July 26, 2011

Wealth gap ratio hits new high

From a new study of Census Bureau data by the Pew Hispanic Center:
Hispanics: The net worth of Hispanic households decreased from $18,359 in 2005 to $6,325 in 2009. The percentage drop--66%--was the largest among all groups. Hispanics derived nearly two-thirds of their net worth in 2005 from home equity and are more likely to reside in areas where the housing meltdown was concentrated. Thus, the housing downturn had a deep impact on them. Their net worth also diminished because of a 42% rise in median levels of debt they carried in the form of unsecured liabilities (credit card debt, education loans, etc.).  
Blacks: The net worth of black households fell from $12,124 in 2005 to $5,677 in 2009, a decline of 53%. Like Hispanics, black households drew a large share (59%) of their net worth from home equity in 2005. Thus, the housing downturn had a strong impact on their net worth. Blacks also took on more unsecured debt during the economic downturn, with the median level rising by 27%.  
Whites: The drop in the wealth of white households was modest in comparison, falling 16% from $134,992 in 2005 to $113,149 in 2009. White households were also affected by the housing crisis. But home equity accounts for relatively less of their total net worth (44% in 2005), and that served to lessen the impact of the housing bust. Median levels of unsecured debt among whites rose by 32%.  
Asians: In 2005 median Asian household wealth had been greater than the median for white households, but by 2009 Asians lost their place at the top of the wealth hierarchy. Their net worth fell from $168,103 in 2005 to $78,066 in 2009, a drop of 54%. Like Hispanics, they are geographically concentrated in places such as California that were hit hard by the housing market meltdown.  
The arrival of new Asian immigrants since 2004 also contributed significantly to the estimated decline in the overall wealth of this racial group. Absent the immigrants who arrived during this period, the median wealth of Asian households is estimated to have dropped 31% from 2005 to 2009. Asians account for about 5% of the U.S. population.  
No Assets: About a quarter of all Hispanic (24%) and black (24%) households in 2009 had no assets other than a vehicle, compared with just 6% of white households. These percentages are little changed from 2005.

72 comments:

Mannerheim said...

Reality is racist, exhibit #412,368

It's simply mind-boggling that an entire demographic group could have such a low average net worth. I think I was worth more than that when I was a college student, and I come from a normal middle-class background. I thought all those Mexican immigrants were groundbreaking entrepreneurs bringing their capital here to create new jobs?

Carol said...

...and we were just trying to help them accumulate wealth the way whites do, through home appreciation!

Wait, that's not how it works - ?

Paul said...

When I was in my late 30's, I literally lay awake at night wondering how I was ever going to accumulate the $1 million in savings that financial planners said I'd need to retire comfortably.

Now, in my mid 50's, I realize that not only was I a fool for losing sleep over this, but I'm probably a chump for having saved as much as I have. No way the government is going to let me retire in comfort while a majority of NAMs live in cardboard boxes.

Camlost said...

And our current chief executive is probably the best example of black money management - spend like there's no tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

Which tells you all you need to know about why politics in the US is a racial game, with whites on one side and the "minorities" on the other.

Anonymous said...

Whites richer than Asians!

Anonymous said...

bring on the disparate impact suits!

Red Fox said...

Fascinating data. Thanks for the post. It is worth noting that east of the Mississippi, the cities with the most foreclosures tend to be in Florida or places with very large black populations e.g. Chicago, Detroit, and Atlanta.

Anonymous said...

This is just more evidence of white privilege and how white supremacist societies work to steal form People of Color.

The day is coming when justice will be done.

Jonathan Silber said...

Moral of the story: Better to put your money into little violins, not hoodies or leaf blowers.

Anonymous said...

Net worth does not include cash or other payments received from the 70+ federal and state welfare programs available to people with low incomes. What would the data look like with these factored in?

keypusher said...

If you go far enough into the Pew writeup, you see that US household wealth dropped 30% across the board between 2005 and 2009. But (as you might say) that's not news.

Anonymous said...

The relative low hit that whites have taken in wealth during these times compared to Asians is interesting. I think this reflects cushy positions that white people seek.

Leveraging relationships that white people have (family, fraternity, church etc) white people are better able to survive in an economy where who you know is very important.

Anonymous said...

The debate about the 'browning' of America is hardly ever framed in this way.Instead attention is focussed on the inevitable decline of whites to minority status, and not on the appalling inter-racial wealth gap.
This can only bode evil for America's future.Nevermind all the right-wing screams about 'libertarianism','IQ' and 'we earned our money!', the NAMs will get angry - and jusifiably so.The situation can be compared to pre-revolutionary France in the 'let them eat cake' sense.Due to globalisation and neo-con politics (that have been the uncontested dominant force of the past few decades, together with the linked uncontrolled mass immigration), the wealth gap between those whom the markets favor (generally high IQ whites) and those it couldn't give a shit about (the NAMs) has never been more glaring,and this being America, more importantly, in your face.
Thus we have a nation where the damned of the barrios and ghettoes shhot and maim each other for trivial dollars whilst big-teethed, flashy yuppies spend more on their labridoodles than yer typical ghetto hispanic earns in a year, and the hispanic has no prospect of betterment.
An explosive cocktail.Contary to popular belief, the NAMs are not dumb and know precisely what the game is.The best case scenario is a gradual Brasilia style rundown into endemic kidnap and murders.The worst, 'Lord of the Flies'.

Anonymous said...

For any group to have such a pitiably low nett worth only means one thing:

They cannot have worked for many years on average.

There is no other possible explanation.Even the poorest paid, as long as they maintain long and steady work habits accumulate surprising nest-eggs of cash.

Anonymous said...

We need to look at the Jewish/white gap. Also, I'll bet top 1% of whites have much of the wealth.

Jack Aubrey said...

So, how's that Obama dude working out for them?

Bottom line: wealth is created by work. Obama is discouraging work, especially amongst welfare use-prone minorities. He's also allowing the importation of vast numbers of legal & illegal minorities who compete most directly with (go figure) minorities.

Not only are whites harmed by the open borders welfare state. So are blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.

Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

Steve,
You left out this amazing quote:

"What's pushing the wealth of whites is the rebound in the stock market and corporate savings, while younger Hispanics and African-Americans who bought homes in the last decade, because that was the American dream, are seeing big declines," said Timothy Smeeding, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor who specializes in income inequality."

http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1663005

Wasn't it the drive to give access to the "American Dream" that brought about the diversity recession in the process?


And to think every advantage that Black people get in America... and such a massive percentage have negative wealth...

Mind blowing.

rightsaidfred said...

Is it maybe not such a bad strategy to keep the net worth low? Fewer costs of maintenance, more eligibility for disaster assistance, trading of worth for leisure, etc.

I often wonder who are the wise one's: Property owners = looting victims.

Kaz said...

I wish we could see the stats for separate Asian groups. East-Asians, South Asians, SE Asians, etc..

It's kind of a big difference.

eh said...

mind-boggling

Not to anyone who's seen a 'barrio' up close.

What's "mind-boggling" is trying to imagine how these people are going to pay enough tax to provide the much better off, retiring 'baby boomers' with their Social Security checks.

Anonymous said...

How the hell do Asian's have less wealth than Whites?

ricpic said...

A regular grapes of wrath for the poor put upon browns. And yet they keep pouring in. The statisticians must be missing something. What could it be? What could it be?...

Fred said...

"For any group to have such a pitiably low nett worth only means one thing:

They cannot have worked for many years on average.

There is no other possible explanation."


There are other explanations. But you have to flip it around to ask why people save in the first place: for college, for a down payment for a home, for retirement, to buy something fancy, to leave a legacy for their kids. Consider each of those from the perspective of a black American.

College? Any black kid who is talented enough to go will have his pick of scholarships.

Down payment? Why buy in the first place, when you've got Section 8? You don't have to be a mathematician to realize it's a better deal to get $1000 worth of rent for $200 than to pay $1000 or more in mortgage for the same sized place.

Retirement? Black life expectancy is shorter than that of other races. Lack of future time orientation comes into play here too, but poor blacks also know plenty of poor older blacks who aren't starving, between food stamps, Section 8, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

To buy something fancy? Thanks to easy credit and payment plans, you don't need to save up to buy a BMW today. That's why you see plenty of blacks driving them.

To leave a legacy? This doesn't seem to be a concern with blacks as much as with whites, which could be an extension of overall lower parental investment/concern (it's common to see black kids riding their bikes in busy streets in black neighborhoods, where white parents would keep them caged like veal by comparison).

Unanimous said...

"We need to look at the Jewish/white gap. Also, I'll bet top 1% of whites have much of the wealth."

The top 1% in U.S. have $1.2+ million in net worth. But the top 0.1% actually run the planet and don't allow anyone else into the club. An investment manager tells the story in a very interesting article at:

http://ampedstatus.org/who-rules-america-an-investment-manager-breaks-down-the-economic-top-1-says-0-1-controls-political-and-legislative-process/

Paul said...

How the hell do Asian's have less wealth than Whites?

First, it is my observation that rich Asians are very materialistic, and put a lot of their wealth into "stuff" -- like glitzy McMansions in the newest subdivisions. The kind of houses that took a big beating in the real estate bust.

Second, it is my guess that rich Asians hide a lot of their money and would be unlikely to tell the Pew people how much wealth they actually have.

beowulf said...

1. Tighten up labor market from bottom up by restricting immigration (border fence from sea to shining sea, mandatory E-Verify) and foreign trade (Warren Buffett's import certificate plan would work nicely).
2. To redistribute wealth, Congress could replace the $1.3 trillion in tax expenditures with a federal version of Alaska's citizen's dividend for every registered voter. That'd be roughly $7000 a year in dividends to each of the 180+ million registered voters (plus whatever's re-allocated from wasteful spending that's cut).

Since Social Security numbers are required for voter IDs these days, simplest way to set up system is for Social Security Admin to collect state voter rolls and then pay out Supplemental Security Income to every SSN holder registered to vote (almost by definition, the list would be E-Verified).
http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/

Oops, only citizens can vote. I guess that idea wouldn't do all that much for wealth gap ratio after all :o)

Lugash said...

I am Lugash.

For any group to have such a pitiably low nett worth only means one thing:

They cannot have worked for many years on average.

There is no other possible explanation.Even the poorest paid, as long as they maintain long and steady work habits accumulate surprising nest-eggs of cash.


No, you can work all your life and still not accumulate anything.

There are people who blow their discretionary income on baubles, don't have all that much discretionary income to begin with, have an unexpected expense come up, have to tap their savings due to being laid off, or try investing but put their eggs in the wrong basket.

I am Lugash.

Anonymous said...

I would really like to know the methodology used in this study to ascertain "net worth". I find the figures amazingly low. Something seems funny to me.

TH said...

Controlling for immigration status puts Asian households handily ahead of whites.

Anonymous said...

These categories are very broad. In NYC, there are two major groups of blacks: native-born and West Indian. In my observation, they are about equal in size. The West Indian blacks are invariably more successful than the native-born. 99% of the time in NYC, if you see a successful black, he/she is West Indian.

West Indians save for houses like crazy. A lot of them bought brownstones in areas like Bed Stuy, saving the money on housekeeper's salaries, and now those homes are worth a lot. If you go to Bed Stuy, and you see a nicely kept block, with lovely brownstones, it is 100% sure that it is a West Indian block.

I'm sure there are similar divisions into which one could divide Hispanics, Asians, and yes, even whites.

Anonymous said...

Think of the jobs that white people have. Firemen, police, military, university professors, etc. No cutbacks there.

Asians have more jobs in the private sector because they are shut out of cushy jobs with the government.

Thus Asian wealth will fluctuate more rapidly up and down depending on the economy.

Truth said...

"No way the government is going to let me retire in comfort while a majority of NAMs live in cardboard boxes."

I know, Bro, A rich white guy has NEVER retired comfortably in this racist country before.

Truth said...

"First, it is my observation that rich Asians are very materialistic, and put a lot of their wealth into "stuff" -- like glitzy McMansions..."

Yeah dude, I hate all of those "glitzy", flashy Japanese and Koreans.

europeasant said...

We need to take back our country. All of you euro peoples get yourselves some white girlfriend's and start contributing to the European population growth! Right now! This is an order!

Anonymous said...

Whites skewed because their average age is so high. Tons of old white people.

Anonymous said...

In all fairness the US black average net worth should be compared to the worldwide black average net worth.

Also, US white average net worth should be compared to the worldwide white average net worth.

If you look at it that way, blacks in the US are probably 100x richer than the worldwide black average, but whites are at parity. It isn't a privilege or advantage to whites to be here, but it sure is a privilege for blacks to be able to live with whites and Asians.

I would like to see the black on Asian crime stats. Those are likely stunning. In my neighborhood in Texas, it seems blacks target Asians more than whites. There are still enough tough whites down here that given the abundance of affluent Asians, they seem to prefer the easier Asians as targets.

Anonymous said...

How the hell do blacks have less net worth than Hispanics? They've been in this country longer, more likely to have professional jobs, better educated, older, etc.

Asians are more likely to live in California, NYC, and other high cost areas. More income in those areas. I'm still impressed that, for a group that's not been in America that long, Asians have that type of net worth.

Cat Patrol said...

"Wealth" is defined as the difference between what one earns and what one spends. Take 2 people both making 100K per year, 1 of them spends all of it, the other spends half and banks the rest. The one who lives below his means is always going to accumulate greater wealth.
Blacks are known for having little ability to defer gratification. There were experiments back in the 1960s where a teacher would offer a candy bars to a mixed black and white crowd of schoolchildren. They could have a candy bar in the morning, but if they were to wait until the afternoon, they could get 2 candy bars instead. Guess which group overwhelmingly chose which? Blacks chose one candy bar immediately, Whites chose 2 candy bars in the afternoon.

Anonymous said...

Hey, guys, Truth is back! I guess we know he didn't lose HIS job with the SPLC.

Jack Aubrey said...

Note that the data are for median net worth. Half of all households in each group have net worths above the stated numbers, and half are below. Many people here are interpreting the data as "average."

Anonymous said...

The relative low hit that whites have taken in wealth during these times compared to Asians is interesting. I think this reflects cushy positions that white people seek.

It reflects the fact that white people are older and more established. How much net worth do you expect a Korean here on a green card to have?

Keep in mind that net worth is not the same thing as income. People with high net worth are people who own their own home. That's the one valuable asset which most people possess.

Anonymous said...

These stats are MEANINGLESS until they're adjusted for age.

White people are much older than every other racial group, so they will obviously have a much higher net worth. It takes time to pay off your mortgage, save for retirement, and gain home equity.

You also have to keep in mind that 30-40 years ago, when most current white people were getting started, housing was cheap, and going to a state college didn't involve tens of thousands of dollars in debt. Wages were higher and it was easier to find jobs.

We're transforming into a debt peonage society. I wouldn't crow about whites' high position until you look at how YOUNG whites are doing.

They're obviously doing a lot better than young blacks and Hispanics, but not well enough. By the time they pay off their exorbitant student loans they'll be selling off organs to help fund their kids college education.

Anonymous said...

How tough are whites in Texas and the South? I ask because it seems like black-on-white violence is less common down there and I assume it's because southern/Texan whites are more macho, tough, muscular, street fighting, gun-owning than whites elsewhere. Rednecks more than anyone else.

SWPLs seem really wussy in general.

Matt said...

The relative low hit that whites have taken in wealth during these times compared to Asians is interesting. I think this reflects cushy positions that white people seek.

If you read the report it's pretty much only explained by White people gaining less from overvalued houses in sunshine and diverse states, and losing less from their devaluation, and because Asian people have many more new arrivals depressing their median wealth.

No need for any White institutionalised privilege or corruption, thanks. I can't see Whites out guanxi-ing Asians in any event.

We need to look at the Jewish/white gap. Also, I'll bet top 1% of whites have much of the wealth.

We're looking at the median here for a reason. Differences are actually reduced when we look at the mean.

Steve Sailer said...

Regarding mean vs. median: there's so much inequality in net worth that it's hard to use mean statistics. As I pointed out in my review of Gladwell's "Outliers," say you are doing a net worth survey and you get one response of $50 billion? Is that a typo? A lunatic? Bill Gates?

So, you exclude superhigh net worths as outliers, but then that means it's hard to estimate mean net worths.

Anonymous said...

"How tough are whites in Texas and the South?"

A mixed bag.

The Asians in contrast are not. They are pretty much all smaller and less aggressive.

My point is that pretty much any Asian down here is easy pickins, but against whites, one is definitely taking a significant risk of getting shot, or ass kicked, etc. Funny however, I am friends with one Chinese family that has been in the US for over 100 years and lived in the deep South for generations. They are armed and tough, too.

Anonymous said...

"SWPLs seem really wussy in general."

Good point.

SWPL may just be the new word for wuss.

Same stuff different day.

Anonymous said...

So how many of the 'Hispanics' are illegal aliens? The first who should lose the most.

Svigor said...

If you look at it that way, blacks in the US are probably 100x richer than the worldwide black average, but whites are at parity.

My estimate was 20x, but it was very fast and loose, back of cocktail napkin style, and compared only SSA to black America.

Svigor said...

T, I remember a pretty good bit of bling from the Korean kids in high school. Particularly spoilers. But then a lot of white kids are into bling these days.

Anonymous said...

"You also have to keep in mind that 30-40 years ago, when most current white people were getting started, housing was cheap, and going to a state college didn't involve tens of thousands of dollars in debt. Wages were higher and it was easier to find jobs."

Life was way better for Americans back then wasn't it.

"We're transforming into a debt peonage society. I wouldn't crow about whites' high position until you look at how YOUNG whites are doing."
http://bls.gov/news.release/youth.t01.htm

Still better than everyone else, but thats probably an artifact of whites moving their children away from diversity. Which immigrants would not doubt have a harder time accomplishing

Eric said...

And our current chief executive is probably the best example of black money management - spend like there's no tomorrow.

It's going to work out for them, too. What the savers don't lose in the market or to inflation will be taxed away.

Jack Aubrey said...

"It's going to work out for them, too. What the savers don't lose in the market or to inflation will be taxed away."

No. The impoversihment of America will not work out better for blacks. Right now Obama is lavishing as much taxpayer and borrowed wealth as he can on blacks. It can't last.

Whites in America do about as well as whites in every other country. Every major white country has at least half the per capita GDP of the United States. But blacks do 10-30 times better than they do in major black countries like Kenya, Ethiopia, or Nigeria.

The surplus thrown off by the high productivity of whites has allowed us to subsidize blacks. Once a high degree of austerity sets in (and it will, and soon) the welfare programs and regulations that have benefitted blacks will vanish.

Anonymous said...

Life was way better for Americans back then wasn't it.



Yes, it was. Then your political leaders decided to change it.

ATBOTL said...

"How tough are whites in Texas and the South? I ask because it seems like black-on-white violence is less common down there and I assume it's because southern/Texan whites are more macho, tough, muscular, street fighting, gun-owning than whites elsewhere. Rednecks more than anyone else.

SWPLs seem really wussy in general."

Where do people get the idea that black on white violence is less common in the South?

Jack Aubrey said...

"Where do people get the idea that black on white violence is less common in the South?"

I went looking, but couldn't find the data (not yet, anyway). But one interesting stat I found was this: 9,535. That's the number of victims of hate crimes in the USA in 2007. In contrast, in 2007 there were 14,916 vcitims of murder and 83,333 victims of forcible rape.

So when you hear the horror stories of all the alleged hate crimes in the US, recall that a person is over 36% less likely to be a victim of a hate crime than of the most violent crime of all and, adjusting for gender (i.e., most rape victims are female), about 1/16th as likely to be a victim of "hate" as of rape.

ss said...

"...pay enough taxes for all the retiring 'baby boomers' with their Social Security checks."

That's what I don't understand. Isn't S.S. our own money we give to the government for safe keeping all the years we are working? It's our money. Now if you end up getting more than you paid in, well, that's another story.

Anonymous said...

"Hispanics...are more likely to reside in areas where the housing meltdown was concentrated."

Huh, why would that be?

Anonymous said...

Steve, favor please. Could you label this entry under 'political economy' so that it's easy to find later.

Jack Aubrey said...

"Where do people get the idea that black on white violence is less common in the South?"

I went looking for the data, but couldn't find it (yet). But one tidbit I found was this: 9,535. That's the number of victims of hate crime in the USA in 2007. In contrast in the same year there were 14,916 victims of murder and 83,333 victims of rape in the same year. A person was over 50% more likely to be a victim of the most violent crime of all as to be a victim of a hate crime; and, adjusting for gender (i.e., rape victims are overwhlemingly female), about 16 times as likely to be a victim of rape as of "hate." Data is here.

Anonymous said...

Okay, well it seems like most of the black-on-white stuff, like flash mobs, is up north in the urban/suburban areas. I assumed it's because there are lots of SWPLs and SWPLs are weak/effeminate.

I also assumed that you hear less about black violence in the South because Southern whites are violent alpha male types that carry guns and street fight when neccessary. So blacks are scared of their redneck neighbors.

I can't find exact data on the issue, but there is plenty of data that shows southern whites are more violent and more likely to fight over perceived slights. I'd be surprised if blacks didn't find them a little scary. At least in comparison to the bend over and take it in the rear end SWPL guys.

Svigor said...

It's our money. Now if you end up getting more than you paid in, well, that's another story.

Actually, getting more out than you pay in should be expected. Someone "holds" my money for me whether I like it or not, the least they can do is pay interest on it when they return it. And that should be on top of pacing inflation. Same goes for tax returns IMO.

Svigor said...

The comparison between SWPLs and southern Whites is apt, but many of the toughest White dudes I've met have been from dense northern urban centers. On the other hand, the most violent guy I know is your typical Scots-Irish from Tennessee; maybe I'm just using the wrong southern Whites (lowland/coastal) for a baseline.

Anonymous said...

"Yes, it was. Then your political leaders decided to change it."

And how.

Anonymous said...

The population up north are mixed. I think some of the ethnics (Italian, Irish, maybe Polish) from the northeast are tough. You've got Stallone/Pacino type ethnic guys that live in pretty run down areas in NYC, Boston, Buffalo, etc. and aren't afraid of NAMs. The big beefy rustbelt union guys that can be intimidating too. Middle class suburbanites are weaker in general than these guys. SWPLs are at the bottom and look like Justin Bieber. In the South, in comparison, the general overall population is more hardcore.

I think one reason white southerners are less scared of black is because blacks are more scared of them. Nobody is scared of SWPLs, except when they get elected to office.

ATBOTL said...

"Okay, well it seems like most of the black-on-white stuff, like flash mobs, is up north in the urban/suburban areas."

No it doesn't. Many of these stories are coming from the Carolinas, Georgia, Missouri and Louisiana. There are fewer cities in the Deep South and even less nightlife. Blacks in Birmingham and Jackson can't attack white pedestrians on Saturday night because there aren't any.

Marlo said...

"No. The impoversihment of America will not work out better for blacks. Right now Obama is lavishing as much taxpayer and borrowed wealth as he can on blacks. It can't last."

Not really. Obama is scared to death to say or do anything that could be perceived as pro-black. You know that, fool.

"Where do people get the idea that black on white violence is less common in the South?"

From Steve. He said that blacks fare better in conservative environments.

Anonymous said...

If we assume

1.) White southerners tend to be more macho and violent
2.) Blacks are the same in the South as the North

then why don't we read about more incidents of white Southerners fighting/killing blacks?

Anonymous said...

A lot of big southern cities (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Charlotte) draw people from across America. Perhaps blacks feel tough around those type of whites and attack them, but more scared in the smaller cities and rural towns because the rednecks wield guns. I have a tough time believing that your typical Son of the South is gonna take crap from anybody. It seems more plausible that the white "Southerners" getting attacked are transplants from the north or maybe a Southern version of SWPLs.

Let's ask Svigor, as he knows this stuff pretty well.

Maya said...

About the tough southern boys...

From my recent experiences, I'd imagine that they are less likely to fight it out than you'd imagine because they become men with responsibilities much earlier than anyone else in this country.

I'm a recent transplant from Chicagoland to a large city in Tennessee because that's where Teach for America placed me. I've been dating a real country redneck which is a new thing for me because I'm pretty much a SWPL. He is from a tiny little town, knows how to make moonshine and told me about hunting squirrels. He is definitely more macho and frank in his demeanor than what I'm used to, but I think he'd walk away from a fight if some piece of shit antagonized him.
The reason is that being in his mid-late twenties, he is already a father of two, and he is a proud, involved parent. Though his formal education is limited, he is working hard and advancing in his career. Apparently, as a kid, he used to get into trouble, but now, the priorities are elsewhere. Real men can't indulge in mindless fights when they have families to take care of. Out of the people who actually do their best to bring their kids up, it seems that the southern country men create families at the youngest age.

skiffle said...

"Not really. Obama is scared to death to say or do anything that could be perceived as pro-black. You know that, fool."

You say the weirdest things. You display very little knowledge of the world and its peoples, judging from some of the comments about Europe you've made. You simply consult your PC little red book and choose what makes you feel better to think.
Obama's first response when the white cop/black professor situation of two years ago was to condemn the cop. But his mouth always runs to bad judgment and babel when he's not reading his teleprompter. He really needs people to tell him what to say. He cannot be trusted by his handlers to think on his own. Even Bush II did better in that area, and I never thought I'd be saying that.
B.O. refused to meet with the mothers of the black/white couple who were brutally tortured and murdered by four black marines. He appointed a "black" attorney general who refuses to proscute black criminals because they are "his people." That man definitely doesn't belong in that position. Just that comment should hvae gotten his butt kicked out of there.
Obama doesn't have to say things that favor blacks. We don't know much about him, but we do know where he went to church for years, and we know who his buddies were. And we know who supports him by 90% for no other reason than that he is "black" (sort of.)