>>>Please don't tell me that minorities are been kept away from schools/Universities and jobs.
>
>>From the better ones only.
>
>I don't know about that. Have you ever seen who goes to Harvard and other Ivy league schools? The student body list is so full of foreign names.
So what does that tell you? That education is there for those who can pay, and it's an exportable commodity. How many of these foreign names are there because USA is paying for them, and how many are there because someone paid for them?
If you meant that these are all the names of recent immigrants, who haven't anglicized their names, that may mean that they've finished some of the previous stages of their education in their home countries and are doing fairly well here. All three of my daughters are/were straight A students - even the one that had finished only one year of school when we came. Conclude what you want from that.
>>IMO, there's no way out of having the poor, as long as we have a lessez-faire capitalism and unrestrained corporations. The powers that be will always need certain level of unemployment (6% unemployment is good for the economy, they say), or else they'd have to deal with employees' demands, and start paying them properly and give them benefits and even, maybe even, decrease their profit rate because of that.
>
>Interesting theory.
Sure, but the practice is quite boring. Same old, same old, all over again.
>>Charity and/or throwing money at the poor will not work in the long run because it doesn't address the cause. And the cause is the corporate need for a certain level of unemployment... which is something that's been out there for a few centuries now.
>
>I think people like NAACP, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton needs them more.
NAACP is a people? Interesting theory. As for the other two, I figure they'd fit the bill, being peddlers of spiritual goods. You can throw Pat Robertson into the mix.
I've heard expression "charity industry" here. And just like any other industry, it can't exist when there's no market for it.
