Where Do Drug Users Get Money for Drugs?

The poor are not poor due to lack of money, but because of how they spend it.

I mentioned before that there are "poor" people in America who claim to be broke all the time or living paycheck-to-paycheck, but yet work at jobs sometimes paying in the six figures.  How is this possible?  And how can someone making half as much have money in the bank and no debts?  It makes no sense, does it?

I get this all the time.  People dismiss what I say in this blog as the ranting of some "rich guy" - you know, one of those evil 1%'ers who makes millions a year.  Yet, the peak of my earning years was not much more than what some of these guys were making in the fracking fields during the heyday - probably less, in fact.  The difference was, of course, that although I squandered a lot, I saved a lot, too.

A lot of money passes through the hands of the poor.  I recounted before the conversation I overheard from Mr. Mullet-head on the beach in the Bahamas.  The guy was complaining he was broke, but also recited a litany of internal-combustion powered vehicles he had in his barn - all broken - that he was still making payments on.

The list goes on and on.  Folks working in the car factories making huge salaries and banking none of it - but with a list of payments as long as your arm.   They make "good money" but save none of it.  Do you feel sorry for them when the factory closes and they are broke?   I don't.

It is like the guy profiled in the paper today who lost $800,000 by betting on an exchange-traded fund that was paying back 18% in dividends for a few years - until it went from $14 a share to 20 cents.  He's bankrupt now, as he put all his money - his "life's savings" - in that one single, highly risky investment.   Do we feel sorry for him?   Particularly when he was the guy laughing at you, just last year, for being so "tame" in your investments, by diversifying your portfolio and not investing in things you didn't understand.

A lot of people who claim to be "poor" actually have a lot of money pass through their hands - the key word is "pass through" as they fail to snag any of it as it tears through their wallets.  Not even a tiny amount can be retained, it seems, when some luxury item is for sale.

Drug addicts are a prime example of this effect.   Drugs are very expensive to buy, and drug addicts spend an awful lot of money - often other people's money - on their habit.  They find the money, somehow, to buy drugs.  In fact, it is pretty amazing how they manage to do this.  And I say this as a former drug user - looking back it was amazing as broke as I was all the time, how I could find $20 to buy a bag of weed.

But if you re-read that last sentence, you find the key.  I was broke all the time, because I was buying bags of weed - and drinks at the bar, and a six-pack from the convenience store (paid for by a check that bounced) and so on and so forth.

I recounted before about a friend of mine whose husband decided, in law school, to start smoking crack. Marijuana is not a gateway drug and donchuforgetit!   He went to George Mason Law School, home of Robert Bork (for a time).  It was then in a bad part of Arlington (which no longer has bad parts, but just good parts and really good parts) in an old Sears building (and they say you can't re-used old retail!).   He ran into a drug dealer and asked him if he had any pot for sale.  No pot, but this fun new drug called "crack"!  Whydoncha try it?

Well a year later, he's spending the mortgage money on crack.   His wife says, "But then we won't be able to pay the mortgage!" and he replies, "but think of all the crack we'll have!"    Like I said, any idiot can be a lawyer, and I'm living proof of that.   Last I heard, he was in jail for running a meth lab.  But of course, that's all been glamorized on a television now, right?  Sadly, I've run into people who have tried to convince me it was possible to have a "responsible meth habit" - although the word "habit" seems to negate this.   I ran away as quickly as I could.

So where do drug users get money from drugs?  The stereotype is the drug user living under a bridge, homeless, begging for money from passing cars.   And yes, there are people like that, who can collect hundreds of dollars a day this way - sometimes a hundred dollars an hour, in a crowded tourist district.   Money passes through their hands, but doesn't manage to stick.   Well-meaning tourists give them money, thinking they are going to spend it on medicine for their baby (as the weathered cardboard sign claims) but the only "medicine" it is buying is for Momma.

I said "well-meaning tourists" but they really aren't well-meaning, are they?   They claim they give money to a drug addict because they care about others.  But giving money to a panhandling drug addict is like giving a loaded handgun to a suicidal person.  "Here, let me help you!" they say, "this will speed things up!"   The other side of the coin is that they usually make a big show out of handing out this money, so everyone will see what a great altruistic generous person they are.  In other words, they are getting something out of this, which is evil.  Altruism usually is.

But not all drug addicts are the guy-under-the-bridge.   In fact, they are a small minority.   Many have jobs or are in college or are living with parents or otherwise have some sort of home, income, and whatnot.  They may be people you know, work with, or even friends - although usually you figure out pretty quickly about the latter.   They spend - like I did - an inordinate amount of money on recreational drugs, and then wonder where all their money went.

And then they borrow.  My lawyer friend divorced her husband when he decided to spend the mortgage money on crack.  Over a year later, she realized he took out loans in her name.   But many others take out loans, usually in the form of credit cards, in their own names.  Or they do a refinance of their home mortgage.  No, no one takes the cash-out and brings it directly to their drug dealer.   Rather, they use it to pay off the credit card debts, which in turn allowed them to use "excess cash" to buy drugs.

It can take a decade or more for a credit card crises or debt crises to materialize.   This is true for the drug addict, for the consumer, or even for corporations.   We see companies like Sears or JC Penny stagger on with ever-increasing debt loads and declining income.   You wonder whether they would have survived even if people kept going to malls.  Once you hollow out a company with debt, the end game isn't a matter of "if" but "when".

Of course, there reaches a point in the drug users life where borrowing money isn't in the cards anymore.   They lose their job, they lose the house, their credit rating is shot, they lose their car  - they lose everything.   This is largely how homelessness happens - it isn't like they say on the television, where someone just loses their job and is homeless the next day.    The working person goes out and tries to find a new job - they also collect unemployment for a while.    They sell off possessions, they do something.   The drug addict searches out more drugs.  At that point in their life, there is little to be gained by interviewing for a job - no one will hire them.

So the panhandling and stealing starts.   Hang out on a street corner with a cardboard sign and hey, you're making almost as much as you did with that stupid "job" - and it is all tax-free!  See an unlocked car - rummage through it, maybe there is some spare change, a bottle of booze, or a cell phone in there.  If it's locked, a rock or brick will unlock it for you!  Your shelter needs are taken care of by the nearest bridge overpass, your food needs taken care of by the local shelter, food bank, or soup kitchen.  The feral lifestyle isn't all that bad - the big bonus being you get to stay high all the time.

So what's the point of all this?  I dunno.   Only that people who aren't drug addicts often behave in similar ways, although perhaps not resorting to vandalizing cars or panhandling.   But the early stages of drug use are not too dissimilar to the early stages of compulsive shopping, compulsive gambling, and so on and so forth.  People hollow out their lives so they can have "things" and not wealth.

I guess the other thing that made me revive this draft posting from several years ago was that we drove by a church yesterday and they were tearing it down.   Kind of odd to be tearing down a church, particularly one in pretty good shape.  But it was in a commercial district and churches can be a tough sell on the real estate market.

What set me off was a large sign posting at the site.  It read, "Coming soon!  Tiny homes for the homeless!"   Oh, boy, this isn't going to end well.   The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

And here, we have someone aggrandizing themselves by going out to "help the homeless" and perhaps get that nice profile article in the local paper - maybe even the New York Times!  ("Georgia man builds tiny homes for the homeless!").   Maybe.   But the reality of homelessness is that it has a lot less to do with not having a home and drug and mental health issues.   It isn't that these bums hanging out on the street corner with their well-worn cardboard signs need a place to stay - they make enough money panhandling every day to afford a motel room - but that they need mental health treatment, drug treatment, or a combination of both.  Or a good kick in the ass.

Unless these "tiny home" people are willing to intervene in the the lives of their "clients" this tiny home encampment is going to turn into a tiny ghetto - replete with its own tiny crime wave, tiny assaults, and tiny murders.   The theory that many "homeless advocates" have is that these folks are just like you and me, but had "bad luck" and lost their jobs and just need a place to stay until they get back on their feet.   The reality is that they are feral humans, who will take whatever society hands out for free, or whatever isn't nailed down.

Expect to see a rash of petty crimes, break-ins, and other sorts of thefts in the neighborhood once this homeless encampment opens up.   And expect to see a regularly rotating cast of characters, each with his own cardboard sign, at the nearby intersection.   Good luck getting through that stoplight.   Local businesses will get tired of the thefts and break-ins and shoplifting, and move to better locations (and since there is a plethora of commercial real estate, they have choices).  Customers will get tired of being accosted in the parking lot by bums shouting in their ears, "Excuse me!" and asking for money, while they scope out your car for things to steal.

When word gets out on the homeless grapevine (and they do have one, as they have cell phones, provided for free, paid for by your "universal access fee") people will actually move here to snag one of those free tiny homes.   It is the buglight effect, plain and simple.

It will not end well!

Sadly, these good intentions end up enabling a lifestyle - an expensive lifestyle at that.   These folks are not really "poor" and they are not "priced out" of housing in our area (where you can rent an apartment larger than a 'tiny home' for about $600 a month).  Maybe people in San Francisco or New York City are priced out of housing, but not here.

No, it is just they'd rather spend the money on drugs.  And speaking of which, I forgot to mention the other method may drug users resort to, to pay for their drug habit - dealing drugs.  It is tempting, with the high cost of even pot, to try to buy a pound or kilo and then cut it up into baggies and sell it to your friends, with your "profit" largely going up in smoke.

So as an added bonus, the tiny home encampment will mean more drug dealing in the area, right down the street from the local high school.

It is sad, but the neighborhood was just staring to improve.  Walmart put in their "Ghetto Gourmet" local market, and some boarded-up buildings once again had tenants.   But when you put poverty services in a particular area, you attract poverty.   It will only be a matter of time before the neighborhood, starts to go down.

Very sad.

Corona Campers?

RV sales are through the roof. Is this a good time to buy an RV? Probably not.

2020 is proving to be a very interesting year, to say the least. We were all poised to enter a major recession as it was, as car sales and RV sales plummeted in late 2019 and early 2020 - usually a sure sign of impending recession. Not only that, but consumer debt was at an all-time high, and our government was running record deficits.   The stock market was starting to slow down and it looked like our eleven-year bull market was coming to an end.

Usually, declining RV sales are a sign of a recession.   When the virus hit, you would think this would be be the nail in the coffin for RV sales.  But at least temporarily this is not the case.

People still want to go on vacation, but there are fewer choices.  Cruise ships are out - even if they were available, few people would want to go on them. Similarly, flying anywhere seems like a bad idea, trapped in a tiny metal tube with hundreds of other people coughing on you.

Many people have decided to try out the RV lifestyle, and sales are up 50% over the same month last year. This is good news for the RV business, but perhaps bad news for consumers.  It is always a bad idea to buy things at the same time as everybody else, as you have lost all of your leverage, in terms of price negotiation.

Not only that, but these people rushing into the RV world may discover quite quickly that it's not what they thought it was.  They may be shocked to discover the quality of an RV is nowhere near that of a car, for example.  And they may be upside down on their RV loan, and unable to get themselves out from this commitment.

But having owned RVs for 30 years now, I can understand why people are attracted to the concept. It's nice when traveling always to have a clean bathroom and kitchen, as well as your own refrigerator and your own bed with you at all times.  You always have a place to relax, and a table to eat at as well.  You never worry about where your next meal is coming from or where you are going to stay that night - it's all with you.

So it seems like a good idea to buy an RV right now, as you can take the whole family on vacation without having to worry about getting germs from other people - right?  But sadly, like so much else in this Corona madness, it seems like we're all doing the same things at the exactly the same time. And the lemming approach or the herd approach to life never results in an optimal outcome. So what to do?

As I noted before, renting an RV is probably a good idea to try first. You might discover you actually despise RVing and you could save yourself an awful lot of money and hassle if you rent an RV first and discover this, rather than drop $50,000 to $100,000 on an RV and find out that you hate it. Of course, one of the problems is that probably everybody else has the same idea and they are also renting an RV right now.

Another approach would be to wait a year or so. I think a year from now this Corona Virus hysteria will have died down quite a bit, and people will have returned to a more normal mode of living. Maybe this means you can't go on vacation this year, but then again we all have to make sacrifices.  Making small sacrifices usually ends up in saving a boatload of money.

The upside would be that next year you'll find all those people who rushed out and bought RV's this year will probably be trying to unload them, as they discover they don't really like RVing, as the cruise line they normally travel on is now offering discounts, and thus they go back to cruising or Disney or whatever. Moreover, the RV dealers might be a little more desperate to make a sale and offer better prices than they have to, today.

But with sales up as high as they are right now, it has all the makings of a bubble.  And you never want to buy anything during a bubble, whether is real estate or cars or stocks or gold or Bitcoin.  As soon as everybody is talking about it, thinking about it, and doing it, it's a good idea to run as fast as possible in the opposite direction.

I suspect the people rushing out to buy RVs today are the same people who have a moldering hoard of toilet paper in their basement - another sound financial decision they made!

Another Reason Why Leasing Sucks

When you give up control of when you can buy and sell your own car, you place yourself at a strategic disadvantage.

I harp on leasing a lot here as a really shitty financial transaction.   When you lease a car, you are buying it, but at a price higher than merely purchasing it.  And since the actual cost of the car is usually obscured, you don't realize how much you are paying for the car.  And you are buying the car, not renting it.   You'll find this out if you ever wreck it.   And if it is even dented slightly, or driven too far, you pay, when you turn it in - often thousands of dollars. 

No problem, they roll over the fines and excess fees into a new lease!  And over time, you pay more and more every month to own something that you should be owning outright.

But worse yet, is the timing issue.  I mentioned before a friend of mine leased a beautiful new Volvo wagon - back when they were steel tanks.  Her husband died and she went to turn in the car.  Turns out, turning it in early cost her a lot of money.  She handed them the keys to a low-mileage car that was in perfect shape, and had to pay thousands of dollars in "early termination fees".   Leasing ties your hands when life circumstances change.

With this virus thing, people are finding themselves out of a job and their lease ending.  So, turn in the car, right?   Some dealers refused to accept the cars unless you leased a new one.  "We're closed!" they would say - closed unless you want a new car, of course.  Is that legal?  Hell no.  But you are not going to hire a lawyer, pay $10,000 and sue them, are you?   This is what people don't get - companies and individuals can steal from you, and so long as the amount is small - a few thousand bucks, they know you are not going to do anything about it.

So the poor slob who has a car he no longer needs, has to keep it a few extra months and pay the monthly fees - plus late fees, in some cases.    Now the dealers are re-opening and they have no inventory of cars to sell (our drive by the Fiat-Chrysler production overflow lot shows no inventory, unless you want a burgundy minivan - they have those in spades).

But some folks have car leases that are expiring and they need a car to get to work.  They go to the dealer and.... no inventory!  Cars, Trucks, and SUVs are in such short supply that dealers are charging premium prices for their remaining inventory.   By this time next month, there may be plenty of cars on the lot.  But your lease expires today.

You have to turn in your car or pay late fees - and now your negotiating power is very, very limited. You can turn in the car and walk away - literally - and hope to find a good used car, or share a car with your spouse.   But if you want to ride, well, the dealer has you over a barrel.

Sure, you could always "buy" the car you leased, but usually the purchase price (residual) is not a very good deal.  So that's not really even a realistic option.

If you owned the car outright, you could keep it or you could sell it.  You could decide whatever it is you want to do, whenever you want to do it.  There is no time deadline forcing you to trade at a specific date.   You could decide to buy later in the year, when inventories are higher - or at the end of the year, when they are trying to close out the older models. Or you could buy a used car or whatever. You could take the bus.  You have choices, and those choices mean you have negotiating power and leverage, as you don't need the car and can afford to walk away.

But a lease?   It forces you to revisit the car dealer on a date specific, and either turn in the car and pay all those "excess wear" fees (which they pile on, to convince you to lease another car) or lease or buy a new car from them.   When you go to a dealer on a specific date and say, "I have to lease a new car TODAY" you have given up all your negotiating power.   And you have to hope what they have on the lot is a car you want, too!

Why people do this to themselves is beyond me.  There is a mindset in America that "you'll always have car payments, so you might as well lease!" and yet, cars today easily last ten years or more and are capable of going over 150,000 miles without any major repairs.  And a car loan can be as short as three years - if you buy a car you can actually afford.

This Corona Virus situation points out yet another reason why leasing is a raw deal.  But even in virus-free times, the same situation exists - with a lease, you have to trade-in your car on a date specific - a date which may or may not be a convenient date for you.

Why would anyone tie their hands this way?

A friend of mine loans her car to her grandchildren, as they are going over their lease mileage.  "It's the only way they can afford a car!" she says.  Yet leasing a car is the most expensive way to own a car.  It is like saying you can't afford groceries, so you'll eat in restaurants all the time.

And yet, I am sure they probably think that, too.  It is like the waitress we met here on the island, who was going to pay $6 a day, for over a week, for the toll to get to our island, rather than pay $45 for an annual pass.  "I can't afford that right now!" she says, and yet she probably took home more than $45 in tips that night.   I tried to explain it to her, but it was like trying to explain calculus to a mule.

The poor make poor choices, and increasingly, the middle-class is making poor choices and wondering where all their money went.  No one "took it away" from them - they gave it away.

And leasing a car is just giving away your money!

You can't fix stupid, as they day.   Should we feel sorry for stupid?  Should we be bailing out stupid?

Go ahead, if you want to.  Please use your money, though!

Why Are We All Doing The Same Things in Isolation?

Original ideas are in short supply.

One of the weird things I've noticed about this quarantine deal is how everyone is engaging in the same activities as though it were orchestrated.  I know most people watch television, or are on Facebook, or they listen to Twitter - and maybe they get a lot of these ideas from those sources. Maybe that explains why people were hoarding toilet paper and bottled water really on.  They saw something on Facebook or Twitter about it. and decided they needed to get involved.

But I'm not on Facebook or Twitter and I don't watch television other than YouTube and Netflix videos. How come I came up with the same ideas as everyone else?

For example, early on into the quarantine, I decided to let my beard grow out. I was somewhat shocked when we left the house a couple of weeks later and saw that all our friends have done the same thing. We all came up with the same clever idea all at once.  Of course, most of us shaved them off again, because they didn't fit under our masks.  Once again, we behave as herd animals.

We heard something about there being a bread shortage - although it never really materialized where we live. Nevertheless we thought it would be fun to drag out the old bread maker machine that somebody gave us and make some homemade bread. Well apparently a lot of other people had the same idea, as when I went to the store all the bread flour was sold out and the yeast was in very short supply.

Of course, we live in the south, where biscuits are king. So it's entirely possible that the biscuit demand is what created these flour shortages. Nevertheless, I talked to many of my friends and they all said the same thing – that they were bringing out that old bread machine that got as a Christmas gift and years ago and were now making bread at home.  How original!

I was online on the Walmart site buying something for a bathroom remodeling. They offered free shipping if we added more items and we were able to find bread flour for cheap.  I was still $2 short of the free shipping and Mark suggested I buy and lasagna noodles.  I was shocked to see that most all the pasta it was sold out including lasagna noodles. Apparently other people had the idea to make lasagna.

And I guess that's because people want comfort foods in this time where we need comfort.  So all the comfort type foods are selling out.  Also, I think things like flour, rice, and pasta are good staples that have a long shelf life,  and thus people bought these because they could keep them and not have to go back to the grocery store again in the near future.

But speaking of home remodeling, we decided after sitting around the house that maybe it was time we finished our painting and remodeling project, starting with the guest bathroom. We ordered most of the things we needed online and we already bought the paint.  However that when we went to Home Depot and Lowes, we are shocked to see how many people were there.  Apparently everybody else had the same idea, sitting around the disheveled hovel that they lived in and decided maybe it needs a little fixing up.

David Sedaris commented on this phenomena in one of his books. He went to a novelty shop in Brooklyn and they had fake glass eyeballs in a tray by the cash register. There was a sign next to the trace saying "Please do not place these up to your eyes as they will scratch your cornea!"  Apparently they had a rough cut section in the back.  What Sedaris thought was interesting was his first instinct was to hold the glass up in the front of his eyes and make some sort of face or comment and apparently everybody else thought the exact same thing.  He thought he was being original and funny when in fact what he was thinking was what everyone else was thinking too.

We are herd animals.  We are lemmings.

So even without the television or Facebook or Twitter or other online sources to guide me, I came up with the exact same ideas as all my fellow citizens. Or maybe the normative cues are more subtle than we think. When I went to the grocery store perhaps I subconsciously noted the lack of bread flour and thought to myself "Gee, maybe we should get out the old bread machine!"   It could be that.

Or maybe we all have some kind of ESP.   I doubt it though.  Probably a better theory is that as human beings, we are all pretty much the same and have the same thoughts, so when left alone in lockdown, we come up with the same ideas.

Maybe that is a little depressing to think about, but it may be our reality, and reality is value-neutral.  The real downside to this isn't that it is depressing we are so unoriginal, but that when we all act as a herd, it usually is to our disadvantage, personally, as we shall see in my next posting.

White People Trying to Out-Black Each Other

If you ain't black, you ain't black.  So stop pretending.

In the aftermath of the killing in Minneapolis of George Floyd, the reaction has been interesting.   As you might imagine, a lot of people are upset, and many are peacefully protesting for justice - which is happening, slowly.  People have been fired and charged with crimes.   You really can't expect much more than that, right away.  It is a big change from when I was a kid - no one would have been charged, and since there were no cell phone videos back then, no one would have known.  A lot has changed in 60 years. Then again, a lot hasn't, either.

But the weird thing is how white people are acting, particularly the self-anointed "woke" variety, who not only are marching in sympathy, but are getting out in front and thinking they should lead the parade.  Not only are they usurping these protests from their rightful leaders, they are shaming and damning anyone who questions what they are doing.  They act like they are the only ones who "care" and everyone else is just some heartless bastard who supports police brutality.

Worse yet, are the white folks from the comfortable suburbs, who decide to drive to a black neighborhood and set it on fire.   I am sure their efforts are appreciated!   How about set fire to your own neighborhood instead?  Oh, right, I thought so.

Don't get me wrong, it is great that people of all races are coming together.   But there is something about the tone of some of the white folks that bothers me a bit - and it is hard to put my finger on it.  It is like they are getting off on this - putting themselves in charge and acting like they know what it is like to be black in America, and moreover, it is their responsibility to educate the rest of us.

Hmmm...... yet another example of white people appropriating black culture and profiting from it?  Well, profiting in the Social Justice Warrior way, anyway, through self-aggrandizement.

Sadly, there is a long history of white folks appropriating black culture.  Music, for starters, whether it was the blues, R&B, Gospel, Rock 'n Roll, or even rap and hip-hop.  What as the first rap song to hit #1 on the charts?  "Rapture" by Blondie.  Doesn't get any whiter than that!   But that's just one of a long line of "cultural appropriations".  Elvis Presley took black R&B and Rock and Roll and sanitized it for a white audience, doing covers of songs first made famous by black artists.

This comic strip, apparently written by two white women, tries to shame the rest of us for not "understanding" the plight of minorities.  They know!  They care!

Now granted, progress for any minority isn't going to happen unless the majority cooperates to some extent.  Women got the vote, but only after men voted for it.   Slaves were freed, but only after the bloodiest war in US history - with more casualties than all others combined.  Historically, whites have been involved in the civil rights movement from the beginning.  So it is a positive thing that people of all races are behind this.   But that being said, I am not sure I need to be lectured to by some white chicks as to what it is like to be black.  There is something wrong here.

The image at the top of the page is of Rachael Doezel, a confused young woman who claimed she was black - and even headed a local chapter of the NAACP.  Her parents found out about this and informed people that she was, in fact, whiter than white.   She apparently colored and teased her hair as well as her skin, to "pass" as black.  And you wonder, why is this?   After all, the statistics on being black are pretty bleak - and historically, many blacks tried to "pass" as white for that very reason.

Culturally, being black is considered cooler than being white.  In terms of music, fashion, cuisine, there is a lot in "black culture" that is considered more trendy and desirable (I hesitate to use that phrase, as I am not a fan of this "culture" nonsense - culture belongs to everyone and no one at the same time).  So Ms. Doezel wanted to be black - which would have harmed no one, until she decided to become President of the local chapter of the NAACP.

It also becomes a problem, like with Elizabeth Warren, when a false claim of ancestry leads to some kind of preferential treatment.  Warren claims she received no benefit from claiming "Native American" ancestry, but Harvard trotted her out as their first "Native American" faculty member, and used her specious claim of ancestry to meet government quotas.  So there was some benefit, only because there are set-asides in our society.

On the other hand, I get it that people want to be nice and do something to be supportive.  But one sure way to make a black person uncomfortable is to go up and high-five them and shout "Black Lives Matter!" in their face.   I mean, they appreciate the gesture, to be sure, but it is a bit awkward to deal with.   I mean, what do you say to that?  It is like when people come up to us and say, "You're so brave!" and while it is nice people are supportive, it is.... awkward!

I am not sure where I am going with this, other than something doesn't seem right about some of this. White kids from the suburbs driving their Mom's car to the protest in the black part of town (which they had never been to before) and starting fires, throwing Molotov cocktails, looting, or starting riots.  If you want to protest, as a white person, great.   But I don't think it is your place to lead the protest, much less escalate it to violence.   Yet, some white kids are doing just that - looking for a thrill, and a chance for self-aggrandizement among their peers as being "woke".

Perhaps this has always been the case.  My brother protested the Vietnam war, but got a deferment as he was in college.  My brother-in-law was drafted right out of high school.  He was sent to Germany, where he spent his "war years" fighting with black soldiers.  Yes, he was a bit racist.   Was he the guy my brother was protesting for?  Because if the two of them had met at the time, my brother-in-law would probably have punched my brother in the face and called him hippie scum.

So why did my brother have this social justice boner his whole life?  Interesting question.  If you met his peer group, you might get an inkling of what was going on.  While some folks in the suburbs claim status by who has the most perfect lawn or the largest SUV, in my brother's social group, status is achieved by how politically correct and "woke" you are (although they predated that term) as well as your intellectual credentials, and so on and so forth.

And I think the same thing is happening today.  I get this impression from people - as expressed by the comic above - that somehow they believe they are better than us because they care and the rest of us are heartless cruel bastards who are woefully uninformed and need to be "schooled" by them.  Because, no one knows more about what it is like to be black than two white girls, right?

Thank God for that, is all I can say, because until today, I didn't realize racism was a problem.   But today's kids, well, they've got it all covered!   Thank you for bringing this to our attention!   We were so ignorant of this, until you brought it up.

Myself, I am not getting involved in any protests.  Why?  Well, first of all, it isn't my protest, and I wasn't invited.  Plus, I am not driving six hours to Atlanta (this is a bigger State that you think!). Also, since these protests have gotten violent (thanks in part to misguided "antifa" white people) it isn't safe.   Finally, I think the point of the protests has already been made.  At this point, the folks who are still protesting are the ones hoping a riot breaks out, and maybe a little looting, too.  All the legitimate protesters went home, once the fires started.

It's a real tragedy.  But I am not sure that what some of these white folks are doing is the right response.   It isn't our place to lead the protest, or lead the parade, is it?

UPDATE: What is fascinating is how the left-wing press is playing this, claiming there is "no evidence" that white kids from the suburbs are involved in this rioting - even as more and more are arrested and charged, even with murder. What are they getting at? That it is OK that black people riot? I am not sure - there seems to be a narrative that rioting is OK, so long as it is justifiable black rage. Yet people - including policemen - have been shot, run over, burned, and killed. How is it "justice" to kill several innocent people in response to the unjust killing of one?

UPDATE: Another white kid has been arrested, for handing out Molotov cocktails and filming himself setting fire to a cell phone store in a black neighborhood two States away - commuting to the riot, only in America. Some folks say that these are outliers, that there are only a few white troublemakers. But even one is too many. It is one thing to show up at a protest, another to show up, take over, and start a riot. I suspect a lot of this is being fed by social media, and you know who is posting and encouraging this online - our friends in Russia. Don't be a useful idiot. Don't be an idiot, period!