All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Spidey5640]

Percentage-wise? Pretty close to black on black killings. And when controlling for economic circumstances, crime rates aren't all that far off either. Those who try and throw the "Black on Black crime" smokebomb forget that other people can read data too (and likely better or that stupid stat wouldn't be thrown out very much).

Most murder victims knew their killer - and people tend to segregate. Unless you are part of a tiny ethnic group for your area, if you are murdered the killer is most likely going to be of the same ethnic group as you.

Overall crime rates (for non-white collar crime) tend to be inversely proportional to the amount of wealth in the area - the poorer the neighborhood, the higher the crime rate. This cuts across racial lines, and has been a known fact for years. Fighting poverty IS fighting crime, no matter what the detractors say. And I say that as a fiscal conservative - I prefer value for my tax dollar, and ballooning police budgets don't make me feel safer, not when the police seem divorced from all accountability.

Fairly accurate. Correct that people usually kill within their own race. Number of blacks killed by blacks is fairly close to that of white killing whites but you do have to consider blacks make up 12-13 percent of the total.population. you're right, crime does tie in to economic factors, which always makes me wonder why minorities continue to support Dems and big government programs that haven't worked to reduce poverty.

[The Cool Thatguy]

Fairly accurate. Correct that people usually kill within their own race. Number of blacks killed by blacks is fairly close to that of white killing whites but you do have to consider blacks make up 12-13 percent of the total.population. you're right, crime does tie in to economic factors, which always makes me wonder why minorities continue to support Dems and big government programs that haven't worked to reduce poverty.

Because, even if we take your argument on face value, Republicans re worse?

Who is it who stigmatizes welfare by requiring drug testing that costs more money than it saves? Ain't democrats

[Spidey5640]

You mean the ones where the police didn't use tear gas and rubber bullets on peaceful crowds. Where they did nothing about armed people walking into a State Capitol?

And what was the "split second" decision that killed Eric Gardner, George Floyd and Freddie Gray?

We can trade videos all day, you want to believe the hundreds of rioters, looters criminals were just an anamoly you go ahead, Santa will still come on Christmas for you

[Gray Lensman]

Because, even if we take your argument on face value, Republicans re worse?

Who is it who stigmatizes welfare by requiring drug testing that costs more money than it saves? Ain't democrats

Plus the 'work for benefits' stipulations that turn workers into captives of their employers. It turns out that treatment gets much worse when they know you face other penalties for leaving, or even standing up for yourself.

[sammy_hansen]

Fairly accurate. Correct that people usually kill within their own race. Number of blacks killed by blacks is fairly close to that of white killing whites but you do have to consider blacks make up 12-13 percent of the total.population. you're right, crime does tie in to economic factors, which always makes me wonder why minorities continue to support Dems and big government programs that haven't worked to reduce poverty.

Fuck me. Do you know anything? Do you get how much Republicans cut taxes that destroy social services? Do you get how much money was wasted on blowing the shit out of Iraq?

Again, I seriously can’t believe you use Spider-man as an avatar. It’s disgusting. People please stop feeding the white supremacist troll.

[Spidey5640]

Because, even if we take your argument on face value, Republicans re worse?

Who is it who stigmatizes welfare by requiring drug testing that costs more money than it saves? Ain't democrats

How would you know? The major cities have been Dem controlled for decades. How's that worked out?

[aja_christopher]

which always makes me wonder why minorities continue to support Dems and big government programs that haven't worked to reduce poverty.

You should wonder more why Republicans like constituents who are uneducated and ignorant of the facts.

This is all information you could find on your own with a little research.

But you'd rather sit here and defend cops shooting black people in the back, through windows or in their own bedrooms.

-----
"UNDER DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS, MINORITIES MAKE ECONOMIC GAINS - AND SO DO WHITES"

"Many GOP analysts call for new economic appeals. But which party really has the better economic case to make?

Using data from the U.S. Census to track annual changes in income, poverty, and unemployment over the past five decades, we asked how each of America’s major ethnic groups has fared under Democratic or Republican presidents. Our findings are striking. When Republicans are in the White House, minorities generally lose ground. But Democratic presidents have presided over steady and substantial improvements for communities of color – and the nation as a whole.

Trends in Income, Poverty, and Unemployment

Economic outcomes clearly diverge under Democratic versus Republican presidents – especially for African Americans.

Under Democratic presidents, black families’ incomes grew on average $895 dollars annually, but grew only by $142 dollars under Republicans. The black unemployment rate fell by a net 7.9 percentage points across the 26 years of Democratic leadership, but went up by a net of 13.7 points during 28 years of Republican presidencies. Across the years of Democratic leadership, black poverty declined by a net of 23.6 percentage points, but grew by three points when Republicans held the White House.

Although data on Latinos and Asian Americans do not go back as far in time, the results are similar. For Latinos, Democratic presidencies are associated with large annual gains in income, substantial declines in poverty, and real drops in unemployment, while under Republican administrations Latinos tend to lose income, become poorer, and experience greater unemployment. Latino incomes grew an average of $627 annually under Democrats, but declined by an average of $197 annually under Republicans. Less consistent data for Asian Americans also suggest gains under Democrats versus stagnation under Republicans.

Tellingly, white Americans make gains under Democrats, too. On average, under Democratic administrations, white incomes have grown, and white joblessness and poverty have declined...."

https://scholars.org/contribution/un...d-so-do-whites

[Spidey5640]

Fuck me. Do you know anything? Do you get how much Republicans cut taxes that destroy social services? Do you get how much money was wasted on blowing the shit out of Iraq?

Again, I seriously can’t believe you use Spider-man as an avatar. It’s disgusting. People please stop feeding the white supremacist troll.

I know how unemployment decreased and wages increased far more under Republican rule over Dems. But, perhaps facts don't really matter

[The Cool Thatguy]

How would you know? The major cities have been Dem controlled for decades. How's that worked out?

Do you care to provide any examples or are you just going to throw out blanket statements?

[The Cool Thatguy]

I know how unemployment decreased and wages increased far more under Republican rule over Dems. But, perhaps facts don't really matter

Yeah. Lets try a fact on for size.

Bush Senior?

Recession.

Clinton?

Recovery.

Bush Junior?

Recession.

Obama?

Recovery.

Trump?

Amazing recession.

You're not great with patterns, are you?

[Spidey5640]

Plus the 'work for benefits' stipulations that turn workers into captives of their employers. It turns out that treatment gets much worse when they know you face other penalties for leaving, or even standing up for yourself.

Funny how welfare rolls decreased when Clinton signed the overhaul.requiring work and shockingly people didn't die in the street s..

[Spidey5640]

Do you care to provide any examples or are you just going to throw out blanket statements?

How about you tell me which Dem city is doing great?

[aja_christopher]

I know how unemployment decreased and wages increased far more under Republican rule over Dems. But, perhaps facts don't really matter

You're lying -- there's absolutely no proof of that while I've posted data that shows the opposite is true.

To top it off, you're sitting here trying to make that argument during the worst economic crisis since the last time a Repupblican held office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession [of Republican George Bush Jr]

Black unemployment now sits at nearly 20% while overall unemployment sits at around 15%.

Republicans have nothing to brag about when it comes to their economic record -- all they do is wreck the car after being given the keys by the public.

[Spidey5640]

Yeah. Lets try a fact on for size.

Bush Senior?

Recession.

Clinton?

Recovery.

Bush Junior?

Recession.

Obama?

Recovery.

Trump?

Amazing recession.

You're not great with patterns, are you?

Seriously?

Bush Sr... recession ending at election time

Clinton....greatest success when he worked with Republican majority in House and Senate...last instance of compromise

Bush Jr. C'mon, 9/11 eight months in, credit for recovery after..

Obama... Credit for stopping the slide caused by the housing bubble cause by Dems relaxing the eegsnpn obtaining mortgage s but still worse recovery on record.

Trump.. best economy in your lifetime, will be again..

Your forgot about Reagan saving us from Carter too

[aja_christopher]

Trump.. best economy in your lifetime, will be again..

Show data that backs up your argument that "minorities" -- or Americans in general -- do better under Republicans.

Then explain why you don't think cops should be held accountable for abusing and shooting black people in a court of law.