Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, August 25, 2006
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Race and economics
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Andrew Young's statement that blacks have been "ripped off" by stores run by Jews, Koreans, and Arabs has been rightly criticized and he has apologized. But these irresponsible remarks have wider implications than Andrew Young and wider implications than their political repercussions.

For decades, one of the biggest blind spots of most civil rights "leaders" and "spokesmen" for the black community has been their utter lack of knowledge of economics.

As a purely factual matter, prices do tend to be higher -- and the quality of service and products lower -- in stores in low-income neighborhoods. But the knee-jerk assumption that this represents "exploitation" or "racism" ignores the economics of the situation.

Many of the ghetto stores charging high prices are struggling to survive, while supermarkets in other neighborhoods are very profitable charging lower prices. There are many reasons for this.

The reason least likely to be acknowledged by those who blame the store owners is that crime, shoplifting, vandalism, and riots have raised the costs, both directly and by causing insurance rates and the costs of security to be higher in ghetto neighborhoods.

The costs of delivering goods to small neighborhood stores are also higher than the costs of delivering goods to huge supermarkets. Delivering a hundred cartons of milk to a supermarket is cheaper than delivering ten cartons of milk to each of ten local stores scattered around town.

Selling a customer $50 worth of groceries in a supermarket takes less time than selling ten customers $5 worth of groceries in a little neighborhood store. Faster turnover is one of the keys to a supermarket's lower prices.

A supermarket can prosper with one cent of clear profit on each dollar of sales because that dollar comes back to be re-used again and again in the course of a year.

If the inventory of a supermarket sells out in two weeks, that one cent comes back 26 times in the course of a year. This means that a penny of profit on a dollar from each sale becomes more than a quarter on a dollar annually.

Few local stores can match that. Not only are the delivery and overhead costs of the local store likely to be higher, the slowness with which its inventory turns over means that even higher prices may not fully compensate for such differences.

The cumulative effect of such cost differences is that prices are often higher and at the same time profit rates lower in poor neighborhoods.

One of the factors limiting what a ghetto store can charge is that many ghetto residents already shop in other neighborhoods, when the price savings are enough to cover bus fare or taxi fare.

Every increase in prices risks losing still more customers.

Many of the same black "leaders" who accuse local store owners of making exorbitant profits also complain that supermarkets seldom locate in ghetto neighborhoods. Do they think supermarkets are against making money, if ghettos are so profitable?

The poor quality of many goods and of the service in ghetto stores is also a result of what has happened in these neighborhoods over the years.

My niece, living in the same Harlem neighborhood where I grew up in the 1940s, often complained of rude service and bad quality goods, as well as their high prices -- complaints that were not at all what I experienced growing up in that same neighborhood.

There were far more stores back in the 1940s and it would have been financial suicide for any given store to treat its customers the way ghetto stores can get away with treating them today.

What happened in between? Ghetto riots happened, beginning in the 1960s. Many stores that were looted or burned out in those riots never re-opened. Nor were many other people ready to come in from outside to replace them. Nor were local residents.

People who have neither the efficiency nor the courtesy to compete with other stores in middle-class neighborhoods can survive running ghetto stores because of the lack of competition.

Many black "leaders" and "spokesmen" who romanticized ghetto riots as "uprisings" against oppression are now displaying their ignorance of both history and economics. Those ghetto residents who had nothing to do with those riots are still paying the price.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
One solution..
....a Wal-Mart in every ghetto...

If Wal-Mart were a gvt program...
every liberal would own it. They would trumpet its successes and vilify alternatives. But WalMart is a private, for-profit company, so liberals hate it. Which is why I hate them.

If Wal-Mart were a gvt program...
every liberal would own it. They would trumpet its successes and vilify alternatives. But WalMart is a private, for-profit company, so liberals hate it. Which is why I hate them.

If Wal-Mart were a gvt program...
every liberal would own it. They would trumpet its successes and vilify alternatives. But WalMart is a private, for-profit company, so liberals hate it. Which is why I hate them.

If Wal-Mart were a gvt program...
every liberal would own it. They would trumpet its successes and vilify alternatives. But WalMart is a private, for-profit company, so liberals hate it. Which is why I hate them.

The economic picture you paint
Is very true in all cases. Race does not matter. A supermarket chain, or a Walmart etc. Will not build a store until many months of study and surveying of the potential customers. If they find that that the customer criteria meets their specks, that is, it's determined that there will be enough continued customers to support their profit margin. They will build. If there is not the amount of customers necessary, They will not.

We that live in rural areas have the same problem. Living 30 miles, one way, from the "Big" stores. We buy small things from our little resident market and pay the higher price per item because it is convenient and cheaper than spending gas money to make a 60 mile round trip. When it comes time to "stalk up" We make the 60 mi. trip to the big markets.

And no, if your thinking, from my description, that we are elite and chose to live in a expensive area you would be wrong. Our little town is a desert community with a mixture of Anglos, Negro's, Mexicans, Cambodians, to name a few. We all get along and shop the same way. Race, never enters the picture.

Simple Economics
Typical, typical, typical, the liberals just don't get it. It is simple economics. I teach Ecnonmics in a somewhat rural high school in the state of Georgia and you can bet this will be required reading with discussion in my classroom.

Ghetto
Somewhat off the subject, but, if we (as a nation) were to rid the 'dope' epidemic, would this wipe out ghetto environments or, at least help out tremendously? Just thinking, if dope were gone, there would be less crime through theft and breakins which would lead to less spent on security and more money for durggies to purchase autos for travel to other outlets.........and, basically, no dope, more money for all to spend anywhere which would help the entire nation. Also, fewer needs for street gangs to terrorize neighborhoods which would bring school attendence up.......improving educational efforts for the 'would be dopers' and the beat goes on. A no dope nation is a win / win deal for all. It worked in Singapore, it can work here and should.

I believe dope is the / a big reason for all things wrong in our great nation. I support war on drugs and war on terror. Whatsayyou?

"A WalMart in Every Ghetto...."
Yet everytime they try to move into parts of the world that would benefit from extra jobs and fresher cheaper groceries--say, inside the Chicago city limits--Whole Foods-shopping rich white libs pass ordinances to keep them out. Disgusting.

neighborhood stores
a number of years ago my synogogue shared services and breakfast meetings with a predominately black church. as a matter of fact, the reverend of that church was emanual cleaver, currently representing this district in congress.
at one of these breakfasts i sat at a table joined by four or so members of his church. these were all young, bright black professionals. we talked about racism and anti-semitism.
to my amazement, all of these educated professionals held resentment toward jews. why after all the participation of jews in the civil rights marches in the south and my perception of a shared history of discrimination and even slavery would these people resent us (me being jewish)?
their answers were all the same. when they grew up it was jews who owned their neighborhood stores. it was the jews who charged high prices and ripped off their parents. it was the jews who added (according to their version of urban mythology) usorious fees to the open accounts the jewish store owners allowed their parents to maintain.
well the jews owned the stores because it was the jews who were the previous inhabitants of these neighborhoods. the prices were high because as the brilliant mr sowell points out, they didn't have the purchasing power of the giant suburban markets. these were the first form of the current "quick trip" stores. and usorious interest rates?! i asked these bright young folks how that worked. well, they replied, when our parents would run out of money in the middle of the week, these local store owners would "run a tab" for them until they got their next paycheck. and they were certain that these evil jews added money onto the "tab".
i asked what supermarket would allow them to walk out with food to feed their families without having paid cash for said food. did they suppose that there were times when these little jewish store owners didn't get paid back?
economics 101 with a masters degree in self-loathing. that's what i took from those enlightening breakfast meetings.

So what else is new
Libs have been singing the same song for generations. They are so far removed from reality and enmeshed in "feel goodisms" that they simply have no clue. What is more important they do not care. They only want to keep their power.

Economics 1848
The libs (socialists) don't get CAPITALIST economics. They do get MARXIST economics.

Assume the socialists took over the USA completely. Under their ideology, the only stores would be the big-box stores. Mom & Pop stores are too inefficient and promote the evils of competition.

That's the real hypocrisy of the left.

Race
Have any of you posters ever glanced at Mr. Sowell's picture?

Jman...
You are on the right track. Unfortunately, I don't think you can simply eliminate a vice like drugs by declaring war on it. Another economic reality is that if somebody wants something bad enough, they will pay whatever it takes. And if somebody is willing to pay whatever it takes, there will be somebody else willing to supply it for a handsome profit. From the supplier point of view, profitability includes the risk of getting caught and punished. An organization forms with the real money and motivation rising to the top. Suddenly, there is enough money to pay off the necessary politicians and law enforcement. No matter how you slice it, there will be a black market that develops with corrosive effects on society whenever you outlaw something like drugs or booze.

An alternative is to force the user to take personal responsibility. It might not work, either, for a number of reasons, but I believe it is worth a try. Stop worrying about the sellers. If there is no risk in dealing in drugs, the price will come way down and you will eliminate the motivaion for turf wars and other corrosive problems. Heck, even Wal-Mart might end up selling recreational drugs. But the key is to hold the drug user accountable for his actions. We do this only partially with alcohol. We don't do it at all for tobacco. Let the government withdraw the "safety nets" for addicts. Let the addict himself, or at least his family or friends be responsible for actions taken under the influence or health problems stemming from abuse. Eliminate welfare checks and other sources of income for able-bodied people who are too stoned to hold a job. Suddenly, I believe there would be a lot less incentive for people to get high. It might be a better self-regulating solution to the drug problem. Maybe there could be more focus on enforcing a limited scope of laws and regulations like underage drug use or drug use in schools rather than a blanket effort to eliminate all drug use.

Unfortunately, the root cause of the problem is poor parenting. Parenting skills have declined for many reasons, but they are not strictly related to wealth. A lot of wealthy parents do a poor job of raising kids. But if you don't have the wealth or prospects for income to raise a family, you shouldn't be having children. If you have the wealth, but don't have the willingness to do what it takes to raise a family, you also ought to avoid having children. Too many people are having children as an ornament rather than as a commitment.

There You Go Again
Using facts, logic and reason to debunk yet another popular race-industry myth. Darn you to heck, Dr. Sowell. [Insert quiet chuckle here]

Unfortunately, the people whose income is dependent upon perpetuating these myths won't be affected by your thoughtful commentary. I just hope their wider audience is reading your work and learning in the process.

Higher prices don't equal higher profits
As a resident of Baltimore (NOT in the city itself, thank God), I have heard all too much complaining about the so-called ghetto tax.

I've also seen first-hand the conditions under which small merchants must work in the 'hood, and the risks they take. Even in this semi-respectable suburb where I live, the convenience store owners feel the need to turn a deaf ear to verbal abuse from customers, lest things turn violent. That is shameful.

Assume a large chain store opened in "the ghetto." Besides the problems Dr. Sowell has mentioned is the very real problem of WHO WOULD WORK THERE? The worst parts of Baltimore City (the North Avenue corridor, for those who know it) are home to people who have no ambition and no work ethic. One need only drive through to observe this. So, could this hypothetical chain store employ them? Would they even apply for work? Assuming not, what would it take to entice workers to commute from less-risky parts of town, and put up with constant problems on the job?

I've seen two pharmacy chains build from the ground up in these "ghetto" areas, only to abandon ship two years later because of bad economics. Walgreens seems to be attempting to serve this market, and time will tell whether they can craft a retail model that will supply this community without taking huge risks and losses.

For always Right;
So? What's your point? You just now realizing Dr. Sowell is a Negro? Are you about to reveal your prejudice?

Wal-Mart blocked in Atl
An old mall, the Avondale Mall off Mem.Drive in Atlanta, sits empty for many years now; bad things happen there at night... things that wouldn't happen if the rich white liberals down the road at Agnes Scott College and Avondale Estates didn't block a Super WalMart/Mixed Use development from going in there, creating jobs and offering a multitude of goods and services to the community adjacent. You'll find a variety of economic classes in the area, mostly lower middle to middle class, but sprinkled with young black professionals trying to renovate and bring up the community, as well as those on welfare.If ever a situation cried out for this type of development, this was it.
But the anti Walmart snobs and college professors from down the road had more reps on the local board, and had more free time to organize... and well, there you go. Liberalism.

Economics
jman:

I personally don't use drugs, but I agree with Feedfwd that prohibition doesn't work.

Let's look at the other side for just a minute and see what the effects of legalizing drugs would do.

1. There would be no black market in drugs eliminating the gang controlled drug sellers.

2. The local, state and federal governments could put taxes on them, increasing revenue.

3. The black market economy that currently exists and now pays NO taxes would come under control and put those taxes back into the system.

4. Laws governing alcohol abuse already exist. Adapt them to any form of substance abuse.

5. Individuals would have to face up to their own responsibility. We already have addicts and that will never, never change. But this would help reduce the stigma associated with it and let them seek treatment for something they must hide now.

6. Communities now blighted by the drug usage and drug violence would now get a chance to clean up

So. What you would get is: Increased tax revenue, elimination of the black market and the crimes associated with it, more help for addicts and a chance for communities to heal.

Sounds reasonable to me.


If Wal-Mart were a govt program
...their prices would be twice as high, their service half as good, congress would have made them a government mandated monopoly prohibiting any competition, and they'd only be open 2 hours a day. See the United States Postal Service as an example of this.

(Yes, the USPS is a government mandated monopoly. It is unlawful for anyone else to deliver First Class mail. In fact, the Boy Scouts of America were once fined $50,000 for putting Christmas cards in people's mailboxes. They were made a monopoly in the mid-1800s, and according to the congressional record, the reason was that they thought the USPS would be unable to compete with private mail carriers, ergo, instead of making the USPS more efficient, they simply banned private competition.)

Sorry. Sorry. Sorry.
Don't think I hit post more than once ...Gahhd...what a loser!


always Right - Not!
Dr. Sowell is the perfect picture of conservative bootstrap ideology. By drawing attention to his race you reveal the bigotry that is rampant among liberals.

God bless America, where everyone, regardless of race, can become a success by applying the necessary effort. Government meddling hampers success more often than it aids.

Prolific
Thank you, Dr. Sowell. Best column on TownHall 3 DAYS IN A ROW!

Despite the facts
the libs will continue to cry foul.

Sounds a lot like Atlas Shrugged. (Perhaps one of the best economic novels ever)

race matters
I claim that Sowell's comments have nothing to do with race.
But, notice how folks are dying to inject the race card into the discussion---is guilt creeping in?

Black Entrepreneurs are needed
In the 1960's, my mother worked at the local Montgomery-Wards. A couple of Black girls started a lunch-wagon service, and stopped at Wards to provide coffee and snacks to the auto mechanics.

At first, there was some resistance, but quickly the mechanics (all White) came around. The girls delivered good products and service. And, the fact they were really good looking did not hurt.

Not only was this a rare case of Black entrepreneurship, it was even more unique in doing business to a wider (White) clientele.

Most importantly, it may have changed attitudes about race.

Why don't the "revs" provide seed money for other legitimate Black entrepreneurs - especially for those willing to expand their business into the larger community?

Superb explanation. And what law...
Mr. Sowell needs to be prepared to be vilified for stating that the '60s riots were damaging in any way to anyone or any thing. Leftists won't like that!

Also, what law says blacks can't open stores in "their" neighborhoods? If Jesse or Al want to change that "none of the money goes to blacks", why don't they underwrite ghetto stores run by blacks?

Once saw a TV special, with John Stossel I think, and he was talking about small businesses with a young group of blacks. There were repeated, for a minute or two, *very bitter* recriminations against the Small Business Administration and, to a much lesser extent, local banks about not "refusing" to lend to blacks, etc..

Stossel wanted to check it out and so asked "Who applied for a loan or assistance and didn't get it" *NO ONE* in the group had ever even asked for a loan or grant. Yet they spent huge amounts of time vilifying the "refusers"!

That makes no sense at all, atlhough I'm sure Jesse and Al understand.

CORRECTION
instead of:
... local banks about not "refusing" ...
should be:
... local banks about "refusing" ...

Thank you
it is nice to see in writing thoughts i have had for awhile. As for wal-mart i only have problems with them when instead of taking over an already established building that is available they dig up land where kids and animals play and wild life lives. i had to call and have some groundhogs and other animals rescued because we couldn't pass and bills/legislature/whatever to have walmart not build in that one area. there available space 2 miles down the street that was the same aproximate size as the store they opened. Thank you MR Sowell again for a well written article.

elsinore
Who says the irreverends don't help black entreprenuers? The irreverend Jackson got his black son a Budweiser distributorship in Chicago. You see? He really does care.

Economics
Unfortunately I see too many people who suspect that every establishment is somehow a Gov't entity. As if all stores are somehow owned and operated by the Gov't and therefore unfairly distributed, and not by enterprising people actually tryingto be self-sufficient. (Oh the humanity!)

Another subject in the story
Anyone notice how Andrew Young and Jesse Jackson get a pass for anti-Semitism spoken as part of a public speech but Mel Gibson is demonized for drunken ravings made while being arrested?

Beowolf subscribing to myths
beowulfe writes: Friday, August, 25, 2006 10:44 AM
"If Wal-Mart were a govt program
...their prices would be twice as high, their service half as good, congress would have made them a government mandated monopoly prohibiting any competition, and they'd only be open 2 hours a day. See the United States Postal Service as an example of this.

(Yes, the USPS is a government mandated monopoly. It is unlawful for anyone else to deliver First Class mail. In fact, the Boy Scouts of America were once fined $50,000 for putting Christmas cards in people's mailboxes. They were made a monopoly in the mid-1800s, and according to the congressional record, the reason was that they thought the USPS would be unable to compete with private mail carriers, ergo, instead of making the USPS more efficient, they simply banned private competition.) "


Sorry to bring bad news to you, but the USPS does a remarkable job doing what they do for so little money. Although the reason is that they have to be self supporting so there is a bottom line to how they perform. Do mistakes happen, of course they do. Even if they are 99.99% accurate in mail delivery, they would lose over a million pieces of mail per day. They lose less than 100,000 temporarily. You are correct that most gvt programs are as wasteful of our money as could possibly be imagined because the system rewards those that can't do the job with the money provided by giving them more money next year. If you do a good job and save the taxpayers money, then you get less next year as punishment for good behavior. That is why the saying "If government is the answer, you asked the wrong question." is so valid. Our form of government was the best ever designed, unfortunately, it has been usurped by politicians and made almost unrecognizable to any that think like the original framers of our constitution.

Race and Economics
There's a very simple explanation for the "problem," and an honest answer to the question, "If blacks feel that Jewish, Korean, Arab, etc. owners of neighborhood grocery stores are harmful to their comunities, why don't they open up stores themselves?" will furnish it. Is your answer that there are not enough blacks with the ability or the money? Try again, and this time try to give an honest answer.

Ghetto groceries
Dr. Sowell has done it yet again. I couldn't agree with him more. These so called black "leaders" are always running their mouth about something. In my opinion, they are about as bad as some people in the middle east. Always playing the damn victim. Never accepting responsibility for their own actions, but always quick to pass the blame.
I think this article can be summed up with this statement:
For decades, one of the biggest blind spots of most civil rights "leaders" and "spokesmen" for the black community has been their utter lack of knowledge of economics.

Thank you Dr. Sowell

ladisney
that is easy to answer. americans love to see the mighty fall which is why Mel Gibson got so much press over his idiot behavior. And while those are his feelings at the same time of his speaking ill there was a muslim who held a 13 yr old at gun point shot 5 jewish woman killing one. which was the worse offence? the irreverands {i like that one...} incite these kinds of thoughts and behaviors however they are not held accountable - like farrakon they speak evil but if you would say the same and change jew to anything else {with the exception of christian} they would be all over it.

irresponsible remarks?
I'd say they were factually truthful remarks and there was nothing irresponsible about them, in fact the comments are entirely appropriate.

I don't think Mr Young insinuated racism but merely that those little ghetto stores were a rip off, that fact that they are mostly owned by people other than blacks who are mostly Jews, Arabs, Koreans is irrelevant but truthfull.

I think the point was that the "friendly neighborhood Mom & pop shop" was good for the "community" is a myth and giant corporate enties subject to all of our employment laws & diversity programs & mandates is good for blacks for black employment as well as black consumers.

It's not a "race" thing but an "economic" thing-that was true but shaking the finger at the "irresponsible black man" when he tells the truth is wrong, those small shop owners do exploit those inner city areas, that's what capitalism is all about-exploitation!

"Exploitation" is where the money is, even Walmart is exploitating the neighborhood's excess supply of cheap unemployed labor & lack of retail competition when they open a store in those areas.

Smitty
If it is not about race, why bring it up? Plus, look at the source.

Hard Thought - think again.
7. People would think doing drugs is right since it is legal. This would increase use.

8. It would become discriminatory to not hire or fire someone because of their drug use.

9. It would promote the increasingly hedonistic view we live with today.

10. It would sap the ambition of a growing number of users (as it does today.)

11. Young people would still get it illegally, like they do alcohol today, regardless of regulations.

12. Smoking marijuana is more damaging to health (think throat and lung cancer, emphasyma (sp?) etc.) than tobacco.

etc.

Why is Walmart always the bad guy?
I know this is a bit off topic but I couldn't help but wonder why Wal*Mart always catches so much hell from the lefties, but Target, K-Mart, Costco, etc. are never villified??

Wal*Mart has saved my family several hundred $$ per year verses the "local" grocery store which we only shop at in DIRE EMERGENCIES. Many middle and lower income families couldn't survive (comfortably) with out stores like Wal*Mart. My hat's off to CAPITALISM, it keeps the prices low.

Sir Michael
You must be from the government...can't let people make and learn from their own bad choices , gotta regulate everything.

From the stories I've heard you still can't fire someone on a first offense (substance abuse) they have to be offered rehab. Atleast that's the policy my husbands employer takes.

I think it should all be legalized and taxed heavily, it's more efficient than fighting a LOSING war on drugs. Besides it would free up more prison space for all of the pedophiles , rapists, murderers, and theives.

As far as recreational drugs go what's the difference between that and alcohol?? As long as you don't get behind the wheel of a car and endanger innocent lives I don't care what you do in your own home. Bottom line Prohibition didn't work it made more criminals than it eliminated. Who cares if someone wants to go get high, as long as they aren't causing you or someone else direct bodily harm stay out of their business. But that's just my opinion...I'll get off my soap box now :)

Two Questions
Two questions that EVERY Federal and State Leaders needs to be asked!

Question no 1: How much do YOU earn as a Senator from this great State that you serve per year? Please all income from your position as an Elected Official?

Question no 2: Do you know of ONE Elected Official in Washington DC, or any Elected Official in any United States of American State, either now in Office or that is running for ANT Office, Federal or State that REALLY cares what the majority of the people they represent desire?

Iloveit writes race matters
YES, race matters. Dr. Sowell, Bill Cosby, Condolizza Rice, Ward Connerly and Dr. Alan Keyes have a much more powerful impact with the black community because they are black. And thank goodness for them. They constantly remind me that the loud trumpeters of victimhood don't really look like any of the black folks i work with. It amuses me that the large majority of my conservative heroes and heroines happen to be black. Its true that they can speak the truth where whites can not. You go, guys. You are leading the way.

Just one question...
Where do Je$$e Jack$on and Al $harpton live? I have a feeling that it's not a tenement house!

SassafrasTea~~

Just one more question...
Why do we never hear of the great inner city projects from irreverands (I like that one too!) Jack$on and $harpton?

Isn't that why they shakedown all those nasty corporations... to give back to the people they say are so "held down" by said corporate man???

As stated by many on this thread, entrepreneurship (i.e., hard work in general!) is what gets you out of poverty (although it certainly doesn't feel that way sometimes! :-).

SassafrasTea~~

Wal Mart is Socialist
Probably the reason that Wal Mart is not in more ghettos is that there is nobody in power there to pay them off. My strapped city paid the Arkansas Mafia more than a million dollars to keep them from moving to another, nearby city. And you think that the Reverend$ Jack$on and $harpton have a monopoly on extortion?

Race and Economics and Econrules
Dr. Sowell is always correct. Right, too.

Economics was not a subject available during the years of my education about a hundred years ago. However, it should be a required subject beginning in, say, kindergarten.

More power to an economics teacher who will use tools of education, such as this column of Dr. Sowell's, not found in textbooks. My experience in life is that K-12 economics would have improved my own understanding of this very, very complex matter.

Kindergarten itself might have helped, too.

Dr. Sowell
Dr. Sowell is almost always correct, I hope he lives forever.

Why can't a guy like Sowell become president?

Race Matters (no more)
At the time of my birth (60 yrs. ago) the principled
conservative position was that the colour of a person's skin mattered far more than character.


Now here we are 180 degrees later and the people
on this board act as if the first 400 yrs. of this wonderful American experience did not happen!


If what you say is true, THANK GOD.

PS. Glad ya'll get a kick out of Mr. Sowell, for he certainly get's a kick out of throwing wood on this fire.

Very True
I travel to all levels of neighborhoods as part of my job (and live in a bad neighborhood) and it's amazing the difference in attitude and service between workers in a bad neighborhood and a good one.

You can travel just three or four miles and it's like night and day.

It's really sad what has happened to so many neighborhoods in this country, how the thugs and hooligans have been allowed to take over.

Decent people (95% of all people in any neighborhood) should not have to live like that.

Re: Stan 47, Shempy LaRue, always Right
"I've also seen first-hand the conditions under which small merchants must work in the 'hood, and the risks they take."

Ditto. When I lived at the corner of Charles and 23rd (the infamous "Motel Hell" building), I couldn't believe the amount of crap the staff of the little sub shop/corner store a block behind me took from the customers. The bulletproof glass is definitely there for a reason. Not to mention the shoplifting, frequent product/property damage by angry hoodrats, and generally poor condition of the building itself.

Anyone think this might all contribute to driving up prices? Gee, no way. The shop owners are are just eeevil capitalists "exploiting" the ghetto, like Smitty says. (sigh, roll eyes, etc.)

Shempy:
"An old mall, the Avondale Mall off Mem.Drive in Atlanta, sits empty for many years now; bad things happen there at night... things that wouldn't happen if the rich white liberals down the road at Agnes Scott College and Avondale Estates didn't block a Super WalMart/Mixed Use development from going in there..."

If by "bad things" you mean it's become a drug house, as I suspect you do, then where would those poor little kids at the college go to get their dope after Wal-Mart took over? Gee Shemp, how can you be so heartless?

always Right:
"Now here we are 180 degrees later and the people
on this board act as if the first 400 yrs. of this wonderful American experience did not happen!"

Who said it didn't happen? What the posters on this board get, and you seem to miss, is that the economics involved in this problem and in it's solution are the same regardless of race, or the last 400 years. Got any better ideas? I doubt it, and either way you certainly haven't posted any.

Race and Economics
What Andrew Young said was the truth, to a certain degree. He forgot to say that Negroes played a part in that transaction.

They would rather go to the corner market that is owned by Mr. Wang, Mr. Habib or Rabbi Gold, and pay higher prices for subpar merchandise, than take the time to go to a more established chain store like Wal-Mart. Why, maybe conveinence, who really knows.

Living in the metropolitan L.A. area, I have seen this personally. Also, as somone how has Arab and Negro ancestry, I see this with a jaundice eye

Race Matters (no more)
always Right wrote -

"At the time of my birth (60 yrs. ago) the principled conservative position was that the colour of a person's skin mattered far more than character."

I say that character matters much more that race, but very few of the black leaders today have any character to speak of. Instead of encouraging the people in their communities to accept responsibility for their own lives and circumstances, they cry "Foul!!!" and "We're all victims of the white man's government."

This is why it's refreshing to read the editorials of people such as Dr. Sowell. A black man who has chosen to make something of himself and refuse to adapt to the victimhood syndrome.

Race Matters
We in the Black community have to start to take
responsibilty for our own actions at some time.
If we continues to accept yhe victim's mentality
we will never move to the next level,economically,politically or socially.

We can't allow our politcians of the old school
continue to allow our coomunties to regress.

We as a community have more politcians,teachers
educated folks and preachers than anytime in the history of this country. The Black still has not been able to move past certain ECONOMIC
situations.

Until we can come up with real leaders that understand that there is a direct relationship between poverty and crime and the building of institutions to address these issues we might
as well become museum pieces because we will become extinct.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.