# Does the US still have freedom of the press?



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It seems there are no rules any longer when it comes to press. We have numerous examples in the last week of members of the press being assaulted by police despite identifying themselves as press. A photojournalist who was permanently blinded. CNN crew being rounded up and arrested without justification. I know it is a popular pastime to hate the press among some here, but there is a reason why freedom of the press is a fundamental right in liberal democracies and one of the first things to go when they slide into totalitarianism. This should be very concerning.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Yes it does according to Zuckerberg or whichever conglomerate who can benefits or be catered to:

Civil rights leaders say they're 'disappointed and stunned' after call with Facebook's Zuckerberg and Sandberg


> ... In posts on Twitter and Facebook on Friday, Trump addressed protests over the killing of George Floyd while in police custody, saying, “Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts.” *While Twitter flagged the tweet with a warning that it violates the company’s rules about “glorifying violence,” Facebook took no action.*
> 
> Trump and Zuckerberg had a productive call on Friday, people on both sides of the matter told Axios. CNBC confirmed the call. *In a Facebook post that day, Zuckerberg said he personally has “a visceral negative reaction to this kind of divisive and inflammatory rhetoric” but defended the decision to maintain the post. ... *


 ... the irony.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Just as in Canada there is an increasing amount of consolidation and corporate control of the media. Not just the press.


----------



## alexincash (May 27, 2020)

andrewf said:


> It seems there are no rules any longer when it comes to press. We have numerous examples in the last week of members of the press being assaulted by police despite identifying themselves as press. A photojournalist who was permanently blinded. CNN crew being rounded up and arrested without justification. I know it is a popular pastime to hate the press among some here, but there is a reason why freedom of the press is a fundamental right in liberal democracies and one of the first things to go when they slide into totalitarianism. This should be very concerning.


In terms of press freedom - it's so hard to tell for certain because we are witnessing an unprecedented scenario where social media plays a larger role than most people realize. Whether anything is "true" or "false" is almost impossible to tell nowadays because of how you can just decide to frame the narrative in any way you want. Although I do believe Canada is much better than the US with media transparency..


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I pity America. It used to be a beacon to the world and now it is a crumbling empire that other countries mock.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I was born in Canada (1948) and I became intensely interested with American media because 90% of media originated in America and expressed the American view concerning world events,

Our local library was chocked full of American media because the complete mining town was owned and operated by the Americans.

I used to listen to all the late night talk shows with Larry King and Tom Snyder.
The American Government had Voice of America and Radio Liberty or Radio Free Europe as well.
It amuses me today that the U.S. bad-mouths Russia for financing a media station inside America.
America has been propagandizing for the American Government across the universe since time began.

I always thought that this was the best .....

Manufacturing Consent - A Propaganda Model
Excerpt:
Manufacturing Consent
-- Propaganda Model
-- Conclusions
By Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky 
1988


Manufacturing Consent



Media is just a propaganda arm of government.

The CIA and the Media
By Carl Bernstein
Rolling Stone Magazine
October 20, 1977


The CIA and the Media by Carl Bernstein Rolling Stone







Operation Mockingbird - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org






http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm


http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Operation_Mockingbird 

Refusing to buy The Wall Street Journal, I sometimes sneak a look at copies that are left behind by other people.
So it was last month when a friendly couple dumped their paper on the train seat opposite me. And bingo, it was as bad as ever. "Defence Officials Predict Slow Afghan Progress." And the sourcing for this hardly unexpected headline? "Senior US military officials", "military officials", "a senior US military official", "Obama administration officials", "defence officials", "the senior military official", "military leaders", "the official", "military officials", "the officials", "many in the military", "military officials" (again), "officials" (again), "military officials" (yet again) and "officials" (yet again).
--Robert Fisk, They're trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge again, October 23, 2010--
Robert Fisk: They're trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge again 

While it is impossible for the media to tell the population what to think, they do tell the public what to think about.
--Media pundit Ben Bagdikian-- 

"Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have." 
--Richard Salent, former President of CBS News--

"The owners and managers of the press determine which person, which facts, which version of the facts, and which ideas shall reach the public." 
--Commission On Freedom Of The Press-- 

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
--John Swinton, The former Chief of Staff of the New York Times, in 1953 [the figurative dawn of the national security state]--
http://www.counterpunch.org/gancarski01302003.html 

"...financial journalists have developed into a group of incompetent lackeys who were puffed up with self-importance and who had no record of thinking critically...time after time, without the least objection, so many financial reporters seemed content to regurgitate the statements issued by C.E.O.s and stock-market speculators – even when this information was plainly wrong or misleading. These reporters were thus either so naive and gullible that they ought to be packed off to other assignments, or they were people who quite consciously betrayed their journalistic function… 
[T]he normal journalistic mandate to undertake critical investigations and objectively report findings to the readers appears not to apply. Instead the most successful rogue is applauded...all remaining trust in journalists as a corps of professionals is being compromised."
--Stieg Larsson, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, September 01, 2008-- 
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo: Larsson, Stieg: 9780670069019: Books - Amazon.ca 

We're journalists, but we're American citizens first. 
Interview with Tim Russert
Aired May 18, 2005
CNN.com - Transcripts 

TIM RUSSERT: [W]hen I talk to senior government officials on the phone, it's my own policy our conversations are confidential. If I want to use anything from that conversation, then I will ask permission.


http://busharchive.froomkin.com/BL2007020801013.htm


A note on going 'off the record' 

A conversation with Chris Matthews of MSNBC with Chris Matthews (Clip)
Chris Matthews on Charlie Rose makes the astounding pronouncement that he knew full well that what he was saying on the air about our invasion of Iraq was wrong but he didn't want to admit it since he felt it would have been bad for the country. He also takes a cheap shot at bloggers while he's at it. 
May 25, 2009


http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10314







Hardball with Chris Matthews - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




Hardball: Joan Walsh Smacks Down George Bush For His ABC News Interview 

Poll: Bullshit Is Most Important Issue For 2008 Voters
For a majority of likely voters, meaningless bullshit will be the most important factor in deciding who they will vote for in 2008.
The Onion
Poll Tracker: Robert Braun
Correspondent Kip O'Leary: ShuttleWorth Research Center
2007 
(YouTube Video)


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> It seems there are no rules any longer when it comes to press. We have numerous examples in the last week of members of the press being assaulted by police despite identifying themselves as press. A photojournalist who was permanently blinded. CNN crew being rounded up and arrested without justification. I know it is a popular pastime to hate the press among some here, but there is a reason why freedom of the press is a fundamental right in liberal democracies and one of the first things to go when they slide into totalitarianism. This should be very concerning.


Freedom of the press doesn't mean you can go anywhere, at any time you wish.

Here in Canada the government is working on a hybrid mix of bribing some media, denying credentials, and even battling in court to control the press, and prevent them from covering events.


However if you're in a restricted area, being press doesn't give you some magical power to be there.
The police/government declared curfews or unlawful assemblies and gave orders to disperse.

These people decided not to comply with a lawful order, and the police enforced the order.
Being part of "The Press" doesn't give you magical powers that place you above the law.

As far as the actions of some police, yeah, there are some brutal video clips out there.
But when you go into a riot, **** happens. Maybe you shouldn't go to riots and illegal demonstrations?
There are several competent journalists who are specifically not going to these riots, because they KNOW they're too dangerous.


This is actually an interesting situation, to all those people protesting police, and systematic problems.
Why do you want to give them more power?
I think governments already have a dangerous level of power, and the ruling elites seem quite happy to abuse it.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> There are several competent journalists who are specifically not going to these riots, because they KNOW they're too dangerous.


This is called 'a chilling effect'. Abuse press so there is no coverage and police can act with impunity. The press go into warzones. They are starting to have to employ similar protections to cover domestic protests. And the police are engaging in tactics that would be considered Geneva Convention violations (aka war crimes) if they performed during a war (deliberately targeting press included) instead of merely a war on American civilians.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> This is called 'a chilling effect'. Abuse press so there is no coverage and police can act with impunity. The press go into warzones. They are starting to have to employ similar protections to cover domestic protests. And the police are engaging in tactics that would be considered Geneva Convention violations (aka war crimes) if they performed during a war (deliberately targeting press included) instead of merely a war on American civilians.


few points.

1. Going into the riots is too dangerous. Experienced conflict journalists, including Arab Spring and other events are staying away. Not because of police, but the crowds are also very dangerous.

2. I've heard reports that the police are turning off body cameras etc. But part of the problem is a lack of accountability. The US has problems with this. One advantage of the National Guard is that they have more robust training and supervision. 

3. I haven't heard any credible reports that the police are explicitly targeting media. It does happen that the media tend to be stragglers, you get better photo/video that way. In most of the clips I've seen the media didn't move away, and got pushed. So if they're ignoring the orders of the police, they should expect the consequences. I've even heard medics etc were getting the same thing. 

4. The Geneva convention argument is not applicable to illegal gatherings. Just like when teachers engage in collective punishment, not applicable. I'm not even sure what clause you feel is being violated.


But to repeat, I generally agree.
1. We should have freedom of press and freedom of expression.
- Our current governments attack on our free press and freedom of expression should have everyone outraged. 
2. It is essential that police have proper accountability and supervision to minimize the abuses.
- I think in general Canada is better at this than the US, but we should be trying to do better.


Finally, several of these illegal gatherings are in jurisdictions still under health orders prohibiting gatherings. 
I really have no patience for those who don't care about the health and welfare of their fellow citizens.
I'm not calling for the police to start gassing and shooting them, but they definately should have been giving out those $800 tickets. It's selfish self entitled POS like this that are extending this COVID19 lockdown, and they need to knock this $#$# off.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/windsor-george-floyd-march-1.5592576


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

1. Some, maybe. I know there have been incidents in the past where Antifa has attacked members of the media. There are plenty of media covering the protests as well as riots, even if some are choosing to sit this out. If Hamas did to the media what the police are doing, there would be outrage.

3.









Police Target Journalists as Trump Blames ‘Lamestream Media’ for Protests (Published 2020)


“I’ve really never seen anything like this”: Reporters and news photographers describe being roughed up, arrested and shot with projectiles while covering demonstrations across the country.




www.nytimes.com





A CNN crew was arrested on while reporting on live TV, despite being fully cooperative with police.








Minnesota police arrest CNN reporter Omar Jimenez and crew | CNN


CNN's Omar Jimenez was taken into police custody during a live broadcast at the site of the protests in Minneapolis, after clearly identifying himself to officers. Jimenez's crew were also placed in handcuffs.




www.cnn.com















It is not merely a matter of being pushed. Some are beaten with clubs, are fired upon, with one one journalist being permanently blinded in one eye after taking a rubber bullet or bean bag round to the face. Not to mention the wanton use of tear gas, which is also prohibited in war as a war crime, even against peaceful protesters.

4. The point being that American citizens & press are being treated by police in a way that would be illegal in an armed conflict. Geneva conventions do not apply because there is not a war. It does not make the behaviour acceptable (or legal for that matter--the first Amendment protects the press and the right to peacefully assemble).


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

It's safer to be embedded with the US military than it is to be on the wrong side of a violent protest.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

doctrine said:


> It's safer to be embedded with the US military than it is to be on the wrong side of a violent protest.


You mean wrong side of police crowd control?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

On a battlefield, the first thing that the U.S. military does is to destroy the media and all media infrastructure as it invades.

All this chatter about the military and with everybody bad-mouthing Trump is a deliberate strategy.

They can not impose military control when the leader of the country only has 50 percent of the electorate. Trump won the presidency because he won the Electoral College. In a sense he was/is illegitimate. The media is helping to arrange the next president obtaining at least 60% support. It will be said that the new president has a mandate.
Martial Law will then be imposed.

A country leader wants to be able to prance around the universe with some legitimacy, especially if martial law is in place.

The press is going to arrange it all. They are going to "Manufacture Our Consent" to introduce Martial Law.

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
By Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky
1988
From Wikipedia








Manufacturing Consent - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





All Walmart parking lots will be a military base.
All bakeries will have a contingent of soldiers based outside.

Lets get real ..... we got 40 million unemployed. Nobody is planning anything.
The complete country leadership is arguing who or which party leader is the most racist when they should be discussing about helping people with rent and groceries for at least 6 months. (Probably another year.)

The U.S. Capitalists need to pay at least 30 million Americans about 2 thousand per month each and for the next 6 months or year.

It means the U.S. Dollar as a World Reserve Currency is debased.
China may then respond with offering a currency which is gold backed,
Both China and Russia have partnered up and have a complete financial system already in place. They got the rating agencies and the computer systems to handle it all. China owns the fastest computer in the world, This could be done in a NanoSecond. China set this all up because America was/is abusing the SWIFT financial system with sanctions on countries.

The Ruling Class and the press acting as the propaganda arm of government is just stalling for time ..... just stalling until the cold weather arrives.

The press had no reputation after being found in a coma leading up to the war in Iraq.
The media pundits are using this time to Re-Friend with the pretense that they are on "Our" side. They will be on "Our Side" as they excuse the introduction of Martial Law.

American citizens always believes their own propaganda.

Always realize that most of these protesters are middle class and have just lost the American Dream and they are into Class War now.

Always know and realize that a majority of these middle class protesters are carrying a cellphone. The government has all that info at their disposal.

They have the data for every keystroke you took with your computer. They know where you are (where you have been), and within 15 feet using cell towers.

They got licence plate readers on cop cars and grab all plates of all vehicles.

The car companies will supply all area travel using the car computer.

Bill Gates put a back door on every computer and gave the government the key.

I published a tune in 2013 detailing it all .....

A Song For Edward Snowden
When the Edward Story broke within the media in early June, my twin brother and I (Dot and Calm) instantly recalled a tune by Sting-Police, and rhymed "Every Call You Make". So, we altered the lyrics a bit and the tune was Produced/Arranged/Distributed and website up and running, within a mere 32 days and at an approximate cost of 25 hundred
The video presently featured has an Edward Snowden voice-over as a means of preventing piracy.
July 27, 2013
(YouTube Video)


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

What a quaint idea. America no longer has a press, period. It has propaganda outlets pushing an agenda. They are free to drive people nuts with partisan bullshit, what they are not free to do is tell the truth.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I am Canadian. So, I don't care at all as to who wins the next election,

I am always thinking strategy ...... I love thinking or guessing the next move. I love the intrigue.
Other than that, I could care less who wins.
In my mind, North American Democracy Political Parties are all bankrupt.

I think that the U.S. supreme court made a horrible decision with the claim that money was speech.

The first thing they do when they get out of bed in the morning is make a call asking for a campaign contribution.
They are so bankrupt that the party membership need to spend about 3 or 4 hours a day making telephone calls.
It's a corporation with the preferred share holders


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> 4. The point being that American citizens & press are being treated by police in a way that would be illegal in an armed conflict. Geneva conventions do not apply because there is not a war. It does not make the behaviour acceptable (or legal for that matter--the first Amendment protects the press and the right to peacefully assemble).


You missed my point that teachers routinely act in a way that would be illegal during a war as well. I actually had a principle that laughed at the idea students had rights in schools.
Freedom of the press means you can write what you want, not that you get to go anywhere and do anything.


The protests were ordered to disperse. You know, for years the right leaning people have been complaining about the restrictions on speech, and the lefties didn't care.
Now that lefties are suddently complaining about their rights. It's still the same darn argument.
When someone says that the government should restrict freedom of speech, or freedom of association to stop voices they don't like, that the government will also shut down their rights as well?

I agree that there is a problem, but if you're going to these riots, particularly if you're untrained, you're an idiot. 
It has nothing to do with Antifa, or the police or other elements, participating/being at massive protests and riots during a pandemic is moronic.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

All those stories spread by the White House and right wing media that bricks were strategically placed so they could be used in the violence, are proven to be false. They were placed there previously for construction or in baskets to protect property from vehicles, much like posts do.

The White House has removed the posts. Don't believe anything from the White House or right wing media.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> The protests were ordered to disperse. You know, for years the right leaning people have been complaining about the restrictions on speech, and the lefties didn't care.


Perhaps you can accuse others of it, I have been consistent in defending freedom of speech for the right as well (such as all the college campus deplatforming that was/is happening, often through threats of violence).


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> All those stories spread by the White House and right wing media that bricks were strategically placed so they could be used in the violence, are proven to be false. They were placed there previously for construction or in baskets to protect property from vehicles, much like posts do.
> 
> The White House has removed the posts. Don't believe anything from the White House or right wing media.


Yep, not even so much as a retraction... fake news!


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Just listen to what the media is focused upon.

Law - Law - More Law

Don't ever forget that the country is built upon laws.

No mention that the country is managed by finance.

These same laws which are presided over by the Supreme Court and which allowed these societal inequalities to occur and called it legal.

The press has chosen to ignore Finance ..... It is all about law and order.

The trivia details about 1st degree and 12th degree, but no details about how many laws were abused by the upper class to "Legally" get a debt jubilee and get bailed out.

Oh! The bailouts in 2007 and again today were both legal.









Why Didn’t Eric Holder Go After the Bankers?


If the doctrine of too big to jail endures, it will blight Eric Holder’s legacy. Not only is it morally indefensible, it doesn’t make sense.




www.newyorker.com












Eric Holder’s Longtime Excuse for Not Prosecuting Banks Just Crashed and Burned


New evidence supports critique that Holder, for a combination of political, self-serving, and craven reasons, held his department back from prosecuting big banks.




theintercept.com





For nine years between 1972 and the end of 1981, Chief Justice William Rehnquist consumed great quantities of the potent sedative-hypnotic Placidyl.
The standard dose for adults is 500 milligrams, taken at bedtime. Rehnquist was taking 1,500 milligrams a day.
One doctor said Rehnquist thought he heard voices outside his hospital room plotting against him and had "bizarre ideas and outrageous thoughts," including imagining "a CIA plot against him" and "seeming to see the design patterns on the hospital curtains change configuration."








Chief Justice Rehnquist's drug habit.


An FBI file released this week reveals the bureau's involvement in William Rehnquist's confirmation hearings in 1971, when he joined the Supreme Court,...




www.slate.com






http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/04/AR2007010400140.html



Chief Justice Roberts was very involved with providing assistance to Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris in the Florida recount against Al Gore. He was one of the people slamming on the window in the election office demanding no recount as well.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-recount21jul21,0,2794359,print.story



Three years later, George Bush nomintated him to the Supreme Court.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The protestors were ordered to disperse by whom ? The authorities they are protesting against ?

I think some people have it backwards. The government and police are accountable to the public, not the other way around.

The public is telling the government and the police they are not going to tolerate the kind of abuse that has been taking place since the US was founded.

When the protestors see meaningful leadership and change, they will stand down.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The protestors were ordered to disperse by whom ? The authorities they are protesting against ?
> 
> I think some people have it backwards. The government and police are accountable to the public, not the other way around.
> 
> ...



The people protesting today are the same people who were pushing to repeal the first and second amendment in the US until last week.
That's the problem, we keep giving the government more power, and restricting the rights of the people.
Yet nobody seems to think it's a problem.

The police and government should be accountable to the public. I think we can all agree on that.
We want the laws to be enforced fairly.

It's easy for some to sit here smug as these racists and agitators inflame tensions and destroy their communities.
But it really makes me angry, these people are poisoning the youth, and destroying their future. It hurts them, and it hurts the rest of us.

What scares me the most is that people are bringing this crap up here.
Calls to "disband the police" are being made. Who will stop the criminals then?

We need real leadership to fix the problems in the system, or even significantly revamp it.
But tearing it down and living in anarchy will be worse.


Finally, I fear the protests will cause a COVID19 spike, centered in certain populations, and they'll then claim it as more evidence of "systematic racism", instead of their own stupid choices.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> The people protesting today are the same people who were pushing to repeal the first and second amendment in the US until last week.


I don't think this is fair, or accurate, at least on the first amendment.

Maybe the protesters should take Trump's advice and exercise their second amendment rights whilst protesting. Isn't that the argument for second amendment--to defend against a tyrannical government?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I don't think this is fair, or accurate, at least on the first amendment.
> 
> Maybe the protesters should take Trump's advice and exercise their second amendment rights whilst protesting. Isn't that the argument for second amendment--to defend against a tyrannical government?


Many people who say "Black Lives Matter" are calling "All Lives Matter" hate speech. They're also calling for "hate speech" to be criminalized.
Personally I think Black Lives Matter is a very good slogan, it's well delivered in such a way as to suggest that there are actually people who disagree with them.
I also think that All Lives Matter is a good slogan, because ALL LIVES MATTER, it's about agreeing with BLM, and saying "yes of course, we all agree with you".


Deploying law enforcement to stop you from destroying your own community is "tryannical government". That's an interesting perspective.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Many people who say "Black Lives Matter" are calling "All Lives Matter" hate speech. They're also calling for "hate speech" to be criminalized.
> Personally I think Black Lives Matter is a very good slogan, it's well delivered in such a way as to suggest that there are actually people who disagree with them.
> I also think that All Lives Matter is a good slogan, because ALL LIVES MATTER, it's about agreeing with BLM, and saying "yes of course, we all agree with you".


This is not novel. It is just pro-life vs pro-choice all over again. Of course, those terms are on their face something just about everyone would agree with. They are short form coding for more complex ideas. To pro-life, pro-choice means pro-baby murder. To pro-choice, pro-life sounds like forcing women to bear rape babies or carry babies to term even if it means the death of the mother, and denying women bodily autonomy. 

In this context, 'black lives matters' is code and 'all lives matter' is code. This is how political discourse works. You might as well complain about pro-choice vs pro-life. This is not a new thing.



> Deploying law enforcement to stop you from destroying your own community is "tryannical government". That's an interesting perspective.


You would have a very strong point if force was only used to directly prevent crime. Care to explain to me what crime those reporters were committing when they were fired upon by police? The fact that someone, somewhere is committing a crime is not justification for use of force against people who are not committing a crime and exercising their rights. Unless you also agree that all guns should be confiscated because some guns are used for criminal purposes.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> You would have a very strong point if force was only used to directly prevent crime. Care to explain to me what crime those reporters were committing when they were fired upon by police? The fact that someone, somewhere is committing a crime is not justification for use of force against people who are not committing a crime and exercising their rights. Unless you also agree that all guns should be confiscated because some guns are used for criminal purposes.



I'm not sure what incident you are referencing, but there is significant video of inappropriate police action during these riots. The one i thought that was truly outrageous was the mob of police walking through a quiet residential neighbourhood telling people to get inside, then shooting at them because they didn't.
I don't think shooting at people for being on their porch, instead of inside their residence is appropriate.

I think the riots are wrong and deserve a strong response.
I believe that peaceful protests, without COVID, should have been left alone. 



I'm pretty strong on the gun rights thing, we need proper enforcement of our laws, I've been pretty clear on this.
Almost all crime is by known criminals with illegally smuggled guns.
I think law abiding gun owners should be left alone.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I sure wish that they would talk about the need for law and order for days and days on end when the Justice Department issues a Deferred Prosecution.





Deferred prosecution - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Just let the poor folks say they are sorry and then we can move along.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I'm not sure what incident you are referencing, but there is significant video of inappropriate police action during these riots. The one i thought that was truly outrageous was the mob of police walking through a quiet residential neighbourhood telling people to get inside, then shooting at them because they didn't.
> I don't think shooting at people for being on their porch, instead of inside their residence is appropriate.


Perhaps you have accepted the framing that all protests are riots. There have been some riots, and those warrant a police response. When Trump ordered protesters cleared using pepper spray, smoke grenades and physical force from Lafayette Square in DC (and kicked clergy out of their church), there was no riot. Calling all protests riots is giving cover to unwarranted police violence against citizens. All so Trump could pose with a Bible held upside down and make silly faces for photos.

It was completely inexcusable and a direct abuse of power by Trump. It is mirrored by police violence against other peaceful protests across the country.









How Trump’s Idea for a Photo Op Led to Havoc in a Park (Published 2020)


When the history of the Trump presidency is written, the clash with protesters that preceded President Trump’s walk across Lafayette Square may be remembered as one of its defining moments.




nyti.ms







> I think the riots are wrong and deserve a strong response.
> I believe that peaceful protests, without COVID, should have been left alone.
> 
> I'm pretty strong on the gun rights thing, we need proper enforcement of our laws, I've been pretty clear on this.
> ...


So, if only those committing crimes with guns should be stripped of them, why don't you agree that people protesters should not be deprived of their first amendment rights, just because there are criminals elsewhere? Protesters can be held to collective guilt but gun owners cannot?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Perhaps you have accepted the framing that all protests are riots. There have been some riots, and those warrant a police response. When Trump ordered protesters cleared using pepper spray, smoke grenades and physical force from Lafayette Square in DC (and kicked clergy out of their church), there was no riot. Calling all protests riots is giving cover to unwarranted police violence against citizens. All so Trump could pose with a Bible held upside down and make silly faces for photos.
> 
> It was completely inexcusable and a direct abuse of power by Trump. It is mirrored by police violence against other peaceful protests across the country.
> 
> ...


Perhaps you are assuming a position I don't hold.

It does appear that the clearing of Layfette park was arguably inappropriate and done poorly. Not much debate there.

I don't think protestor should be deprived of their first amendment rights. I think they should be protected.
In fact I think we should have freedom of expression in Canada too.

Who exactly is saying anyone should be deprived of their first amendment rights?
Nobody is arguing this.

Everyone agrees that in some cases the police are acting improperly and we have to improve accountability.
Most people agree that the right to protest and free speech should be protected.
- Be it protesting Covid lockdowns, or Police brutality, or that it's too sunny in July.
Most people agree that violent riots must be stopped.

There really isn't much disagreement.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrMatt said:


> Most people agree that violent riots must be stopped.


What about disruptive protests, as in blocking a highway?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

cainvest said:


> What about disruptive protests, as in blocking a highway?


It's illegal to block the highway, calling it a protest shouldn't excuse otherwise illegal behaviour.
That's just my opinion.

Restrictions on abortion protest are an interesting one.
Here they are not permitted to block access, but they can be in a public space outside the clinic. 
Attacking the workers as part of your "protest" isn't an appropriate form of protest.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> There really isn't much disagreement.


People seem to repeatedly bring up riots whenever discussing police actions against protesters. Many people are defending police actions against protesters.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park after watching Tucker Carlson "talking tough" on Fox News.

It was nothing more than a lame publicity stunt in the middle of a pandemic. He used a Bible as a stage prop.

The "all lives matter" slogan, didn't exist until after "black lives matter" become popular.

_While the intention of the phrase "All Lives Matter" may be to put everyone’s life on equal footing and convey a sense of unity, responding "All Lives Matter" to "Black Lives Matter" is actually more divisive than unifying. That's because it discounts and diminishes the focus on the violence and discrimination Black individuals face every day in this country. 









Saying That "Black Lives Matter" Doesn't Mean That Other Lives Do Not


If you're saying "all lives matter," here's why it doesn't advocate for equality in the way you might think.




www.goodhousekeeping.com




_


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

IMO typica


andrewf said:


> People seem to repeatedly bring up riots whenever discussing police actions against protesters. Many people are defending police actions against protesters.


I think the actions against rioters have been insufficient. They should not be permitted to loot, kill and torch buildings.

I think there have been several inappropriate actions against peaceful, lawful protestors. They should not be touched.

In the middle is the unlawful or violent protests, there could be a discussion there.

I think there is a lot of disagreement on when it moves to an unlawful protest, and what the appropriate action is then.

In the example at the White House, I'm not sure what an appropriate amount of time between the order to clear the park, and how quickly it should escalate, and result in the use of force. I think most people agree that the timeline appears to have been way too short.

The problem is, people would rather be hyperbolic, and rant about the extremes, than the middle ground where the actual problem is.

If you think peaceful protests are the problem, or that torching homes is not a problem. YOU are the problem.
We need to have a discussion about all the stuff between those two extremes.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> People seem to repeatedly bring up riots whenever discussing police actions against protesters. Many people are defending police actions against protesters.


Also, quite honestly, I don't care what people do to a bunch of racist protestors.
I think BLM and the KKK should go off, form their own segregated state of hate, and leave the rest of us alone.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> I think the actions against rioters have been insufficient. They should not be permitted to loot, kill and torch buildings.


If money is speech then sticks and stones are speech as well.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> If money is speech then sticks and stones are speech as well.


That doesn't even make sense.
Money is a thing, not speech.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Also, quite honestly, I don't care what people do to a bunch of racist protestors.
> I think BLM and the KKK should go off, *form their own segregated state of hate, and leave the rest of us alone.*


 ... that's a laugh. It's like seperating an Oreo cookie ... don't forget the chant "We're All in Together" on planet earth. Unless you bleed green blood.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Also, quite honestly, I don't care what people do to a bunch of racist protestors.


In Israel they arrive with a bible in one hand and a rifle in the other, knock on doors, and say: "according to my bible, my family lived in your home two thousand years ago, and the property owner is instructed to pack up their bags and leave.

You Said:
"I think BLM and the KKK should go off, form their own segregated state of hate, and leave the rest of us alone."

My Reply:
Israel is doing exactly that.

Americans are hypocrites
[SNIP]
Let’s suppose that in a mythical state, a governor announced a campaign to punish blacks for alleged violence.
Step one is to confiscate the land owned by blacks, evict them from it and use the land to build massive new subdivisions. Only white Protestant Christians may live in these subdivisions.
Step two is to connect these all-white Protestant Christian settlements to each other by a highway on which blacks are forbidden to drive. To facilitate control, the automobile tags for blacks will be a different color from the tags issued to white motorists. Checkpoints would be set up all around the state capitol to search and harass blacks trying to enter.
Would you support such a plan? Would you hail that mythical governor as a man of peace? Would you go to your church congregation and ask the members to send money to the occupants of these white settlements? Would you lobby the federal government to subsidize this new apartheid state in our midst?
I don’t think so. I think most Americans would consider such acts an abomination, un-American and a mockery of everything both Christianity and the United States stand for.
By Charley Reese
March 15, 2006


http://www.columbiatribune.com/2006/Mar/20060315Comm002.asp


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> That doesn't even make sense.
> Money is a thing, not speech.


Citizens United v. FEC
From Wikipedia





Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Seems like there's some confusion on the "Black Lives Matter" slogan. It doesn't mean that only Black lives matter. It means that Black lives ALSO matter. There is implied also after the slogan.

But, since some people here need pictures:


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Seems like there's some confusion on the "Black Lives Matter" slogan. It doesn't mean that only Black lives matter. It means that Black lives ALSO matter. There is implied also after the slogan.
> 
> But, since some people here need pictures:


Thanks, that's EXACTLY the point of why it's offensive.
It's implying there is a widespread belief that people don't think black lives matter as much as other lives.
Or that we shouldn't deal with the most pressing problems.

The sad part is that there are a generation of people being told these lies. It's destructive to them.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Thanks, that's EXACTLY the point of why it's offensive.
> It's implying there is a widespread belief that people don't think black lives matter as much as other lives.
> Or that we shouldn't deal with the most pressing problems.
> 
> The sad part is that there are a generation of people being told these lies. It's destructive to them.


And that's precisely why you don't seem to live in our reality.
It's already shown that rate blacks are killed by police is 2.5x higher than whites.
It's already shown that there is systematic bias against ethnics in hiring practices.
It's already shown that blacks get disproportionately punished by the justice system more than whites, i.e. you just have to look at affluenza cases to see that.

The fact that you can't seem to accept these realities shows that you are either shutting your eyes and ears to reality, or you just have a kneejerk reaction that drawing attention to the problems that minorities face is somehow racist. The latter reflecting more on you than the situation.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> And that's precisely why you don't seem to live in our reality.
> It's already shown that rate blacks are killed by police is 2.5x higher than whites.
> It's already shown that there is systematic bias against ethnics in hiring practices.
> It's already shown that blacks get disproportionately punished by the justice system more than whites, i.e. you just have to look at affluenza cases to see that.
> ...


I'm aware of that, but there is a lot to look at.
If it's racism, why do black police kill blacks at the same rate as white officers?

The fact that you can't see any reason, other than racism, is part of the problem.

It isn't racist to draw attention to problems, it is racist to blame a particular race for these problems.


Also, it's pretty insulting and not conducive to a discussion to say things like.
"And that's precisely why you don't seem to live in our reality."
"The latter reflecting more on you than the situation."

Because they're not helpful, if not an outright insulting.
Also I want to actually fix the problem, what needs to change, what steps can we take.

All I see is a bunch of people hurting and killing and "raising awareness", but I haven't heard a SINGLE reasonable change to make things better.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I'm aware of that, but there is a lot to look at.
> If it's racism, why do black police kill blacks at the same rate as white officers?
> 
> The fact that you can't see any reason, other than racism, is part of the problem.
> ...


You don't think black police are racists or at least biased as well? The problem is that there is a systematic bias in police training and law enforcement in general to treat blacks unfairly. 

Considering that you are keeping your mind shut on what is going on, I figure it was a fair response. And no, I don't think you want to look at a reasonable solution to the problem, you just want to repeat conservative talking points and just sealioning, pretending that you are reasonable.

However, what you don't understand is that this is not because of one incident, or a dozen incidents, but something that has been going on for centuries. 

Here, you want suggestions? Here's one that took less than 10 seconds of googling: CSRA Black Lives Matter group wants to see these local changes


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> You don't think black police are racists or at least biased as well? The problem is that there is a systematic bias in police training and law enforcement in general to treat blacks unfairly.
> 
> Considering that you are keeping your mind shut on what is going on, I figure it was a fair response. And no, I don't think you want to look at a reasonable solution to the problem, you just want to repeat conservative talking points and just sealioning, pretending that you are reasonable.
> 
> ...


I feel like you're projecting opinions on me. You're attacking statements as "conservative talking points", so what if they are? If they're valid points, they're valid points.

I honestly have trouble with the idea that black police officers are simply racist against blacks. Labelling it all "racism" is a lazy and cheap way to ignore the problem. I honestly don't think there are a bunch of self loathing black officers out there just looking for their chance.

I think there might be other factors at play, for example, if the interactions are more violent in general, it's a downward spiral, and that's not simply racism, it's an experiential cycle, on both sides, that needs to be addressed.


I think reporting of data to the community, or at least the police service board is a good idea.

I think having a proper place to complain is also a good idea.
I think we should actually have complaint procedures for ALL government services.


I think they need more civilian oversight, however it can't be like the situation in New York where the Mayor and Governor are basically attacking the police on national TV. They're suffering a major breakdown in trust and leadership, and it's getting worse.


This feeds back into my overall view on government accountability and faith in the institutions. When these start to fail, we have problems. 


As far as real solutions, get the crime and drugs out of the neighborhoods.
Get economic growth and jobs, education and stronger families.
Build real relationships with government, law enforcement and the people.
Stop telling young kids that everyone is out to get them, give them hope and let them know opportunity is out there, if they want it. Get positive about what you can do.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I feel like you're projecting opinions on me. You're attacking statements as "conservative talking points", so what if they are? If they're valid points, they're valid points.
> 
> I honestly have trouble with the idea that black police officers are simply racist against blacks. Labelling it all "racism" is a lazy and cheap way to ignore the problem. I honestly don't think there are a bunch of self loathing black officers out there just looking for their chance.
> 
> ...


Actually, they aren't valid talking points, and that's the problem. The idea that Black Lives Matter is a racist trope is not a valid talking point. It's just like those people who protest the #MeToo movement, complaining that it unfairly judges all men. It doesn't. The only men who complain are those who feel that women should be treated the way that they have been. So it's interesting to see who are the people who are offended by these movements because it tends to indicate how they really feel.

And that's why I said bias. Racism doesn't necessarily imply self-loathing, what it means is that you've a prejudged view of someone based on their race regardless of what race you consider yourself. http://wittenbrink.org/research/pdf/cpjwsk07.pdf Sure there is training to reduce the implicit bias, but the results are mixed, and there's always some resistence. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/checkup/hi...ving-police-racism-has-no-quick-fix-1.4947995

All your examples are examples of bias and prejudice.

Blame the protesters for escalation of violence? Amazing that we don't hear much about the protests where the police didn't suit up in riot gear or driving over protesters. Instead, when the police joined in, or at least did not confront with force, there was little violence. Contrast that to places where the police suited up and went in with the mindset of beating up protesters and shooting onlookers or reporters. And you wonder why there is mistrust of the police?

These "real solutions" are irrelevant for the most part as you're pretty much blaming the victims for their problems. In other words, making it seem like the police are the good guys all the time. By the way, most police forces are overseen by civilian boards or civilian commissionaires, but you know what happens? They reject that oversight and it gets problematic. So maybe the problem is really the police and police culture and not the public? Hard to build relationship with the law enforcement when they go into treating the public as the enemy. What happens when police officers see protesters as 'the enemy'

And yes, the fact you can't even acknowledge that there are certain indisputable facts means that there is very little chance of constructive debate.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Actually, they aren't valid talking points, and that's the problem.


That's the problem, you're too close minded.
You can't counter the "talking points" and simply say "they're not valid".

Not to defend Chauvin, but apparently Floyd had a history with him, he was no doubt aware of his violent criminal past, and that is OF COURSE going to factor into their interaction. 
Pretending that the personal history and relationship of the involved individuals isn't a factor is just ridiculous. But that's just "bias"... uh ok.

There are bad cops out there, I've never disputed that.
Look at the Daniel Shaver shooting. There the officer was just looking to kill someone, and he got away with it.


I've been complaining about the lack of government accountability for years.
I'm aware that the police decide to ignore civilian oversight the carding controversy got quite heated in London, with the police at one point simply ignoring the directives of the board.

That's a problem, government must be accountable. It's a huge problem in parts of the US, but also in Canada at the city, provincial and Federal level.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> That's the problem, you're too close minded.
> You can't counter the "talking points" and simply say "they're not valid".
> 
> Not to defend Chauvin, but apparently Floyd had a history with him, he was no doubt aware of his violent criminal past, and that is OF COURSE going to factor into their interaction.
> ...


You can't even accept that bias exists, and I'm the one who is close minded?



MrMatt said:


> If it's racism, why do black police kill blacks at the same rate as white officers?
> 
> The fact that you can't see any reason, other than racism, is part of the problem.
> 
> It isn't racist to draw attention to problems, it is racist to blame a particular race for these problems.


Ok, so these are your talking points you want to discuss? I already answered the first one, it's bias that already ingrained in the training. Point 2 is your projection because you are the one fixed on the racism tag. Point 3, you're sidestepping the problem in that you're not acknowledging that race and bias is a factor in all this. Let's put it this way, when was the last time a white person died because a police officer keeled on their neck.

Or here's another example which removes the bias of neighbourhoods, when was the last time a white person was shot in their own apartment by a cop who walked into the wrong apartment? Amber Guyger, Ex-Officer Who Killed Man In His Apartment, Given 10 Years In Prison

I can see that you are pretty defensive, calling everyone else racist because people are pointing to issues where race does play a role. Textbook example of projection.

Chauvin also had a history of complaints that were swept under the rug. Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin Had 17 Complaints Against Him Before He Was Charged With Murder For George Floyd's Death So I'd say that is more relevant than anything else.

But let's go with the fact that the personal history is the issue. That does not excuse someone kneeling on another person's neck for over 8 min, when that person is already in handcuffs. Why not discuss that issue? Are you saying that Chauvin is so unprofessional that he shouldn't be a police officer? Maybe that's the discussion?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I'm aware of that, but there is a lot to look at.
> If it's racism, why do black police kill blacks at the same rate as white officers?


The system is racist? Why do judges give black defendants harsher sentences than whites after controlling for severity and type of crime? Why are they more likely to be indicted, convicted, offered worse plea deals, etc.? 

Some of it is class discrimination, but even after controlling for that, there seems to be racial bias. It could well be subconscious bias--I doubt many people are mustache twirling avowed racists, though more than you might think would cop to pretty racist beliefs if they were completely candid.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Ok, so these are your talking points you want to discuss? I already answered the first one, it's bias that already ingrained in the training.


Please support this claim.
I'm not aware of any part of police training that say "shoot the X before they shoot you"



> Point 2 is your projection because you are the one fixed on the racism tag.


Apparently point 2 was "The fact that you can't see any reason, other than racism, is part of the problem.:



> Point 3, you're sidestepping the problem in that you're not acknowledging that race and bias is a factor in all this.


It isn't racist to draw attention to problems, it is racist to blame a particular race for these problems.
Not really sidestepping. 
I think that "Blaming a race for a problem is racist."



> Let's put it this way, when was the last time a white person died because a police officer keeled on their neck.
> 
> Or here's another example which removes the bias of neighbourhoods, when was the last time a white person was shot in their own apartment by a cop who walked into the wrong apartment? Amber Guyger, Ex-Officer Who Killed Man In His Apartment, Given 10 Years In Prison


The fact that they're going to trial, and prison for their crimes suggests that there is accoutnabilityu.



> I can see that you are pretty defensive, calling everyone else racist because people are pointing to issues where race does play a role. Textbook example of projection.


I just don't see race everywhere


> Chauvin also had a history of complaints that were swept under the rug. Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin Had 17 Complaints Against Him Before He Was Charged With Murder For George Floyd's Death So I'd say that is more relevant than anything else.


Why was he still a cop?
What were the complaints.


> But let's go with the fact that the personal history is the issue. That does not excuse someone kneeling on another person's neck for over 8 min, when that person is already in handcuffs. Why not discuss that issue? Are you saying that Chauvin is so unprofessional that he shouldn't be a police officer? Maybe that's the discussion?


That likely is a discussion, what were the complaints, were they founded, what was the history?
The one that there sketchy details about doesn't sound good. If true he should have been fired, not only for the assault, but for denial of medical treatment. 

But yeah, a bad cop, with a bad history, running into a known violent criminal, with drugs in his system. I don't expect that to turn out well regardless of race.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Please support this claim.
> I'm not aware of any part of police training that say "shoot the X before they shoot you"
> 
> 
> ...


So, the training itself isn't biased; however, there are a number of studies that show that police have a bias against black suspects, including a quicker reaction to fire. Most likely due to society pushing the narrative of the aggressive black man. Why police so often see unarmed black men as threats Again, I've mentioned implicit bias training, but results are mixed.

Are they blaming race, or is that your interpretation? The issue is about police brutality, if you want to say that this is racist, then you're making the assumption that it's about white police only. 

Let's see, they were only charged after the initial protests. If anything, they should have been charged the same day that they were fired. Funny how it works that nothing happened, but the day after the protests, things go on fast forward? As for going to prison. Yeah... let's see in a year if that happens. How many police officers actually go to prison? Most are acquitted. Police shootings: Trials, convictions are rare for officers

Yet, you still have the same blinders by using racism as an excuse not to see that there are still implicit bias that stacks the deck against blacks.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> So, the training itself isn't biased; however, there are a number of studies that show that police have a bias against black suspects, including a quicker reaction to fire. Most likely due to society pushing the narrative of the aggressive black man. Why police so often see unarmed black men as threats Again, I've mentioned implicit bias training, but results are mixed.
> 
> Are they blaming race, or is that your interpretation? The issue is about police brutality, if you want to say that this is racist, then you're making the assumption that it's about white police only.
> 
> ...


There is an issue with police brutality.

BLM is making the race argument, not me. If it wasn't a race issue, they'd just be "All lives matter", or something.
They'd also be more clear that this is an issue that affects everyone, and it does.
When police use their power to abuse the citizens, we ALL suffer. 
But when criminals are allowed to run free with impunity we suffer then too, look at all the communities devastated by these riots. 

I don't know how many of the officer involved deaths are legitimate and how many are not.
Quite honestly we both know that even if caught, cops get off way too easily.

I do doubt that most cops are simply psychopaths looking to kill people, but there clearly are some. 
There is no good data on this, because even charges and convictions are a poor indicator.

I think we need to improve civilian oversight, and the justice system needs to be fixed.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> There is an issue with police brutality.
> 
> BLM is making the race argument, not me. If it wasn't a race issue, they'd just be "All lives matter", or something.
> They'd also be more clear that this is an issue that affects everyone, and it does.
> ...


The issue is police brutality that is disproportionately affecting blacks. Do you not understand that? The point is that whites are getting some benefit of the doubt when interacting with the police. Police brutality may still affect white civilians, but it is at a lower rate than for blacks. That's the issue. In other words, police should treat blacks the same way they treat whites, because black lives matter as well.

Oh, and another example of bias: Police in Van Nuys Detained a Black Family Defending a Local Business, Mistaking Them for Looters

Here's the thing, cops get away with things all the time. The only instances that get publicized are the ones that are caught on camera. Think about all the other interactions that you don't hear about because no one is filming.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't think it is a fair comparison of the "Me Too" movement and the "Black Lives Matter" movement.

I think the "me too" movement has gone a little too far. They assume that all men "accused" of abuse are guilty. They assume that women never lie.

There have been a couple of cases to disprove that, and many more quietly flow through the courts.

It is well known in family courts that domestic abuse is sometimes claimed to gain the "upper hand" in custody battles.

Joe Biden is the latest victim of false claims. It became so obvious from the evidence that her well known "me too" lawyer dropped her as a client.

Sometimes the pendulum swings too far. Unfortunately for the BLM, the pendulum has barely moved at all.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

sags said:


> I don't think it is a fair comparison of the "Me Too" movement and the "Black Lives Matter" movement.


My point about the Me Too movement was more about the fact that people who are the most offended, tend to be those who condone the actions of the men who are accused.

Yes, there shouldn't be a blanket statement that all women never lie; however, there should be some expectation that the complaint looked at on its merit. If the woman is lying, then the merit is not there.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> My point about the Me Too movement was more about the fact that people who are the most offended, tend to be those who condone the actions of the men who are accused.
> 
> Yes, there shouldn't be a blanket statement that all women never lie; however, there should be some expectation that the complaint looked at on its merit. If the woman is lying, then the merit is not there.


Tell that to Brett Kavanaugh.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> The issue is police brutality that is disproportionately affecting blacks. Do you not understand that? The point is that whites are getting some benefit of the doubt when interacting with the police. Police brutality may still affect white civilians, but it is at a lower rate than for blacks. That's the issue. In other words, police should treat blacks the same way they treat whites, because black lives matter as well.
> 
> Oh, and another example of bias: Police in Van Nuys Detained a Black Family Defending a Local Business, Mistaking Them for Looters
> 
> Here's the thing, cops get away with things all the time. The only instances that get publicized are the ones that are caught on camera. Think about all the other interactions that you don't hear about because no one is filming.


I agree that cops get away with things all the time, and this is a problem.

I don't see why you keep bringing race into it. You keep bringing in a few carefully selected statistical claims, while neglecting all the data that counteracts your claims.

Next you'll be arguing the wage gap. Do you really not understand math?

What about the systematic discrimination against men?
List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia

Pretty much every country in the world. Care to explain why there is NO action on this systematic discrimination.

Even better police killing of men.
People shot to death by U.S. police, by gender 2020 | Statista

Police are killing men at 20x the rate of women, care to explain why that isn't a hot issue?

Ben Shapiro makes a nice case. I'd love to see a data supported argument that he's wrong.





The simple fact is that there are issues with police and use of force, and better oversight is needed, more transparency, and more trust. I even agree with BLM and other groups on that. I just don't accept that there is this massive undercurrent of racism.
The data simply isn't there. There are some cases, but widespread systematic discrimination? Show me the data.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Tell that to Brett Kavanaugh.


Why? He got away with it. During the whole process, he should have disqualified himself as a candidate considering that he couldn't keep his composure and decided to rant about how the whole thing was a conspiracy theory. There were other possible witnesses and they were never interviewed.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Why? He got away with it. During the whole process, he should have disqualified himself as a candidate considering that he couldn't keep his composure and decided to rant about how the whole thing was a conspiracy theory. There were other possible witnesses and they were never interviewed.


He should have turned down a spot on the Supreme court because of false accusations?
That's EXACTLY the problem!


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

bgc_fan said:


> But let's go with the fact that the personal history is the issue. That does not excuse someone kneeling on another person's neck for over 8 min, when that person is already in handcuffs. Why not discuss that issue? Are you saying that Chauvin is so unprofessional that he shouldn't be a police officer? Maybe that's the discussion?


Why did a Democrat mayor and Democrat chief of police in a Democrat state allow this man to remain in uniform after repeated violations?


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I agree that cops get away with things all the time, and this is a problem.
> 
> I don't see why you keep bringing race into it. You keep bringing in a few carefully selected statistical claims, while neglecting all the data that counteracts your claims.
> 
> ...


Explain how the data counteracts my claims. They all point to the fact that there is a bias against blacks. 
This is why I can't take you seriously and consider you a sealion. I've posted studies and reports that demonstrate that there is a bias and you can't accept that fact.

Quite frankly this is a waste of time. What does men life expectancy have to do with any of this? You are just bringing up strawmen.

Ben Shapiro is an idiot and the fact that you follow him, tells me all I need to know about you. He is trying to implying that blacks are more criminal than whites. Here's the problem, the justice system treats both differently so it's a flawed comparison. Here's an example of how there is a difference between the treatment between the 2 when it comes to drugs: Comparing Black and White Drug Offenders: Implications for Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice and Reentry Policy and Programming, you'll notice that a lot more blacks get incarcerated, and for longer periods even though the majority of the time, it's for simple possession or sale of marijuana. Whites? Not at the same rate, and it's usually due to actual criminal activity like B&E and robbery to support their heroin habit. And here' the thing, whites are more likely to use illicit drugs more than blacks, but blacks are incarcerated at a higher rate: Every 25 Seconds | Human Rights Watch.

Maybe you follow Rush Limbaugh, that seems to be your style. He should have been put in jail if we used the same criteria as was used for black people, but charges were dropped if he undergoes treatment. Rush Limbaugh Arrested On Drug Charges Nice deal, too bad it seems to be offered only for a few.

Again, this is all bad faith, and a waste of time, I've posted data and you don't even look at it.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> He should have turned down a spot on the Supreme court because of false accusations?
> That's EXACTLY the problem!


No. He should have turned down because he can't handle the pressure. A supreme court judge should be able to act under pressure, he demonstrated that he couldn't regardless of the accusations being false or true.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Explain how the data counteracts my claims. They all point to the fact that there is a bias against blacks.
> This is why I can't take you seriously and consider you a sealion. I've posted studies and reports that demonstrate that there is a bias and you can't accept that fact.
> 
> Quite frankly this is a waste of time. What does men life expectancy have to do with any of this? You are just bringing up strawmen.
> ...


No the data shows there is a difference, I accept that.
It does not show bias, that is your conclusion, having reviewed further data, I do not share your conclusion.

Numerous studies show there is no such bias. 
It is unfortunate that you can't accept the data and published studies. 

What does male life expectancy have to do with any of this? It's an example of a clear, global inequality that is only in part due to systematic discrimination. While anti-male bias is a clear problem, regarding life expectancy much of it, in my opinion, is due to factors other than systemic discrimination. It isn't a straw man, it's simply an example that you might be able to understand.

I assumed you were acting in good faith, but you've got your conclusions and no amount of facts or data is going to change your mind.
Thank you for coming clean that you are acting in bad faith. I really appreciate that.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> No. He should have turned down because he can't handle the pressure. A supreme court judge should be able to act under pressure, he demonstrated that he couldn't regardless of the accusations being false or true.


Victims of crime shouldn't have to apologize about becoming emotional or upset.

Victim blaming is wrong.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Ben Shapiro is an idiot and the fact that you follow him, tells me all I need to know about you. He is trying to implying that blacks are more criminal than whites.


He's quoting Harvard and DoJ statistics and reports.

He's such an idiot, ok. I've been looking for YEARS for someone who can quote data on the other side.
Is there anyone on the other side, who can quote studies and provide an informed contrary opinion?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Tell that to Brett Kavanaugh.


Conservatives don't care either way, as long as he is reliable to vote their way on abortion, etc.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> He should have turned down a spot on the Supreme court because of false accusations?
> That's EXACTLY the problem!


The bar is so low for who conservatives think should sit on the SCOTUS, the criteria is basically: "probably not a rapist". Liar? Just fine.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

I wonder how the circle of the opposite sex of this type of ****-sapiens' specie live each day. Like being told "b1tch, don't forget to smile for the camera".


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> The bar is so low for who conservatives think should sit on the SCOTUS, the criteria is basically: "probably not a rapist". Liar? Just fine.


No credible evidence that he did it.
Lots of evidence that she's lying.

Of course Biden also has accusations, much more credible ones, but hey, as long as he's not Trump.
The US political system is messed up. 

I have serious problems with unfounded accusations impacting innocent peoples lives.

There is something seriously wrong, when all it takes to destroy a life is a false accusation.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> There is something seriously wrong, when all it takes to destroy a life is a false accusation.


And some people openly support those tactics. Maybe they're so naïve that they think they'll be immune from the same thing happening to them one day. They have no idea that they're just the useful idiots who will be discarded as soon they're no longer needed.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Numerous studies show there is no such bias.
> It is unfortunate that you can't accept the data and published studies.
> 
> What does male life expectancy have to do with any of this? It's an example of a clear, global inequality that is only in part due to systematic discrimination. While anti-male bias is a clear problem, regarding life expectancy much of it, in my opinion, is due to factors other than systemic discrimination. It isn't a straw man, it's simply an example that you might be able to understand.
> ...


Congrats. You get a cookie for a being a troll.

Name the studies, I've shown you the studies that show a bias, you haven't shown any that refutes. Explain the anti-male bias, I'd be curious where you get this from.

Right now, all I can say is that you are a troll and have no interest in any sort of debate.



MrMatt said:


> Victims of crime shouldn't have to apologize about becoming emotional or upset.
> 
> Victim blaming is wrong.


Yes, Kavanaugh is a victim, that's why he is sitting on the supreme court and Christine Blasey Ford is in hiding.



MrMatt said:


> He's quoting Harvard and DoJ statistics and reports.
> 
> He's such an idiot, ok. I've been looking for YEARS for someone who can quote data on the other side.
> Is there anyone on the other side, who can quote studies and provide an informed contrary opinion?



Here's an example of his debating skills: 




Keep in mind that Andrew Neil is as conservative as one can get. Oh, and it was an interview, the snowflake gets flustered being asked questions about previous views.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> No credible evidence that he did it.
> Lots of evidence that she's lying.
> 
> Of course Biden also has accusations, much more credible ones, but hey, as long as he's not Trump.
> ...


People don't have a right to be SCOTUS justices. One would think that it is not controversial to say that SCOTUS justices should be above reproach. Or are there no conservative judges that meet that criteria?

Regardless of the allegations against Kavanaugh (which were never fully investigated), Kavanaugh lied several times during his confirmation hearing (mainly about things that would perhaps spare him embarrassment). He also became quite emotional, hostile and partisan. I think that, too, should be disqualifying.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Oops, I forgot about the original topic, I guess trolls have that affect.
'I’m getting shot': attacks on journalists surge in US protests


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Congrats. You get a cookie for a being a troll.
> 
> Name the studies, I've shown you the studies that show a bias, you haven't shown any that refutes. Explain the anti-male bias, I'd be curious where you get this from.
> 
> ...


I must have missed the studies you posted. I just saw some opinion pieces and selected statistics.
I actually claimed that the discrepancy was due to other factors, while acknowledging that anti male bias and systemic discrimination against men exists.

Yes, Kavanaugh is a victim of false accusations. I didn't realize the Christine Blasey Ford was in hiding, I thought they simply ignored her after her false allegations were refuted.

Yes, he was unprepared and didn't research the interview, and looks bad. He even admits it.
Actually, if you want a better critique of Ben Shapiro, why don't you just quote the "Giant list of all the dumb stuff I've done". 
So a relatively intelligent and articulate guy makes a mistake, then admits it. I actually see publicly admitting your mistakes as a positive thing.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Oops, I forgot about the original topic, I guess trolls have that affect.
> 'I’m getting shot': attacks on journalists surge in US protests


I think everyone agrees that the police in some cases were too aggressive.
I think we can also agree that media don't get a free pass to ignore lawful orders.

Is there really any disagreement here?


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I must have missed the studies you posted. I just saw some opinion pieces and selected statistics.
> I actually claimed that the discrepancy was due to other factors, while acknowledging that anti male bias and systemic discrimination against men exists.
> 
> Yes, Kavanaugh is a victim of false accusations. I didn't realize the Christine Blasey Ford was in hiding, I thought they simply ignored her after her false allegations were refuted.
> ...


Then read again, because I posted studies from the Journal of Drug Issues. Unless you actually are willing to put some effort in this conversation, then I'm through with you.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Then read again, because I posted studies from the Journal of Drug Issues. Unless you actually are willing to put some effort in this conversation, then I'm through with you.


I honestly don't recall that link, scrolled back and didn't see it.

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force
On the most extreme use of force –oﬃcer-involved shootings – we ﬁnd no racial diﬀerences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> Explain the anti-male bias, I'd be curious where you get this from.


Our biology has an anti-male bias in some respects. Life ain't fair. Male offspring are high risk high reward evolutionarily speaking. Most males are 'losers' from a Darwinian perspective but some males are capable of passing genes to far more offspring than a female could. So biologically, males are more a 'swing for the fences' and sacrifice survivability. Male babies are more likely to die, etc.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Our biology has an anti-male bias in some respects. Life ain't fair. Male offspring are high risk high reward evolutionarily speaking. Most males are 'losers' from a Darwinian perspective but some males are capable of passing genes to far more offspring than a female could. So biologically, males are more a 'swing for the fences' and sacrifice survivability. Male babies are more likely to die, etc.


That doesn't explain workplace deaths, increased incarceration rates, lower education levels.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> That doesn't explain workplace deaths, increased incarceration rates, lower education levels.


Maybe not fully. Men are generally more willing to take risks, which will make them more willing to work dangerous jobs. Men also commit more violent crime by far. Whether these ought to be so is a different question, and doesn't mean there isn't also bias. I would be very surprised if women are not much less likely to get shot in similar situations as men (traffic stops, etc.) because they are perceived to be a greater threat even after controlling for propensity to arrive in such situations.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Maybe not fully. Men are generally more willing to take risks, which will make them more willing to work dangerous jobs. Men also commit more violent crime by far. Whether these ought to be so is a different question, and doesn't mean there isn't also bias. I would be very surprised if women are much less likely to get shot in similar situations as men (traffic stops, etc.) because they are perceived to be a greater threat even after controlling for propensity to arrive in such situations.


That's actually my point, there are a lot of explanations for them, and it's not simply "sexism".

However it is actually well researched that the current education system is heavily biased towards women, with a massive over representation of female instructors, particularly at the younger ages, and behavioural expectations that more closely align with female tendancies (ie sit down in a spot and work).
There is also more external support and motivation to encourage women to pursue post secondary education, many schools have prominent campaigns to attract women, and no comparable plans to attract men.
Then there is the social issue, look at the level of support for victims of domestic abuse. Male victims get ridiculued, and have virtually no male shelters in Canada.

It's widespread, systematic, legal, and intentional and overt. That's simply not the case for the alleged racism against blacks.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/WatchPeopleDieInside/comments/gx6ijy


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Our biology has an anti-male bias in some respects. Life ain't fair. Male offspring are high risk high reward evolutionarily speaking. Most males are 'losers' from a Darwinian perspective but some males are capable of passing genes to far more offspring than a female could. So biologically, males are more a 'swing for the fences' and sacrifice survivability. Male babies are more likely to die, etc.


Here's the thing... there are a lot of different reasons for reduced life-expectancy.
However, to make the equivocation that the bias against blacks (which is evident from studies I've linked to, i.e. the fact that they are treated differently), is the same as a bias against male life-expectancy is a strawman and unfortunately, you also fell into the troll trap.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I honestly don't recall that link, scrolled back and didn't see it.
> 
> An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force
> On the most extreme use of force –oﬃcer-involved shootings – we ﬁnd no racial diﬀerences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.


I love it when people try to pull out information to make their point, but it usually shows the opposite. You focus on the use of force aspect but ignore all the others:

A number of stylized facts emerge from the analysis of the preceding sections. On non-lethal uses
of force, there are racial differences – sometimes quite large – in police use of force, even after
controlling for a large set of controls designed to account for important contextual and behavioral
factors at the time of the police-civilian interaction. As the intensity of use of force increases from
putting hands on a civilian to striking them with a baton, the overall probability of such an incident
occurring decreases but the racial difference remains roughly constant. On the most extreme uses
of force, however – officer-involved shootings with a Taser or lethal weapon – there are no racial
differences in either the raw data or when accounting for controls.

Basically up until actual shooting, there is more use of force by the police against blacks.
Oh, and remind me again which interaction category Chauvin would have fell in? He was able to kill easy enough without pulling his weapon.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> I love it when people try to pull out information to make their point, but it usually shows the opposite. You focus on the use of force aspect but ignore all the others:
> 
> A number of stylized facts emerge from the analysis of the preceding sections. On non-lethal uses
> of force, there are racial differences – sometimes quite large – in police use of force, even after
> ...


Yes, and that's an important point about differences in force escalation.

However the key finding is that the cops aren't out there running around shooting black men.

There are issues in police behaviour, nobody is disputing that.
But this crazy idea that blacks should live in fear of the police coming and killing them is literally laughable.
They, like every other race, is at more risk of harm from their neighbours than the police.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

andrewf said:


> Regardless of the allegations against Kavanaugh (which were never fully investigated), Kavanaugh lied several times during his confirmation hearing (mainly about things that would perhaps spare him embarrassment). He also became quite emotional, hostile and partisan. I think that, too, should be disqualifying.


Sure...make blatantly false accusations and then when someone emotionally defends himself call that reason to disqualify them. That was probably the goal the entire time.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Here's the thing... there are a lot of different reasons for reduced life-expectancy.
> However, to make the equivocation that the bias against blacks (which is evident from studies I've linked to, i.e. the fact that they are treated differently), is the same as a bias against male life-expectancy is a strawman and unfortunately, you also fell into the troll trap.


Saying that you've linked to "studies proving the bias against blacks" over and over doesn't make it true.
You have shown discrepancies by race, but no proof of bias. 
These are different things.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

bgc_fan said:


> Yes, Kavanaugh is a victim, that's why he is sitting on the supreme court and Christine Blasey Ford is in hiding.


She made false accusations under oath, just because it didn't work and he was still nominated doesn't mean that he wasn't a victim of slander.

If she's in hiding, then it's her own fault for lying under oath. Her story changed 3 or 4 times and every one of her witnesses denied her version. If she's in hiding then it's her own fault and well deserved. I'm sure the $700,000 or however much she made on GoFundMe will ease the pain somewhat.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> Sure...make blatantly false accusations and then when someone emotionally defends himself call that reason to disqualify them. That was probably the goal the entire time.


Of course it was, but for some reason they're not holding Biden to the same standard. 
I honestly can't fathom why anyone would think he's the best choice to lead the country.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> She made false accusations under oath, just because it didn't work and he was still nominated doesn't mean that he wasn't a victim of slander.
> 
> If she's in hiding, then it's her own fault for lying under oath. Her story changed 3 or 4 times and every one of her witnesses denied her version. If she's in hiding then it's her own fault and well deserved. I'm sure the $700,000 or however much she made on GoFundMe will ease the pain somewhat.


She made $700k off perjury? I think that should be seized as proceeds of a crime.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> She made $700k off perjury? I think that should be seized as proceeds of a crime.


Actually it was "only" $647,000:









Help Christine Blasey Ford, organized by Team Christine Blasey Ford


Message from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford - November 21, 2018 Words are not adequa… Team Christine Blasey Ford needs your support for Help Christine Blasey Ford



www.gofundme.com





Lying under oath pays very well if you're part of the left. How much do you wanna bet that the next time the left needs someone to lie in court that they're be a lineup of willing parties flowed by a GoFundMe page?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The Proud Boys are an organized domestic terrorist group in the US. I personally witnessed them bring in armed combatants (men in military-like dress, with real weapons) into a city when I lived in Oregon. They came into town to harass the intimidate the population.

They were founded by a Canadian named Gavin McInnes. He was a personality with The Rebel, a far right media outlet in Canada.

@bgc_fan there is a widespread belief in the US that police are cozy with these kinds of terrorist groups. They don't enforce laws against them and tend to overlook them, probably because they agree on values (suppressing minorities and enforcing white dominance).

In my opinion, Gavin McInnes is the founder/leader of a terrorist group. If he sets foot into Canada, he should be arrested for involvement in terrorism.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> The Proud Boys are an organized domestic terrorist group in the US. I personally witnessed them bring in armed combatants (men in military-like dress, with real weapons) into a city when I lived in Oregon. They came into town to harass the intimidate the population.
> 
> They were founded by a Canadian named Gavin McInnes. He was a personality with The Rebel, a far right media outlet in Canada.
> 
> In my opinion, Gavin McInnes is the founder/leader of a terrorist group. If he sets foot into Canada, he should be arrested for involvement in terrorism.


You realize that Gavin McInnes isn't racist, right?
Did you know when Proud Boys shifted that way, he left the group and disowned them.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> You realize that Gavin McInnes isn't racist, right?
> Did you know when Proud Boys shifted that way, he left the group and disowns them.


He said he quit, once the FBI started monitoring the group. This isn't much different than someone like Ayman al-Zawahiri saying he's no longer with Al-Qaeda. It may be true, but that sure doesn't wash his hands.

My primary concern with the group isn't racism. It's that they are an armed terrorist group which threatens violence on the population.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> My primary concern with the group isn't racism. It's that they are an armed terrorist group which threatens violence on the population.


Antifa has outdone them by several magnitudes in the last week....they don't threaten violence, they actually commit it including killing cops and innocent people and lighting fires in homes with children and then preventing fire fighters from trying to rescue them.

But, go hide under your bed from the non-existent threat from the Proud Boys while Antifa destroys the country.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Saying that you've linked to "studies proving the bias against blacks" over and over doesn't make it true.
> You have shown discrepancies by race, but no proof of bias.
> These are different things.


Here's one about resumes: Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination - American Economic Association
Sentencing bias: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208129.pdf
Bias in health care: Implicit Racial/Ethnic Bias Among Health Care Professionals and Its Influence on Health Care Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Just because you want to close your eyes and not read, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Here's one about resumes: Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination - American Economic Association
> Sentencing bias: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208129.pdf
> Bias in health care: Implicit Racial/Ethnic Bias Among Health Care Professionals and Its Influence on Health Care Outcomes: A Systematic Review
> 
> Just because you want to close your eyes and not read, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


Here's a more recent study that addresses weaknesses in the one you linked to. 
https://economics.missouri.edu/working-papers/2014/wp1419_koedel.pdf


Bias in health care claims to find "implicit bias", but didn't find differences in health outcomes.
So a bias with no impact on outcomes? That's interesting.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

james4beach said:


> The Proud Boys are an organized domestic terrorist group in the US. I personally witnessed them bring in armed combatants (men in military-like dress, with real weapons) into a city when I lived in Oregon. They came into town to harass the intimidate the population.
> 
> They were founded by a Canadian named Gavin McInnes. He was a personality with The Rebel, a far right media outlet in Canada.
> 
> ...


Proud Boys does tend to attract a certain type. From the clip, it's evident that the police was willing to give a pass.
As for Gavin, well, he's in the States and his accounts in social media have been suspended for his views, so the less conversation about him the better.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Proud Boys does tend to attract a certain type. From the clip, it's evident that the police was willing to give a pass.
> As for Gavin, well, he's in the States and his accounts in social media have been suspended for his views, so the less conversation about him the better.


That's actually part of the problem.
You don't like his opinion, so you want to shut him up. That's not acceptable.

Gavin is a journalist, and the social media companies are trying to silence him. Not the government.

That's the point, it's the media companies who are trying to stop the press in the US.

In Canada, it's the government.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Here's a more recent study that addresses weaknesses in the one you linked to.
> https://economics.missouri.edu/working-papers/2014/wp1419_koedel.pdf
> 
> 
> ...


So... do you just google and not read the study? So to differentiate the ethnicities they used these names:
Specifically, we used three female-sounding first names – Isabella, Megan and
Chloe – and three male-sounding first names – Brian, Carlos and Ryan. The first names Isabella and Carlos were paired with Hernandez and Garcia to suggest Hispanic origin, while Chloe and Ryan were pared with Washington and Jefferson to indicate an African American applicant. For white applicants, the first names Megan and Brian were paired with Anderson and Thompson

Are there a lot of African Americans with names Chloe and Ryan? Of course, they're banking on the idea that the fact that their last names are Washington and Jefferson is enough. 

So, here's a newer one: https://siepr.stanford.edu/system/f...idence from a lab-in-the-field experiment.pdf

Here's an excerpt:

We find strong evidence of levels-based statistical discrimination against younger black applicants having worse computer skills and less training, as well as evidence that screeners are more likely to expect work gaps for younger black applicants compared to white. We also find compelling evidence of variance-based statistical discrimination against all black applicants. Job history signals and possibly high school signals are clearer for white applicants compared to black applicants

Again, I see a lack of comprehension. They weren't looking for the differences in health outcomes, and recommended that it be studied.

Implicit attitudes appear to be an important target for further research in health care; however, methodological limitations need to be addressed in future studies to more fully and accurately understand how implicit bias affects care and health. In addition, researchers will need to ask more nuanced questions and use more rigorous designs and analytic methods to fully understand the role, impact, and appropriate intervention strategies for implicit bias within health care.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> That's actually part of the problem.
> You don't like his opinion, so you want to shut him up. That's not acceptable.
> 
> Gavin is a journalist, and the social media companies are trying to silence him. Not the government.
> ...


That's funny. He's a journalist? You have any links to news articles that he wrote that actually required research? Here's a link to a bunch of opinion pieces Articles by Gavin McInnes | WCBS-TV (New York, NY) Journalist | Muck Rack


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> So... do you just google and not read the study? Here's an excerpt:
> We find strong evidence of levels-based statistical discrimination against younger black applicants having worse computer skills and less training, as well as evidence that screeners are more likely to expect work gaps for younger black applicants compared to white. We also find compelling evidence of variance-based statistical discrimination against all black applicants. Job history signals and possibly high school signals are clearer for white applicants compared to black applicants
> 
> Again, I see a lack of comprehension. They weren't looking for the differences in health outcomes, and recommended that it be studied.
> ...


I didn't see that quote in my study.

I question the definition of "implicit bias".
Given that different populations experience different health issues, I would expect and HOPE to see differences in interactions. What's important is if the outcome is appropriate.

I am interested in differential sentencing, even small problems should be investigated.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> That's funny. He's a journalist? You have any links to news articles that he wrote that actually required research? Here's a link to a bunch of opinion pieces Articles by Gavin McInnes | WCBS-TV (New York, NY) Journalist | Muck Rack


oh my, an opinion piece!!!


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Yes, and that's an important point about differences in force escalation.
> 
> However the key finding is that the cops aren't out there running around shooting black men.
> 
> ...


Have you been listening to all the personal accounts of black people's encounters with the police? It is completely normal for them to have to prostrate themselves before the police to de-escalate the encounter and ensure they live to see another day, even when they are getting stopped/questioned for no legitimate reason. It is not one-off, it is systemic.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Prairie Guy said:


> Sure...make blatantly false accusations and then when someone emotionally defends himself call that reason to disqualify them. That was probably the goal the entire time.


So you also endorse Kavanaugh lying under oath during his confirmation? I seem to recall you complaining about perjury.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> oh my, an opinion piece!!!


Does having an opinion in public make you a journalist?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Have you been listening to all the personal accounts of black people's encounters with the police? It is completely normal for them to have to prostrate themselves before the police to de-escalate the encounter and ensure they live to see another day, even when they are getting stopped/questioned for no legitimate reason. It is not one-off, it is systemic.


Have you been reading what I've been saying?

There is a problem with police in the US.
It is clear that in some instances they are too aggressive.
Something needs to be done, I even agree that improved oversight and transparency are an issue.

All I'm saying is that I don't think we need to bring race into this issue. There are many white, or white presenting people that have similar stories. Can't you accept that it's a problem, without trying to cast it as a racism problem?

Everyone who is knowledgeable on this can see it isn't a race problem, but an issue with policing strategies in the US. Even if you removed the race issue 100%, you'd still be left with roughly the same numbers of people being abused by police. How many protestors were treated improperly during the BLM protests in the last few days? Did it look like the aggressive response was only limited to one race, or were they being $#[email protected] to everyone?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Does having an opinion in public make you a journalist?


Sure, it's very common for political commentators to voice opinions. Just because they're open about their biases doesn't mean they're not journalists.
It's not like anyone is reporting on stuff objectively anyway.
Can you name a single mainstream journalist who is not sharing their opinion, or injecting bias into their presentation?

Maybe not weathermen, other than Ron Burgundy, I think they're pretty objective.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Sure, it's very common for political commentators to voice opinions. Just because they're open about their biases doesn't mean they're not journalists.
> It's not like anyone is reporting on stuff objectively anyway.
> Can you name a single mainstream journalist who is not sharing their opinion, or injecting bias into their presentation?
> 
> Maybe not weathermen, other than Ron Burgundy, I think they're pretty objective.


My point is that having an opinion in public is not sufficient to be a journalist, otherwise every celebrity is a journalist.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> My point is that having an opinion in public is not sufficient to be a journalist, otherwise every celebrity is a journalist.


Thats why I asked for an example, but I see you can't provide an example, and didn't provide a definition either.

I think sharing information and/or opinion on an issue can be considered journalism.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Have you been reading what I've been saying?
> 
> There is a problem with police in the US.
> It is clear that in some instances they are too aggressive.
> ...


Why can't it be both? It is not merely a race thing--police are out of control in the US. But in addition to that, there is clearly a racial element to how black people are treated by police in ways white people cannot claim to be. I fully acknowledge that even as a white person in Canada, I recommend you have as little interaction with police as possible, and not be any more confrontational with them than is needed to protect one's rights. But even still, I definitely am privileged to not face the same kind of propensity for police abuse, merely for driving a certain car or walking in a certain neighbourhood. You never know when a cop has had a bad day and will decide to take out his frustration on someone who crosses his path.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Why can't it be both? It is not merely a race thing--police are out of control in the US. But in addition to that, there is clearly a racial element to how black people are treated by police in ways white people cannot claim to be. I fully acknowledge that even as a white person in Canada, I recommend you have as little interaction with police as possible, and not be any more confrontational with them than is needed to protect one's rights. But even still, I definitely am privileged to not face the same kind of propensity for police abuse, merely for driving a certain car or walking in a certain neighbourhood. You never know when a cop has had a bad day and will decide to take out his frustration on someone who crosses his path.


I never said race wasn't a factor.
I just don't think it's a particularly important or significant factor. 

The simple truth is that the laws and policies are typically not racist. That's why they never point to actual laws or policies causing problems.
They can't actually find too many cases of actual racist people either.

Now they typically rely on vague claims of "systematic racism". There doesn't seem to be much evidence of this, and when you correct for applicable factors the differences continually reduce, often to the point of very small differences if any.

When you're faced with a problem, such as police violence, why not go for the heavy hitters, like better training, supervision and accountability?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I have no idea what evidence you could be using to come to the conclusion that racism is not a significant factor in policing in America. Frankly, that is a very strong claim. Seems like it might be how you wish the world was, rather than a pragmatic evaluation of the way it actually is.

Do you think it is racist for, say, a shop clerk to follow or surveil a black person in a store to a much greater extent than they would a white person?

I don't disagree that training *and culture* * are perhaps more pressing. But to put a lot of energy into asserting that there is no significant racial bias in policing strikes me as odd.*


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

In other news, Trump has deployed secret police to DC. Thousands of officers are on the streets, with no badge or insignia and many are refusing to identify themselves or even what agency they work for. This is kind of disastrous to the idea of social license and trust in policing. How are any of these individuals being held accountable? How would anyone know if a person is actually a low enforcement office or merely impersonating one?

Is this the US or is it Turkey or Venezuela?









Unidentified Federal Police Prompt Fears Amid Protests in Washington (Published 2020)


The Trump administration has deployed phalanxes of officers in riot gear and no identifiable markings to police demonstrations in the capital. Democrats want to know who they are.




www.nytimes.com


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

This is essentially black bloc for law enforcement. Have at it boys--no one can charge you for strangling a person to death if they can't identify you!


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> So... do you just google and not read the study? So to differentiate the ethnicities they used these names:
> Specifically, we used three female-sounding first names – Isabella, Megan and
> Chloe – and three male-sounding first names – Brian, Carlos and Ryan. The first names Isabella and Carlos were paired with Hernandez and Garcia to suggest Hispanic origin, while Chloe and Ryan were pared with Washington and Jefferson to indicate an African American applicant. For white applicants, the first names Megan and Brian were paired with Anderson and Thompson
> 
> Are there a lot of African Americans with names Chloe and Ryan? Of course, they're banking on the idea that the fact that their last names are Washington and Jefferson is enough.


Last names correspond to family and as explained in the study, correlate strongly to the respective races.
First names are more an indicator of culture and SES, which they ALSO addressed in the study.

Apparently you didn't read the study.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I have no idea what evidence you could be using to come to the conclusion that racism is not a significant factor in policing in America. Frankly, that is a very strong claim. Seems like it might be how you wish the world was, rather than a pragmatic evaluation of the way it actually is.
> 
> Do you think it is racist for, say, a shop clerk to follow or surveil a black person in a store to a much greater extent than they would a white person?
> 
> I don't disagree that training *and culture* * are perhaps more pressing. But to put a lot of energy into asserting that there is no significant racial bias in policing strikes me as odd.*


How could I come to that conclusion?
The data.
It's pretty clear that race is not as important as other factors.

I do think it is racist to follow or surveil people differently based on their race. Again, what are you trying to say about me?

So we both agree, or at least you don't disagree that training and culture are more pressing concerns. Good.

Why are "you" (in the general sense) putting so much energy into asserting a significant racial element into stuff when the data doesn't support it?
Why is it, on something like Climate change "you" say follow the data and science, but when it comes to Racism in policing, or the wage gap, you ignore the data?

But mostly I'm upset at the general accusation that "white people" are racist, which is racist in itself, and offensive to me.
I'm also frustrated how hurtful and divisive these beliefs are.
Finally it's those massive illegal gatherings, violating health orders and putting lives at risk of COVID19. I'm very frustrated that we're still under lockdown, because self entitled jerks can't seem to follow the advice of our health professionals and stay home.








Trudeau takes a knee at anti-racism demonstration


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau knelt on the ground as part of a crowd gathered on Parliament Hill Friday afternoon, in solidarity with anti-racism demonstrators protesting police killings of Black people.



www.ctvnews.ca





I wasn't specifically angry at Trudeau, I think his 21 second pause wasn't newsworthy, and his response wasn't too bad. Actually I'm glad he took some time to collect his thoughts, rather than pissing off Trump as he's deploying the US military.

But I also think it's wrong for him to be violating social distancing guidelines to protest the government, when he is the single most powerful politician in the country, and could easily take real concrete steps to address these problems.
Instead he's picking on law abiding gun owners, and risking lives for photo ops.

That's really it, the offensive statements and virtue signalling, rather than attacking the actual problems affecting the black community.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

When I hear the military rant about not wanting to report for civil war duties because this is America ... It is a joke.

The Generals are all ranting on because they know full well that they are going to be called upon to man the barricades but are saying that they would prefer not to.

Not that they won't ..... Not that they would refuise ........ Not that they are not peparing to control the streets of Martial Law, .......... it is just that the military would prefer not to.

But believe me ..... They are gonna jump into their uniforms as soon as the media has managed to convince us that it is a "Well Intentioned" deployment.

3 out of 10 adult middle class citizens are pissed off. They have lost the American Dream,

They gotta print another 15 trillion or put the military on the streets.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

calm said:


> 3 out of 10 adult middle class citizens are pissed off. They have lost the American Dream,
> They gotta print another 15 trillion or put the military on the streets.


You have explained exactly why they will print $15 trillion more. And if you look at the lower classes, it's _much more_ than 3/10 adults who are pissed off.

Printing money, suffering some inflation, but putting cash into people's hands -- and making them feel better -- is a thousand times better than civil war and violent societal collapse.

Sadly, America is now dealing with the consequences (a long-time-coming) of the enormous wealth disparity, and poverty that's developed in the lower classes.

I never want Canada to go down that road, which is why I always argue for providing strong social support, services, and welfare for people in need. I am very happy to pay my taxes, and share the wealth I earn, to ensure that my neighbours are comfortable. I think this leads to a better society, and therefore, better quality of life for ME too.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

The main thing is that the press has to build up to it.

The press needs to explain how hard people had to work trying to agree on printing money.

Agreeing to print 15 Trillion requires a whole lot of exertion and heavy breathing. They just grabbed it out of thin air, but it took hard work.

If it did not take work, then what value is it?

The press is going to spend the next while explaining the "Work Process" and baptize the 15 Trillion with holy water. (In God We Trust)

It is only a computer blurp on a monitor but the press needs to have it appear as holding some value. (It has no value.)

Nancy Pelosi will appear at the microphone and seem to be almost out of breath. Gasping with excitement after working so hard .....

The press will tell us that it was really-really touch and go. A whole bunch of determination and skill. Work-Work-Work and finally an agreement between the Capitalists.

The press will canonize McConnell and Pelosi as very hard workers.

There are 12 Apostles at the Last Supper ..... and today we got 12 Federal Reserve Seats.

The press is going to give the Federal Reserve Sainthood.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I am quite positive that you will all agree that I worked hard composing the above post, but it has no value.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I didn't see that quote in my study.
> 
> I question the definition of "implicit bias".
> Given that different populations experience different health issues, I would expect and HOPE to see differences in interactions. What's important is if the outcome is appropriate.
> ...


You see that's your implicit bias. You're assuming that different populations would have something like different pain thresholds based on.... what exactly? If you noticed, in the study, there was assumptions that minorities were exaggerating symptoms and they were provided with lower dosage of painkillers.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I didn't see that quote in my study.
> 
> I question the definition of "implicit bias".
> Given that different populations experience different health issues, I would expect and HOPE to see differences in interactions. What's important is if the outcome is appropriate.
> ...


Yes, I edited it after I posted when I realize I was quoting a different study.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Last names correspond to family and as explained in the study, correlate strongly to the respective races.
> First names are more an indicator of culture and SES, which they ALSO addressed in the study.
> 
> Apparently you didn't read the study.


Read it, don't agree with it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Read it, don't agree with it.


So there is a published study, and since it doesn't show what you want, you reject it.
It isn't about the facts and the data, you have an opinion, you want to see a certain result.
Bit close minded. I should have listened when you said that you weren't participating in good faith.

I'm just an optimist and can't help but hope people will open their minds and learn.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> You see that's your implicit bias. You're assuming that different populations would have something like different pain thresholds based on.... what exactly? If you noticed, in the study, there was assumptions that minorities were exaggerating symptoms and they were provided with lower dosage of painkillers.


Different populations are different, there's something called "science" and "data" that shows this. 

Did you know that.
Different populations experience different diseases at different rates?
Did you know that some diseases present different symptoms in some people?
Did you know that there is evidence some drugs and treatments work better in some populations?

It's important to note that "different populations" includes the same person at different times throughout their life?

You want to see racism and "implicit bias", as if every difference is due to some unconscious thoughts that people just can't control.

Sorry, but if you're dealing with a man, you should be less inclined to consider the possibility of pregnancy. That's not "implicit bias", or "sexist", that's acknowledging that different populations are likely to experience different issues.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> You have explained exactly why they will print $15 trillion more. And if you look at the lower classes, it's _much more_ than 3/10 adults who are pissed off.
> 
> Printing money, suffering some inflation, but putting cash into people's hands -- and making them feel better -- is a thousand times better than civil war and violent societal collapse.
> 
> ...


"Suffering some inflation". Do you know what happens when you have hyperinflation?

The problem with the "wealth disparity" is that some people are just lots better at creating value.
The argument to flatten out wealth is the argument that Steve Jobs should have never been allowed to make the iPhone, Sam Walton should have never been allowed to make Walmart, Ford shouldn't have made Ford, Musk should not be allowed to make Tesla or SpaceX.

It's the argument basically we shouldn't have innovation and progress, or allow people the fruits of their own labour.

As far as government and taxes, I have a responsibility to make the best use of my resources. The government isn't the best use, therefore I have a moral obligation to redeploy elsewhere.

The "I am happy to pay my taxes" rarely comes from people who give to charity, and they NEVER give to the government.
When Bernie Sanders was asked about sharing his millions in book profits he got indignant that it was "his money".

james, I'd bet that you have NEVER clicked the box to send your tax refund to the government as a donation.

I'm happy to help people, provide services and support. I do give to charity, and I do volunteer. But I don't think the government is particularly good at providing these services.
We have government funded groups doing a LOT of things I don't approve of. Plus the government already has too much money. They literally don't know what do with all the money they have, and they waste billions, and give away billions more. If the government got their act together and actually focused on helping people, instead of stupid wasteful projects, I could consider supporting more taxes.

One thing I hope will come out of COVID19 is that the cities and provinces will be short on money and have to cut the dumb programs that don't help people.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Yes, I edited it after I posted when I realize I was quoting a different study.


Because it was not published, I reject your unpublished study.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Matt, I think you're strawmanning the idea of reducing income disparity. No one (or hardly anyone) is saying that Jobs or Walton should not have been permitted to engaging in their entrepreneurship. Or even that they ought to benefit substantially from their financial success. It's not about confiscation. It's about less unequal societies being stronger and better to live in, even for the wealthiest. And I doubt that Jobs or Walton would have decided to forego their efforts if they ended up with half or even 10% of their wealth in the end in an alternate universe. Do you think Jobs was especially motivated by money--they guy who wore levis and a black turtleneck every day?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

For balance, I watch 30 minutes of CNN's coverage and watch Cooper, Cuomo and Lemon lecture how people should favorably view the protestors, and then switch over to Fox News for 30 minutes to watch Carlson, Hannity or Ingraham lecture people on how outraged they should be by it all.

After an hour or so, I decide to watch a movie or listen to a podcast instead.

About half the US population watches CNN and the other half FOX. Both sides are rooted in cement on their sides.

Bridge the gap........LOL, like that is ever going to happen.

Warren Buffet quipped he won the "birth lottery" being born male and white.

I am thinking Canadians also won a birth lottery, so we sit and watch the three ring circus in the US.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Matt, I think you're strawmanning the idea of reducing income disparity. No one (or hardly anyone) is saying that Jobs or Walton should not have been permitted to engaging in their entrepreneurship. Or even that they ought to benefit substantially from their financial success. It's not about confiscation. It's about less unequal societies being stronger and better to live in, even for the wealthiest. And I doubt that Jobs or Walton would have decided to forego their efforts if they ended up with half or even 10% of their wealth in the end in an alternate universe. Do you think Jobs was especially motivated by money--they guy who wore levis and a black turtleneck every day?


Glad you grabbed the Jobs example. You realize that his massive wealth is what gave him the ability to take charge at Apple and push the innovation.
Walton wasn't about making money, it was about helping people.

That's the problem, people think it's about greed, not about having the resources to build and create.

The real problem isn't Capitalism vs Communism. It's Builders and Creators vs Zero Summers.

"You" (generally not specifically) think it's about being rich and having financial success.
Capitalists like Elon Musk see it as getting the resources to create and accomplish great things.

Is Elon Musk risking his fortune to become even richer, or is he trying to save the earth, and trying to build for the long term survival of humanity (by colonizing Mars)?

The problem isn't that the rich are building too much wealth and creating too much.
Bill Gates is using his (and many others) billions to attack problems. 

There are far fewer people living in poverty today than at any time in history. This is due to the ongoing wealth creation of Capitalism, we're all objectively better off than we were a generation ago.

Things are so good, we're inventing problems to be upset about, "First world problem" isn't just a meme, it's a flag of success.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Different populations are different, there's something called "science" and "data" that shows this.
> 
> Did you know that.
> Different populations experience different diseases at different rates?
> ...


Did you know that people with certain experiences will be biased? 
Here's the thing. All of what you said is irrelevant to the paper. It was about interactions and how people are treated differently:

Some White health care providers maintain problematic explicit ideas about their Black American patients, viewing them as less intelligent, less able to adhere to treatment regimens, and more likely to engage in risky health behaviors than their White counterparts. Hispanic/Latino/Latina patients too were viewed as unlikely to accept responsibility for their own care and more likely to be noncompliant with treatment recommendations. Yet, even if explicit attitudes are modified, implicit bias among providers toward people of color is likely to remain and influence care in ways that perpetuate disparity and inequity. Thus, even if explicit attitudes demonstrate a desire to provide equitable care, health care providers may unintentionally interact with patients of color less effectively than with White patients, which may contribute to health disparities.



MrMatt said:


> Because it was not published, I reject your unpublished study.


You mean this one? [PDF] Discrimination at the Intersection of Age, Race, and Gender: Evidence from a Lab-in-the-field Experiment | Semantic Scholar

I figure this interview is appropriate to the topic: https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/waneek-horn-miller-oka-crisis-racism-canada-1.5598757. 
"When we're talking about racism in Canada, it's not like what you face in the United States. It's more subtle. It's the indifference. It's the insensitivity. Or people saying they don't see colour."


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Did you know that people with certain experiences will be biased?
> Here's the thing. All of what you said is irrelevant to the paper. It was about interactions and how people are treated differently:


Of course interactions will be different, but that isn't implicit bias.
My interactions with my current doctor are significantly different that with my last doctor. As well my spouses interactions are also different with each.
There are many reasons.
1. My spouse and I are from distinct populations with different health concerns.
2. I had a lot in common with my previous doctors spouse.
3. My SES has changed in that time.
4. My family situation has changed.
5. My age has changed.
6. My address and community have changed.
7. My education and speech patterns have changed.

Due to the above factors, I would fully expect to have a significantly different interactions with a doctor. It would have little to do with "implicit bias",and more to do with simply doing their job.




bgc_fan said:


> "When we're talking about racism in Canada, it's not like what you face in the United States. It's more subtle. It's the indifference. It's the insensitivity. Or people saying they don't see colour."


When you say that treating people the same is "racism", you've lost me.

Yeah, I'm indifferent to your race, I literally don't care. Why should I?
What is there to be sensitive to? Every person in the world has different experiences.

Maybe we should treat people like individual people with their own unique lives and experiences.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Some White health care providers maintain problematic explicit ideas about their Black American patients, viewing them as less intelligent, less able to adhere to treatment regimens, and more likely to engage in risky health behaviors than their White counterparts.


I think what you meant to say was "hate fact".









Racial Differences in Medication Adherence: A Cross-Sectional Study of Medicare Enrollees


Racial differences in adherence to prescribed medication regimens have been reported among the elderly. It remains unclear, however, whether these differences persist after controlling for confounding variables.The objective of this study was to determine ...




www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov




"Elderly African Americans reported that they followed physician instructions on how to take medications less frequently than did elderly whites, even after adjusting for differences in demographic characteristics, health literacy, depression, and social support. "




Given that African Americans reported they are less likely to follow physician instructions, wouldn't it be prudent to consider that in creating a treatment plan that more appropriately aligns with the patients needs?
That's not implict bias. That's proper treatment.

I personally was prescribed a treatment that I would not be able to complete as directed, upon informing the medical professional, an alternate, and more appropriate treatment plan was developed. A good doctor should ensure that compliance is realistic for all patients.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Glad you grabbed the Jobs example. You realize that his massive wealth is what gave him the ability to take charge at Apple and push the innovation.
> Walton wasn't about making money, it was about helping people.
> 
> That's the problem, people think it's about greed, not about having the resources to build and create.
> ...


I'm not so concerned about wealth, but about disparities in consumption. Should we be happy with a society where a tiny minority live in opulence like Louis XIV? You can't say that today's plutocrats deserve that wealth and were solely responsible for it. The societies in which those billionaires found themselves contributed greatly to their success. Would Jobs have been as successful if he was born in Syria (where is biological father was from) rather than adopted by a well-to-do Californian family? Or consider this quote from Warren Buffet:



> I personally think that society is responsible for a very significant percentage of what I've earned. If you stick me down in the middle of Bangladesh or Peru or someplace, you find out how much this talent is going to produce in the wrong kind of soil... I work in a market system that happens to reward what I do very well - disproportionately well. Mike Tyson, too. If you can knock a guy out in 10 seconds and earn $10 million for it, this world will pay a lot for that. If you can bat .360, this world will pay a lot for that. If you're a marvelous teacher, this world won't pay a lot for it. If you are a terrific nurse, this world will not pay a lot for it. Now, am I going to try to come up with some comparable worth system that somehow (re)distributes that? No, I don't think you can do that. But I do think that when you're treated enormously well by this market system, where in effect the market system showers the ability to buy goods and services on you because of some peculiar talent - maybe your adenoids are a certain way, so you can sing and everybody will pay you enormous sums to be on television or whatever -I think society has a big claim on that.


There is, however, a legitimate concern about the amount of influence that enormous wealth brings. Lonewolf is at least partially correct in his criticism of Gates on that point. I don't think Gates has any nefarious motivation, but we largely lucked out that Gates seems like a decent person. 

And when you consider that there is compelling reason to believe that the US is more a plutocracy than it is a democracy, in that moneyed interests usually win out over popular will, it is concerning that we allow so much power to be concentrated in the hands of so few with lack of accountability. And it effectively magnified the power of those wealthy individuals, who can achieve so much more with the resources available to the state than they could with their own resources. It is shockingly cheap for people with tens of billions to buy the levers of power. And is this problem only going to get worse when we eventually have trillionaires?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I'm not so concerned about wealth, but about disparities in consumption. Should we be happy with a society where a tiny minority live in opulence like Louis XIV? You can't say that today's plutocrats deserve that wealth and were solely responsible for it. The societies in which those billionaires found themselves contributed greatly to their success. Would Jobs have been as successful if he was born in Syria (where is biological father was from) rather than adopted by a well-to-do Californian family? Or consider this quote from Warren Buffet:


I think the world benefits when people are best able to use their talents.
No Jobs wouldnt' have been as successful if he was born elsewhere, and if the systems weren't set the way they are, we'd all be worse off for it.

I don't care about a tiny minority living in opulence, why should I? 
Their wealth doesn't take anything from me.
If anything their wealth facilitates the creation of new technologies which benefits all of us.
Are we better or worse off that Elon Musk, with his opulent lifestyle, has also helped make Electric cars a feasible technology? 
He has so changed the world for the better, the amount "wasted" on his personal opulence is relatively insignificant. Even then, to spend all that money created lots of jobs. There is no loser here.

I do care, greatly, that quality of life is dramatically better, for everyone.



> There is, however, a legitimate concern about the amount of influence that enormous wealth brings. Lonewolf is at least partially correct in his criticism of Gates on that point. I don't think Gates has any nefarious motivation, but we largely lucked out that Gates seems like a decent person.
> 
> And when you consider that there is compelling reason to believe that the US is more a plutocracy than it is a democracy, in that moneyed interests usually win out over popular will, it is concerning that we allow so much power to be concentrated in the hands of so few with lack of accountability. And it effectively magnified the power of those wealthy individuals, who can achieve so much more with the resources available to the state than they could with their own resources. It is shockingly cheap for people with tens of billions to buy the levers of power. And is this problem only going to get worse when we eventually have trillionaires?


I'm terrified of that, absolutely terrified.
There is a systematic attack by the ruling elites on freedom of speech.
They know that the strongest possible weapon the people have against their authoritarian rule is information and speech. Every advance in human rights was accomplished with speech, and it's the first thing the dictators and authoritarians want to shut down.

That is why the fight for free speech is so critical.
It's why cancel culture is so toxic.

There is a reason that the ruling elites want to have "approved media", to ensure only their message gets out.

If you think the solution is government, you really need to ask yourself if Trump is the solution you want.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I think what you meant to say was "hate fact".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting that you think you can generalize the result for a subset of the population "elderly" for the whole population. That's pretty lazy bias there. So, the African Americans in that study were older and poorer. Or the fact that they were more likely to live alone so the social support isn't as strong? Yes, they conclude that social support isn't going to going to help, based on ... nothing really. Even though they've cited a paper where it is helpful.

Basically, you're saying, "they don't understand what's good for them, so why bother?". The paper conclusion isn't so useful. But there is something useful that can be pulled out. I'd say the main confounding variable is health literacy. Of course, that means spending more time with the patient, but when you are predisposed to think that they don't understand what is going on, it's easier to quickly write up a prescription and off they go.

I think the COVID situation has shown some examples where there is a problem at the start when people are rejected for COVID testing and then dying even though they show symptoms and are at risk.

Man with coronavirus symptoms dies after being allegedly turned away from 3 ERs
Beloved Brooklyn teacher, 30, dies of coronavirus after she was twice denied a COVID-19 test
Detroit health care worker dies after being denied coronavirus test 4 times, daughter says
Questions of Bias in Covid-19 Treatment Add to the Mourning for Black Families
Black woman dies after being turned away from hospital she worked at for 31 years


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Interesting that you think you can generalize the result for a subset of the population "elderly" for the whole population. That's pretty lazy bias there. So, the African Americans in that study were older and poorer. Or the fact that they were more likely to live alone so the social support isn't as strong? Yes, they conclude that social support isn't going to going to help, based on ... nothing really. Even though they've cited a paper where it is helpful.
> 
> Basically, you're saying, "they don't understand what's good for them, so why bother?". The paper conclusion isn't so useful. But there is something useful that can be pulled out. I'd say the main confounding variable is health literacy.


Typical troll, assigning claims I didn't make, coming to conclusions nobody made.

The conclusion is simple, after controlling for many items, they still found that African Americans were not following the treatment plan. They don't know what the actual issue is, it isn't any of the "obvious" things they controlled for. 

You claim that it's health literacy, though they actually adjusted for that in the study.
Clearly you are unable to read scientific literature, or you're purposely blind to the facts. 

You are not having a good faith discussion.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Typical troll, assigning claims I didn't make, coming to conclusions nobody made.
> 
> The conclusion is simple, after controlling for many items, they still found that African Americans were not following the treatment plan. They don't know what the actual issue is, it isn't any of the "obvious" things they controlled for.
> 
> ...


Let's see, the study was about elderly patients, and you use that as proof that blacks in general are not following the treatment plan. Was that what you were trying to say? If not, then why not just state that this study only applies to elderly patients?

They included this in the paper:

Health care providers should adopt a culturally sensitive, patient-centered approach to identifying and addressing barriers to adherence.

You realize that the paper is pushing the fact that there needs to be positive interaction between the patient and the health care provider to have a positive outcome, whereas the paper that I had presented before pointed out that blacks have had more negative interactions? So what is your point out of this? Mine is that health care providers should provide more understanding rather than just ignore what is being presented as symptoms.

BTW no comments about the lack of COVID testing?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Let's see, the study was about elderly patients, and you use that as proof that blacks in general are not following the treatment plan. Was that what you were trying to say? If not, then why not just state that this study only applies to elderly patients?
> 
> They included this in the paper:
> 
> ...


I did not make that claim that this was generally applicable across age groups. 
The study literally says that it is only applicable to that age group. 
This is the second time you're asserting the exact same claim neither I, nor the study made. 

Interesting that you pulled out the item that health care providers should have different approaches, and consider patient culture in their interactions. It's almost like they're saying you can't simply treat everyone the same. 
That's actually my point, different populations need to be treated differently. However that isn't implicit biased, it's simply proper patient centered care. If you get a patient with elevated hCG, it suggests dramatically different medical conditions.

So what is it, purposeful culturally sensitive patient centered care, or implicit (ie unconsious) bias?

My position is that health care providers should provide proper patient centered care, and when they do, it isn't necessarily due to implicit bias. In light of the fact that they get equivalent outcomes, according to your study, I'd say it is most likely the former.

I'm not going to comment on anecdotal stories, there are lots of them, from every perspective. They don't prove systematic problems. If you had aggregate data showing a problem, we could discuss. But that data doesn't seem to exist.

Finally if there was such pervasive, and systematic racism and implicit bias, why can't you seem to find much evidence of it?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

My historical view of American media .,...

The United States began in smallpox-infected blankets and mountains of Native American scalps-for-bounty, and remains true to its genocidal imperatives. People are living in concentration camps that are euphemistically referred to as Indian reservations.

Books have even been written about how crack cocaine was introduced into the black community through the CIA. More than a million Africans are now lumped up in prison?

At the same time that Hitler was killing off the prominent capitalists and their friends in Germany, the U.S. capitalists were practicing eugenics (Human Betterment Foundation), enforcing Jim Crow Laws, using Zyklon-B for executions, sterilizations by force, experimentation within mental homes and using humans as medical guinea pigs, and were continuing the holocaust against the North American Indians,

And, let us not forget what happened after World War II and the holocaust ....

Following the Hitler Trip and the horrible experiences of the Jews, many left Europe and invested heavily into media and Hollywood.

Many, many, of the same Jewish Folks who fled Europe during Hitler's rampage arrived in Hollywood and New York, and set up film studios. Hollywood financed, produced and distributed 90 percent of U.S. media in the early television days. (The ADL would prefer people say that many executives in the industry "happen to be Jewish" at the time.)








ADL Spies


The Strange History of the Anti-Defamation League




www.counterpunch.org





It was some of these people who "Fabricated" American history on film. Some of the same people who had just experienced and fled from the discrimination, stereotyping and racism by Hitler, only to commit the identical crime in America .... and making films about black and native indians in North America.

The American media stereotyped the blacks and First Nations People just like Joseph Goebbels had done to the Jewish Folks in Hitler's Germany.

Hollywood committed huge harm to Aboriginals and Blacks.

They were said to be inhuman and a bunch of savages.

During the 1940's onward, it was Hollywood which fed us images of the First Nations People as being untrustworthy savages and who spoke with a forked-tongue.

It was Hollywood who financed and produced the propaganda about African Americans being inhuman and a criminal element. The stereotyping of minority groups has me with my heart beating quicker when a large black man is walking behind me.

Have you ever seen a "scheming Jew" in a Hollywood movie?

".... there's a whole army of actors like Joe Pesce, that serve the niche of playing Italian Mafiosi. But no actors playing the scheming Jew because that is not a Hollywood Role. ..... The role of the scheming, subversive, money-loving Jew is just not allowed ...."

".... As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you'd be flipping between "The 700 Club" and "Davey and Goliath" on TV all day...."








Who runs Hollywood? C'mon


I have never been so upset by a poll in my life.




www.latimes.com





There has been enough myth, duplicity, and shame for everyone.

While our media in North America were screaming about how bad things were in Europe during the war years, this is what was happening in the background .........

In 1948, with Hitler dead less then 2 years, .... At the very heart of the newly formed country of Israel, .... at the highest levels of government, .... within the Israeli cabinet, the Jewish folks were actually talking about committing a holocaust against the Arabs and which is the exact same crimes as Hitler was being chastised for.

“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.”
–-David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978--
--Israel Koenig, advisor to the Israeli Knesset, The Koenig Memorandum (Al Hamishmar newspaper, September 7, 1976)--

"The compulsory transfer of Arabs from the proposed Jewish State could give us something we never had ... Any doubt on our part about the necessity of the transfer ... may lose us an historic opportunity."
--David Ben-Gurion, 1937--

In 1934, according to published statistics, nearly half of those holding the most senior posts in Stalin's government and the Soviet security apparatuses and to carry out the holocaust against Ukraine were of Jewish origin.
Lazar Kaganovitch, the Soviet Eichmann ....








Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org












Yakov Sverdlov - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org






http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3342999,00.html


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I did not make that claim that this was generally applicable across age groups.
> The study literally says that it is only applicable to that age group.
> This is the second time you're asserting the exact same claim neither I, nor the study made.
> 
> ...


Here's the thing. The point in the original piece that I linked talked about negative interactions. In other words, offering WORSE care. How is that better?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Here's the thing. The point in the original piece that I linked talked about negative interactions. In other words, offering WORSE care. How is that better?


I never said it was "better".
The studies aren't clear that there is a significant difference in outcome.

I'm also not clear how they determined it was implicit bias, they touch on a number of behavioral differences between populations, but never explain how they addressed this, and how accounting for differences in the populations is necessarily implicit bias as opposed to simply patient centric care.

Remember I linked to a data that corrected for a wide number of factors, but still found different behaviours.
Maybe different people behave differently?

Maybe the problem isn't racism, maybe we just need to do better treating people fairly irrespective of any number of characteristics?


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I never said it was "better".
> The studies aren't clear that there is a significant difference in outcome.
> 
> I'm also not clear how they determined it was implicit bias, they touch on a number of behavioral differences between populations, but never explain how they addressed this, and how accounting for differences in the populations is necessarily implicit bias as opposed to simply patient centric care.
> ...


Here's the thing, everyone has some sort of bias. It's built upon personal experience, and is inherent to human nature, and animals for that matter. Basically, from an evolutionary perspective, people will generate heuristics to quickly react to a situation: fight or flight. These days the stakes usually aren't life or death, but for police officers it can be.

For example, you mention the study about difference of adherence to medical treatment. If the health care provider thinks that the person isn't going to adhere to the treatment plan, perhaps they figure they're not going to waste their time so they are curt and don't spend the appropriate time to ensure they understand why it's important.

Likewise, when you are driving, and someone in a fancy sports car cuts you off, are you going to assume that the driver is a jerk, or are you going to assume that they have an emergency and need to get to the hospital?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> Here's the thing, everyone has some sort of bias. It's built upon personal experience, and is inherent to human nature, and animals for that matter. Basically, from an evolutionary perspective, people will generate heuristics to quickly react to a situation: fight or flight. These days the stakes usually aren't life or death, but for police officers it can be.
> 
> For example, you mention the study about difference of adherence to medical treatment. If the health care provider thinks that the person isn't going to adhere to the treatment plan, perhaps they figure they're not going to waste their time so they are curt and don't spend the appropriate time to ensure they understand why it's important.
> 
> Likewise, when you are driving, and someone in a fancy sports car cuts you off, are you going to assume that the driver is a jerk, or are you going to assume that they have an emergency and need to get to the hospital?


If this was a statistically significant problem, you'd expect the data to show it.
Note I'm not saying there are not problems at the individual level, which there are, but to claim a systematic problem, you need to provide data.

Actually if a patient self reports to the doctor that they are unlikely to follow the treatment plan, I expect the doctor to adjust their interaction accordingly.

If someone cuts me off in a fancy sports car, luxury SUV, beater, or Minivan I assume they're an ***hole, because they are driving like one.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

Patient man bgc_fan. One can only have so many questions and answers deflected or taken out of context. 

I don't always agree with The Patriot Act, but this is an interesting dig into current state of "the press" and more broadly our broken economic system.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

The media likes to talk about criminal laws and investigations and legalities.
A nation of laws.

The American System is really a corporation and corporations are ruled by Regulations and not so much criminal law.

The media tells us that criminal law is what is making the protesters angry.

Not inequality.

You can "Reform" criminal law but yuh can't "Reform" inequality.

The press needs to talk about "Regulations" and how the Ruling Class manages to accumulate such massive wealth while manipulating the "Regulations".

That is the Reform which is needed.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Why is it that some of America's greatest intellectuals and thinkers are not allowed or never seen in TV-Land?

They have been banished from the air waves in North America and treated like lepers.

We keep getting the same ol' propaganda in the Land of the Puppet People.

Chris Hedges








Chris Hedges - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Michael Hudson








Michael Hudson (economist) - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





Noam Chomsky








 Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Tweet:
By Matthew Keys
One of our local newspapers here in Solano County literally re-writes police press releases, and then assigns the "article" a reporter's byline.
June 08, 2020

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270240374187933696


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

It looks to me that the military is doing it's best to appear friendly and honourable.
They are all over TV-Land trying to look like they really don't want to take over the city streets.

Never mind that they are getting the citizenry to accept Martial Law ater the upcoming election.

Shake the Money Tree for another 20 Trillion dollars to carry the U.S. Capitalist System for the next 6 months minimum ......... Or let the empire collapse.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

They say that Black People and Latino's are the poorest in the country.
And I then have to admit that many-many Blacks and Latino's are poor.
When I see blacks and Latino's protesting, I see "Poor People" who happen to be Black or Latino.
The press keeps talking "Black": or "Latino" the term or description being "Race".
Why can't they just say "Poor People"?

The Ruling Class do not want to talk Class Warfare.
It is easier to have a conversation about racism then it is to talk about wealth inequality.
The media will never call this protest a "Poor Protest".
Only Communist Social governments have Poor People.
Media describes the protest as black and latino and young people ....... Not Poor People.
They are wanting to have voter attention dealing with racism and not Wall Street Gangsters and other Economic Terrorists.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> The press keeps talking "Black": or "Latino" the term or description being "Race".
> Why can't they just say "Poor People"?


Because making it about race pushes their agenda.
We know the solution to poverty, have for decades, but the poverty industry, and rulers benefit, so they push poverty traps.

Read
WEALTH, POVERTY AND POLITICS by Thomas Sowell.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It is not all about race, though race is a factor. I think more importantly, policing in the US is broken with bad training, legal impunity, civil asset forfeiture, etc. And the US is very unequal with a degree of intergenerational poverty. It is not the land of opportunity--it has less equality of opportunity than historically class-bound countries like the UK.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Yuh know ..... Over the years I have viewed many news clips showing crowds stuffing themselves into a subway car.

Honestly; if some person reading this can link me to video content of a rush hour in Toronto as an example, I could like a link.

Is it just me? I was thinking that I have not seen recent film with people riding the subway at what used to be Rush Hour.

Seems the media does not want to "Practically" talk about what Rush Hour is going to look like.

The media spends all day ranting about what we are allowed to do. (Sort of like telling us how long are we allowed out for recess?)

I think they need to tell us what the media know to be our future.

Distancing guidlines of just 12 inches causes huge problems with Subway capacity. Giving every passenger a 12 inch envelope of safety will mean huge delays in subway services.

I think that if city people viewed a news clip of people needing to stand at least 12 inches (Not six feet but rather just one foot distancing) is going to really shock the viewers.

Economic costs are immense. Unimaginable.

All the Money People must know or recognize these facts.

As an investor, I would not be spending a dime for action being associated with the downtown core of any city with more than 2 million population.

I just can't imagine how any country on the face of this universe walks away from this virus event. The very heart of every country, the largess of a country are it's cities.

I think that Billy Gates and Buffet and The Clowns are begging the Pension Funds to buy the stock and are cashing out. And the Federal Reserve is backing the play and backing every transaction.

This problem might well be easily solved if a half million young people were hired for a Test / Trace.

Hire a private person like Mayor Bloomberg and have him in charge of all the data.

Nobdoy can legally demand to see the data because it is private information and Milke Bloomberg holds the patent on the information.

If you control the data, you control The Success.

Maybe then I might go downtown and be normal again.

And, God Bless


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> Yuh know ..... Over the years I have viewed many news clips showing crowds stuffing themselves into a subway car.
> 
> As an investor, I would not be spending a dime for action being associated with the downtown core of any city with more than 2 million population.


You realize the ruling class is trying to take our cars away and stuff us into cities, totally dependant on government for every aspect of our survivial?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> You realize the ruling class is trying to take our cars away and stuff us into cities, totally dependant on government for every aspect of our survivial?


I am not into stuff like the government is trying to take our cars away.

I am angry that the Ruling Class is using climate change to make me feel guilty enough to fit me into a sardine can on the 401.

The Rich Folks should need to shut down the electric heating components of the swimming pools before I need to crawl into a sardine can on the Gardner Expressway.

Rich Folks tourist destinations should be much-much taxed because a single flight of a 747 would create 100 thousand years worth of my car CO2 Emmissions.

I think that the Rich Folks are the people who should wear the most shame and pay huge taxes when reviewing individual carbon footprints.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Yes, urbanization is a conspiracy, and not a consequence of greater productivity of being close to other firms, customers, etc.

It's amazing that this conspiracy has covered every country on earth and for thousands of years of human history.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I do not think there is a conspriacy to get people into cities.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Yes, urbanization is a conspiracy, and not a consequence of greater productivity of being close to other firms, customers, etc.
> 
> It's amazing that this conspiracy has covered every country on earth and for thousands of years of human history.


I'm not saying there is a city conspiracy.
I'm saying that left wing governments see an opportunity to make people totally dependant on them for the necessities of life. Then they think they'll have those votes locked up.

Get enough people into public housing, nobody will ever vote to slash it.
As it is, there is no interest into simply fixing the rental laws.
Tax away peoples cars, everyone will vote for public transit.

If people think they need big government, they'll continue to vote for it.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I think that if there is a conspiracy of sorts in an attempt to force people to live in cities it would be with the distribution of welfare as an example.

The Rich Folks refuse to pay extra taxes and invest into social services in the surrounding communities.

The Rich Folks do not want Poor Folks living in their community.

Those Rich Folks living in all the small communities around Toronto refuse to give assistance to people and thus force the Poor People to move to Toronto and where Welfare is purposely available.

In 1998, at 50 years of age and single, I applied for welfare assistance. The Province issued me a cheque for 535 bucks.

In Toronto, a single room in a rooming house was $420.00, leaving only 115 bucks to buy food with. Poor people had no choice but move to the city.

In all the surrounding villages and communities surrounding Toronto, the Rich Folks have refused to pay an increase in property taxes in order to build housing for Poor People and thus Poor People rushed into Toronto.

Today, In *Ontario*, a *single person* on *welfare* receives $656 monthly.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

calm said:


> In 1998, at 50 years of age and single, I applied for welfare assistance. The Province issued me a cheque for 535 bucks.
> 
> In Toronto, a single room in a rooming house was $420.00, leaving only 115 bucks to buy food with. Poor people had no choice but move to the city.


Didn't you also have the choice to get a job?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Yep! I got a job. But it took a while.
It was almost a full time job trying to survive on welfare,


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I'm not saying there is a city conspiracy.
> I'm saying that left wing governments see an opportunity to make people totally dependant on them for the necessities of life. Then they think they'll have those votes locked up.
> 
> Get enough people into public housing, nobody will ever vote to slash it.
> ...


Whether they want it or not, urbanization is going to continue. Only way to fight it is to promote suburbanization (still basically cities) by turning the inner city into a ghetto. The places in the US that tried this fell far behind economically.

Maybe better internet service through low-orbit satellites will make rural living more practical. The overall trend will continue to be toward urbanization, at least as long as people want more money.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> In 1998, at 50 years of age and single, I applied for welfare assistance. The Province issued me a cheque for 535 bucks.
> 
> In Toronto, a single room in a rooming house was $420.00, leaving only 115 bucks to buy food with. Poor people had no choice but move to the city.
> 
> Today, In *Ontario*, a *single person* on *welfare* receives $656 monthly.


Don't live in Toronto.


calm said:


> Yep! I got a job. But it took a while.
> It was almost a full time job trying to survive on welfare,


Yeah, looking for a job IS a full time job.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

What is the most important issue happening in the universe today?

I don't think that the largest problem we have is Racism.

The biggest problem our society has is Covid-19 and the collapse of every city with a population of 2 million or more.

40 million unemployed in North America.

It is the media which decides what is newsworthy.

I am beginning to think that the media intends to make racism the largest threat to our society so they don't need to give us the bad news all day and every day about this virus.

The Media does not want to discuss the options we have. They just want to discuss "are we open or closed".

Who cares if we are open or closed? Because everybody is too afraid to travel crowded subways anyway.

Open it all up but nobody is going to show up.

50 percent of city economic activity has disappeared for at least a year.

Should we not be discussing this circumstance in TV-Land and kind of learn how we are going to handle such brutal news?

I honestly think that this economic collapse on the horizon is going to be hugely painful and hugely alter our lifestyles.

Should we not already be planning many more food banks and stuff like that?
How can we prepare for huge amount of homelessness?

How are we going to survive such a huge retraction in our economy for the next year at least?
(Best case is a vaccination in 6 months and then to prick every arm is another 6 months.)

Racism is not our largest problem. Racism is not our most pressing problem. Racism is not our most immediate problem facing our society.

I think that the costs to keep America in "Pretense Zone" is about 2 trillion per month minimum. That is 25 Trillion dollars for next year waiting for a vaccine. In the next year America is going to borrow the same amount of money that it took 40 years to accumulate, or the total federal debt since 1980. (40 years of accumulated debt now being printed again inside of a year.)

I think the virus is more important for TV-Land to discuss and more consequential to our society.

I think Congress is gonna show up and talk Racism and the media will have us all shed tears of sorry-sorry and then all of them will run off and hide til the fall. The Rich Folks will spend all summer building higher fences in the gated community.

The Ruling Class want to simply ignore the totally dire situation we are really in because of this virus.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, looking for a job IS a full time job.


Absolutely true. I've kept stats on my past job hunting since the first time I sent a job application.

As of today, I have applied to 199 jobs. This resulted in 5 or 7 job offers, depending on how you count it. Only 3% of my job applications resulted in an offer.

At times I was searching, this was a lot of work. I met a few people over the years who sent out a dozen applications and were disappointed they didn't hear anything. It seems to me you have to send about 50 to 100 before expecting to see anything come of it.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

What I remember most about my unemployment days is the lineups I had to stand in for hours just to get some free food at food banks. Also standing in line for street car fare at the Salavation Army just to look for a job.
Like I said, it was a full time job just to survive. I spent hours and hours just standing in lines.
I remember a food bank giving me a small plastic pouch with about 15 chocolate candies. I was ever so grateful. (They were the best.)
Most food banks got Kraft Dinner and Chick Peas.
I ate tons of tuna and macaroni. I used a large tinfoil container used to bake a turkey to mix my tuna/macaroni in.
The very worst thing in a rooming house with a shared kitchen is that terrorists steal what you got in the fridge.
There was an alcoholic terrorist yelling and screaming half the day.

--------------------
Standing in line for 8 hours or more in Kentucky just to talk to some human being about the unemployment benefits not arriving yet .








Hundreds line up in Kentucky to ask for help with unemployment claims


On Wednesday, hundreds of people lined up on Kentucky state capitol grounds, hoping to get unemployment help, many frustrated after going months without any benefits or updates on their claims. On Thursday morning the Labor Department is expected to report that another 1.3 million Americans...




www.today.com


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

By this time next week, the media will have a huge emotional "Thank You" and there will be another need to choose the next newsworthy event.

Those media personalities that carried the Racism Event can head off for vacation too.

The media will need to find a military threat worthy of chattering on about.

This newsworthy event will need a completely new set of experts and military commentators.
The military will be occupying endless hours of chatter in TV-Land while awaiting for the eventual declaration of Martial Law just after the new president is sworn in.

The Establishment media does not want to talk about the virus and the huge economic damage it is heaping upon North America. It is all bad and depressing news.

I believe that America will bring a majority of the troops home from Europe. These troops will be available to patrol American cities.

Perhaps, just prior the collapse of empire, America bombs Iran and Syria into the Stone Age, Israel can then take it's place as the NATO of the Middle East and America itself can pivot completely towards China.

After the collapse of empire, Possession is 9/10ths of the law. Where your chess pieces are is what you now own and need to defend.

Israel will own Palestine and the Golan Heights in Syria.
America will exercise it's right to travel the Northwest Passage unhindered.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I just heard the Canadian Minister of Finance say that things are very uncertain.
He said we don't want to project the future and that is why we don't have forecasts.

I read an article to day where it mentioned Public Transit in Los Angeles is down by 70%.
Needing billions in a bailout.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

10 Words And Phrases People Say Incorrectly


https://i.redd.it/icitu2hmaz551.jpg


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> I just heard the Canadian Minister of Finance say that things are very uncertain.
> He said we don't want to project the future and that is why we don't have forecasts.
> 
> I read an article to day where it mentioned Public Transit in Los Angeles is down by 70%.
> Needing billions in a bailout.


You're listening to the advice of someone who "forgot" they had a French Villa?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

At least 60 percent of the American Voters are quite convinced that there is a severe problem of "Inequality" within society.

The media does not really spend much time talking about "Inequality".
It is a huge "Issue" for 60 percent of the population,

The media is doing whatever it can to ignore "Inequality".

Half the country is protesting some form of "Inequality" but the media is talking about "Personalities" and police reform.

The media has made "Mask Wearing" an issue.
They cover this "Issue" 24-7.
The pro's and the con's. A Zillion viewpoints heard.

But I think that "Inequality" is injuring and harming more people than those who don't wear a mask. There are 30-40 million people on food stamps.

Inequality is an issue.

Nobody wants to talk or even think about tinkering with the Capitalist System and make a plan, a policy on how to root out "Inequality" or to "Lessen" the amount of people reliant on food stamps. (Economic Terrorists keep telling us that wealth will trickle down, and no need for a plan.)

Media has decided that Inequality is not an issue ...... Masks are.

Law and Order is an issue but not "Inequality".

And yet 60 percent of the population is wanting to discuss "Inequality.

Inequality has been put on "Ignore".

Who is "Managing" (who is paying) and who is Producing this Trump Reality Show?

The Trump Campaign is collecting a zillion dollars this past month alone because somebody thinks that Trump is the Cat's Meow!

Who is bankrolling this supposed idiot?
What U.S. crew of U.S. Capitalists are responsible for this political charade?

These Economic Terrorists are encouraging, supporting, and paying Trump to continue on this path.

If not for the Economic Terrorists, the campaign would be financially bankrupt.

But the Clown is collecting countless millions.
Many, many U.S. Capitalists (Property Owners) are bowing towards Trump, ...... and genuflecting on bended knee .... just begging to donate more money to the Trump campaign,

Who are these U.S. Capitalists who worship the ground Trump walks on?

The Economic Terrorists are complaining about Mail-In Ballots in case there is fraud ...... and at the same time these Terrorists are allowed to make a a campaign contribution anonymously.

We need to boycott these Domestic Terrorists and treat them all as parasites.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Calm down! You are starting to sound like a socialist The US has the best government that money can buy! Sad isn't it?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

kcowan said:


> Calm down! You are starting to sound like a socialist The US has the best government that money can buy! Sad isn't it?


Yeh! 
A raging battle between the Economic Terrorist and the Radical-Left Terrorist.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

A very long (9,000 Words) commentary dealing with the topic of propaganda.

The Anger Campaign Against China
By Larry Romanoff
August 06, 2020








The Anger Campaign Against China


Introduction It shouldn't be a secret, though it still seems to be, that neither of the two World Wars were started (or desired) by Germany, but were the creation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany. However, that thesis is not the...



www.unz.com


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

An article about the Advertising Industry

It is all about "Images". We remember what we see and not what we hear.

Oatly: The New Coke
Fool me once, shame on you...
By Nat Eliason
August 07, 2020








Oatly: The New Coke


Fool me once, shame on you...



divinations.substack.com


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Absolutely true. I've kept stats on my past job hunting since the first time I sent a job application.
> 
> As of today, I have applied to 199 jobs. This resulted in 5 or 7 job offers, depending on how you count it. Only 3% of my job applications resulted in an offer.
> 
> At times I was searching, this was a lot of work. I met a few people over the years who sent out a dozen applications and were disappointed they didn't hear anything. It seems to me you have to send about 50 to 100 before expecting to see anything come of it.


I changed jobs in 1 of 2 ways. One, I got head hunted away from a company. Two, I quit a job and then went to a recruitment agent who got me an interview. I don't think I ever interviewed for more than 3 companies at any one time and always got a job offer.

To apply to 199 companies is just a scattergun approach as far as I am concerned. I can't imagine there being 199 jobs that I would even WANT to apply for at a given time. I never applied directly to a company for a job, always went through an agent. I don't think I ever 'filled out' a 'job application' in my life.

It seems to me that anyone who sends out 50 to 100 applications needs to re-think how they go about finding a job. Any company that simply asks for resumes to be sent or an application to be filled out, probably expects to get 50-100 of them to look at. Trying to differentiate yourself and stand out in that kind of approach will be extremely hard to do. So if it were me looking for a job, I would simply refuse to play that game. Change the rules.









Top 7 Reasons Not to Apply for a Job


How to decide whether to apply for a job, including reasons not to apply, when to put in an application, and how to make the case for getting selected.




www.thebalancecareers.com





The best way in my opinion to get a job is through a 'connection'. Whether that is a good recruitment agent that will get you an interview or some other kind of connection like a Linkedin connection who will put your name forward to someone, doesn't matter. What matters is a person to person referral.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

The American media is encouraging top U.S. government officials to leak what is happening and perhaps just quit their job. It is said it is a patriotic thing to do.

And on this very day the American government is prosecuting Julian Assange for leaking.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

The idea of applying for jobs almost seems obsolete to me... too few good jobs and too much competition. Next time I plan to just walk in and offer my services for free. If after a week they like my work, and I like working there, then they can hire me. Connections are another valid way to get a job. Sending in resumes and doing interviews where you're competing with 100 other people seem like a waste of time.


----------

