Joe Louis, did America let him down?

70+ years of hindsight show Louis was screwed, and it is a sore for the USA. But the USA is not alone, the Captain of England's 1966 World Cup winning team was never given the knighthood he deserved, and died aged 52 with little of the kudos due him.

Like Louis, Moore had to resort to cameo appearances on TV and degrading celebrity appearances to make ends meet.

Also like Louis, Moore was bad with money, but still, you would of hoped the people around him, would come to his rescue. I know some of his friends helped Joe out later in live, but for what that man for his Sport, his Country and for his race (the human race ), he would of had better life post boxing.

 

No they dont. It isnt the governments responsibility to give Joe Louis financial advice. At all.

I find some of this talk strange.

"He gave exhibitions and donated two purses (a drop in the bucket compared to what he earned as an american citizen) so his tax burden should have been forgiven? Why? What about all those 100s of 1000s of boys who gave up arms, legs, eyes, and even their lives. And went on to live productive lives and continue paying taxes? Joe Louis was bad with money, plain and simple, why should he get a pass for it?

the number of fighters who have donated TONS of money to charity, or their services, or whatever and ended up going broke and being chased by the tax man is legion. Most of the time people simply shake their head and wonder at how someone who was so wealthy could go so broke. The government hounded Louis for years for his tax money. He simply didnt pay it. If the government comes after me for tax money you better believe Im going to pay it and avoid any trouble.

The idea that Louis should get a free pass because he was black, or rich, or famous, or loved, or donated a couple purses to the war effort (which helped us all, Louis included, not just the US Government) is pretty week. Louis made a fortune, a massive amount of money during the worst economic period in American history, he continued to thrive AFTER the war and then suddenly hes going to cry poor when the government comes calling for taxes? Sorry I dont have a whole lot of sympathy.

When you consider all the people who were losing their homes, farms, jobs, and families during the great depression while Louis was riding around in a limo, and all the guys who getting shot, killed, and blown to pieces while Louis was doing exhibitions, well, I dont have a whole lot of sympathy that he couldnt pay the taxes which amounted to a drop in the bucket of his total earnings.

 

If applicant A. is highly qualified and has excellent experience and credentials and happens to be white, and applicant B. isnt as qualified, has less experience, and so so credentials but happens to be black, yet applicant B. gets first hiring privilege strictly because of his minority status what do you call that if not reverse racism? I see this all the time and it serves to fill the job market with sub par labor that is a lot more difficult to get rid of in case of incompetence. Racism is horrible but you dont throw gasoline on a grease fire to smother it.

 

Your argument ends here. In affirmative action they do not hire less qualified people. If there are two candidates with equal qualifications and affirmative action is in effect, the black candidate will get the job.

Add to the fact that blacks account for a small part of the population and an even smaller portion of the unemployed population, and affirmative action cases account for an even smaller percentage of employed people, I don't see the problem.

You are saying that less qualified people are getting jobs because they're black but that is not correct. They are equally qualified candidates.

 

I recall a story from Joe's manager who had taken much flack for letting Joe get into so much trouble. His side was that Joe would demand his entire take from an upcoming purse and then go through it like water, and this continued with Joe borrowing from upcoming bouts until the taxes owed starting to build up, Joe was spending that also. Eventually it became too much for Joe to get out of. I question why as a manager he didn't just say no to Joe taking even the money that was to be set aside for taxes but if it was a case of Joe then firing him and he being left out,,,,,one could say it was just Joe's fault.

 

I find your line of reasoning alittle curious.

You seem to be arguing that thae fact that a lot of people were in a worse position than Louis in some way diminishes any wrong done to him. This is like arguing that it would be less moraly reprehensible to steal sombodys watch during the second world war, because the suffering of the watches owner would pale in comparison to the suffering of everybody who was killed in the war.

I also find it a little curious that you would think that it is not the responsibility of an organisation taking charitable donations to look after the financial interests of those making the donations. I doubt that any major charity could function on that basis today.

 

agreed. end of the day, i think it comes down to the fact that we like joe louis and want to give him a break. lots of nice guys lost money, were bad with money, got screwed over, etc. because louis was famous and a hero to many, we want to cut him slack where he doesn't deserve it.

most of us make what, 1% of what he was making back then? we manage our taxes pretty well and have never been hounded by the government

 

It is a cultural thing. Socialism is a no no in the States. Even what Americans term Liberal members of their Country, would be considered Conservative in Britain or Europe.

 

Thats bull**** because in hometown the chief of police moved on to a different position. Two people made the final cut for his position: A black police officer who had less experience and less sterling record and a white officer who had been a former chief in a different town and had an excellent record at a larger department. The white guy was hired, the black guy filed a lawsuit under affirmative action and won. Then the white guy filed a countersuit to defend his pay and won that won which put our town in a nice situation of having one chief, less qualified and less experienced, for the price of two and he was nothing but an embarrassment in his position. Ive seen it over and over and over at the local university as well. Less qualified, less experienced minority workers hired over more qualified more experienced white workers for the same pay.

 

I'll forgo the history part of your post, because it is rather self-evident.

"Another thing - people claim that "less qualified people" get jobs because they are black. This is not true. In all affirmative action cases, the person is equally qualified. A less qualified person will not get a job because of their skin tone."

Having worked in higher education, and been on a review panel for admissions, I will let you know this is simply not true. No, I am not the embittered white dude who thinks he is getting screwed. But I have seen this in action.

"I do not see any which way that you can twist it so that it is "reverse racism." I don't understand how it is reverse racism at all."

I don't buy the reverse racist angle so much as being intentional. However, it is racist to insist that one group could never succeed in a country such as the US (in this day) without a built in advantage. And yes, it is an advantage. For instance, when I started my own business, and applied for a biz loan, having immaculate credit and security, my banker told me in confidence that I needn't bother, that SBA loans were near impossible to get without being a minority or female owned business.

AA is not a scourge, nor certainly the worst policy in the US (I would much rather spend my energies combating corporate tax relief, unregulated banks, useless wars, and ill-conceived foreign policy) but it is outdated and a rife breeding ground for corruption.

And, yes, Joe Louis got screwed.

 

Im not arguing that other less well off peoples situation diminishes any wrong to Louis because I dont think any wrong was DONE TO LOUIS. If Louis has a responsibility, which we all do, to pay taxes and doesnt. How is the government doing him wrong by coming after him for what is owed?

And no, it is not a charitable organizations responsibility to look after my financial house if I donate to them? If I donate $100,000 to the red cross it is not the responsibility of the red cross to sit me down and say "You make x amount of dollars a year and just donated x amount of dollars to us, x amount of the dollars you donated to us will be taxable to you at 20% rate." It doesnt work like that. That is my responsibility or my accountants. How is the charitable organization even going to know what tax bracket Im in, what my income is, what the basis of the tax will be (if any) etc etc.

You can plead ignorance but thats no different than killing someone and then saying you werent aware that murder was a crime. At the end of the day the responsibility for murder, or in this case tax evasion, resides with Louis. The fact that government went after him for what was owed (and keep in mind that his deliquency affects all US tax payers) doesnt mean that they were singling him out.

 

That is a big difference in our societies, if you do kill someone (in Britain) and it is shown you are ignorant to the consequences of your crime, you would not necessarily be charged with murder.

 

Really? In the USA Mentally handicapped, crazy, ignorant, immature, etc. They are constantly getting sent away for murder. I wont say that their sentence is as harsh as someone who clearly knows what he is doing but you regularly see people going for that.

In fact, now that I think about it when I was in grade school ******ed boy in the sixth grade (about 11 years old) set fire to a house at the urging of some other people who were taking advantage of him to get revenge on their enemies. One person died in the fire and the house burned to the ground. He went away to a juvenile detention center for several years over that one.

 

He sold war bonds and did morale-boosting for uncle Sam.

He waas a National hero of sorts.

Did the IRS really need to bankrupt the man ?

Couldn't they have wiped the slate clean ?


Even Nixon got a pardon.