Originally Posted by Robbie

kane, I know next to nothing about Native Americans.

The only reason I thought to look up anything about them was when I read that there was a lot of poverty in New Mexico...I remembered driving through that state and seeing lots of tourist traps with "Indians" all dressed up in traditional headgear dancing around.

When I looked it up, sure enough they are in poverty.

I'm thinking that if you or I asked them: "Hey can't you just move?"

We'd probably be doing the same thing as asking black people why they can't "just move out" of the inner city ghettos.

I'm gonna have to assume that there is a lot at play there. Culture, their way of life, etc., etc.

And the thing I noticed about American Indian poverty is...no matter how much Federal welfare they got, it never helped them.

What finally changed their fortunes was when they figured out that they could have casinos and they cashed in.

Just my observation...but handing them money as welfare worked about as well as it has for every other group that has been given handouts: it doesn't.
But being smart and taking advantage of their situation's strengths VS weaknesses...did.

But again, I don't know. Just a thought. I've never been a big proponent of continuous handouts like our society does.

But at the same time, when the Federal Govt. itself is responsible (like blacks with slavery & Native Americans having their land stolen)...then it's hard to figure out how to approach it.

Apparently crockett's view is that if they live in a "red state" (like the Native Americans in New Mexico), then they are a dirty leech who is taking welfare.

But if they live in a "blue" state (like New York or California)...then they are a gentle and noble people who merely need our money to be able to feed the poor children.

Seems a bit of a double standard to me. But that's just the way I see it.