like he has the quickness to defend smaller guys on switches, and the strength and athleticism to bully big guys out of their spots. Looks more like an NFL DE or TE!

The funny thing about Barrett, Reddish, and Williamson is that they’re all best suited as wings at the NBA level. Williamson plays a game like Miles Bridges except he’s an elite athlete with a great handle for the position and Bridges is a great athlete with average handle for the position. If Bridges had Williamson’s first step, agility, and handle nobody would have pegged him as a small ball power forward and he would have been a Sacramento King. It’s going to be very hard for teams to look past Williamson’s 285 pounds, but he’s skilled enough to play and defend 2-4. Cam Reddish is a Paul George type but doesn’t bring the same level of intensity on defense. RJ Barrett is a two way stud wing player with a reliable if not good 3 point jumper. If Reddish has PG13 potential, RJ Barrett’s best case scenario is Kawhi Leonard.

Of all three players, I’d probably want RJ Barrett, Zion Williamson, and Cam Reddish on the Knicks in that order. If the Knicks draft Zion Williamson and sign Kyrie Irving we would lead the NBA in nationally televised games.

@101

It’s harder to have a clean line of sight to success and wealth when you’re part of an ethnic group that has been historically targeted.

It think that’s the truth many in the black community do not want to face: it is harder for blacks, immigrants and all other disadvantaged groups. So, tighten your belt, go out and get yourself some power (and money!) through education.

There is no other way.

If I were a black leader, my motto would be ‘Education leads to lives that matter’, instead of the utterly pointless and passive ‘Black Lives Matter”.

It begins at home for everybody, sure. But marginalized and minority communities don’t have higher rates of drug use or the various bugaboos like divorce so called values voters claim they do. Even educated black people (and other minorities and marginalized groups) have lower rates of social mobility than white people do. And the cherry on top is that social mobility is dropping for everyone in the US. Unregulated markets concentrate wealth in small groups of people based more on structural factors than on merit, and we’re seeing that happen right now in real time. Throwing your hands up and saying “welp, nothing we can do about. Just have to bootstrap ourselves better” works less and less well. Maybe it was fine for white boomers, who could assume a starting salary out of college that’d let them pay off their student debt in a few years, but now it’s closer to twenty years. It’s becoming harder and harder to succeed in the US. There are solutions to this that are fair for everyone (and that don’t involve a command economy). But it’s not easy to get there, because there’s a whole lot of money and power who want to see the bad old days of the gilded age come back.

All of these systems are artificial. They’re all created by people. We can change them to work better for everyone.

ProjectKnicks, I will try to say this as respectfully as I possibly can:

Please fuck off trying to speak for what blacks or any other minority wants or should want. Blacks, LGBTQ people, women, whatever group you’re talking about is not a homogenous mass. As many blacks agreed with Denzel, I can assure you many others have completely different perspectives. Every minority movement is filled with subgroups, historical struggles and discussions and they are all trying to figure out ways to make stuff better.

If you want to know what can be pragmatically done? Let those people speak, and actually make an effort to listen to them. Stop laying down every part of the onus and of the blame on them to solve everything in this world. If this matters in anyway to you, listen to what is being said with open ears and for once put yourself in a position of listening instead of speaking. I’m sure from every bit of my extensive personal experience with these groups that you will hear very, very interesting ideas.

@99 Did you ever consider that the “rich fucks” would get a bigger amount of that tax cut money because they pay most of the fucking taxes?

Conversely when the taxes go up the rich fucks pay a lot more while the “peons” increase is only crumbs.

Not saying it’s right or wrong but that is the simple math of the equation.

Thank you, Bruno.
ProjectKnicks, your comments highlight a lot of why those who “claim to not be racist but…” don’t get it. Believe you me, many of us have been raised to believe that we must be 2x, 3x, 4x better than our white counterparts just to obtain same success they enjoy. Telling many of us to “work harder” is an insult. Telling us “well that’s the way it is” is an insult. So never strive for change or improvement??? Forget Rosa, forget Martin, forget Malcolm, forget Jackie, et al. I might as well go back to being three-fifths a citizen then. Damn.

Haha this discussion went from kumbaya to off the rails pretty quickly.

2for18, you are so willfully naive about the deficit that I won’t try and change your mind, but it is primarily from 1. Bush tax cuts. Then 2. “entitlements” as you call them aka Medicare/Medicaid, particularly for the aging Boomer generation. Both parties added to that, but are you actually against basic healtcare for the very poor and aged??? 3. Obama’s 2008 economic bailout plan that kept Great Depression 2 at bay. Was it the greatest plan ever? Who freaking knows but it stopped the bleeding.

2 and 3 are generally considered worthwhile spending while 1 is the rich taking for themselves and now it’s happening again. And yes, tax cuts are for everyone but give me a fucking break. A $1000 tax cut rebate is not the same as a tax cut you can go and drop on actual fucking real estate (not to mention the tax loopholes that have been added for the wealthy and their corporations.)

I’m sorry, but Jowles said it best. The flu and lung cancer are not the same thing,

@116 I was talking about lies told about tax cuts and jowles changed the argument to the deficit and debt. I know perfectly well that we are fucked and wouldn’t mind talking about my ideas about the deficit or debt.
You called me naive, yet your whole childish post boils down to its the republicans fault and rich people suck. You dont want to discuss solutions; you want signal to the crowd that you’re a Democrat in good standing.