2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

How would you explain women getting lower sentences then men then? Men traditionally have more income than women?

Spoiler alert; it’s judicial inequality that spans race and sex.

Not directed at you, but there are tons and tons of well researched and data driven studies on this stuff. Does anybody ever think “huh, maybe the people who do this for a living have it right”?

It seems like we’re always trying to find ways to exist in our own biases, myself included.

I'm not trying to exist in my own bias. I'm trying to exist in a world that explains away any bias. When I hear "the judicial system treats X differently than Y," my first thought is, "that can't be. It's the judicial system. It's a fair system. There must be something wrong with the conclusion." Plus, holes have been blasted in so many of these "that's not fair" arguments that my default is to always question them.

But I was just messing around anyway. I really don't have any answers for you and was only jokingly making an observation. NeedChapmans says he has a three week project ahead to provide a rebuttal. I'll read it, but as it stands, the judicial system seems to favor white women.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

I'm not trying to exist in my own bias. I'm trying to exist in a world that explains away any bias. When I hear "the judicial system treats X differently than Y," my first thought is, "that can't be. It's the judicial system. It's a fair system. There must be something wrong with the conclusion." Plus, holes have been blasted in so many of these "that's not fair" arguments that my default is to always question them.

But I was just messing around anyway. I really don't have any answers for you and was only jokingly making an observation. NeedChapmans says he has a three week project ahead to provide a rebuttal. I'll read it, but as it stands, the judicial system seems to favor white women.

I favor them too. #notracist

Would it be funny to you that NC linked the same thing I did? It was funny to me!

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Everything comes back to income. It's why I bring up income and not race. Affirmative action is meant to help people with less opportunities because of income. Again people feel obligated to take the 3.0 GPA black lawyer over the 4.0 GPA white lawyer. Why is the black application pool less competitive? I do believe (I don't know about law school per se) that certain genders/races gravitate towards certain jobs but to act like the application pool is truly representative of a certain gender or races is silly. Income makes a larger impact than I think people believe. It's also why I think we need to stop with this BLM and actually help lower income people who are willing to work through programs so we have a stronger application pool.

What most people do these days blame race as the reason there are less qualified African Americans. It's not, it's because of income. Once we start facing the truth then the black community will start to see the progress they want.

The lower GPA/SAT standards weren't for poor kids. They were for black kids, and it was meant to promote diversity in universities. They spelled it out for us. There was no guesswork involved.

Of course certain genders/races gravitate toward certain jobs. I've been around construction my entire life. Even certain trades within construction are focused on by a particular race or nationality. I don't see women crying foul about not getting that job as a roofer.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

I favor them too. #notracist

Would it be funny to you that NC linked the same thing I did? It was funny to me!

I've set my alarm for 3 weeks from now to run a search for NeedChapmans and this extensive report he will be providing. He better not let me down.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

I've set my alarm for 3 weeks from now to run a search for NeedChapmans and this extensive report he will be providing. He better not let me down.

I’m sure I can find a Ben Shapiro video in 10 minutes that will mirror his sentiments.

If he can rebuke a multi-year study in 3 weeks I’d be impressed!

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

I'm not trying to exist in my own bias. I'm trying to exist in a world that explains away any bias. When I hear "the judicial system treats X differently than Y," my first thought is, "that can't be. It's the judicial system. It's a fair system. There must be something wrong with the conclusion." Plus, holes have been blasted in so many of these "that's not fair" arguments that my default is to always question them.

But I was just messing around anyway. I really don't have any answers for you and was only jokingly making an observation. NeedChapmans says he has a three week project ahead to provide a rebuttal. I'll read it, but as it stands, the judicial system seems to favor white women.

As of now, the basis for the argument is unknown. We're not looking at the data, we're looking at someones conclusion of the data. It may very well prove to be correct IDK.

But I don't like when I'm provided 50 pages of summary, without any ability to view the data for myself. WAR is guilty of this; telling me what's valuable and what's not, guided by the preferences of two guys.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

The lower GPA/SAT standards weren't for poor kids. They were for black kids, and it was meant to promote diversity in universities. They spelled it out for us. There was no guesswork involved.

Of course certain genders/races gravitate toward certain jobs. I've been around construction my entire life. Even certain trades within construction are focused on by a particular race or nationality. I don't see women crying foul about not getting that job as a roofer.

I didn't explain it well enough. Affirmation action is meant to help people with lower incomes. They do a crappy job at it by literally targeting race. Instead they should give additional points to people with lower income. Again with this solution, blacks will be the greatest beneficiaries but at least there is actual logic to the reasoning. It sorta already plays out like that with Asians being at the greatest disadvantage but the highest income. They really should go based on income and not race but you won't see much of a change in the grand scheme of things.

Again this is why I think we should be targeting income not race. Although they are very connected, people are more likely to suffer because of their income than their race. John didn't get a higher SAT because he's white, he got it because his parents paid for a tutor.

Oh and one of the reasons there are less females in trades is because of the higher levels of sexual harassment. You will see the lowest female dominated jobs have the highest levels of sexual harassment.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

As of now, the basis for the argument is unknown. We're not looking at the data, we're looking at someones conclusion of the data. It may very well prove to be correct IDK.

But I don't like when I'm provided 50 pages of summary, without any ability to view the data for myself. WAR is guilty of this; telling me what's valuable and what's not, guided by the preferences of two guys.

I don’t know what WAR is. What is it good for?

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

I don’t know what WAR is. What is it good for?

Don't make me say it.

[free2131]

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

― Jean-Paul Sartre

[calculusdork]

Originally Posted by free2131

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

― Jean-Paul Sartre

Replace "anti-Semites" with sooooo many other phrases and it fits today. Both sides fail.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by mike1498

Serious question. What does inserting race actually do? Do most people actually believe that Floyd's death was just? And for those people who do, do you think chanting BLM does anything?

I think the general feeling is that if it had been a white man in custody for exactly what George Floyd was in custody for, that fellow would be alive right now. At that point, it falls to us all to determine why that is.

[rcmb3220]

The next virus to escape China

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-...mpression=true

[NeedChapmans]

These people are broken beyond repair. Nichols would prefer 1.5MM dead vs. 3,700. Well done sir.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I think the general feeling is that if it had been a white man in custody for exactly what George Floyd was in custody for, that fellow would be alive right now. At that point, it falls to us all to determine why that is.

So chanting BLM is your solution? Regardless of your feelings, statistics say otherwise.

Anyways, The reason MLK was more successful than BLM was because he tried to bring people together. I think the most beautiful part of his I Have a Dream speech is where he says "I have a dream that one day little black boys and girls will hold hands with little white boys and girls". Where is BLM in that? He knew inclusion is how you make allies even when they are wrong.

Look, you've seen me condemn Trumps rhetoric, it's time to condemn your parties rhetoric.

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I think the general feeling is that if it had been a white man in custody for exactly what George Floyd was in custody for, that fellow would be alive right now. At that point, it falls to us all to determine why that is.

He sure would be. On the other hand, this happens a statistically insignificant number of times per encounter. So is the goal perfection?

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by mike1498

So chanting BLM is your solution? Regardless of your feelings, statistics say otherwise.

Anyways, The reason MLK was more successful than BLM was because he tried to bring people together. I think the most beautiful part of his I Have a Dream speech is where he says "I have a dream that one day little black boys and girls will hold hands with little white boys and girls". Where is BLM in that? He knew inclusion is how you make allies even when they are wrong.

Look, you've seen me condemn Trumps rhetoric, it's time to condemn your parties rhetoric.

I'm not much of a chanter, and I was referring to the general view, not my feelings.

Good on you for calling out Trump, but the continued effort to achieve equal rights for all doesn't need to be condemned.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by mike1498

I didn't explain it well enough. Affirmation action is meant to help people with lower incomes. They do a crappy job at it by literally targeting race. Instead they should give additional points to people with lower income. Again with this solution, blacks will be the greatest beneficiaries but at least there is actual logic to the reasoning. It sorta already plays out like that with Asians being at the greatest disadvantage but the highest income. They really should go based on income and not race but you won't see much of a change in the grand scheme of things.

Again this is why I think we should be targeting income not race. Although they are very connected, people are more likely to suffer because of their income than their race. John didn't get a higher SAT because he's white, he got it because his parents paid for a tutor.

Oh and one of the reasons there are less females in trades is because of the higher levels of sexual harassment. You will see the lowest female dominated jobs have the highest levels of sexual harassment.

I wouldn't be opposed to trying to give the poor kids a boost. Poor Lives Matter.

There are fewer females in trades because they're simply not good at that stuff. Why they're not good... I don't know... aside from being physically weaker. Funnily enough, my wife is a project manager/VP at a small construction company. She hasn't ever been sexually harassed, but she does receive emails all the time where the salutation is "Gentlemen:" She laughs it off and sends me fake angry screenshots of it all the time.

[pingbling23]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I think the general feeling is that if it had been a white man in custody for exactly what George Floyd was in custody for, that fellow would be alive right now. At that point, it falls to us all to determine why that is.

Where do we get that feeling from? Race baiting narrative from the media and people like you that spread that toxic message. Fentanyl and methamphetamine (speedballing) is a dangerous game to play. Resisting police while under those conditions enhances everything. If Floyd wouldn’t have been committing a crime while under the influence of drugs and fully complied with police he would be alive. If it’s proven the officer was the main contributor to Floyd’s death then the officer deserves what he gets. There’s just a lot more to this situation then simply white officer unjustly kills black man because of systemic racism.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

He sure would be. On the other hand, this happens a statistically insignificant number of times per encounter. So is the goal perfection?

Every single word in this reply is wrong. I don't know how you did it, but you did it.

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I'm not much of a chanter, and I was referring to the general view, not my feelings.

Good on you for calling out Trump, but the continued effort to achieve equal rights for all doesn't need to be condemned.

If that's what you feel BLM is then I feel sorry for you. MLK believed in inclusion BLM doesn't. Do yourself a favor and read some of their rules when protesting with them and you're white. I have yet to come across MLK's list of rules for white protesters.

One supports inclusion, one doesn't. If the chant wasn't obvious I don't know what is. I don't need to here all lives matter either but lets actually solve problems together than targeting each other because of each others race. Isn't that what caused the problem?

I don't ever want to hear you complain about divisive rhetoric again when you openly support it.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I think the general feeling is that if it had been a white man in custody for exactly what George Floyd was in custody for, that fellow would be alive right now. At that point, it falls to us all to determine why that is.

What's the deal with Tony Timpa, then?

[hairysasquatch]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

The next virus to escape China

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-...mpression=true

The double whammy to finish us off!

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Every single word in this reply is wrong. I don't know how you did it, but you did it.

Sorry. I should have left it at statistically insignificant and not said per encounter. But yes he’s be alive if he was white and yes this whole thing is over a very small number of encounters that go wrong.

Did you ever find that control group that proved schools should open up like its 2019?

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

What's the deal with Tony Timpa, then?

Oddly enough, the majority of Timpas reside in Africa....