Usa Thread

[cavanami]

In reply to the moron known as Coss...so yes, non-white people in the USA commit more crimes then whites in the USA especially given that non-whites make up a far less percent of the population.

Someone can do the math for the moron...

...It’s true that around 13 per cent of Americans are black, according to the latest estimates from the US Census Bureau.

And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008. Only 45 per cent of the offenders were white...

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

As usual....
 

[cavanami]

Dozens of men tricked into 'Hunger Games'-style competition via Tinder

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dozens-men-tricked-hunger-games-style-competition-via-052749781--abc-news-sex.html

Dozens of men tricked into 'Hunger Games'-style competition via Tinder originally appeared on goodmorningamerica.com

In some kind of modern-love social experiment, dozens of men in New York City reportedly showed up for what they thought was a Tinder date but ended up being in a "Hunger Games"-style competition against each other to win that date.

Some of the men who were duped have spoken out about what happened on social media, and one Twitter thread from user @bvdhai that outlined the stunt in great detail went viral on Monday.

Essentially, a woman who went by Natasha messaged dozens of men on Tinder, and eventually asked them all to meet her at New York City's Union Square Park. When they arrived, she jumped out on stage, delivered a speech and asked them to compete for the date. While many of the men went home, a few stayed to partake in the competition...

[Coss]

5 hours ago, cavanami said:

In reply to the moron known as Coss...so yes, non-white people in the USA commit more crimes then whites in the USA especially given that non-whites make up a far less percent of the population.

Someone can do the math for the moron...

...It’s true that around 13 per cent of Americans are black, according to the latest estimates from the US Census Bureau.

And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008. Only 45 per cent of the offenders were white...

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

 

 

Cavanami, I'm not gonna debate you on your racism, your posts stand proud and clear on this, you wear your racism as a badge of honour.

Why aren't you hunkered down in the deep south of the USA? clutching guns and confederate flags? how is it you can live in a nation that's not white?

You should come and live in Auckland NZ, one of the best little multicultural societies on the planet. A great place, particularly noted for our intolerance for racist c*nts.

[Coss]

[Coss]

And the fella that's supposed to be running the USA ::

 

"I have tremendous respect for China. I mean, the energy, the genius…it's incredible what they have done. We can't do it, it's got to be a two-way street. We have only one-way streets," Trump stated. "You know what bothers me? I have people coming to me, some people in Congress 'sir, can you get this deal done immediately?'."
"It's gotta gestate. The word 'gestate'."
Trump continued: "Like when you are cooking a chicken. Time…Time… Turkey for Thanksgiving."
"My mother would say 8 hours. I said '8 hours?'… She made the greatest turkey I ever had. It takes time. It takes time. So when they run and say 'can you do Nato right now, can you sign it next week?' I say, 'wait a minute'…I like Mexico. I like the new leader. I think he's gonna be terrific. A little different than us. I think I am doing better with him than with the capitalist. But he knows Mexico needs the United States."

ramble ramble ramble...

[Steve]

Totally agree with the actual stats on crime. As in all things we have to look behind the stats. The un-said, whispered implication is that it's some how inherent. It's implied by giving the stats. 

Most crime, especially violent crime historically has always been a function of poverty. It's possible to have a place be poor and not much crime (certain factors specific and unique will do that) but on-going violent crime (with one exception I will get into at the end of this post) has always been a function of poverty  (ff we remove religouis wars, civil wars, etc.). This has been the same all over the world, Roman empire, Persian empire, British empire. East London, Essex and other areas of "Cockney" London, pre and post "Dicksenian era"  has had a higher than average crime rate going back centuries. 

When the immigrants came to America in huge waves in the 1800s, very peaceful people, usually small, rural areas of the Balkans, Russia, Germany, various Irish counties, etc, peaceful people. It didn't take long for peoples not known for crime to organize themselves into violent gangs. As noted prior in the immigration post, whole parts of major cities were literally run by various immigrant groups, Irish being the largest but most of the immigrants had gangs. Self protection partly and also economic reasons. Newer immigrants were not able to find work as easily as the previous groups who were more established. At one point in NYC, the Irish were committing 69 percent of the crime and police wagons were nicknamed 'Paddy wagons'. Poverty was always the defining factor. 

The souith and midwest of America was and is always hailed as 'heartland' of America. The law abiding, bible reading, God fearing part of America. However, in the 1930s these law abiding, God fearing Americans started committing all manner of crime, bank robberies being the more famous ones glorified in movies. Why did this area produce so many criminals, scam artists and the like in the 1930s? Gave us famous names like Bonnie and Clyde, Ma Barker, John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Machine Gun Kelly. All to a person from the 'heartland of America'. What made this area all of a sudden produce criminals that dominated the FBI's most wanted list? 

Why did Jews who faced hundreds of years of discrimination, often violent, in Europe, but never known to organize criminally into violent gangs, all of a sudden form criminal gangs in America. Giving us famous gangsters as Dutch Schultz, Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel? To a person they grew up abject poverty. 

Also, why did the black crime stats take a sharp rise in the 1970s. White crime stats were higher as a percentage and in number compared to today. So, we know it wasn't always that way. Nixon had is war on drugs which we know later from released information was a war on the black power movement and the anti war movement. Also, the targeting of urban areas for crimes. Its a well known fact that drug use between the races are the same but blacks are arrested for possession, very often for personal use quantities of pot, at a far higher rate. A cop can go to any random frat house on any college campus and find ample users of not only pot for a variety of other drugs. Furthermore, the solution for crack was to lock people up. The current solution for opiates which is largely a white problem is to treat it as a disease and give drug counseling instead of jail time. Its a fact these days there is still a disparity in sentencing. 

The fact is that crime has actually dropped since the mid '90s http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/30/5-facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/  and Chicago which is being trolled out to suggest black crime is some how different than other past high crimes by groups (the aforementioned) has a lower crime rate than it did in the late 90s. Murders in Chicago were about double what they were now. When the murder rate dropped the media started using 'shootings' that didn't result in a murder as a new metric, when it didn't prior. There is and always has been media bias. There are a number of black middle class areas in America. Even in Chicago and their crime stats are far, far below the high crime black areas. Even though some of these middle class areas are adjacent to the low income areas such as Windsor Hills, in Los Angeles which is a stones throw from 'The Jungle' area made famous in the Denzel Washington movie 'Training Day'. The difference is income levels obviously. 

If we are going to infer some implied propensity for one group based on stats then we must accept it for all. We must ask why Italian Americans formed organized crime in numbers far exceeding any other ethnic group and why Jews were/are by the far the most arrested for Wall Street insider trading in the '80s and after as two examples. If we are going to apply stats to groups that is and imply inherent propensity. And lastly if that is the case, then we have to look at mass shootings in America as a white American male issue given the stats overwhelmingly suggest they commit mass shootings at a far higher rate than blacks do as a percentage of crime. What makes this last stat particularly interesting is that no other country with a majority white population in peace time within the country, excepted for civil wars, inter-religious conflict (Balkins), poverty or any other extenuating factor, has this issue. It's a unique and specific white American male issue, committed by people in working class or middle class status, not found in any other country with people of European ancestry. That is question that can't be answered by economics, religion or any other metric. That is the one head scratcher that social scientists and sociologists have not been able to explain. Any theories? 

[radioman]

I read that pretty much, not all but most, serial killers are male and ethnically white. Hmm, I need to avoid white males in case etc etc. Just sayin.

So far as what drives the people to form the gangs and confederations that they do in order to promulgate crime I have to believe the drivers are a fix of financial and social, the former being dominant. As you noted some groups never display this tendency, in upcountry Thailand you don't see such things, yeah plenty of violence but it is generally one on one or some weird family feud, something driven by a single specific. I would suggest that historically there has been little recognition of the haves and have nots. Pretty much everyone you knew was in the same boat and there was little awareness of the greater world, satisfaction is driven by what you know.

During the great American expansion from the post civil war period onward there has been a great explosion of wealth, in some circles. There was never a division of that wealth between those who could create it and those who couldn't. Particularly for people coming from cultures that, even though they were poor traditionally shared what they had this was pretty alien and this no doubt fueled the comfort in grouping, gangs.

Areas where social status and wealth are increased generally see less crime no matter the ethnic or cultural makeup of the people. They also tend to be more diverse areas racially, as well. There is a tendency to think some groups or types of people are lazier than others but I think given opportunity most would not choose to be. Laziness at that point I think is driven by a lack of perceived opportunity.

One thing that seems clear after such a long time is that you simply cannot fix discrimination or racism.

[Steve]

America glorifies how formerly maligned groups "made it" as the worked hard, nose to the grindstone. But when analysed closely, we see similar things across all the groups: Jews, Irish, Italians, Chinese, Koreans, any group that faced discrimination. 

They did it by group economics. They became entrepreneurs, bought from each other, had a code of conduct about how to treat each other and their progeny were sent to colleges but also had the choice of taking over family businesses. These businesses were not sold to anyone outside the family but if so, not outside the group. 

There is a reason why we America saw economically successful ethnic enclaves like the various Little Italies, Chinatowns, Koreatown in LA,. The Irish were a bit different. They forced their way into acceptance via politics. They were in such large numbers in NYC, Boston, Chicago and other northern cities that they voted themselves in as city council and mayors. When they got political power they hired their own in city governments. Instead of being the criminal in the "paddy wagons" they became the police in such numbers that the NYC cop portrayed in movies and TV was the 'Irish cop on the beat' with a pronounced Irish accent. They got into and dominated all the city unions: police, sanitation, fire, etc. The (in) famous Tammany Hall syndicate in NY being one of the more famous. For a time NY, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit had decades of Irish descended mayors. 

Blacks actually did the same post Civil War, Reconstruction. There were a number of all black well off towns and parts of cities that is rarely discussed in American history. The most famous was called 'Black Wall Street' in Tulsa that eventually was burned down and became one of the biggest domestic massacres in American history in the early 1920s. But there were many and what made the story so fantastic was that they were started by ex slaves with who obviously could not read or write at all. The rise of the KKK was in response to these economically vibrant towns that sprang up across the south and midwest. Many were targeted and the people were ran off, jailed, killed, etc. Something other groups didn't face. 

Anyway, other ethnic groups began being accepted as equals AFTER they become powerful economically and to some extent politically. Many blacks believe emulating what the other ethnic groups have done (group economics) is the means to achieve parity. They argued integration didn't work because it destroyed what black economic zones there were in the '60s because Blacks abandoned the stores and economic base in their own area for other stores and businesses. 

 

 

 

[Coss]

 New York state subpoenaed Michael Cohen for information about the Trump Foundation. The New York State Attorney General alleges that Trump illegally tapped his Trump Foundation to settle legal disputes, help his campaign for president, and pay for personal and business expenses, which included spending $10,000 on a 6-foot portrait of himself. 

https://apnews.com/72c5c19195f84abfaa42eaffe78d806a

[Steve]

Mueller is playing chess. He may not get Trump specifically but he can certainly "f*ck" with people close to him up to and including his family. Its personal with Mueller because Trump made it so but Mueller is smart enough to investigate it in a way where he can't be accused of bias when he brings cases. He played chess by putting  putting as many cases as he can in state court. Trump can only pardon federal crimes not state crimes. Cohen flipped because part of his charges will be in state court. Mueller has it in NY state where Trump doesn't have enough straw men in the state government or a governor that will pardon on behalf of him. Ironically enough its his home state (which he lost in the election). I think Gore lost his own state in '00 (Tenn.), can't think of a last time if ever a winning candidate lost his own state. 

While it may give a bit of a laugh and joy to those who detest Trump in America, long term its bad for the office and America because the bar for decency and protocol and such have been removed and set low. I've seen it reported Trump wanted to take away Obama's clearance but sober minds prevailed. Imagine that? 

I've seen people argue the actions he's taken aren't impeachable or legal but when has that been the standard for a President? Why has the standard for support been lowered to impeachable acts? Especially by the religious right. Whom I don't regard as Christian in any way, shape or form. Fundamentalists who were rebranded as such has been on the wrong side of ever socially morally issue since the inception of the country: slavery, women's right to vote in 1919, Jim Crow/Segregation, Civil Rights, Women's rights, Gay rights (although I support gay marriage I can at least see an argument biblically against it) and it will be so with immigration. So, with a track record of 0 moral wins out of at least 7 great issues historically, how can any reasonable person say they are any more Christian than the Ayatollah? But I digress.

The office of the President has taken a mortal hit in terms of stature and respect. Both the President and First Lady.