Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

[Andreyich]

Okay, from just that example. In Europe you were beaten, not just assaulted, but beaten...but it sounds like bar brawls? So that leads to is this where all the crime is taking place? When your drunk? You get drunk a bar and when you wake up the next morning your money is missing? Cuz uh, I have explanations for that. :P

Exactly, it was a sort of "consensual" crime because I gave them hell too, even if I didn't win. In America, it was just shit on the street, muggings, getting pushed off my bike, etc.

Where in America was this exactly? And you consider yourself "racist", but racist toward what exactly? Or is it a wide range of things?
<.<

Because america isn't getting more violent. Violent crime has fallen by 51 percent since 1991, and property crime by 43 percent. In 2013 the violent crime rate was the lowest since 1970. And many places of Europe have higher burglary/theft and assault crimes. Like I think I know where this is going, and I'll comment about it when we cross that road.

But I've been assaulted and mugged as well, but I'm not sure if it changed any of my social or political opinions. I guess aside from most crime isn't punished well enough. <.<

In that I have prejudice, meaning I pre-judge people based on what ethnic grouping they are. Like I said, East Asians for example tend to have a higher mean and median IQ whilst cough others cough tend to commit more crime. I went to Texas, Boston and New York with the amount of crime witnessed or experienced increasing in that order. America might not be getting more violent but certain peoples within it continue to be. Yes, you probably guessed where this is going.

[SleepingSilence]

@Andreyich (Well I know something I say, is bound to piss someone off. So *fingers crossed*. So here I go.)

It was just shit on the street, muggings, getting pushed off my bike, etc.

New York.

It all makes sense.

Bloomberg thinks his citizens are too stupid to drink for themselves, yet they still have some of the most pride for the state by far. So you'll have to take that into account...

I jest. But okay, yeah being a drunkard in places like New York is probably asking for trouble...

Boston, MA crime rate is 45% higher than the Massachusetts average. So I don't know what to say about violence, other than you picked bad places to be. :/

"Texas, Boston and New York with the amount of crime witnessed or experienced increasing in that order." "Whilst cough others cough tend to commit more crime."

So blacks right? Well by the logic from personal experiences, logically the places with more percentage of black would have higher crime rates then right? 1. New York (most crime.) 2. Boston (2nd) 3. Texas (3rd/least.) By you're own admission. So let's just wiki that.

Blacks Percentage
Texas 2,979,598 11.91%
Massachusetts 528,761 8.1%
New York 3,073,800 15.18%

Well those stats don't add up. Because Texas has almost the same total and yet they don't seem to commit any more crimes. :/

Though I've seen reports that the south, that has more blacks and subsequently more crime. Yet western California is number one in violent crime. And they only have a 6% percent amount of them.

So maybe it's less the race, vs the political/financial backgrounds of those particular places? Food for thought.

Also though Texas does certainly have a high crime rate, I can goddamn guarantee it's not caused by the black population. *cough* illegals *coughs*

According to DPS criminal history records, those criminal charges have thus far resulted in over 266,000 convictions including 496 homicide convictions; 26,565 assault convictions; 8,411 burglary convictions; 34,929 drug convictions; 246 kidnapping convictions; 18,851 theft convictions; 22,644 obstructing police convictions; 2,011 robbery convictions; 2,906 sexual assault convictions; and 3,707 weapons convictions. Of the convictions associated with criminal alien arrests, over 177,000 or 66% are associated with aliens who were identified by DHS status as being in the US illegally at the time of their last arrest.

And that's not even a jab at the "race", but the poor culture bought over by people not wanting to integrate.

But yes, I'm not ignorant to the facts. Black crime is high, especially Black on Black crimes. But you have to look a bit deeper than the shallow end with that...

It's not simply due to race at all.

Gang Violence, is the problem and cause most of the crimes and homicides etc.

As many as 1 million gang members are believed responsible for as much as 80 percent of crime in America -- and the gangs are spreading across the country, according to a Justice Department gang threat assessment.

Approximately "1 million gang members belonging to more than 20,000 gangs were criminally active within all 50 states and the District of Columbia as of September 2008," the report says.

"Criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of the crime in many communities, according to law enforcement officials throughout the nation," the report notes as part of its key findings. "Typical gang-related crimes include alien smuggling, armed robbery, assault, auto theft, drug trafficking, extortion, fraud, home invasions, identity theft, murder and weapons trafficking."

And gangs aren't solely represented by a single race...

The most recent figures provided by law enforcement are 46 percent Hispanic/Latino gang members, 35 percent African-American/black gang members, more than 11 percent white gang members, and 7 percent other race/ethnicity of gang members.

And hell according to this, blacks aren't even the TOP percentage of people IN gangs.

So clearly, there's a little more going on...not just race. But where they grew up, and the politics and propaganda that they learn about in their cultures. There's a few more factors at play that I think you might want to consider before assuming an entire race is predisposed to violence. Maybe like racism and most (to use their word) problematic things aren't something you're born with. But learned.

But you don't live in America. So I'm not entirely sure if I can explain much clearer than that or go more in depth. ^-^'

[Andreyich]

It all makes sense.

Bloomberg thinks his citizens are too stupid to drink for themselves, yet they still have some of the most pride for the state by far. So you'll have to take that into account...

I jest. But okay, yeah being a drunkard in places like New York is probably asking for trouble...

That's what I was saying though, I wasn't getting like that in those areas because I knew that isn't the old country.

So blacks right? Well by the logic from personal experiences, logically the places with more percentage of black would have higher crime rates then right? 1. New York (most crime.) 2. Boston (2nd) 3. Texas (3rd/least.) By you're own admission. So let's just wiki that.

Community within the cities matters too.

"Texas, Boston and New York with the amount of crime witnessed or experienced increasing in that order." "Whilst cough others cough tend to commit more crime."

So blacks right? Well by the logic from personal experiences, logically the places with more percentage of black would have higher crime rates then right? 1. New York (most crime.) 2. Boston (2nd) 3. Texas (3rd/least.) By you're own admission. So let's just wiki that.

Blacks Percentage
Texas 2,979,598 11.91%
Massachusetts 528,761 8.1%
New York 3,073,800 15.18%

Well those stats don't add up. Because Texas has almost the same total and yet they don't seem to commit any more crimes. :/

Though I've seen reports that the south, that has more blacks and subsequently more crime. Yet western California is number one in violent crime. And they only have a 6% percent amount of them.

So maybe it's less the race, vs the political/financial backgrounds of those particular places? Food for thought.

Also though Texas does certainly have a high crime rate, I can goddamn guarantee it's not caused by the black population. *cough* illegals *coughs*

According to DPS criminal history records, those criminal charges have thus far resulted in over 266,000 convictions including 496 homicide convictions; 26,565 assault convictions; 8,411 burglary convictions; 34,929 drug convictions; 246 kidnapping convictions; 18,851 theft convictions; 22,644 obstructing police convictions; 2,011 robbery convictions; 2,906 sexual assault convictions; and 3,707 weapons convictions. Of the convictions associated with criminal alien arrests, over 177,000 or 66% are associated with aliens who were identified by DHS status as being in the US illegally at the time of their last arrest.

And that's not even a jab at the "race", but the poor culture bought over by people not wanting to integrate.

But yes, I'm not ignorant to the facts. Black crime is high, especially Black on Black crimes. But you have to look a bit deeper than the shallow end with that...

It's not simply due to race at all.

Gang Violence, is the problem and cause most of the crimes and homicides etc.
As many as 1 million gang members are believed responsible for as much as 80 percent of crime in America -- and the gangs are spreading across the country, according to a Justice Department gang threat assessment.

Approximately "1 million gang members belonging to more than 20,000 gangs were criminally active within all 50 states and the District of Columbia as of September 2008," the report says.

"Criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of the crime in many communities, according to law enforcement officials throughout the nation," the report notes as part of its key findings. "Typical gang-related crimes include alien smuggling, armed robbery, assault, auto theft, drug trafficking, extortion, fraud, home invasions, identity theft, murder and weapons trafficking."

And gangs aren't solely represented by a single race...

The most recent figures provided by law enforcement are 46 percent Hispanic/Latino gang members, 35 percent African-American/black gang members, more than 11 percent white gang members, and 7 percent other race/ethnicity of gang members.

And hell according to this, blacks aren't even the TOP percentage of people IN gangs.

So clearly, there's a little more going on...not just race. But where they grew up, and the politics and propaganda that they learn about in their cultures. There's a few more factors at play that I think you might want to consider before assuming an entire race is predisposed to violence. Maybe like racism and most (to use their word) problematic things aren't something you're born with. But learned.

It is a jab at their race though, hispanics also tend to be more prone to criminality than whites; even in Brazil you can see that the population in mountains and other predominantly white communities is less criminal despite having nearly the same socioeconomic status.

Yes, more hispanics are in gangs but that is because of more clannish nature in their culture. Disorganized crime is still crime.

You see, the thing is that race is a better predictor of crime than poverty, and the "wypipo are school shooters lol" is not really an excuse since in all sorts of mass shootings non-whites are actually overrepresented.
archive.is/yKWA0 archive.is/5wE1S

And of course, I also have prejudice against hispanics though in Canada and the places I visited there were few to none, at least I didn't see any.

Yes, perhaps socioeconomic factors affect them but even if that is true, that doesn't really remoe justification from prejudice. When thinking of my safety I don't care if the lowriding "thug" with a snapback is acting that way because of genes or because of their environment, and I'm especially not going to care when he shot me. And, I do recognize that environment does screw them over. The degenerate rap and hip-hop culture encouraging single motherhood, "playas," profanity, aggressiveness being equivalent to masculinity and other such things is naturally a detriment to the development of a young black. But trouble is that their culture isn't changing, so I might as well stay safe and at least surround myself with people of similar cultural and ethnic backgrounds i.e. the Russo-German community I picked to rent a house in whilst here in Canada.

But since that was brought up I believe that environment and genetics play about a 40-60% role in the development in humans, evening out to about 50/50.

[SleepingSilence]

That's what I was saying though, I wasn't getting like that in those areas because I knew that isn't the old country.

@Andreyich

Not to make it a personal judgement. But people who get drunk in bars, are likely not to make the best decisions in practically, so at best
I have to take your word for it, that your decisions didn't lead you don't those paths. #victimblaming ^-^'

Community within the cities matters too.

I assume this is talking about racial percentages in those cities communities will lead to crime. But there's plenty of cases that show that isn't the case. What can be statistically shown, is the most violent cities are the ones that have been unending democratic control for long periods of time.

It is a jab at their race though.

No, it's not. It's a bias to illegals (or criminals who happen to be non-Caucasian.) All those crimes didn't come from legal Hispanics. There's a stark contrast in their cultures. If a place like Russia, or Germany was joint at the hip to the United States. And all of them decided to move here without integrating, we'd have very similar problems...

Hispanics also tend to be more prone to criminality than whites; even in Brazil you can see that the population in mountains and other predominantly white communities is less criminal despite having nearly the same socioeconomic status.

Would of liked links, but looking myself.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3419140/…

bridgingeurope.net/a-brazilian-take-o…

Maybe there's a religion at fault for that one. (At lack of better information.)

I don't believe racism plays a big part in America. But I completely acknowledge and believe it probably is more of a problem everywhere else. Because many people don't take outsiders as kindly, and when they try to hard to accept the wrong ones there cultures get destroyed.

You see, the thing is that race is a better predictor of crime than poverty, and the "wypipo are school shooters lol" is not really an excuse since in all sorts of mass shootings non-whites are actually overrepresented.

The first link is true, but I don't deny of those statics. I point out those statics aren't linked due to genetics. But gang related crime.

The second link isn't really meaningful, it's point is that some shooters who got more kills aren't white. But does a shooter become "more deadly" because his gun was more accurate than somebody else? And even in the title "30" of them at least 12 aren't white...that's not even half.

A poor analogy, but has equal substance. Because I would like to point out plenty of white people have killed people...probably most than many others. Hitler was white, his kill count is staggering. There are also plenty of places (out of the US.) with mostly Caucasians that you'd feel much less safe than the higher black populated areas of America...

Yes, perhaps socioeconomic factors affect them but even if that is true, that doesn't really remove justification from prejudice. When thinking of my safety I don't care if the lowriding "thug" with a snapback is acting that way because of genes or because of their environment, and I'm especially not going to care when he shot me. And, I do recognize that environment does screw them over. The degenerate rap and hip-hop culture encouraging single motherhood, "playas," profanity, aggressiveness being equivalent to masculinity and other such things is naturally a detriment to the development of a young black. But trouble is that their culture isn't changing.

But since that was brought up I believe that environment and genetics play about a 40-60% role in the development in humans, evening out to about 50/50.

Do you think that same lowriding "thug" with a snapback wouldn't act that way, if he was white? :/

Like I said America's violence is at a 20 year low...so something has to be changing right?

And actually it is changing, for the worse. (thanks obama.) Black employment is at the lowest level in 17 years. (and no it's not because of just laziness. xP) But I say that to point out their is a problem happening, and it plays a much bigger part than you're acknowledging.

I'm not particularly sure if genetic has anything to do with behavior. But, my point is that. You're allow to acknowledge the differences between races, they exist. But my problem comes from stereotyping and generalizing all of them, and assuming one race is superior or inferior to another. Environmental change drastically changes your respective on life.

It's kind of difficult to outright discussion that part though. Because it's another thing people don't necessarily know.

But I guess kind of furthest I can really go. I'd just lament that being overtly prejudiced won't be particularly helpful in real world.

Appreciate the conversation.

[Andreyich]

Not to make it a personal judgement. But people who get drunk in bars, are likely not to make the best decisions in practically, so at best
I have to take your word for it, that your decisions didn't lead you don't those paths. #victimblaming ^-^'

I have high tolerance and only drank beer, not the homemade stuff we had in the old country that we'd put in a car sometimes.

What can be statistically shown, is the most violent cities are the ones that have been unending democratic control for long periods of time.

Sorry to be blunt but that the hell does this mean?

The first link is true, but I don't deny of those statics. I point out those statics aren't linked due to genetics. But gang related crime.

They are, at least in part.

I don't believe racism plays a big part in America. But I completely acknowledge and believe it probably is more of a problem everywhere else. Because many people don't take outsiders as kindly, and when they try to hard to accept the wrong ones there cultures get destroyed.

I don't know dude America seemed pretty racist and you hear stories of raycis people in America all the time but if you're an American I'll take your word for it.

No, it's not. It's a bias to illegals (or criminals who happen to be non-Caucasian.) All those crimes didn't come from legal Hispanics. There's a stark contrast in their cultures. If a place like Russia, or Germany was joint at the hip to the United States. And all of them decided to move here without integrating, we'd have very similar problems...

It is unintentionally, because culture is not the only difference.

A poor analogy, but has equal substance. Because I would like to point out plenty of white people have killed people...probably most than many others. Hitler was white, his kill count is staggering. There are also plenty of places (out of the US.) with mostly Caucasians that you'd feel much less safe than the higher black populated areas of America...

Very poor analogy, since that was after all 80 years ago and it's an argument based on "muh exceptions" which I instantly discount. Rich blacks also tend to commit as much or equivalent crime to poor whites.

Do you think that same lowriding "thug" with a snapback wouldn't act that way, if he was white? :/

He's much less likely to do so, not to mention poor whites don't fall into that culture as much as poor blacks.

And actually it is changing, for the worse. (thanks obama.) Black employment is at the lowest level in 17 years. (and no it's not because of just laziness. xP) But I say that to point out their is a problem happening, and it plays a much bigger part than you're acknowledging.

No, I acknowledge what is due acknowledgement. I do think that the break up of family structure thus leading to unemployment and a nasty circle is very detrimental. However, long ago, in ye olden days before words were even created, the white lad had to care for a family to help them survive the cold, they had to swim, and build shelter much more often, for this was the best way to pass on his DNA. For the African lads, the best way to pass on their DNA was to simply have as many partners as possible and beat the competition away. This, by natural selection and all created two groups of people with traits physical, behavioural and emotional that are very different, so while society can largely be blamed it isn't the sole thing to be blamed.

I'm not particularly sure if genetic has anything to do with behavior. But, my point is that. You're allow to acknowledge the differences between races, they exist. But my problem comes from stereotyping and generalizing all of them, and assuming one race is superior or inferior to another. Environmental change drastically changes your respective on life.

Yes they most definitely do. I do generalize although I find stereotypes to be often silly, i.e. Asians being bad at driving; they are most likely on average about as good at driving as whites because of higher IQ and thus pattern recognition and spatial awareness, whilst blacks loving their watermelons more than their mothers is also very silly since watermelons grow best in far north africa and the middle east and naturally wouldn't be part of their preferred/customary palette. Superiority is theoretically and in practice impossible, simply adaptations for different ways to lead of life is what happens. Blacks are faster than whites, whites are stronger than blacks, blacks are much better adapted for jumping whilst whites are better adapted for swimming. Yes, I admit that environs do heavily affect perspective.

But I guess kind of furthest I can really go. I'd just lament that being overtly prejudiced won't be particularly helpful in real world.

I mean, I'm not. I don't assume that every single black out there is going to be some fried chicken munching serial rapist, I just think recognition of differences between various ethnic groups is healthy, and that has helped me in the real world.

[SleepingSilence]

I have high tolerance and only drank beer, not the homemade stuff we had in the old country that we'd put in a car sometimes.

@Andreyich

Yea...most people that tell me that get drunk quicker. Because they end up drinking more than they can tolerate. XP

Sorry to be blunt but that the hell does this mean?

In layman's term, the "democrat" party, who run cities continuously without any other party getting a chance. Has lead to the worst living conditions and cities, which lead to those cities to become susceptible to crime. Detroit for instance, had one of the highest city per capita of every city of the U.S, is now in ruins from this.

I don't know dude America seemed pretty racist and you hear stories of raycis people in America all the time but if you're an American I'll take your word for it.

Google and many american run businesses have gender and race quota's to make sure their's enough "diversity" within a business. You know how those quota's are in Japan? They DON'T HAVE THEM, because they don't give a damn.

You hear it because the media outside is spreading even worse propaganda out there...

It is unintentionally, because culture is not the only difference.

Neither is race? It's not racist. It's literally about opposing criminals. You can have a problem with a person or group and not care about the characteristics.

Very poor analogy, since that was after all 80 years ago and it's an argument based on "muh exceptions" which I instantly discount. Rich blacks also tend to commit as much or equivalent crime to poor whites.

I know, I said it was. But so was the link you provided. Individuals shouldn't matter and even if they did, it wasn't a good one to provide. Most (and I mean nearly all) "crimes" rich blacks get punished for though related to drug possession. Which can be debated if that's a worthy crime or not.

He's much less likely to do so, not to mention poor whites don't fall into that culture as much as poor blacks.

There's a fault in your own logic. You used the word "thug"...that already implies the fucker ain't on the up and up. It would be like using the word "rapist" implying men and telling me it less likely to happen because that rapist is a women. But the word you used was already a negative connotation. So how does that really make any logical sense?

Poverty is still a large factor of crime. I'd argue more so than race. In almost all cases of various crimes.

secureteen.com/juvenile-delinquency/p…

vittana.org/26-poverty-and-crime-stat…

People living in households in the US that have an income level below the Federal poverty threshold have more than double the rates of violent victimization compared to individuals in high-income households.

Individuals who live in poverty are more likely to report a crime than those who do not live in poverty, but more than half of all crime is believed to go unreported to local law enforcement.

When people live in households that are struggling with poverty, they also have a higher rate of violence that involves a firearm at 3.5 per 1,000 people compared to 0.8-2.5 per 1,000 people in middle-to-high income families.

For both whites and blacks/African-Americans in the US, the overall pattern of being in poverty with the highest rates of victimization was consistent. For Hispanics and Latinos, violent victimization is relatively equal across all income levels.

Hispanics in the US who are living in poverty have nearly half the rates of violent victimization when compared to poor whites. Even poor blacks/African-Americans have a lower rate of violent victimization in poverty compared to whites.

Urban poverty increased the risks of violence and crime for US households, but did not change the racial risk factors. Whites are the most at risk in an urban poverty household to experience crime, at a rate of 5.64%. Blacks/African-Americans had the second highest level of risk for experiencing crime in urban poverty at 5.13%.

No, I acknowledge what is due acknowledgement. I do think that the break up of family structure thus leading to unemployment and a nasty circle is very detrimental. However, long ago, in ye olden days before words were even created, the white lad had to care for a family to help them survive the cold, they had to swim, and build shelter much more often, for this was the best way to pass on his DNA. For the African lads, the best way to pass on their DNA was to simply have as many partners as possible and beat the competition away. This, by natural selection and all created two groups of people with traits physical, behavioural and emotional that are very different, so while society can largely be blamed it isn't the sole thing to be blamed.

Now I'm not sure where you get this from exactly...

Yes they most definitely do. I do generalize although I find stereotypes to be often silly, i.e. Asians being bad at driving; they are most likely on average about as good at driving as whites because of higher IQ and thus pattern recognition and spatial awareness, whilst blacks loving their watermelons more than their mothers is also very silly since watermelons grow best in far north africa and the middle east and naturally wouldn't be part of their preferred/customary palette. Superiority is theoretically and in practice impossible, simply adaptations for different ways to lead of life is what happens. Blacks are faster than whites, whites are stronger than blacks, blacks are much better adapted for jumping whilst whites are better adapted for swimming. Yes, I admit that environs do heavily affect perspective.

Well again, you say definitely but it's to be debated by people still to this day. :/

I feel like generalizations aren't practical on a pure logical standpoint and the more people that think in those ways, take one step towards suggesting shit like eugenics. Not saying you in anyway. But admitting your "racist" and just being aware of differences between bodies and cultures etc. aren't the same...

Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race (or someone else race) is superior.

I mean, I'm not. I don't assume that every single black out there is going to be some fried chicken munching serial rapist, I just think recognition of differences between various ethnic groups is healthy, and that has helped me in the real world.

I sort of doubt it. (the help of being prejudiced) Though I guess people perceive things differently all around.

But you call yourself a racist, without a hint of hesitation? I feel like the only reason to do that is to be provocative...

It's like people on youtube, young blokes in their 20's starting to outright post sympathizing remarks to pedophiles. It's just a little worrying that people like that don't seem to even be aware of why that's a problem in the first place.

Not to get off in the weeds, but I assume you're an atheist? (Just curious.)

[Penny]

Show me the gland which causes altruism.

@mdk

If you are actually interested you can see variations in altruistic behavior with gene distributions of neuroreceptors like DRD4 in various areas of the brain. While it is a mistake, in my view, to ascribe complex behaviors like altruism to any single gene, it does demonstrate the type of chemical linkages which will probably make up an essentially chemical model. It is nearly always more complicated than a single gene of course, not even considering epigenetic factors, but the more we learn the more understandable chemical linkages we discover.

[Penny]

May the gods deliver us from armchair evolutionary psychologists...

[POOHEAD189]

<Snipped quote by POOHEAD189>
Hate is a type of prejudice, but prejudice is not all hate.

@Andreyich

That was exactly my point, though. Hating anyone based upon race is prejudice to that race.

I couldn't help but find it funny that I am essentially the same as you: Christian, and independent politically, but found myself going in a much different direction. I found both candidates to be atrocious, Trump for being his uncouth self and Hillary for embodying the corrupt establishment heavily entrenched in power. Finding myself unhappy with both of them, I voted third party even though I knew they would not get the votes needed to even take one state, though I do hope this can happen in the future as the Republican and Democratic parties are falling apart at the seams.

While I could not bring myself to vote for Trump even though I consider Hillary to be a lying scum-bag with virtually no moral compass whatsoever[her campaign strategy certainly didn't help her image any + all them scandals], I still found myself hoping that Trump would win the presidency. The number one reason for this being getting a constitutional judge on the Supreme Court, if Hillary had been elected, God help America with whatever loony hard core liberal she would have tried to put on there. The hard stance on illegal immigration was a plus and also a faint hope that a business man might have the know-how to help the economy.

I could certainly say I was essentially the opposite of you, anti-Hillary but even that wasn't enough to push me to vote for Trump.

As for 2020, Trump will get a second term if he is able to bulldoze through the establishment and get even a few of the things on his agenda done. Considering all that he has accomplished in his short time as president he can certainly get a lot more done in three years time. Unless the democrats can somehow get their acts together and stop acting like violence against dissenting voices is a good thing, they will be unable to find a person who can run against Trump in 2020.

Of course what I hope will happen is that because Trump was kind of like a third party runner using the Republican party, this will encourage more third parties to get into the race who could give us people we might actually want to vote for. Here's to hoping for the rise of third parties as viable alternatives in political races! Gotta break apart the bi-partisan effort to keep everyone else out of political races. You ever look at the requirements for non-Republicans/Democrats to run for some offices? Pretty crazy how much harder they make it for other people.

Not to be rude, but you do know Trump has spent nearly half of his presidency golfing or at Maralago, he's done very little except signing executive orders, and making one mistake after another. The only thing that can be considered something that hasn't been either idiotic or selfish was his missile strike on Syria, and even then, that was prematurely done at best. I'm honestly worried on him being in office another year, much less three.

Hillary is no one's first choice, but at least she has experience and, even if you might think she's the anti-christ, she has people who she wishes to please, and good candidates that vouche for her like Obama, Sanders, and her Husband (though that's a given).

[Penny]

Not to get into if free will or whatever to call it, is real or not. But this seems a bit A + B = Clear to me. Not the best analogy you could have chosen. That person didn't take calcium, that person could of done that and not developed that. I don't want to pick a mere example apart.

@SleepingSilence

I'm using a relatively simple example to illustrate the sort of biological processes that make up the human body. These sorts of processes (and its waaaaaaaaaay more complicated than I'm making it sound) control every aspect of our bio chemistry. Why would we assume that the decision making processes which integrate our sensory data are structured any differently? Just because we feel that way? We feel a lot of stuff based on the current hormone and neurotransmitter levels in our brains. I can literally change the way you feel by medicating you.

Why would there be another type of system buried deep in our brains that provides some sort of contra-causal freewill? Isn't it more likely that the same sort of predictable, if complex chemical, interactions serve that purpose?

Assuming for a moment we have freewill. Do other animals have it? Do worms have it, do ants? What about bacteria? We classify all these things as alive. Is it only mammals? Maybe only Eukaryotes? Where and how did free will enter the evolutionary chain?

The more you think about it, the more it seems like a case of special pleading.

Maybe its all academic anyway and the appearance of free will is as good as the real thing. I certainly try to tell myself that.

[Andreyich]

the appearance of free will is as good as the real thing

@Penny

that's all there is to the free will talk

[Penny]

that's all there is to the free will talk

@Andreyich

Well I'm glad you straightened me out...

[SleepingSilence]

Not to be rude, but you do know Trump has spent nearly half of his presidency golfing or at Maralago, he's done very little except signing executive orders, and making one mistake after another.

@POOHEAD189

Can we really say "half his presidency" has been spent golfing if he's hasn't been in there for even that long? Do you have a link to this? (even looking it up, that seems to be hyperbole, though I don't even get how one can have 8 vacations under their belts already, but I'm not exactly a huge trump person either. :/)

His followers seem to think he's at least doing more than nothing.

Campaign Promise 1: To replace Antonin Scalia with a like-minded justice from a list of 20
Trump replaced Antonin Scalia with Neil Gorsuch, an incredibly qualified and Constitution-abiding justice
Campaign Promise 2: To suspend immigration from terror-prone countries
Trump has attempted to enact a Travel Ban that is 100% CONSTITUTIONAL AND is made from the seven (six, now) "countries of concern" outlined by the Obama Administration. This has been blocked by an extremely liberal Hawaiian judge who was appointed by Obama. (The blocking of this travel ban might piss me off more than anything that has happened during his presidency, because judges should be blind to politics, but that is proving to be false.) Hopefully this will go to the Supreme Court and be overturned quickly.
Campaign Promise 3: To defund and crack down on sanctuary cities
Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on sanctuary cities, threatening to defund them
Campaign Promise 4: To revive the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline
The revival of the Dakota and Keystone XL Pipelines creating American jobs
Campaign Promise 5: To pull the US out of the TPP, an Obama-era trade deal detrimental to the US
Trump pulled us out of the TPP which would have been absolutely disastrous for the US
Campaign Promise 6: DONALD TRUMP LOVES WOMEN AND WANTS TO HELP WOMEN!
Trump has signed an Executive Order promoting women in STEM jobs (careers real feminists strive for, not "dance therapy" feminists)
Trump has Launched a Council empowering female leaders and female entrepreneurs
Campaign Promise 7: To renegotiate, or pull out of Bill Clinton's terrible trade deal, NAFTA
Trump met with Justin Trudeau (what a joke) to discuss the tweaking of NAFTA to benefit the US more, after he threatens to leave it
Campaign Promise 8: To undo ridiculous Obama-era federal agency regulations
Trump ordered a two-for-one repeal for all new regulations enacted by federal agencies
Campaign Promise 9: To rollback Obama-era regulations on small businesses
Trump has rolled back ridiculous Obama-era regulations that have made it nearly impossible for small businesses to hire employees
Trump has already saved taxpayers $86 Billion by cutting regulations
Campaign Promise 10: To help America's inner-cities deeply in need of rebuilding
Trump has signed an Executive Order to give major funding to "Historically Black Colleges and Universities," helping out inner-cities immensely
Campaign Promise 11: To protect our policemen, the true everyday heroes
Trump signed an Executive Order protecting our police
Campaign Promise 12: To crackdown on illegal immigration and to BUILD A WALL
Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on illegal immigration and he has started the WALL initiative
Campaign Promise 13: To bolster our depleted military
Trump has increased our military budget because we don't want to use our military, but want to be prepared to use it
Campaign Promise 14: To enact a five year lobbying ban on government Officials after they leave office
Trump has placed a five year and lifetime lobbying ban on government officials for when they leave office
Campaign Promise 15: To crackdown on drug cartels and illegal drugs crossing the border
Trump signed an Executive Order cracking down on drug cartels
Campaign Promise 16: To revitalize the dying coal industry in the US
Trump has enacted Joint Resolution 38 putting thousands of coal miners back to work
Campaign Promise 17: To create American JOBS and bring companies back to America
Trump negotiated a deal with Carrier promising to bring manufacturing and jobs back to the US.
Trump has met with CEOs from huge companies to work on bringing jobs back to America
There was an increase of 298,000 jobs in February alone (liberals will say that counts in Obama's fiscal year, but we know the truth)
Trump met with Intel CEO who promised $7 Billion investment and over 3,000 high paying (not "shovel ready" bullshit jobs) in America
Trump met with the CEO of Softbank who has promised 50,000 more American jobs and has already fulfilled 3,000 of those jobs
Kroger has promised over 10,000 new jobs in the era of Trump
The month of March yielded 263,000 new jobs, which passes the month's estimated 185,000 Big League
Campaign Promise 18: Pushing NATO allies to pay their fair share or face the reality of the US possibly leaving
Trump has put major pressure on the members of NATO to pay their fair and equal share because there are only a handful of countries in NATO who currently pay as much as agreed upon
Campaign Promise 19: To make America energy independent, relieving us from our dependence on foreign entities, such as OPEC
Trump has taken major steps towards America's energy independence
Campaign Promise 20: To enact a hiring freeze on government employees to help stop corruption
Trump enacted a hiring freeze to all federal employees, cutting down on the over-bloated bureaucracy
Campaign Promise 21: Trump could be the president that takes us to Mars!
Trump signed a Bill allowing NASA funding, including an exploration to Mars
Campaign Promise 22: To undo many of Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders
Rescinding (one of) Obama's incredibly unconstitutional actions regarding transgender bathrooms in schools
Campaign Promise 23: The repeal and replacement of Obamacare. The recent GOP fallout of AHCA Plan was no fault of Trump's. The blame solely belongs to Speaker Ryan. He created a shit bill and couldn't even capitalize to get enough votes. Obamacare will crash in 2017 when individual mandates kick in and Democrats will be to blame. That is when Trump will truly work to Repeal and Replace it with a plan he promised us.
Trump got rid of the idiotic penalty in Obamacare that fines you if you choose not to participate in the program
Campaign Promise 24: To "Bomb the shit out of ISIS"
A few days ago, Trump dropped the YUGE MOAB on a group of ISIS militants, killing 90+ terrorists and causing damage to underground tunnels and technology
He called for a drone strike in Afghanistan killing Qari Yasin, a Pakistani Al-Qaeda leader
Campaign Promise 25: To not take a salary as President
He donated his first quarterly salary to the National Park Service
Campaign Promise 26: To reform the VA and make it easier for Vets to get more healthcare opportunities
He signed A Bill allowing veterans to seek healthcare outside of the broken VA system
Trump has created the Accountability Office at the VA, making it incredibly easy to oust incompetent VA employees
Campaign Promise 27: To create a much needed tax reform
Trump has laid out an extremely concise, yet effective Tax Reform Plan to lower taxes for Americans and end things like inheritance tax, and to cut corporate tax rates down to 15%
Campaign Promise 28 (Scroll down to see "School Choice and Education Act"): To fix our country's incredibly broken education system
Trump has signed an Executive Order giving the power of our country's education back to state and local authorities
ACTIONS NOT PROMISED ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, BUT HAVE BEEN PUT IN EFFECT:
(Even though it was Mike Pence) The defunding of clinics that perform abortions. Because no matter whether you are pro-choice/pro-life, the government should not be funding abortions. (Also, if people bring up the Hyde Amendment which is supposed to not let any federal funding go towards abortions, LET THEM KNOW that US taxpayers pay for about 24% of abortions despite of that "amendment")
Huge spikes in the NASDAQ average index and the DOW average index starting November 8th. (This will count for Obama unfortunately, but we know where the real credit belongs.)
He has placed sanctions on Iran after they tested ballistic missiles
He has met with/talked to over 68 foreign leaders
He negotiated down the Price of the new Air Force One one billion dollars in a meeting that lasted just one hour
He issued major cuts to the costs of the F-35 saving billions
He has opened the eyes of the American public to just how unbelievably corrupt (pretty believable to most) the Obama Administration was.
After spending 3 years in a prison in Egypt, and absolutely no help from President Obama, humanitarian and US citizen Aya Hijazi has safely returned home and has given all credit to President Trump

maga1776.com/actions.html

Trump has signed more bills in 100 days than any president since Truman. I mean whether significant ones or "good." (which is why Polifact labels this statement "mostly true" <.<)

What really else can you expect a president to do?

Aside from trying to abuse his power and go beyond what they can do...which I'd prefer not. I assume most would not like that. >.>

[POOHEAD189]

<Snipped quote by POOHEAD189>

Can we really say "half his presidency" has been spent golfing if he's hasn't been in there for even that long? Do you have a link to this? (even looking it up, that seems to be hyperbole, though I don't even get how one can have 8 vacations under their belts already, but I'm not exactly a huge trump person either. :/)

His followers seem to think he's at least doing more than nothing.

Campaign Promise 1: To replace Antonin Scalia with a like-minded justice from a list of 20
Trump replaced Antonin Scalia with Neil Gorsuch, an incredibly qualified and Constitution-abiding justice
Campaign Promise 2: To suspend immigration from terror-prone countries
Trump has attempted to enact a Travel Ban that is 100% CONSTITUTIONAL AND is made from the seven (six, now) "countries of concern" outlined by the Obama Administration. This has been blocked by an extremely liberal Hawaiian judge who was appointed by Obama. (The blocking of this travel ban might piss me off more than anything that has happened during his presidency, because judges should be blind to politics, but that is proving to be false.) Hopefully this will go to the Supreme Court and be overturned quickly.
Campaign Promise 3: To defund and crack down on sanctuary cities
Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on sanctuary cities, threatening to defund them
Campaign Promise 4: To revive the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline
The revival of the Dakota and Keystone XL Pipelines creating American jobs
Campaign Promise 5: To pull the US out of the TPP, an Obama-era trade deal detrimental to the US
Trump pulled us out of the TPP which would have been absolutely disastrous for the US
Campaign Promise 6: DONALD TRUMP LOVES WOMEN AND WANTS TO HELP WOMEN!
Trump has signed an Executive Order promoting women in STEM jobs (careers real feminists strive for, not "dance therapy" feminists)
Trump has Launched a Council empowering female leaders and female entrepreneurs
Campaign Promise 7: To renegotiate, or pull out of Bill Clinton's terrible trade deal, NAFTA
Trump met with Justin Trudeau (what a joke) to discuss the tweaking of NAFTA to benefit the US more, after he threatens to leave it
Campaign Promise 8: To undo ridiculous Obama-era federal agency regulations
Trump ordered a two-for-one repeal for all new regulations enacted by federal agencies
Campaign Promise 9: To rollback Obama-era regulations on small businesses
Trump has rolled back ridiculous Obama-era regulations that have made it nearly impossible for small businesses to hire employees
Trump has already saved taxpayers $86 Billion by cutting regulations
Campaign Promise 10: To help America's inner-cities deeply in need of rebuilding
Trump has signed an Executive Order to give major funding to "Historically Black Colleges and Universities," helping out inner-cities immensely
Campaign Promise 11: To protect our policemen, the true everyday heroes
Trump signed an Executive Order protecting our police
Campaign Promise 12: To crackdown on illegal immigration and to BUILD A WALL
Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on illegal immigration and he has started the WALL initiative
Campaign Promise 13: To bolster our depleted military
Trump has increased our military budget because we don't want to use our military, but want to be prepared to use it
Campaign Promise 14: To enact a five year lobbying ban on government Officials after they leave office
Trump has placed a five year and lifetime lobbying ban on government officials for when they leave office
Campaign Promise 15: To crackdown on drug cartels and illegal drugs crossing the border
Trump signed an Executive Order cracking down on drug cartels
Campaign Promise 16: To revitalize the dying coal industry in the US
Trump has enacted Joint Resolution 38 putting thousands of coal miners back to work
Campaign Promise 17: To create American JOBS and bring companies back to America
Trump negotiated a deal with Carrier promising to bring manufacturing and jobs back to the US.
Trump has met with CEOs from huge companies to work on bringing jobs back to America
There was an increase of 298,000 jobs in February alone (liberals will say that counts in Obama's fiscal year, but we know the truth)
Trump met with Intel CEO who promised $7 Billion investment and over 3,000 high paying (not "shovel ready" bullshit jobs) in America
Trump met with the CEO of Softbank who has promised 50,000 more American jobs and has already fulfilled 3,000 of those jobs
Kroger has promised over 10,000 new jobs in the era of Trump
The month of March yielded 263,000 new jobs, which passes the month's estimated 185,000 Big League
Campaign Promise 18: Pushing NATO allies to pay their fair share or face the reality of the US possibly leaving
Trump has put major pressure on the members of NATO to pay their fair and equal share because there are only a handful of countries in NATO who currently pay as much as agreed upon
Campaign Promise 19: To make America energy independent, relieving us from our dependence on foreign entities, such as OPEC
Trump has taken major steps towards America's energy independence
Campaign Promise 20: To enact a hiring freeze on government employees to help stop corruption
Trump enacted a hiring freeze to all federal employees, cutting down on the over-bloated bureaucracy
Campaign Promise 21: Trump could be the president that takes us to Mars!
Trump signed a Bill allowing NASA funding, including an exploration to Mars
Campaign Promise 22: To undo many of Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders
Rescinding (one of) Obama's incredibly unconstitutional actions regarding transgender bathrooms in schools
Campaign Promise 23: The repeal and replacement of Obamacare. The recent GOP fallout of AHCA Plan was no fault of Trump's. The blame solely belongs to Speaker Ryan. He created a shit bill and couldn't even capitalize to get enough votes. Obamacare will crash in 2017 when individual mandates kick in and Democrats will be to blame. That is when Trump will truly work to Repeal and Replace it with a plan he promised us.
Trump got rid of the idiotic penalty in Obamacare that fines you if you choose not to participate in the program
Campaign Promise 24: To "Bomb the shit out of ISIS"
A few days ago, Trump dropped the YUGE MOAB on a group of ISIS militants, killing 90+ terrorists and causing damage to underground tunnels and technology
He called for a drone strike in Afghanistan killing Qari Yasin, a Pakistani Al-Qaeda leader
Campaign Promise 25: To not take a salary as President
He donated his first quarterly salary to the National Park Service
Campaign Promise 26: To reform the VA and make it easier for Vets to get more healthcare opportunities
He signed A Bill allowing veterans to seek healthcare outside of the broken VA system
Trump has created the Accountability Office at the VA, making it incredibly easy to oust incompetent VA employees
Campaign Promise 27: To create a much needed tax reform
Trump has laid out an extremely concise, yet effective Tax Reform Plan to lower taxes for Americans and end things like inheritance tax, and to cut corporate tax rates down to 15%
Campaign Promise 28 (Scroll down to see "School Choice and Education Act"): To fix our country's incredibly broken education system
Trump has signed an Executive Order giving the power of our country's education back to state and local authorities
ACTIONS NOT PROMISED ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, BUT HAVE BEEN PUT IN EFFECT:
(Even though it was Mike Pence) The defunding of clinics that perform abortions. Because no matter whether you are pro-choice/pro-life, the government should not be funding abortions. (Also, if people bring up the Hyde Amendment which is supposed to not let any federal funding go towards abortions, LET THEM KNOW that US taxpayers pay for about 24% of abortions despite of that "amendment")
Huge spikes in the NASDAQ average index and the DOW average index starting November 8th. (This will count for Obama unfortunately, but we know where the real credit belongs.)
He has placed sanctions on Iran after they tested ballistic missiles
He has met with/talked to over 68 foreign leaders
He negotiated down the Price of the new Air Force One one billion dollars in a meeting that lasted just one hour
He issued major cuts to the costs of the F-35 saving billions
He has opened the eyes of the American public to just how unbelievably corrupt (pretty believable to most) the Obama Administration was.
After spending 3 years in a prison in Egypt, and absolutely no help from President Obama, humanitarian and US citizen Aya Hijazi has safely returned home and has given all credit to President Trump

maga1776.com/actions.html

Trump has signed more bills in 100 days than any president since Truman. I mean whether significant ones or "good." (which is why Polifact labels this statement "mostly true" <.<)

What really else can you expect a president to do?

Aside from trying to abuse his power and go beyond what they can do...which I'd prefer not. I assume most would not like that. >.>

@SleepingSilence

Signing bills that your party gives you (without reading them I might add) is the easiest thing in the world to do. And yes, the link is here. He's spent 143 days in office, and 71 on vacation. That is literally 1 day less than half of his presidency.

Edit: Also, a lot of those facts are speculative at best.

Campaign Promise 17: To create American JOBS and bring companies back to America
Trump negotiated a deal with Carrier promising to bring manufacturing and jobs back to the US.

He 'negotiated' a deal. He's made us lose far more jobs by trying to revive the coal industry, and by taking is out of the Chinese trade deal, and by not opening up safe, energy efficient jobs that are literally the future. Most things he's done is literally just for show, to say he's done them.

[Andreyich]

I'll skip right to this since the other stuff was just me asking you for clarification.

Neither is race? It's not racist. It's literally about opposing criminals. You can have a problem with a person or group and not care about the characteristics.

I suppose I forfeit this since it turns out I misunderstood what racism is, which I'll visit later in this post. As long as we can agree that there are a variety of factors at work here I think on this point we're done.

I know, I said it was. But so was the link you provided. Individuals shouldn't matter and even if they did, it wasn't a good one to provide. Most (and I mean nearly all) "crimes" rich blacks get punished for though related to drug possession. Which can be debated if that's a worthy crime or not.

The link I provided was to dissuade the "lol whites are mass shooters so it's the same" train of thought, not to prove a point. Individuals however should and matter, at least somewhat since it is they after all who are the ones forming a collective.

There's a fault in your own logic. You used the word "thug"...that already implies the fucker ain't on the up and up. It would be like using the word "rapist" implying men and telling me it less likely to happen because that rapist is a women. But the word you used was already a negative connotation. So how does that really make any logical sense?

I meant a thug as in the cultural thing, gold grillz, blasting boom box, etc.

Poverty is still a large factor of crime. I'd argue more so than race. In almost all cases of various crimes.

It is, but like I said in my π world shithole of a home country I experienced very little criminality apart from that which I brought upon myself. Admittedly this was when I was only in my home village and the nearest city, I haven't been to the whole country for a reasonable amount of time but I doubt it's too different.

People living in households in the US that have an income level below the Federal poverty threshold have more than double the rates of violent victimization compared to individuals in high-income households.

I'm not sure what this means or more precisely if I understand it right, considering the meaning of victimization.

Individuals who live in poverty are more likely to report a crime than those who do not live in poverty, but more than half of all crime is believed to go unreported to local law enforcement.

If you're trying to assert that the more wealthy strata do as much crime as the lower classes then you're plain wrong. At most, they do more crime of the sort like you mentioned, drug use and such that (supposedly) doesn't hurt anyone and is """"""victimless.""""""

When people live in households that are struggling with poverty, they also have a higher rate of violence that involves a firearm at 3.5 per 1,000 people compared to 0.8-2.5 per 1,000 people in middle-to-high income families.

Interesting considering you'd think they can't afford one. Not all that pertinent though.

For both whites and blacks/African-Americans in the US, the overall pattern of being in poverty with the highest rates of victimization was consistent. For Hispanics and Latinos, violent victimization is relatively equal across all income levels.

This is largely to do with hispanics making quite often their wealth off of stuff that is quite simply illicit.

Hispanics in the US who are living in poverty have nearly half the rates of violent victimization when compared to poor whites. Even poor blacks/African-Americans have a lower rate of violent victimization in poverty compared to whites.

Once again, clarify since I'm not sure what you mean by victimization, if it is to make another person a victim or to become one.

Urban poverty increased the risks of violence and crime for US households, but did not change the racial risk factors. Whites are the most at risk in an urban poverty household to experience crime, at a rate of 5.64%. Blacks/African-Americans had the second highest level of risk for experiencing crime in urban poverty at 5.13%.

That's probably because they get targeted and don't really commit crime on their own part making others see them as weaker and more opportune targets, which is not wholly untrue.

Now I'm not sure where you get this from exactly...

History?

Well again, you say definitely but it's to be debated by people still to this day. :/

Can't be a debate if one side isn't really allowed to speak up.

I feel like generalizations aren't practical on a pure logical standpoint and the more people that think in those ways, take one step towards suggesting shit like eugenics. Not saying you in anyway. But admitting your "racist" and just being aware of differences between bodies and cultures etc. aren't the same...

Racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race (or someone else race) is superior.

I think eugenics is pretty autistic yes, but generalisations do have their purpose and use. When I look at someone for the first time I can always draw conclusions that I should act accordingly to and are up to the other person to be proven right or wrong.

I searched up the definition of racism again and yes, you're right. I didn't read it through properly and just saw the "key words" of prejudice against a different race. Since I know that superiority is more or less impossible I suppose I can remove the label of racist from myself. I admit I was wrong to use it, though this probably won't stop others from applying it to me.

I sort of doubt it. (the help of being prejudiced) Though I guess people perceive things differently all around.

It's sure helped me here. It helped me pick what was, I'm sure absolutely coincidentally the nicest neighbourhood to be around, knowing simply the ethnic composition.

But you call yourself a racist, without a hint of hesitation? I feel like the only reason to do that is to be provocative...

As said earlier, I guess I was wrong. I thought it meant to only be prejudiced which I am, I don't believe in superiority of any sort though, but people will call me racist anyways.

It's like people on youtube, young blokes in their 20's starting to outright post sympathizing remarks to pedophiles. It's just a little worrying that people like that don't seem to even be aware of why that's a problem in the first place.

TOLERANCE IS THE WAY TO GO!!!1! WHY CAN'T YOU BE MORE TOLERANT OF SOME PEOPLE"S SEXUAL CHOICES??//?

Not to get off in the weeds, but I assume you're an atheist? (Just curious.)

Reconciled Old Believer.

EDIT: @SleepingSilence since you might have not seen it because of your post and notifications being wonky and the display and all and whatever and yeah....

[SleepingSilence]

Signing bills that your party gives you (without reading them I might add) is the easiest thing in the world to do. And yes, the link is here. He's spent 143 days in office, and 71 on vacation. That is literally 1 day less than half of his presidency.

Edit: Also, a lot of those facts are speculative at best.

He 'negotiated' a deal. He's made us lose far more jobs by trying to revive the coal industry, and by taking is out of the Chinese trade deal, and by not opening up safe, energy efficient jobs that are literally the future. Most things he's done is literally just for show, to say he's done them.

@POOHEAD189

@POOHEAD189

So why did Obama and so many before him do so little? It wasn't due to the economy not needing help. And how do we know what was read or not? Seems rather speculative.

But if that statement is true, that's not very fantastic. I don't know if the "maralago" trips had anything to do with the presidency or not. But I won't defend something that seems suspect. Like I said, not a big Trump fan.

Though the media and people like Seth Myers, giving me that information, I can hardly take those people seriously, from the lies they themselves have said in the past.

I'll admit, this election (and how it's felt like we'd already got the 8 years of bush, in less than a year. When it comes to slandering every single thing somebody has done.) And various things have kind of made me hate politics so much, I don't really follow them as closely as I used too.

But he isn't shutting down jobs for coal. He's rehiring a part of the workers Obama had shut down on purpose to "kill their industry." Alternative energy shouldn't be considered practical on a wide scale, and will have oil and other energies backing it up. Because it has already visible problems lead to problems elsewhere. And that's disregarding an argument for the third world.

[IceHeart]

Not to be rude, but you do know Trump has spent nearly half of his presidency golfing or at Maralago, he's done very little except signing executive orders, and making one mistake after another. The only thing that can be considered something that hasn't been either idiotic or selfish was his missile strike on Syria, and even then, that was prematurely done at best. I'm honestly worried on him being in office another year, much less three.

Hillary is no one's first choice, but at least she has experience and, even if you might think she's the anti-christ, she has people who she wishes to please, and good candidates that vouche for her like Obama, Sanders, and her Husband (though that's a given).

@POOHEAD189

I bet he gets a lot more done and is able to think better when he is outside of the incredibly hostile environment that pretty much envelops the white house. Considering he has been in office for so little time, he has actually got quite a lot done so I have no idea where you are getting this idea of doing very little. Overall though, I am much more interested in what his 'staff' can get accomplished then President Trump, mostly I hope he can be a decent catalyst for the other people to get their jobs done.

I'm more worried about how you can consider Obama, Sanders, and Bill Clinton as being good candidates. Obama got very little done during his time in the White House and created a lot more problems then he fixed, like pushing through a poorly constructed health care bill that is imploding. Sanders seemed like a decent fellow at first, until he sold out his followers to pave the way for Hillary and revealed his true colors. Now Bill, admittedly he actually had some decent success as a President but considering he almost got impeached for some rather disgusting behavior shows he is severely lacking in the moral compass department. As bad as that was, it is the Clinton Foundation that really takes the cake with their despicable behavior in Haiti which includes both Hillary and Bill.

[SleepingSilence]

@Andreyich I did see it. Had a lot of stuff on my plate, suddenly haha. But I appreciate the thought though. :3

I suppose I forfeit this since it turns out I misunderstood what racism is, which I'll visit later in this post. As long as we can agree that there are a variety of factors at work here I think on this point we're done.

@Andreyich

I certainly don't disagree with some things you've said. Just the whole generalization part and slightly doubt on the genes parts. ;P I wasn't necessarily trying to go full blown debate anyhow. So I don't mind closing statements on this topic in particular.

The link I provided was to dissuade the "lol whites are mass shooters so it's the same" train of thought, not to prove a point. Individuals however should and matter, at least somewhat since it is they after all who are the ones forming a collective.

@Andreyich

Fair enough, though I wasn't making the argument against it. So I feel like it wasn't too necessary. But yes whites shoot people, but it's mentally fucked in the head people we're usually dealing with. And that goes into mental health more than anything else.

I meant a thug as in the cultural thing, gold grillz, blasting boom box, etc.

@Andreyich

Ah. Still seems like a negative stereotype. Also I find white people that act like this far more obnoxious because their on a case of "try hard" and desperation does bad things. (*this is not a serious point*)

It is, but like I said in my π world shithole of a home country I experienced very little criminality apart from that which I brought upon myself. Admittedly this was when I was only in my home village and the nearest city, I haven't been to the whole country for a reasonable amount of time but I doubt it's too different.

@Andreyich

I've experienced it plenty, but I don't think it's useful to use those individual incidents to say anything about a culture. Maybe just how I've grown from it.

Beside I find it much more useful to just hate all humanity equally. #Blackcatslivesmatter. Fuck people that kill them because their black, seriously that's a real thing. (*this is not a serious point*)

But yeah, America is far better than the media portrays them, especially elsewhere. But getting into the weeds, and I wouldn't even say I'm that patriotic, so this message may be a little flat coming from me. So I'll leave it at that.

I'm not sure what this means or more precisely if I understand it right, considering the meaning of victimization.

If you're trying to assert that the more wealthy strata do as much crime as the lower classes then you're plain wrong. At most, they do more crime of the sort like you mentioned, drug use and such that (supposedly) doesn't hurt anyone and is """"""victimless.""""""

Interesting considering you'd think they can't afford one. Not all that pertinent though.

This is largely to do with Hispanics making quite often their wealth off of stuff that is quite simply illicit.

Once again, clarify since I'm not sure what you mean by victimization, if it is to make another person a victim or to become one.

That's probably because they get targeted and don't really commit crime on their own part making others see them as weaker and more opportune targets, which is not wholly untrue.

@Andreyich

Okay I would say I don't really like some of the implications here. But I'll admit it's completely my fault. All the stuff above here is a part of the link above it and I just forget to put it in obvious quotes. This isn't my conjecture it's recorded study data by someone else. So a lot of the responses are from that angle, so it's hard to reply to any of them.

History?

@Andreyich

Citation needed? :3 *I spent a lot of time writing things but I deleted it. Dieting doesn't help the brain process things I've learned. :D*

Can't be a debate if one side isn't really allowed to speak up.

@Andreyich

Fair enough, but again. Whose silencing stuff like this? A race? No, a political ideology. Which I argue has caused a lot of the problems.

I think eugenics is pretty autistic yes, but generalizations do have their purpose and use. When I look at someone for the first time I can always draw conclusions that I should act accordingly to and are up to the other person to be proven right or wrong.

@Andreyich

Guilty until proven innocent? I can tell you that doesn't fit western views. (though you're not from here, so that probably means nothing.) But yeah, I just agree to disagree with that ideal. I understand where your logic comes from, but my brain just will never work that way.

I searched up the definition of racism again and yes, you're right. I didn't read it through properly and just saw the "key words" of prejudice against a different race. Since I know that superiority is more or less impossible I suppose I can remove the label of racist from myself. I admit I was wrong to use it, though this probably won't stop others from applying it to me.

As said earlier, I guess I was wrong. I thought it meant to only be prejudiced which I am, I don't believe in superiority of any sort though, but people will call me racist anyways.

@Andreyich

Doesn't help when you applied it to yourself, my man. XP

But yes, that happens. Usually by privileged class white people that project their feelings to things, they actually care very little about. But I'm repeating myself.

It's sure helped me here. It helped me pick what was, I'm sure absolutely coincidentally the nicest neighborhood to be around, knowing simply the ethnic composition.

@Andreyich

My predominantly white schools absolutely sucked, and was full of pieces of shit. And I highly preferred my predominately black school, many who were at least much less spiteful people. And my non-ghetto friends pale in comparison (and having an actual spine.) to how close I've become to them and the things they've experienced and took in stride. (Everyone that I've meet and spent time with, are far less spineless than people seem to think they are. Including my family. <.<) But I guess anecdotally, both hold about the same weight of the real world as a whole.

Maybe I hate my race instead, call the national guard for purging, I'm defective. (*this is not a serious point*)

Reconciled Old Believer.

@Andreyich

Believer of? (I mean I guess it's sort of obvious. (ignoring the 7 billion different denominations.) But I guess I'm not fully sure what that means either.)

Hopefully this closing statement suffices.

[POOHEAD189]

So why did Obama and so many before him do so little? It wasn't due to the economy not needing help. And how do we know what was read or not? Seems rather speculative.

We know what was and was not read based upon his interviews. He never knows what he's talking about, and he's often confused. He's been stated to be factually wrong/lying 3/4ths of the time, compared to Hillary Clinton's 1/4th of the time, and while you might think Hillary's is bad, that's actually normal for a politician.

Though the media and people like Seth Myers, giving me that information, I can hardly take those people seriously, from the lies they themselves have said in the past.

Like I said, I'm independent. I try to look at both conservative and liberal views. Seth Myers is obviously a liberal, however the video itself used its source verbatim. Can't really argue with that.

Also that video you posted is factually wrong.
1) Obama took away Coal jobs, because it's environmentally harmful. Yet he also official (according to the treasury) brought us out of our economic recession and gave us millions of jobs in other areas.

2) "Coal mining is bad for the environment, based on what?" Are...is he serious? (Not only is his german info out of context (because Germany's colder weather, 2016’s leap day, a growing economy and population growth outweighed any energy savings and its been scientifically proven, DESPITE the coal emissions helping keep it down by only raising it 1 percent. I.E. if they had used coal, it would have gone up 5-10 %. So, no coal is still good.) A simple wiki search shows what Coal mining does to the environment.

Coal mining can result in a number of adverse effects on the environment.

Surface mining of coal completely eliminates existing vegetation, destroys the genetic soil profile, displaces or destroys wildlife and habitat, degrades air quality, alters current land uses, and to some extent permanently changes the general topography of the area mined.[31] This often results in a scarred landscape with no scenic value. Of greater concern, the movement, storage, and redistribution of soil during mining can disrupt the community of soil microorganisms and consequently nutrient cycling processes. Rehabilitation or reclamation mitigates some of these concerns and is required by US Federal Law, specifically the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977.

Mine dumps (tailings) could produce acid mine drainage which can seep into waterways and aquifers, with consequences on ecological and human health.

If underground mine tunnels collapse, they cause subsidence of the ground above. Subsidence can damage buildings, and disrupt the flow of streams and rivers by interfering with the natural drainage.

Coal production is a major contributor to global warming: burning coal generates large quantities of carbon dioxide and mining operations can release methane, a known greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. The coal mining industry is working to improve its public image.

This guy is asking John Oliver to prove an obvious fact. Like saying "this steak came from a cow? Prove it. Based on what?"

3) There is no "clean" coal technology. That's a term to show it's using coal in a more efficient way. It's not clean.

4) He used John Oliver's joke as a point for solar power being more expensive. I don't know why... John Oliver never said it was cheaper. Just cleaner and more effective.

5) He's acting like 33,000 jobs is a huge thing, and saying Solar/Wind power has no potential, which both are absolutely wrong. This last rant really showed how right winged this guy is, and you should never listen to someone who is biased. It's why I am an independent.

But he isn't shutting down jobs for coal. He's rehiring a part of the workers Obama had shut down on purpose to "kill their industry." Alternative energy shouldn't be considered practical on a wide scale, and will have oil and other energies backing it up. Because it has already visible problems lead to problems elsewhere. And that's disregarding an argument for the third world.

As far as Coal jobs go, my point is this: New energy such as Solar and Wind, while they aren't perfect, are in fact, the future. Coal hurts the environment. It is literally helping lead to the deaths of our kids and grand kids, to the earth shutting down as a planet, and perhaps the end of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of future jobs so we can have some jobs now. People who are for coal just want things 'now now now' and fuck the consequences.

I bet he gets a lot more done and is able to think better when he is outside of the incredibly hostile environment that pretty much envelops the white house. Considering he has been in office for so little time, he has actually got quite a lot done so I have no idea where you are getting this idea of doing very little. Overall though, I am much more interested in what his 'staff' can get accomplished then President Trump, mostly I hope he can be a decent catalyst for the other people to get their jobs done.

He's doing very little because 1) his staff reportedly does most of everything, and he has his family in the whitehouse handling his affairs. Hell, his son in law was tasked with "brokering peace in the middle east."

I'm more worried about how you can consider Obama, Sanders, and Bill Clinton as being good candidates. Obama got very little done during his time in the White House and created a lot more problems then he fixed, like pushing through a poorly constructed health care bill that is imploding. Sanders seemed like a decent fellow at first, until he sold out his followers to pave the way for Hillary and revealed his true colors. Now Bill, admittedly he actually had some decent success as a President but considering he almost got impeached for some rather disgusting behavior shows he is severely lacking in the moral compass department. As bad as that was, it is the Clinton Foundation that really takes the cake with their despicable behavior in Haiti which includes both Hillary and Bill.

I am not entirely sure what news you surbscribe to, but Obama brought us out of economic recession, was harried at every turn by republicans yet still got his healthcare bill out, which while not perfect, gave 23 million americans affordable healthcare. He gave us over 10 million more jobs, and he also helped us environmentally.

Sanders did not sell out or 'show his true colors'. He simply felt like me, which is "no Trump," so he supported Hillary. I think Sanders goes a bit too far with his socialist ideals, but he's a decent guy.

Yeah, I was more using Bill as someone who'd help guide her as president, rather than being a moral compass. Though that was 20 years ago, and while I've never done it, a lot of people I know have cheated on people. I think bringing it up to use against him now is kind of out of date, even if back then it was despicable.

[SleepingSilence]

I'm using a relatively simple example to illustrate the sort of biological processes that make up the human body. These sorts of processes (and its waaaaaaaaaay more complicated than I'm making it sound) control every aspect of our bio chemistry. Why would we assume that the decision making processes which integrate our sensory data are structured any differently? Just because we feel that way? We feel a lot of stuff based on the current hormone and neurotransmitter levels in our brains. I can literally change the way you feel by medicating you.

Why would there be another type of system buried deep in our brains that provides some sort of contra-causal freewill? Isn't it more likely that the same sort of predictable, if complex chemical, interactions serve that purpose?

Assuming for a moment we have freewill. Do other animals have it? Do worms have it, do ants? What about bacteria? We classify all these things as alive. Is it only mammals? Maybe only Eukaryotes? Where and how did free will enter the evolutionary chain?

The more you think about it, the more it seems like a case of special pleading.

Maybe its all academic anyway and the appearance of free will is as good as the real thing. I certainly try to tell myself that.

@Penny

I know the example wasn't trying to be too serious. Which is why I didn't dive into it too deeply.

Well as a christian, it's hard to really get into a debate of free will from a fully scientific perspective of all of that. Also I haven't been in school in so long, that I'm pretty sure I've gotten stupider at least on a technical level. :/

But I understand what you're trying to say. Maybe it would be fun, or enlightening for you to do a little digging to actually know what you should/would consider yourself. :3