Isn't wasting time what people do here? I mean, it's somewhat of a pastime for me.
The 2012 Booker report found that, all else equal, black people were sentenced 20.4 percent longer than white people. Whenever I argue this I always hear people reference repeat offences, well luckily this report accounts for this stating that the gap between whit and black offenders fell from 20.7 percent to 20.4 percent after taking this into consideration.
Precisely. Multiculturalism brings on a ton of problems to little benefit. As you increase the perceived differences among people and there is any different in outcomes, there is going to be a scapegoat.And when you bring people with different values, cultures, and languages to another country, you are much more likely to have wide disparities. Some cultures don't value delayed gratification, but Asians do a lot, which is obvious from their high savings rates. Delayed gratification is associated with success, so you are stuck with two options: blame people for doing something good that others don't do, or blame people for not making wiser decisions.
That is a really good point. They put so much weight on not "culturally appropriating" and how you aren't allowed to critique other peoples' cultures, yet they do then act like they have no consequences. Even speaking a different language can greatly affect your perception. They studied languages and determined that it is powerful in determining how you deal with abstract issues and shaping habitual thought (like perceptions of time). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010028501907480
Think of how damaging it must be for kids growing up in a household where "ebonics" is the norm. It is improper English, which will lead to worse school grades. Who knows what other cognitive effects might results from it?
The word I was thinking about the whole post. You teach people that things are hopeless and they stop trying. I would personally believe that if you are an authority figure and tell kids that no matter what they do, they will never succeed, they will be inclined to believe you.If you say that until reparations, they will never be able to succeed, do you think they will even try until they get reparations? Most probably won't.
This graph shows that if you ever get a doctor, you want them to be Asian or White lol. https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/new-chart-illustrates-graphically-racial-preferences-for-blacks-and-hispanics-being-admitted-to-us-medical-schools/It breaks down acceptance rate by MCAT and GPA by race.An MCAT between 24-26 and GPA between 3.2-3.39, Asian acceptance is 6% and Black acceptance is 56%!If diversity is our strength, why do they need to alter acceptance rates so blatantly? Why did California's Supreme Court lower Bar score requirements to diversify the law profession(supposedly because of COVID, but then why would it be permanent?)? This article found that the permanent 50 point deduction in score would only lower the racial disparity by 2.7% https://www.law.com/therecorder/2020/10/19/study-lower-bar-exam-cut-score-wont-solve-californias-attorney-diversity-problem/?slreturn=20201018201227In the end, medical and legal malpractice will just hurt all of us.
Thanks for the well-backed post, bruh.
Well I would like to go one point at a time to make sure we don't get gallop-yIt says in that report that women of all races got shorter sentences than White men. Do you think that our country suffers from systemic sexism as well?
It is unclear what methodology was used to account for confounding variables. Without that information, we have to allow for the fact that the study had only a 1 in 15 chance of getting reasonably matched populations, and even then, only on SES.
What is the exact shade of skin where a person has a superior outcome in all situations?
So, it has been seeming like any disparities among races are always just tossed up to "White Racism" or "Systemic Racism", and I was simply wondering, at what point do you consider minorities to be people who are responsible for their own actions?
Cool, and to address your question, yes, there is undeniably systemic sexism in the US against me. Actually, systemic sexism against men is stronger than systemic racism against black people.Remember when I stated that black people got sentenced 20.4% longer relative to white people, well for men, they have to endure sentences which are 63% longer than their female counterparts.(I know my link is a 538 article but it summarizes a 2015 study from Michigan state university)In short, I have always contended that both systemic sexism and racism exist in the courts.
So, we don't know if Black judges gave preferential sentences to Black criminals and harsher sentences to Whites, and the White judges gave harsh sentences to Blacks and lighter sentences to Whites.
So you don't believe that there are any other explanations for this than that it must be sexist? Most judges are male, so why do you think that they would be sexist against their own gender?
Additionally, this didn't break down the rulings based on the race of the judge giving the sentence. So, we don't know if Black judges gave preferential sentences to Black criminals and harsher sentences to Whites, and the White judges gave harsh sentences to Blacks and lighter sentences to Whites. We can't prove racial bias on the part of judges. Additionally, it didn't compare the same judge's sentencing based on White vs Black defendants. Maybe hard-on-crime judges are more prevalent in majority-Black areas?
Hundreds of factors go into sentencing: the type of weapon used, the type of drugs, if the attack was particularly cruel, if the attacker showed remorse in court, if the crime was done in a way as to try to avoid hurting people, etc. I think that the uniqueness of every case makes it very difficult to compare them on race, especially since I pointed out originally that different races have different cultures. They are going to go about crimes in different ways based on motivations and what they were exposed to.
Writing to Lyndon Johnson, Moynihan argued that without access to jobs and the means to contribute meaningful support to a family, black men would become systematically alienated from their roles as husbands and fathers, which would cause rates of divorce, child abandonment and out-of-wedlock births to skyrocket in the black community (a trend that had already begun by the mid-1960s), leading to vast increases in the numbers of households headed by females.
How Long Is a Piece of String?
Illegal aliens compete a lot with high school dropouts in the labor market. Rates for general labor aren't sufficient for a man to be marriageable right now.
Other policy suggestion might be to reduce financial barriers to obtaining marketable job skills. Trade schools can allow people to obtain reasonably good blue collar incomes with minimal education cost in terms of time and money. Training for truck driving, handy man type work and the like perhaps should be subsidized. It's a lot more cost efficient than subsidizing the arts or bloated university budgets that study simply for the sake of academic interest rather than meaningfully improving lives. The student loan system is a joke, really. People get, effectively, a credit card to spend on education. They end up spending it on educations that don't give them good incomes, and then they can't pay back the loans. The winners are the schools. The losers are the students who wasted their time and are now deeply in debt, sometimes for life. The government ends up eating the losses.
The variables not addressed in the 2012 Booker report are as follows: (1) how the defendant presents himself in court, (2) and how likely he is to reoffend. The latter is partially controlled for by the Booker report in that it takes into account criminal history, but that isn't the only part in determining future likelihood of committing a crime (e.g. a new drug habit could have been formed). In particular, this Beaver et al. 2013 study found that when we did control for these variables (by measuring in particular verbal I.Q. and self-reported history of violence), we see that this disparity in sentencing evaporates. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886913000470Hence, the differences in racial sentencing can be explained by things other than "racism".
Yeah, I noticed that a surprisingly small amount of Black men voted for Trump in 2016 after his tough positions on illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants are eroding wages in construction especially, which is what a lot of high-school-educated Blacks work in and are suffering from.
"only used a subsample of African American and White males and did not include any measures of disadvantage status."
Without that information, we have to allow for the fact that the study had only a 1 in 15 chance of getting reasonably matched populations, and even then, only on SES.These were these were two of many points brought up to delegitimatize the study
Unfortunately, African Americans are far more likely to be disadvantaged than Whites because there is a large, negative genetic component (i.e. not racism).
holy shit. do you actually believe that black people are genetically inferior to white people?
you are using a wildly racist argument do argue that racism isn't an issue. that is some serious irony.
Classic case of p-hacking in action
Merely stating something doesn't make it true or convincing. You need to demonstrate how "p-hacking" occurred.
I thought it was evident in the post I replied to lmao.
The two variables not accounted for led to completely different results
Both approaches are obviously conceivable, but then the question becomes whether overfitting is a problem with the added variables. My personal belief is that there are so many variables that it’s impossible to tell the true effect.
On a side note “p-hacking” isn’t indicative of intent. Both studies have great approaches but their results of contradictory. That’s my biggest problem with statistical analysis. There are so many approaches that can be right, it just comes to justification and personal belief of which is actually “right”
Even if what you're saying is true regarding a purported genetic inferiority, it really has no impact on any policy decision from where I'm standing. Lets suppose, hypothetically, that 50% of one group of people - Group A - is stupid while 20% of another group of people - Group B - is stupid. As time goes on, people become prejudiced against all members of Group A - even the half who aren't stupid, and even those of Group A who are intelligent. That prejudice against all members of Group A is unfair, unreasonable and damaging to the collective life experiences of members of Group A.
What do you mean it is expensive? Detroit has self-segregated for years.
