So - today I was reading the Washington Examiner and I saw the following quote:
Furthermore, the proposal would affect only Metrobus, not Metrorail. The bus system already provides less consistent service, with one of every four buses arriving late. Many of the routes already have truncated schedules, running only during rush hours on weekdays. Meanwhile, transit agency statistics show that Metrorail serves a higher proportion of higher-income and white riders.
“We are balancing the budget on the backs of the low income and people of color,” Craig Simpson testified on behalf of the system’s largest union, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 689.
The last statement about balancing budget on the "people of color" totally PISSED ME OFF. Why does race have to factor into this? Then should I inject and say that in the 2 years I've been using the metro system, I've yet to come across a White train operator (I dont know if any of you have) or even at the station booths. Does that mean that Metro is favoring only African Americans at the expense of other MAJORITY folk? WTF.
Get off RACE people. It's only the color of the skin. Everything doesn't have to come down to RACE and people shouldn't use the fact that there was a racial divide about 50 years ago to take advantage of it today and get what they want. If you want to move away from racial difference, perhaps you should stop trying to use it to get what you want in life. Otherwise, you'll always be looked down upon BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING DOWN UPON YOURSELF!
3 comments:
Points like this generally are that the people who make the least are the most likely to get fired causing others at their level to work harder without more pay. Those at the top choosing who to fire don't pick themselves, don't work harder, and don't take paycuts they cannot afford.
I really don't understand your comment. Are you pointing out that my rant was uncalled for? I'm really not against saying "Poor people will get affected". I'm pissed off that he had to inject race into it. If he'd just said "Lots of people who barely make enough money would get affected" I wouldn't have taken offense or gotten pissed off.
I think you can't really say with a straight face that there is no longer a racial divide in this country. Should there be one? Of course not, but attitudes and beliefs are subject to a fair bit of inertia, positive and negative. Things are better than they were fifty years ago, and they will be better in another fifty years, but right now there are still issues, without a doubt.
The problem, and a big reason that race is injected into discussions like this where it seemingly ought not be injected is because being poor is often synonymous with being non-white. This of course is a problem that stems from historical issues like slavery and Jim Crow laws that weren't lifted until the 1970s in some areas, and also from the fact that most immigrants are non-white.
This guy is wrong to include 'people of color' in the discussion. It should say 'low income and people without alternate means of transportation'.
All that said, it's my firm belief that you can take ANYTHING that comes from the mouth of a union boss with a grain of salt. Unions are one of the great grift machines, and their continued existence depends on lies and fear, in the form of compelling soundbites.
Post a Comment