Tunde Wey's Restaurant Activism

[Richard]

Being a conservative on a collage campus these days is like being a mini Trump so anything said and done is considered racist,homophobic,anti immigration etc.etc.

[Zads07]

I mean, seriously people, take a step back for a second. If you know history, you know that Black Americans fought for their Civil Rights in the 1960s and thankfully won.

Racism is still very much alive today.

This is to show people what it was like. People here obviously don't like it so guess what, that's what people experienced back in the day and this still happens today in different forms [[police brutality is one of the main examples).

[Richard]

I think it's more because it's a ridiculous false equivelance.

Whites weren't enslaved by blacks, mass lynched, raped, etc. and subject to significant structural and institutional disadvantages to this day. That's isn't a "liberal" perspective, it's reality.

200 years later it is blacks buying and selling slaves ,rapeing and mass murdering other blacks in Libya,That's a reality.

They say 90% of African Americans can trace their bloodline to the slaves that were brought over,considering the constant genocide that occurs over there what are the odds that any of those bloodlines would still exist today.

The slaves that were brought over for the 10% that actually owned them paid a price and a terrible sacrifice to insure that line would continue just as did many whites during the civil war in order to help gain their freedom.

Life is not fair to anybody and has no guarantees,most of the African Americans that I know are where they are today because they did not allow others to hold them back,somebody said something about overcoming.

It does not matter what color you are if you sit and complain all day about not moving forward you will not,if you decide you want to move forward nothing or nobody can stop you.

[Bham1982]

200 years later it is blacks buying and selling slaves ,rapeing and mass murdering other blacks in Libya,That's a reality.

Whataboutism is non-logic. We're talking about the U.S., not Libya [[which barely has any blacks, so I have no idea what you're talking about, but whatever).

[SammyS]

At least this exercise is voluntary. The restauranteur will have to answer to his family, landlord and banker incase it backfires on him.

[SammyS]

I think it's more because it's a ridiculous false equivelance.

Whites weren't enslaved by blacks, mass lynched, raped, etc. and subject to significant structural and institutional disadvantages to this day. That's isn't a "liberal" perspective, it's reality.

Can’t discount the liberal agenda that has always claimed to help the poor and minorities when in reality it actually hurts them. Public housing, affirmative action, minimum pay etc etc.

[CassTechGrad]

Booker Taliaferro Washington was an American educator, author, orator, and advisor to presidents of the United States. Between 1890 and 1915, Washington was the dominant leader in the African-American community.

How would he be treated by the black community today?

[Bham1982]

Can’t discount the liberal agenda that has always claimed to help the poor and minorities when in reality it actually hurts them. Public housing, affirmative action, minimum pay etc etc.

Last I checked, public housing, affirmative action and minimum wages were strong positives for the poor and upwardly mobility, per basically every economist who has studied such issues. We barely have these things in the U.S., anyways, outside of places like NYC and SF [[which have some of the highest social mobility in the U.S.).

If you believe these things are inherently "bad" or part of a "liberal agenda" you might be a tad addicted to Faux News. The poor in Guatemala aren't exactly better off than the poor in Sweden.

[Bham1982]

How would he be treated by the black community today?

The whataboutism among the Trump cult is still burning strong. Those damn lazy, ungrateful blacks, right?

[Richard]

The whataboutism among the Trump cult is still burning strong. Those damn lazy, ungrateful blacks, right?

Considering Al Sharpton has a net value of $5 million, Mr Washingtons words spoken in 1911,which was way before the currant president was born,seems to have merit.

He seems to have made a profit while being oppressed.

Do you honestly believe giving somebody a stipend in order to barely exist without also giving them to tools in order to personally rise abouve is not oppression?

[SammyS]

Last I checked, public housing, affirmative action and minimum wages were strong positives for the poor and upwardly mobility, per basically every economist who has studied such issues. We barely have these things in the U.S., anyways, outside of places like NYC and SF [[which have some of the highest social mobility in the U.S.).

If you believe these things are inherently "bad" or part of a "liberal agenda" you might be a tad addicted to Faux News. The poor in Guatemala aren't exactly better off than the poor in Sweden.

Let's take these one at a time:

Public Housing:
For over 70 years, reputable economists have agreed that this social experiment has been a disaster to both the inner city and the poor they intend to help. According to some, more public housing units have actually been demolished than those built. I think Detroit is a perfect example of that. Reasons cited:

1. They are an incubator to high crime
2. High concentration of broken families without fathers
3. Lack of maintenance
4. Drives remaining private property prices in desirable or scares areas up [[NYC, SF and possibly Detroit)

The latest iteration of public housing is now moving towards an integration model where 20% "affordable living" mandates are sprinkled amongst more affluent market rate units.

Affirmative Action:
Despite the resentment of those qualifying or missing out on entrance into a course based on their own merit, institutions across the spectrum are forced to accommodate some that will either struggle to just keep up or fail out. The later seems to be the case. Thomas Sowell has spent his entire career on this subject.

Minimum Wage:
If you want to directly attack the poor and uneducated, mandate a minimum wage. It's the employers that it empowers, not the low level labor that's competing for a job. Think outsourcing, automation or closing up shop altogether.

I'm glad you brought up Sweden and I'm sure you can broaden your argument to all Scandinavian nations or even Western Europe. I'm also sure your argument is further reinforced when you read headlines stating that they are the "happiest countries". The problem is when you dig a little deeper. Not only do these nations suffer from the highest alcoholism, anti depressant consumption and even suicide rates, but their happiness is on a completely different scale to what Americans would perceive as being happy. Europeans and Scandinavians are not happy about high taxes to fund their social obligations, they are content with them. Offer up the option to those producing and saving to keep more of their earnings at the expense of those living off welfare, and you will soon realize that the free market economics America stills grasps would be the preferred route. It's only human nature.

[Wesley Mouch]

...

Minimum Wage:
If you want to directly attack the poor and uneducated, mandate a minimum wage. It's the employers that it empowers, not the low level labor that's competing for a job. Think outsourcing, automation or closing up shop altogether.

...

Good point.

Another point lost on MW advocates is that MW and most employment mades make employment more rigid. If you quit your job because your boss sucks, or harasses you, or whatever -- its hard to get another job quickly. Once upon a time, you could just walk into a company's door, and offer to work. They might have some casual work to do. Now, the regulatory burdens we place on employers make that mostly impossible. Heck, if you just want to do lawn work -- its technically illegal unless the neighbor complies with dozens of rules.

MW is just one more nail in the coffin of job flexibility.

[[Fortunately, the gig economy holds out some hope for those just getting a start, or in need of something to tide them over.)

What's this to do with this bigot who wants to discriminate on the basis of race?

Not much. Except that I'm in favor of his right to discriminate. And also in his right to pay the disabled young man in the neighborhood $5/hr. to sit and explain his discrimination menu to guests -- if they both get benefit from it even if its below MW.

Its a mistake for us to add rigidity to the labor market.

[gencinjay]

It isn't meant to be a viable or even "morally correct" model of business. It's meant to start a conversation. By that measurement, he has accomplished exactly what he set out to do.

[Richard]

The only thing really accomplished is stating the obvious.

My car is green, everybody can see and knows it is green,but I want it to be red,until I sand it down and paint it red it will remain green in everybody's eyes.

I do not need to remind them that it is green or even have a conversation about it,because talking it to red will not make it happen.

[Wesley Mouch]

It isn't meant to be a viable or even "morally correct" model of business. It's meant to start a conversation. By that measurement, he has accomplished exactly what he set out to do.

Race relations, by every measure, are better than they have ever been. We don't need to focus on the bigotry of a self-important fool.

'Conversation' seems to mean 'I will tell you the right way to think -- and that you are the problem, white man'.

That approach sets race relations backwards, not forwards. A 'conversation' never starts with an insult towards a group of people.

He'd do more for race relations by serving a good cup of coffee than by hating others because of their race.

[Former_Detroiter]

200 years later it is blacks buying and selling slaves ,rapeing and mass murdering other blacks in Libya,That's a reality.

They say 90% of African Americans can trace their bloodline to the slaves that were brought over,considering the constant genocide that occurs over there what are the odds that any of those bloodlines would still exist today.

The slaves that were brought over for the 10% that actually owned them paid a price and a terrible sacrifice to insure that line would continue just as did many whites during the civil war in order to help gain their freedom.

Life is not fair to anybody and has no guarantees,most of the African Americans that I know are where they are today because they did not allow others to hold them back,somebody said something about overcoming.

It does not matter what color you are if you sit and complain all day about not moving forward you will not,if you decide you want to move forward nothing or nobody can stop you.

Africans, not slaves, were brought here, then they were turned into slaves.

[Richard]

Africans, not slaves, were brought here, then they were turned into slaves.

They were not captured and brought here and became slaves as an afterthought,they became a slave at the moment of their capture.

Even at that a whole 6% in this country owned slaves and they were not cheap,most could barely afford to put food on the table let alone own another human being.

Average cost of a slave [[of any age, sex, or condition) in 1850 = $ 400 [[$11,300 in 2009 dollars)
Average cost of a slave [[of any age, sex, or condition) in 1860 = $ 800 [[#21,300 in 2009 dollars)
Cost of a prime field hand [[18-30 year-old man) in 1850 = $ 1,200 [[$34,000 in 2009 dollars)
Cost of a skilled slave [[e.g. a blacksmith) in 1850 = $ 2,000 [[$56,700 in 2009 dollars)

A factory worker wage in 1850 was 1c a day

[Former_Detroiter]

They were not captured and brought here and became slaves as an afterthought,they became a slave at the moment of their capture.

Even at that a whole 6% in this country owned slaves and they were not cheap,most could barely afford to put food on the table let alone own another human being.

Average cost of a slave [[of any age, sex, or condition) in 1850 = $ 400 [[$11,300 in 2009 dollars)
Average cost of a slave [[of any age, sex, or condition) in 1860 = $ 800 [[#21,300 in 2009 dollars)
Cost of a prime field hand [[18-30 year-old man) in 1850 = $ 1,200 [[$34,000 in 2009 dollars)
Cost of a skilled slave [[e.g. a blacksmith) in 1850 = $ 2,000 [[$56,700 in 2009 dollars)

A factory worker wage in 1850 was 1c a day

Slavery was the reasons Africans were brought to America, however, they didn't know that. Which is why I said Africans, not slaves, were brought here.

[CassTechGrad]

The whataboutism among the Trump cult is still burning strong. Those damn lazy, ungrateful blacks, right?

So how would Booker T. Washington and Martin Luther King be treated by the black community today?

They would be called “Uncle Tom’s,” “sell out’s,” “Oreo’s,” “shameless,” “a traitor to his own race,” “House N***r’s”, and they would be mocked, ridiculed, belittled, and attacked.

[swingline]

So how would Booker T. Washington and Martin Luther King be treated by the black community today?

They would be called “Uncle Tom’s,” “sell out’s,” “Oreo’s,” “shameless,” “a traitor to his own race,” “House N***r’s”, and they would be mocked, ridiculed, belittled, and attacked.

This is delusion.

[gencinjay]

Race relations, by every measure, are better than they have ever been. We don't need to focus on the bigotry of a self-important fool.

'Conversation' seems to mean 'I will tell you the right way to think -- and that you are the problem, white man'.

That approach sets race relations backwards, not forwards. A 'conversation' never starts with an insult towards a group of people.

He'd do more for race relations by serving a good cup of coffee than by hating others because of their race.

While I would agree that race relations are better, I would also say we still have more work to do. Even growing up as a poor white person, I see that I had privileges not afforded to others. Am I insulting my race by saying this? How is it insulting when he says it?

[Canadian Visitor]

The problem is when you dig a little deeper. Not only do these nations suffer from the highest alcoholism

Correcting the load of @#$# you spew on here could be a full time job.

Sadly, I have useful work to do, so can't spend my whole day here, so this post will have to suffice for now.

***

Worst nations for alcoholism worldwide.

https://www.addictions.com/news/drin...es-by-country/

Not a Scandinavian country in the bunch. [[top 10)

and anti depressant consumption

Countries by highest consumption of anti-depressants here:

http://www.businessinsider.com/count...g-users-2016-2

The U.S. is the highest.

Denmark is the highest Scandinavian country at #5 with per capita consumption 29% LOWER than the United States.

and even suicide rates,

Finland has the highest suicide rate in Scandinavia, which puts it at #15 in the world, behind Japan, China, South Korea, India .....etc.

http://www.businessinsider.com/world-suicide-rate-map-2014-4

It is true that their rate is higher than the U.S. But that's about the only hint at truth in anything you posted.

***

On minimum wage I've already completely debunked the non-sense arguments spouted by you Mr. Mouch w/hard facts in another thread.

The fact you were unsuccessful in rebutting them is undisputed. I cite hard data, facts, apolitical sources, clear-as-day.

Suffice to say, you're wrong.

[Canadian Visitor]

On the subject of the original post.

I happen to disagree w/this restauranteur's approach.

I sympathize w/his objective; but I don't feel its best way to facilitate change.

Anyone who fails to recognize that the majority of 'white' Americans lead a more comfortable life than their black counterparts, for a variety of reasons, is a complete moron.

That said, one has to ask what the objective is of the activism, and what it hopes to achieve.

My estimation, is that the hope, ultimately is to reduce and one day eliminate 'the privilege gap' by addressing issues ranging from over criminalization of black Americans to the wealth/income gap expressly noted.

I happen to think that's a laudable goal.

But to get there, one frankly requires buy-in from the majority; or at the very least their acquiescence, with a plurality being positive about such change.

If I were asked how to achieve this, I would suggest, in respect of the economic side of things, reaching out to low-income, and lower-middle-income folks of other groups, to form a united front on issues ranging from the precariousness of work [[too many PT/Casual jobs at the expense of FT); to the need for a higher minimum wage, and investment [[in effort, in regulation and in dollars) that ensures a much more uniform, and higher quality of public education. Those moves help social mobility and those who are disadvantaged irrespective of background.

Likewise, on matter of criminal law I think it would be more useful to do a school assembly at an affluent, primarily white high school, and show truthfully the difference in the way many 'minor' offences are treated.

Many folks truthfully don't realize that simple drug possession in one area may carry a multi-year prison term, while in another it gets you a slap-on-the-wrist.

Likewise, there is a need to provide that same education to police and prosecutors and highlight the unfairness inherent in that. While race is an obvious factor [[as is relative wealth); it need not involve the 'racism' the way most people use the word [[though it surely does involve it too often). It has to do with how someone speaks, how their parents speak and dress, it has to do with whether they can afford a lawyer or a good one; and so many other issues.

Engendering sympathy, and putting forward constructive solutions is the 'winning' strategy to me.

To come back to the original idea under discussion one more time.....

I think if one were to pursue the idea, merely as a education tool, I would have done it this way.

Charge everyone the same amount of money.

Give everyone the same food.

But open by saying in a presentation and in writing that not everyone can afford the kind of food that will be eaten here today and to make guests acutely aware of this present the first course as what could be purchased w/the average low-income earners budget. Say, a meal for $1.99, nicely presented, by chefs, but stark, with a 1/2 empty plate, showing what they would have to eat if they earning minimum wage.

Then, announce the net proceeds from that course are being donated to a local charity.

Then provide a full, high-end meal for the next course, but commit that for that course, the chefs/restaurant will help feed 5 people of lesser means w/the money raised.

Close, by asking those in attendance to consider how they can help reduce poverty, though their personal decisions, their business choices and their votes. That its not ok to have the level of poverty that exists in the U.S.; and that the country and the guests would be better off if nation's poor were treated better and more fairly.

I think that would likely draw more positive reviews and better illicit change.

[Richard]

Interesting take off on this

On Hitler's birthday in Germany a theatrical play called mein campf,if you wear the Star of David you have to pay admission,if you wear the swastika armband admission is free.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=54582000

[Wesley Mouch]

Last I checked, public housing, affirmative action and minimum wages were strong positives for the poor and upwardly mobility, per basically every economist who has studied such issues. We barely have these things in the U.S., anyways, outside of places like NYC and SF [[which have some of the highest social mobility in the U.S.).

...snip the pointless attack ...

1) Public Housing is a strong positive? What economist on earth thinks this? Is it necessary? Is it better than vouchers? Is the the best way to provide housing? Yes, no, no.

I'd be curious to know if there's a study at all on the effect of pubic housing on future income.

2) Affirmative Action, well maybe. Let's leave this for now... but...

3) Minimum Wage... the overall view of economists, such that I can make such a statement... is that the MW is good for those poor with jobs, but causes some job losses. Whether the job losses are worth the cost is really the only argument left here. That's a fair view of the consensus. Oh, and that gradual increases don't seem to disrupt the market much -- but there's no consensus on big increases, as they're just now hitting the world. Seattle's increase is a tough one, since that job market is super-hot on a bad day. Ontario might be more interesting, as it has been applied across many markets.

There's no consensus like you describe.