I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me.

[Boom_70]

As delightful as I find the idea that the American inner-city is going to rise from the ashes on the backs of a Dunkin' Donuts on each corner, it's simply not a sustainable solution on any kind of large scale.

YankeeFan is making the mistake of confusing a solution for individuals with a solution for an entire population of the uneducated and impoverished. You give me enough time with most individuals, along with some background in teaching, and I can probably guide that person to some level of productivity within our society. But as presently constituted, our economy only has so many opportunities available.

Let's assume away every obstacle that might prevent someone from casually pooling together the family's $500,000 seed money. Let's assume that the economy can sustain 1,000 more Dunkin' Donuts. Or even 2,000. Great, 10,000 people, lifted from poverty. Only 50,214,000 to go, by my back-of-the-napkin calcualation.

Sustainability problems aren't confined the impoverished. A few years ago, every other rich kid in America was going to law school. Those who went to a high-ranked school received one of the hundred-plus six-figure jobs that corporate law firms were tossing around like so much parade candy in those days. Starting salaries rose from $70,000 to $160,000 in, not kidding here, like 10 years or less. Today, law school enrollment is plummeting. Like journalism, there just isn't enough work available to sustain the old numbers. Can you imagine if we ever get it right in America and figure out how wasteful litigation is, and start fixing the system?

The encourage-poor-people-to-open-a-Dunkin'-Donuts plan to solve American poverty might work for a finite number of receptive individuals and families. But it's not a magic bullet. Entrepreneurship isn't a magic bullet. And saying over and over again that people should take Personal Responsibility and become entrepreurial certainly isn't a magic bullet.

I know that completely dismantling the social safety net is every conservative's wettest, wildest dream. But if you really want to be part of the solution and not the problem, then you need to begin understanding that the impoverished, at this point, are simply not equipped to become entrepreneurs on the scale that would really change things, and the current economy is not equipped to facilitate their mass conversion from drug-dealing and prostitution to pastry-making.

Inner cities already have a huge diabetes problem. More Dunkin Donuts
will increase the problem.

There is a natural slogan though in promoting the idea:

"Donuts to Dollars"

 

[YankeeFan]

As delightful as I find the idea that the American inner-city is going to rise from the ashes on the backs of a Dunkin' Donuts on each corner, it's simply not a sustainable solution on any kind of large scale.

YankeeFan is making the mistake of confusing a solution for individuals with a solution for an entire population of the uneducated and impoverished. You give me enough time with most individuals, along with some background in teaching, and I can probably guide that person to some level of productivity within our society. But as presently constituted, our economy only has so many opportunities available.

Let's assume away every obstacle that might prevent someone from casually pooling together the family's $500,000 seed money. Let's assume that the economy can sustain 1,000 more Dunkin' Donuts. Or even 2,000. Great, 10,000 people, lifted from poverty. Only 50,214,000 to go, by my back-of-the-napkin calcualation.

Sustainability problems aren't confined the impoverished. A few years ago, every other rich kid in America was going to law school. Those who went to a high-ranked school received one of the hundred-plus six-figure jobs that corporate law firms were tossing around like so much parade candy in those days. Starting salaries rose from $70,000 to $160,000 in, not kidding here, like 10 years or less. Today, law school enrollment is plummeting. Like journalism, there just isn't enough work available to sustain the old numbers. Can you imagine if we ever get it right in America and figure out how wasteful litigation is, and start fixing the system?

The encourage-poor-people-to-open-a-Dunkin'-Donuts plan to solve American poverty might work for a finite number of receptive individuals and families. But it's not a magic bullet. Entrepreneurship isn't a magic bullet. And saying over and over again that people should take Personal Responsibility and become entrepreurial certainly isn't a magic bullet.

I know that completely dismantling the social safety net is every conservative's wettest, wildest dream. But if you really want to be part of the solution and not the problem, then you need to begin understanding that the impoverished, at this point, are simply not equipped to become entrepreneurs on the scale that would really change things, and the current economy is not equipped to facilitate their mass conversion from drug-dealing and prostitution to pastry-making.

Why does it have to be Dunkin' Donuts for everyone?

Greeks in Boston (improbably?) opened pizzerias. Vietnamese on the Gulf coast became shrimpers. Indians in New York City opened newsstands. Koreans opened grocery stores/convenience stores, dry cleaners, and nail salons.

And, these businesses don't need to support the community forever. They are mostly first or second generation businesses. A couple of generations later and their kids are doctors, working on Wall St., or starting technology companies.

 

[amraeder]

And those are all people who had capital to invest. But isn't the problem where the heck they're going to get that capital in the first place?

 

[Dick Whitman]

I'm sorry, but the idea that we are going to solve black poverty in America by telling them really loudly to open brick-and-mortar businesses, in 2014, is preposterous.

 

[Songbird]

Selling cigarettes one at a time till you're choked out.

 

[Boom_70]

As delightful as I find the idea that the American inner-city is going to rise from the ashes on the backs of a Dunkin' Donuts on each corner, it's simply not a sustainable solution on any kind of large scale.

YankeeFan is making the mistake of confusing a solution for individuals with a solution for an entire population of the uneducated and impoverished. You give me enough time with most individuals, along with some background in teaching, and I can probably guide that person to some level of productivity within our society. But as presently constituted, our economy only has so many opportunities available.

Let's assume away every obstacle that might prevent someone from casually pooling together the family's $500,000 seed money. Let's assume that the economy can sustain 1,000 more Dunkin' Donuts. Or even 2,000. Great, 10,000 people, lifted from poverty. Only 50,214,000 to go, by my back-of-the-napkin calcualation.

Sustainability problems aren't confined the impoverished. A few years ago, every other rich kid in America was going to law school. Those who went to a high-ranked school received one of the hundred-plus six-figure jobs that corporate law firms were tossing around like so much parade candy in those days. Starting salaries rose from $70,000 to $160,000 in, not kidding here, like 10 years or less. Today, law school enrollment is plummeting. Like journalism, there just isn't enough work available to sustain the old numbers. Can you imagine if we ever get it right in America and figure out how wasteful litigation is, and start fixing the system?

The encourage-poor-people-to-open-a-Dunkin'-Donuts plan to solve American poverty might work for a finite number of receptive individuals and families. But it's not a magic bullet. Entrepreneurship isn't a magic bullet. And saying over and over again that people should take Personal Responsibility and become entrepreurial certainly isn't a magic bullet.

I know that completely dismantling the social safety net is every conservative's wettest, wildest dream. But if you really want to be part of the solution and not the problem, then you need to begin understanding that the impoverished, at this point, are simply not equipped to become entrepreneurs on the scale that would really change things, and the current economy is not equipped to facilitate their mass conversion from drug-dealing and prostitution to pastry-making.

Why does it have to be Dunkin' Donuts for everyone?

Greeks in Boston (improbably?) opened pizzerias. Vietnamese on the Gulf coast became shrimpers. Indians in New York City opened newsstands. Koreans opened grocery stores/convenience stores, dry cleaners, and nail salons.

And, these businesses don't need to support the community forever. They are mostly first or second generation businesses. A couple of generations later and their kids are doctors, working on Wall St., or starting technology companies.

"Blacks are gifted at worship and celebration" / Reggie White

The problem is that it's hard to monetize that skill on a mass basis.

 

[Dick Whitman]

OK, for the sake of argument, though, let's assume that there are 50,214,000 street corners in America, just waiting for poor black people to open a Dunkin' Donuts or a Chipotle or a pizzeria or an oh-so-profitable newsstand, once they get off their lazy black duffs and pool the family money together.

What is your plan for both incentivizing them to do so, and for equipping them to do so?

Just telling them to do it on SportsJournalists.com?

 

[Dyno]

Outing alert: YF is really a woman named Ligia:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/a-love-of-good-coffee-led-montgomery-county-woman-to-an-unusual-sideline/2014/08/25/9a24a3fe-2c69-11e4-9b98-848790384093_story.html

 

[YankeeFan]

I'm sorry, but the idea that we are going to solve black poverty in America by telling them really loudly to open brick-and-mortar businesses, in 2014, is preposterous.

Not everyone is going to open a business.

But, if some open businesses, that means jobs for others. It means more economic activity in the neighborhood, and more money that stays in the neighborhood.

Koreans, Indians, and Pakistanis have often opened businesses in areas that are largely African-American. This is because they are undeserved, and the capital required is less than in a better area.

(And, in fact it's been a source of tension in places like Harlem, here immigrants have been accused of being "bloodsuckers".)

Look at the businesses that exist in Ferguson. Best I can tell, there's a McDonald's, a BBQ joint, a couple of convenience stores, and a liquor store.

And, the guy that Michael Brown roughed up wasn't African-American. And, to be honest, I'm not sure Big Mike would have shoplifted a box of rellos from an African-American owned store.

 

[YankeeFan]

And those are all people who had capital to invest. But isn't the problem where the heck they're going to get that capital in the first place?

You think all of these people had lots of money to invest at the beginning?

They all used the same formula of people like Mr. Patel in Chicago. They pooled money, they opened low capital businesses, often in less than desirable locations. The businesses were operated/staffed largely by family members, who worked long hours, and took no salary at the beginning.

Once the business turned a profit, they took the money and invested in the next location/business.

 

[Boom_70]

I'm sorry, but the idea that we are going to solve black poverty in America by telling them really loudly to open brick-and-mortar businesses, in 2014, is preposterous.

Not everyone is going to open a business.

But, if some open businesses, that means jobs for others. It means more economic activity in the neighborhood, and more money that stays in the neighborhood.

Koreans, Indians, and Pakistanis have often opened businesses in areas that are largely African-American. This is because they are undeserved, and the capital required is less than in a better area.

(And, in fact it's been a source of tension in places like Harlem, here immigrants have been accused of being "bloodsuckers".)

Look at the businesses that exist in Ferguson. Best I can tell, there's a McDonald's, a BBQ joint, a couple of convenience stores, and a liquor store.

And, the guy that Michael Brown roughed up wasn't African-American. And, to be honest, I'm not sure Big Mike would have shoplifted a box of rellos from an African-American owned store.

You need to start following Nate Silver's 538. Ferguson does have a side of town
that would be considered upscale complete with coffee shop and micro brew pub.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ferguson-missouri/

 

[LongTimeListener]

NFL can't be liking this -- at least for now, Maurice Jones-Drew's touchdown celebration is "hands up, don't shoot."

http://blog.sfgate.com/raiders/2014/08/25/hands-up-dont-shoot-touchdown-pose-important-to-jones-drew/

"I am raising three African American boys," Jones-Drew told the Chronicle. "Whenever you see things like that … and it's not just Ferguson, I was in Jacksonville when Trayvon Martin happened, I was in Jacksonville when the gas station shooting over the loud music happened. Those things touch home."

Since he plays for the Raiders, though, it probably won't come up during the regular season.