That's great - I have met nice Hispanic people too.

I lived in Central California until age 18 and in Southern California in for about 3 years in my early twenties. I don't share the same experience as you.
That is not the point however.
You don't simply walk through life and reward whatever demographic is personally nice to you.

Here is a brief list of what is undermining Southern California:

Mara Salvatrucha
204th Street
La Mirada Locos
Grape Street
Rollin' 30s
Black P-Stones

I'm sure its just a correlation.



I never used to the word pure, so please don't put it in quotes and put words in my mouth. I am simply speaking to the fact that multiculturalism is an ugly thing and it is taking over most societies.



Regarding point one - once again I am simply referring to the general dissolution of culture and the tyranny of the majority.
I really don't appreciate you mischaracterizing things that I alude to, when you don't even take the time to ask for a clarification.
I made a broad statement about foreigners - the context in which was actually military intervention in other people's countries, from Serbia to South America. Foreign dictation of what is accepted by post-Allied powers / NATO.

I'm not going to entertain your allusion that someone is trying to actively dissolute anyone's culture, it is totally off-topic.

Point two has nothing to do with anything.
I clearly made an indication toward foreigners who come to different countries, with no respect or love for that country.
The last thing I need to do is to tell you how my parents never imposed their heritage on anyone, never refused to learn the language, never mock the traditions of the dominant nationals.

You're reaching at hypocrisy - you either don't understand the context of what I am saying, or think that I don't realize how America, Canada and Australia were built by productive immigrants who worked within the confines of laws and didn't operate criminal enterprises.

__________________

You spend the entire first paragraph telling me I am overly presumptious because I said you "probably" don't care about heritage and that deserves an act of violence.

Then you tell me that I was actually right in my guess and you don't respect it much.

I respect beauty and skill universally as well, but I don't revolve my thinking around my "comfort" level of living. That is a typical consumerist mentality.

I don't know what you are implying with a strip of yellow and blue.

__________________

You throw out names of all colored gangs. I'm not from Southern California but those same gangs exist in all colors in this country. Hells Angles, Warlocks, Aryan Brother Hood, are all examples of said gangs who will extirpate anything in the way to make a dollar. In federal prisons the Aryan Brother Hood makes up 1% of the population but account for over 21% of murders inside said prison.

So maybe in Southern California you see a problem with said ethnic groups, but do realize it's not about color but of an individuals mentality that makes them.

__________________

Proaz - that's certainly a valid point --

We could go into this whole discourse about what creates criminal mentality and what types of societies promote it more than others, and if you press me enough I could share my ideas on what causes gang activity in places like LA more than Toronto -- I really dont' want to be inconsiderate and turn this thread totally upside down.

It's worth saying too that I don't have any issue with anyone just because of where they are from - as someone stated, we don't actually get much choice in the matter.

Just recall that my involvement in this whole thread really revolved around the military - and specifically NATO who I basically equate with the US Military - and yes not least of all my anger comes from what happened in South Ossetia in 08/08/08.

__________________

I'm sure you meant "coincidence", but we'll just let that slide. If it makes you feel safer, though, just clutch your purse real close to your chest and cross the street any time you see an approaching Nig Nog or spic on the sidewalk. You should be okay, sweetie.

All joking aside, I know what you mean. These people are needlessly picking on you for telling the GODDAMN TRUTH and you are forced to peruse pretentious condescension and sarcasm (correlation? lawlz!) to force these meanies to become aware of the real threats (blacks, hispanics, and Israel - amirite?). Yes, you're right; a handful of randomly picked black and hispanic street gangs are destroying Southern Cali, if not the WORLD.

I'm not sure how this amazing country ever survived the preponderance of Irish, Italian, Jewish, and German immigrant and 2nd gen street gangs and crime families that owned every major city in this country from the 1890s until the 1950s or so. I'm pretty sure you don't recoil in terror at the sight of a German/Irish kid walking down the street, though, nor would you consider his existence the bane of this country.

Other than Native Americans, blacks and Hispanics are the most disenfranchised groups in this nation. There are tons of reasons why that I'm sure you don't really want to get into, but there are fewer job opportunities, poorer education standards, etc. that leave a higher percentage of these people trapped in a vicious circle of crime and poverty that doesn't ever end. Some get lucky, most don't. The same used to be true for white immigrants; the first wave and 2nd generations were typically discriminated against and disenfranchised. Eventually, America let them up the ladder. Soon as that happens for everyone else, crime alleviates. Simple as that.

How big of a problem are immigrants for Northern European countries where the standard of living for immigrants is relatively high? It's a pretty simple formula that you should have learned in high school or, the very least, an entry level sociology class at any college.

One more thing before I go; your misguided, Travis Bicklesque hate for the lowest classes of people is either grossly ignorant or intellectually disingenuous. Any bit of decent research would have led you to the fact that the true bane of this country, worse than our oft-ineffective government, worse than the steadily rising rate of street crime, is white collar, corporate crime. White-collar crime (beyond it's important role in enforcing poverty and disenfranchisement, thereby keeping the street crime rate up, forcing people to lose their trust in our entire governmental and economic structure, and disrupting societal balance as a whole) is responsible for up to 10 times more fiscal damage than street crime annually.

So, maybe it's just more intellectually honest to analyze complex social problems from the perspective of a complex society with complex issues that need to be fixed instead of just whining, helplessly and ineffectively (but much to everyone else's annoyance), "blacks and immigrants are ruining my country... WAAAAAHHHHH!"

__________________

FWIW, two of the neighborhoods I grew up with were dominated by white street gangs. Not like old fashioned German/Irish gangs or biker gangs, but just picture a bunch of Gangster Disciples and remove the pigment from their skin. Talked the same, walked the same, sold the same drugs, carried the same drugs... it certainly was a unique chance to see how poverty affects every one caught up in it equally. Most people don't really get a chance to grow up in a predominantly white, inner city, impoverished neighborhood and can't really picture what I saw on a daily basis.

Certainly some people near Chicago, can; there aren't many left, but there are a few white street gangs left on the outskirts of the city. Neighborhoods that face the same social issues WILL deal with the same social problems regardless of whether it's a black, white, Hispanic, Asian, or any other type of (broad and arbitrarily construed) ethnic group dominated neighborhood.

__________________

Well said, Chris, though I should point out that we do have some fairly serious issues with immigration in Sweden. It's very much a self made problem and me beloved Alliance government is slowly turning this juggernaught around, but yea. We've fucked up pretty bad on that score. Although, of course, in large parts in the pretty typical Swedish way of doing everything just a little bit nicer and milder than just about everywhere else.



Oh dearie me. No, you picked out, among other things, me and Paddy doing another loop of an old running joke and thought we were calling you a white supremacist. I just let you know you could chill out on that score.
And what's the matter, can't read your own posts? You said explicitly that I hadn't come across the problems of immigration first hand, that I was somehow removed from the very real problems of disenfranchised minorities. IF, as I said, you could be expected to have any kind of knowledge in the matter, that would have been a gross insult. If you'd taken the time to step outside your own head, you might have realized on your own that this is a hypothetical scenario depicting the pointlessness of fantasizing about a stranger's background.
The funny thing is that you keep on fantasizing way out into whatever-the-fuck-land. Typical consumerist mentality. Did it for one second strike you as a good idea to perhaps consider that your first interpretation of that was wrong? That comfortable way of living might in fact entail such thing as democracy, freedom of speech, respect for science and learning?
Oh, and I'm not very surprised that you did not understand the part about yellow and blue. But here's a bit of a clue. There are more nations than the US in the world and they don't all have red, white and blue on their flags.

__________________

Quotation marks are used for things that are actually said. I never said any of the things you are quoting and you're basically taking everything I said out of context to shift the topic further.

I'll remind you for the third time that I mentioned "foreigner" in the context of an actual military invasion. Americans simply do not understand this concept for some reason - other people's army in your country, shooting at people, saying sorry when they kill kids and then saying they'll help you build it back up.

Now you want to focus on California - the reason I even mentioned gangs, is because they are the epitome of the terror that actually grips parts of this state. If it makes you feel better to racially neutralize it and say that Irish and Italian gangs in the 19th century were just as bad and cowboys were just as bad - fine. Recall that Irish and Italians were on the end of a lot of discrimination.

Don't even talk about Germans.
It was illegal to speak German in many states during World War One.
German flags were blacked out of history books. Look it up.

I'm not really interested in exploring who has been more discriminated against - people aren't that stupid. It is really easy to see demographic patterns mixed with crime statistics. This is why Gypsies are disliked in Bulgaria. That is one simple example and they have their counterpart in many different nations.

You simply cannot ignore patterns of behaivor. Neither can you make broad-based presumptions like "all ______ are criminals" or "all _________ are naturally pre-disposed to criminal behavior."
I did niether of these things.

I'm completely disagree with you regarding what you call disenfranchisement. If any thing I think the scales are completely tipped against Whites today. There is so much affirmative action that is not disclosed openly its not funny.
The race card is constantly used and constantly rewarded with more chips.

Just because I hate United States foreign policy doesn't mean I hate this nation.
This entire nation was built on hard work.
This is the kind of nation that you can go from zero to millionaire back to zero and back - you simply can't do that in the majority of the world, and believe me, it matters less your race here than anywhere.
"Trapped in poverty" are people in Africa, China, developed parts of the world were social mobility is ACTUALLY restricted.

There is no reason why any teenager here can't make the median salary no matter what their color - contingent on the fact that work hard and don't commit crime. Just like everyone else.

For someone who is going to tell me that I am not analyzing things in depth enough, you really shouldn't just throw out "white-collar coporate crime."
What exactly are you referring to? Enron's power trading energy manipulation that caused Gray Davis' recall? Granted.
Firms like Bectel cutting off water supplies in South America? Granted.

What that has to do with this topic I do not understand.

Lastly, measuring crime to fiscal impact is profane. You can build back wealth, you cannot bring back a child from the grave.

And what the fuck is your deal with correlation - that is used completely deliberately, as in "correlation versus causation."

__________________

Look at - don't get so god damn cute.

I didn't know you were Swedish and referring to your own flag.
My signature is in Ukranian and I was wondering if you were making some kind of indirect reference to Ukraine's also yellow and blue flag - thanks for the clarification.

I never used the words "disenfranchised" and "minority" in any context. Maybe I'm not the one who has an issue reading posts.

You seem to have issues with thinking in the abstract by giving me shit about "whatever the fuck land" --- I simply made a broad statement about cultural dissolution that applies to any nation.

I'm just trying to be clear and respectful to share ideas - I'd appreciate the same.

__________________

Please share why this angers you.

__________________

I'm can't spend a lot of time on this right now unfortunately---

Firstly, part of my descent is Ossetian which personalizes this issue.

But basically, South Ossetia should be a completely independent nation. It is recognized by Russia as such and should not be a part of Georgia.
Saakashvili basically attacked South Ossetian civilians with 100% full NATO backing, targeting mostly civilians.

I wish I had more time to get into this with you right now - there are volumes on this out there and I think you'd understand where the anger would come from.

This is an excellent piece for the unacquanited : http://war080808.com/

__________________

Racially neutralizing things to be politically correct (as you seem to imply here) is a lot different than acknowledging that countless other ethnic groups have undergone the same social issues (stricken with poverty, disenfranchisement) and social problems (crime) when you, for some bizarre reason, decry black and Hispanic street gangs as the root of all Southern California's evil. It's fairly obvious there's some motivation for you to choose those groups and those groups only to call out and it really isn't fooling anyone so you can just come out with it. I'm simply showing you why you're wrong; we (this country) have been there before and we've done that before with just about every ethnic group to immigrate to this country. It's cyclical and it's far more centered on poverty than anything else you might believe or would care to suggest.


Oh, you mean around the same time black people weren't allowed to vote and were publically tortured for crimes they were known to have not committed? Cool. Of course, there's a reason I didn't bring that up in my original point; it has absolutely no bearing on the issues we're discussing. Which leads me to ask... why exactly did you bring this up?

No, clearly you aren't. You are simply interested in pointing the finger at supposedly problematic ethnic groups without educating yourself as to the real issues at hand. As a result, you will never, ever be part of any sort of social progress. You will simply be Travis Bickle with a hint of Archie Bunker. Congratulations.

No, you didn't explicitly state "all _____ are _____". You did, however, imply that black and Hispanic street thugs are single-handedly responsible for the fall of SoCal. While there is a significant difference between the two, they both imply that you think a certain way about certain groups of people and automatically connect those groups of people with everything you don't like about the world around you.

This is such an obvious ill-informed and kneejerk reaction to an imaginary issue that I'm not even sure how to respond to it. I mean, Jesus Christ, if you feel THIS strongly about a subject, why not do some homework? You'd quickly find out how overstated and ill-informed your opinions are relatively quickly. Where are these hundreds of millions of poor white men that just can't find jobs because STUPID affirmative action gave it away to some unqualified or underqualified black man? Where are all these rich, black CEOs and COOs, rolling around in a pile of gold coins while laughing all the while, "thank you, Executive Order 10925! Muahahahahaha!" Do you even know why affirmative action exists in the first place? You don't seem to know your US history very well.


True. In fact, in the early history of this nation, an enormous portion of our economy was built on the free labor provided by one of the most disenfranchised groups currently in our nation. In fact, we wouldn't have risen as a world power without it.


Your opinions sound very much like a typical high-school age conspiracy theorist. Have you ever taken an actual college course? Again, any entry level sociology class (or just spending time in a shitty, inner-city neighborhood) would reveal a truth to you that you clearly haven't experienced yet.

Kids are trapped in poverty. You're right that in this country you always have a chance to get out, but that chance grows smaller and smaller the deeper and deeper in poverty you travel. The most upwardly mobile people are those who are already well off. A very, very small percentage of the people living in the ghettoes of Gary, Indiana, for example, will ever get out. The rest will die there; many will die young, most impoverished and disenfranchised.


Sure there is. The answer is education. That's one of the most common factors in poverty. These kids remain undereducated and have a slim-to-none chance of ever escaping the situation in which they are stuck.

There are a number of factors driving this. First of all, in an area permeated by constant violence, crime, and poverty, survival itself becomes the priority. This isn't something the average American has to deal with, but anyone who has ever had to live in an inner city ghetto knows. It's difficult to concentrate on doing your math homework when you have to duck bullets flying through your own living room. It's difficult to focus on your reading assignments when you don't really know when your next meal is coming. It isn't easy to stay after school for help when the local thugs who have already fallen into a life of crime basically force you to join them. These are actual problems for a lot of kids.

In addition to all this, the schools themselves are fucking shit. Pure shit. They are underfunded and poorly supervised because nobody gives a fuck. Schools are funded by the districts in which they reside. What do you suppose that means for a child who lives in an impoverished area? It means his or her school isn't worth shit. Even if they can focus on their studies, what difference does it really make?


If you don't understand what it has to do with the real topic, you are either impenetrably dense (and borderline retarded) or you didn't really read what I said. You pointed toward street crime as the source of all that is wrong where you live. I told you are wrong (because corporate crime IS) and explained why (because it causes magnitudes more fiscal damage AND is directly responsible for street crime in the first place). It's that simple. Do you need me to explain why again? Do you need me to go further in depth? What exactly about it didn't you understand? I'll give it a go if you want me to.

This reads as a transparent, intellectually disingenuous attempt to appeal to emotion (oooh, the children!) when you clearly have neither the logic nor the knowledge to make a legitimate point in this discussion. It's a typical, last resort, logical fallacy and I'm not nearly naive enough to buy it.

The larger point (which went over nobody else's head but yours) is that corporate crime, in effect, fuels the same street crime you decry. Whereas you seem more interested in pinning the blame on some 15 year old Hispanic kid with a gun, the better source of outcry is the rich White guy who is economically exploiting that kid and all his friends (and enemies) and passing them the guns in the first place.

It's also used incorrectly. You're already assuming the correlation is there, thereby invalidating your attempt at sarcasm. Whether the correlation is coincidental or evidence of causation is another matter entirely, and that would have been the correct usage.

Examples-
"I'm sure its just a correlation." - incorrect usage.
"I'm sure the whole thing is just a big coincidence." - correct usage.

__________________

On another topic, I believe that David Vincent and Trey Azagthoth just trolled me and anyone else who love or every loved Morbid Angel. The only thing I have to say about this fucking album is that I really, really miss Steve Tucker. I never thought I'd say that, but then I'd never heard this album before, either.

__________________

That allegory illustrates that by choosing words very carefully, you can get your point across ever so subtly while dodging accusations of your true intentions. This is a very common tactic when distributing an extremist agenda: it ropes in the unsuspecting and gives an alibi against those smart enough to see through the rhetoric.

__________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veKg...feature=feedlik

__________________

I like German chocolate cake. Thank you, Mr. German.

__________________

This is why I couldn't be arsed; I knew Chris would take care o' bitniss

Gomers, let's make more German/Irish.

Chris - I'm not interacting with you - you are clearly pretty immature and I'm not going to lower myself to your level and return the insults that you entirely deserve.

But I will respond to your irritating and pathetic attempt at telling me what "correlation" means."

"There is more crime in Hispanic neighborhoods."

Correlation: There happens to be more crime in a neighborhood populated by Hispanics. Two things that are simulataneously present. Two things happen to have a history of appearing together. They are correlated.

Causation: One of these things causes the other. One of these things is the direct result of the other.

I chose my words very carefully and I chose not interact with you any longer.

Your inferences about what I am "implying" are completely incorrect and for your information I have more degrees than you.

I also have the ability to challenge points without personally attacking anyone or questioning their credentials. You on the other hand make blanket statements about White society causing oppression.
Go ahead and look up crime statistics by ethnicity in the US and then take a look at the crime that is occurring in Mexico, and please tell me that it is White "disenfranchisement" that is causing that.

It's completely pointless at this juncture anyway, I'm averting the rest of this conversation.

The next time you have a discussion with an adult and you say something like this:



The answer is - yes you do need to explain.
You don't just throw at things like "corporate crime" and "fiscal damage" and claim a direct link without developing your argument.
What corporate crimes exactly?
What fiscal damage?
Provide a clear link between the actions of SPECIFIC corporations (which may not be incorporated at all by the way, you are much better off using terms like firms like other adults) and what you call "street crime."

Lastly, when someone asks you to develop your vague inference further - an inappropriate response is "do you need to me go futher in depth?"
Yes obviously.

If it didn't go over "anyone else's" head, it's because they are perferctly comfortable with blanket generalizations like "corporations are directly responsible for street crime."

The best you can do is some "rich White guy" gave the 15 year old Hispanic kid a gun?

And I'm supposed to take you seriously and spend more time on this?

I'm not the one lacking objectivity here but I am certainly lacking any hope of having a productive discussion with you.

__________________

Good grief! You say you're done interacting with Chris and then go on for an hour directly to him!! Way to go!

Paddy, if you and Gomers make German/Irish you might be making more of meeeee!!! And the world would be a better place for that.

__________________

Beer and bombs or what?

__________________

If you fill up balloons with beer and shake them up will they inflate themselves into beer bombs? Science geeks answer! (Amadeus, I think that means you.)

__________________

I don't think you need to be a geek to answer that one, just try it

__________________

Besides the fact that this is the most transparent type of pathetic cop out you could possibly employ, it isn't even true, as the rest of your post does nothing but interact with me directly.


Incorrect again. There are plenty of middle class and even affluent Hispanic (and black, FWIW) neighborhoods. These neighborhood are not, as one would expect, plagued with crime. There is, however, a proverbial shit ton of crime in impoverished Hispanic neighborhoods, just as there is impoverished black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, and every other randomly chosen, arbitrarily recognized color or ethnic group your little face could possibly think of.

I can see you have a somewhat tenuous grasp on the definition of correlation (go dictionary.com!), but you clearly have no idea how to apply it properly.

Now, let's have some more fun with examples, as I find it's the quickest way to teach children.

Example 1 - "There is a direct correlation (=causation) between poverty and street crime, regardless of ethnicity, religion, color, hair type, sexual orientation, favorites foods or music."

Example 2 - "There is a direct correlation (=causation) between SoarandEnvision's thinly veiled, incredibly obvious racism that has fooled absolutely nobody reading this thread and his inability to identify street crime other than in the context of black and Hispanic youth."

Example 3 - "There is a direct correlation (=coincidental) between Chris Rezendes turning on the Red Sox game after it has already started and the Sox continuing to give up the lead in said game."

I doubt they are incorrect, as everyone else who has chipped in on the subject sees the same thing I see. As to you having more degrees than I do; how the fuck would you even know? You've never met me and you have no idea what I do or do not hold degrees in. Since you care to brag, however, perhaps you wouldn't mind sharing with us all exactly how many degrees you have and what they are in. It's fairly obvious, based off your incredibly weak abstract reasoning skills, that any sort of science or math is out of the question. Your incredibly loud and stubbornly abrasive ignorance makes it clear you've never mastered anything involving sociology or philosophy, either.


I will certainly attack a person's incredibly weak historical and sociological knowledge when they abrasively and condescendingly harangue about an ignorant and racist subject.


Is it really that hard to prove that the US has historically economically exploited Mexico and other brown countries? Again, your US history is fucking weak, as is your sociological knowledge. Even if it weren't for that, Mexico clearly has issues with poverty and anyone with half a brain already knows by now that poverty roughly equates to crime.

But thanks again for coming further out of the racist closet (Mexicans = natural born criminals) just for shits and giggles. You continue to prove my point and I appreciate it.


Ah, in other words, you have neither the logical abilities nor the testicular fortitude to continue this conversation and can see your true agenda (and the gaping holes in your belief system) further and further exposed as it continues along. Your welcome, sweetie.


Fair enough.


Embezzlement, fraud, forgery, misappropriation of funds and/or resources, collusion, violation of food & drug laws, violation of tax laws, violation of antitrust laws, bribery, violation of safety standards, and gross environmental degradation on an irreversible scale. As to how this affects regular Joes and Janes, think the current mortgage crisis.


I don't even know where to start.

Let's go with ENRON just because it's so fucking easy. The FBI statistics on burglary, larceny, motor vehicle, & arson estimated the cost of those crimes to this country in the year 2002 was under $18 billion. ENRON = $60 billion. That's just one corporation vs. an entire country worth of blue-collar crime. I just like that example soooo much.

Let's move on to a broader scope and leave ENRON alone, though. Dr. F. T. Cullen (of the University of Cincinnati and US Criminal Justice Dept.) estimates the annual damage of trade and antitrust violations at over $250 billion.

The AFL-CIO estimate the damage of occupational injury/illness at between $150-300 billion annually. http://www.aflcio.org/issues/safety...ad/doj_2006.pdf

Dr. J. Paul Leigh et. al found "roughly 6,371 job-related injury deaths, 13.3 million nonfatal injuries, 60,300 disease deaths, and 1,184,000 illnesses occurred in the U.S. workplace in 1992" and that the direct effect of these injuries, illnesses and deaths "included medical expenses for hospitals, physicians, and drugs, as well as health insurance administration costs, and were estimated to be $51.8 billion" and also that "the indirect costs included loss of wages, costs of fringe benefits, and loss of home production (e.g., child care provided by parent and home repairs), as well as employer retraining and workplace disruption costs, and were estimated to be $103.7 billion." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...e/etc/cost.html

According to Russell Mokhiber, the damage of health care fraud is between $100-400 billion annually, auto repair fraud at $40 billion annually, and security fraud at $15 billion annually.

Considering that I'm very lazy this afternoon and am only bringing up number that I could find very easily, it actually becomes overwhelming to imagine how much damage white collar crime causes our nation as a whole.


What do you mean? Detail the corporate crimes committed by ENRON, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Rite Aid, Adelphia, AOL Time Warner, HealthSouth, Massey Energy, Waste Management, Halliburton, Goldman-Sachs, Tyco, and JP Morgan Chase? Pick one and I'll do it.

As for the link between such crimes and the poverty rate, it's a fairly easy one to see. If it's honestly that difficult for you to understand the ways I've already explained it, try reading some papers written by experts-
http://books.google.com/books?id=lS...0Theory&f=false


That's great, except you didn't ask because you weren't actually interested in learning. Instead of asking for clarification, you merely brushed those points aside because they didn't fit in with your boringly transparent agenda and you had neither the knowledge nor the logical capacity to discredit those points legitimately.

Or it's because they were capable of rational thought and can connect the exploitation of the lower classes with poverty and can also connect poverty with crime. Again, this is incredibly simple shit and you are either being intellectually dishonest or stubbornly ignorant in order to keep dismissing such an obvious truth over and over again.


If you have such a visceral reaction to it, perhaps you can explain what's wrong with my analogy instead of simply dismissing it with smug pretention. This is to be read as a challenge. If your problem with it is a legitimate one, it should be easy.


Yes, you are. You started this conversation on a soapbox armed with nothing but a megaphone and a closed mind.

That's because you were never trying to have a productive discussion with me or anyone else here. You were simply sending out feelers to see if anyone else here shared your xenophobic and racist ideals. Of course, since this forum isn't total shit, nobody here really does. Too bad you didn't come here 6 or 7 years ago when there were more racists hanging out here. Where's BOSE when you need him? Shame.

__________________

This. Can't really add anything to what Chris has been saying without being redundant. Except that he's right on every point.

__________________

It's amazing how transparent the whole thing really is but there's always someone willing to fall for it. I'd can really see how this type of rhetoric would work on naive and alienating 15 year olds. You have to get them while they're young, I guess.

__________________

Thanks for proving the prudence of my decision. I'll leave with the following for you to understand further why you are so unpleasant to interact with --

I really suggest next time you have a disagreement with someone you don't take every opportunity to insult them and their intellect because they don't share your Cesar Chavez ideas. It's actually you who are weak and uncivil for doing so.

You spent a long time making no link to coporate crime and proverty, and then presuppose poverty is the cause of crime. This is called circular reasoning. You are using your assumption (poverty = crime) to prove a link between a third, unrelated criminal activity - (in your case, market manipulation that was largely at the expense of shareholders of Enron and employees) and "street crime."


And correlation is not causation for the second time. You will fail a logic test on this subject. I suggest you consult further than dictionary.com.

Very disappointing.

__________________

By the way John Braithwaite simply makes excuses for people who don't want to work, act like descent members of society and take responsiblity for their own actions.

"Powerlessness and poverty increase the chances that needs are so little satisfied that crime is an irresistible temptation..."

Absolutley pathetic. Powerlessness and poverty increase the incentive for people to more aggressively seek employment and educational opportunities which are more abundant for citizens and [legal] immigrants in the United States than any other nation in the world.

If people would read more Nietzsche instead apologetic writing like this Braithwaite, we wouldn't live in such a weak and culture-less society.

In any event - you were much better off leading with the substance of this material instead of your diatribes and attempts to analyze me personally.

And yes I realize I'm contradicting what I said about interacting with you, but there were a few things I couldn't leave unanswered. You can call it an irresistable temptation if it satisfies the likes of Angela Davis and John Braithwaite.

__________________

Well, you did go down the personal attack route yourself, so just button it up on that point.

It's kinda relaxing, coming here seeing this little exchange. I'm none too seldom involved in similar arguments where there are actual political decisions to be made down the line, and oh boy have we heard this stuff before; quite nice to see it smacked down without having to get involved for once. Still, I'm not sure whether it's amusing or depressing to find that at least in the US and in Sweden you get exactly the same style of rhetoric.

__________________

Who did I personally attack exactly?

You even said that immigration is a problem in Sweden and your stance surprises me considering where you live. I know enough people in your country who verify all the media converage on the subject -- demographic trends of who commit more crime in Sweden is a known fact.

__________________

A decision you've yet to actually uphold. Either commit to your decision and run away with your tail between your legs or commit to the discussion and make a legitimate effort to individually debunk the points I've made, as I have so thoroughly done to all of yours.


I already know why. Because I break down every single point you have to make and refute it with actual logic and data. Also, I do it with the same abrasion you display and you don't care for it much. Too fucking bad.


Maybe I was uncivil. I still managed to debunk all of your ridiculous points while you merely ignore or dismiss mine. Good debate, bro.


It might have been circular logic if it weren't backed so strongly with 50 years of sociological research. Again, good debate, bro.


Reminding me what I've already explained to you twice won't trick anyone into thinking that it was really I who said it. Nice try, though.


Clearly I was suggesting that dictionary.com was your highest authority on the matter and the reason you so clearly fail to use such simple words as "correlation" correctly. Nice attempt to turn it around on me, but as hollow and transparent as everything else you've posited in this thread so far.


This isn't so much an excuse so much as something easily witnessed by studying the impoverished anywhere they exist. Eastern Europe, inner city US, third world countries... it's all there and it's all obvious. There's excuses and there's reality. If they were only excuses, why are the same problems affecting the impoverished abroad affecting the impoverished at home, without regard to color, religion, or ethnic background? Do you care to explain?


Ah, except we've already shown how the impoverished in this country, whether you continue to ignore it or not, do not have access to the same education and employment opportunities everyone else does. You are correct, though; it's absolutely pathetic how you continue to ignore facts and figures backed up with decades worth of research by experts in favor of some hateful, pseudo-nihilistic nonsense that anyone who has taken an entry level sociology class can easily debunk. Absolutely, positively, laughably pathetic.


More people in this country read Nietzsche than Braithwaite and other legitimate sociological experts. In fact, Nietzsche is mandatory reading in almost any college level philosophy class.

If you mean to suggest that American society should adopt a totally Nietzschian view, well, that goes completely against the established Judeo-Christian moral system established in this country and, as the son of immigrants, is very disrespectful for you to suggest. I mean, didn't you already say that one of the worst thing about immigrants is that they have no respect of the established culture and moral system of their new land?Hypocrisy reigns.


If you had any genuine desire to discuss or debate, that's exactly how I would have approached the subject. It's how I've always done things in the past, what makes you any different? Most are interested in a legitimate back and forth open minded discussion; you clearly aren't.

You flew into this thread guns blazing, abrasively commandeered the podium, and rudely and loudly spewed your thinly veiled racist and xenophobic ideals. I don't have to treat you as an intellectual peer or superior because you clearly aren't. I don't have to treat you as a man of serious reason because you've proven yourself not to be. I certainly don't have to treat you any seriously than you treated the rest of this forum when you rudely invaded this thread shouting your xenophobic, White supremacist bullshit (from a Persian dude? Are you fucking serious?).

You clearly have no such irresistible (correct spelling FTW) temptation to critically break down or refute any of the actual points I've made, however. In so doing, you continue to prove that you aren't and weren't interested in a legitimate discussion (obvious from the get go) and further weaken your position of outrage against me for being less than cordial in response to your acerbic and pungent tripe.

__________________

Oh fuck off. You've already got an entire website dedicated to your half-baked deluded race avenger nonsense, complete with a forum filled with like-minded dickheads who'll parrot your garbage back to you, so we know where to go if we feel like joining in with your fantasy about Zionist multiculturalist immigrants eroding our identities and eating our children.

You sound like the "disrespect" (not quoting you, simmer down) you feel immigrants have for their new country's heritage is only the tip of the iceberg. You in fact sound like you're saturated with that same old base patriotismesque blind fervour which is extremely passionate but completely hollow and directionless - not to mention hateful and utterly discredited - and if you weren't banging on about race and the loss of culture you'd probably be denying the holocaust or operating a football hooligan firm. I was once so profoundly bored, like you clearly are, that I sodomised myself with a toy flute, and when I dragged it out it was packed with shit and it was oozing out of the finger holes. I haven't turned to definitely not blind bigotry so far, so maybe there's a lesson to be learnt here.

You accuse the people here of using "blanket generalisations" but that's pretty much all I've heard from you. Dropping Caesar Chavez's name into this in an effort to derail our argument shows how unspecific you are in your bigotry and pigheadedness. And bitching about being insulted whilst doing exactly that (in a very underhanded and disingenuous way, I might add) is extremely irritating, mainly because it shows how desperate you are to portray your views as some sort of intellectually considered, thoroughly researched Gospel for which you're being persecuted instead of the age-old, thinly-veiled bigoted horseshit the world has been dealing with for centuries.

Chris is doing a fine job of systematically dismantling each turd nugget of your rhetoric but I don't think he should waste his energy. It's like having a detailed debate about whether or not the Daddy Bear was molesting the Baby Bear in Goldilocks. It kinda overlooks the fact that it's a work of brain-sappingly uninteresting fan fiction for which there was never any evidence to begin with.

Here are a few tips to help free you from your imaginary nightmare world:

* If you wanna preserve your race's bloodline don't fuck other races, even if the Zionist-controlled media strongly suggests otherwise.

* If you see interracial couples don't automatically assume that they "just don't get it!", and if you see a swarthy landscaper don't automatically assume that because of him some toothless white hick with a limp is now starving in his trailer, because assuming makes an ass out of you and me and also makes you look like a smugly self-assured, elitist, generalising racist cunt.

* If you want your traditions and heritage to be preserved just fucking indulge in them like you seem to wish everyone else would on your behalf.

* Stop attributing everything that's wrong with your country and culture to "foreigners", and don't pair your hatred of foreigners with legitimate qualms such as the unjustified wars for empire/oil you mentioned at the start in an effort to make your baseless bigotry seem more credible. People will like you more if you're not a slimy fucker!

* Stop spending so much time fantasising about what the motives of the "unenlightened", liberal multiculturalist-types are, because as much as I'm sure you believe the shit you make up in your head and attribute to large groups of people chances are it's not realistic. I spent several years fantasising that I was handsome and had a girlfriend, but there comes a time when a hollowed out melon layered with strips of raw bacon, barbershop floor sweepings and the juice from sardine cans loses its power to convince.

Having said all of that, FUCK the Japs.

P.S. D&Q, I owe you a beer.

Absolutely unbelievable. Chris you have no idea what the hell you are talking about - I really don't know who the hell you think you are but I really find you intolerable - you give a high school level recitation of Oprah Winfrey apology for crime attributed to the poor and you call it a "debate." You drop broad links between things like "corporate crime" and poverty and you won't even discuss the authors you present yourself.

The length of your posts does not make up for your lack of substance.

I tried to give you a second shot by at least speaking to the little bit of information you bring to the table and what do you do - ignore it. Then you take the time to point out I misspelled a word in a post. I mean thes are your priorities? You are completely pathetic honestly, its like talking to a child.


You also don't really substantively debate anything, you do a line-by-line John Stewart paraphrase of my posts and you call that answer.

"Fuck the Japs" ? And I'm the racist?
I've never said one thing that said one race is better than another and you write things like this. I never said one thing regarding white supremacism and I merely responded to a memorial day post and gave my opinion, which was apparently more than you could handle.

Now we are full circle at what this whole thread was about - the hypocrisy of the American military and the praise it doesn't deserve.

At least I keep my attacks toward the content of information and not the individual, which is more than I can say for both of you.

__________________

By the way, just so you know you aren't fooling anyone with this:



No actually you haven't shown anything. You basically just claimed it. And you posted a link to literature that you won't spend time to expand on.

You don't present decades worth of anything.

If you strip away your insults and your focus on me, the substance of your posts is very small. I would have been happy to discuss it with you but this has clearly gone way too far and probably one of the most pathetic discussions I have had with someone else online.



I wish you wouldn't try to be so funny. Judeo-Christianity is actually foreign to all Indo-European people.

If you really want to draw the shortest line between two points - this is the best way to do it. It is so frustrating that you actually think I meant to infer that societies be left 100% exactly in tact as the forefathers left it. Did I say that every single tradition, regardless of its native or foreign origin and its utility, needs to be kept in tact? Did I say that I don't believe in any type of forward-progress?

This is what you infer when I'm talking about foreign military bodies invading countries and telling people how to structure their society at the end of gun?

__________________

I didn't think being racist and being unable to notice irony were mutually inclusive, but I guess we've learned otherwise today.

Fuck me.

This wasn't the part of your post that we took issue with, mainly because it's a position which is justifiable, and one which is probably held by many members here, Americans included. You just happened to sandwich this stuff between ramblings about Zionism and ungrateful immigrants and their lack of willingness to kneel and lick the feet of Lady Liberty once a week whilst playing the U.S. national anthem on their pan pipes or whatever the fuck, and you went on to blame these ungrateful specifically non-white immigrants for...well, pretty much everything save for your foot fungus.

And WHA WHA STOP INSULTING CHRIS WHA WHA YOU AREN'T DEBATING SERIOUSLY!!!!!11!!1 Either stick to your own standards or quit yo' jibba jabba!

The most insulting thing I said to Chris was that he didn't know what he was talking about. The score is pretty uneven in that match.

Look at - you infer what you seem to want and you really enjoy the focus on me and my activities elsewhere. I never specifically said non-white people are to blame for anything. I simply listed criminal groups that have the highest responsibility for criminal activity in Southern California.
I obtained that list from the Los Angeles Police Department.

There is an old saying that goes the truth is called Hate by those that hate the Truth.

To be honest I've actually made more than a couple friends on this board that I've suprisingly found myself on from time to time. It's too bad this had to get so ugly because some people won't play the ball instead of the player.

__________________

Even if American military people don't agree with what their leaders do there is still a respect and brotherhood that just doesn't happen many places. Memorial Day celebrates those lives that have helped people even if it does hurt a few others. I've had military friends that died in non-combative situations and if I want to hold them up in honor I sure as hell will.

And Angela Davis? The black chick from the 60's with the big 'fro?

And I still wanna know about the beer!!!

__________________

Hey SaE, stop telling people how wrong they are and show us why they are wrong with facts, backed up be sources. Chris is putting out statistics, references, etc that you have been unable to refute or show evidence against - you're just saying he's an idiot. So, lets see something. Also, this is a fucking metal board, not a Single Mother's Book Club or a Sweet Valley High debate team. We insult each other. Don't be such a fucking baby when someone calls you an idiot and use it as an excuse to back out of an argument you are painfully loosing at. Chris has been calling you an idiot, but he's showing you why. You just say he's wrong and unable to accept the truth.

__________________

Because wall of text? I'm surprised I found this little memo.

__________________

What discussion does the author himself merit? He's a PhD in sociology who has studied sociology for years and you are a novice decrying his work. There wasn't anything substantive there to discuss; you weakly and pathetically attempted to discredit his entire line of work with absolutely no substance.

Maybe not, but the facts and figures backed by years of fucking research sure do, sweetie.

You didn't make any sort of legitimate attempt to refute the evidence I provided other than to refer to the author as a pathetic apologist and make incredibly unconvincing and extremely vague references to Nietzsche. Picking on your misspellings is just for funsies.

Actually, everything is a direct quote of your posts. Remember when you were figuring out what "correlation" meant on dictionary.com? Go back and find the definition to "paraphrase" and try again.

Not sure what Jon (correct spelling) Stewart has to do with any of this, but I do watch his show once in a while because, unlike you, I'm not terrified of Jews.

You've done nothing in this thread but continue to blame Mexicans and blacks for crime in a cowardly, roundabout sort of way and spew the same exact garbage one would expect to hear at an Aryan Nations rally. It's extremely obvious to everyone who has read your original (and subsequent) posts in this thread and it isn't fooling anyone. Like Paddy said, if you are that uncomfortable posting on a forum where people are initiated and intelligent enough to see through the extremely transparent veil you wear, go hang out with your Persian Aryan bro bros.

Or, now we are trying to change the subject back to the first loud, pretentious, quasi-elitist, grossly ignorant point you had to make so you can cop your way out of a discussion you are ill-equipped to participate in.

Not an ounce correct. You've failed to adequately address any of the points of made with facts or figures of your own and, on the one weak attempt you made, resorted to attacking the character and motivation of the author (and expert in a field you clearly don't understand, yet were eager to climb on your soapbox and shout about). Similarly, you've continuously attacked me throughout this discussion, but it's cool for two reasons; 1. I've done the same to you, and 2. you aren't clever or creative enough to actually insult me. Unlike you, I'm not whining about your personal attacks in order to undermine or circumvent the conversation, simply to show how you are blatantly lying.

You didn't ask to expand on it and your piss poor attempt to assassinate the character of the author didn't justify any legitimate response in the same way the guy with the tin foil hat running down the street telling everyone to get in their bomb shelters doesn't warrant any further attention than a straight jacket. There's no credibility, just annoying and enthusiastic shouting of nonsense.

EDIT: For the benefit of any legitimately skeptical observers, here are a few great links regarding education and poverty.
http://www.wcpss.net/evaluation-res...920_poverty.pdf
http://www.americanprogress.org/kf/ingersoll-final.pdf
http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/...-and-education/

I guess I don't, but the papers I've linked for you sure do. You could read them if you really cared, but again, you obviously aren't interested in a genuine, back and forth discussion even if you were capable of handling one.

Yawn. Facts and figures. Research. These are the cornerstones of the scientific minded. Empty claims, whiny complaints of verbal abuse (while you are equally guilty of the same), and dismissal with no evidence is the refuge of the weak and illogical sociopaths.

Yes, you are correct; the historic religion of White America is obviously some archaic paganism that we all forgot about after those br002al Romans conquered our country in 392AD and forced us all to worship teh Jesus. For shame!

You're being intellectually disingenuous in a painfully obvious way. Unless, of course, you genuinely believe US history stretches back earlier than 392, in which case I'm sorry, both for what I said and for you in general.


No, but you did whine in an annoying and pathetic way about evil foreigners showing no respect for their host culture's ways and traditions. Considering you were advocating an entire overhaul of this country's Judeo-Christian value system, you fall under that same category, unless you are exempt from that rule since you are 2nd gen. In that case, though, most of the thugs you similarly decry have been here for longer than you and, similarly, are exempt from the whole respect thing.

Are you simply unable to uphold your own convictions?

No, that's what I and everyone else in this fucking thread inferred when you went on about evil, scary immigrants, complained about this country's lack of nationalism (hypocritically, right after complaining about enthusiastic patriotism), vaguely whined that someone is suppresing what you referred to as "racial understanding", and then in subsequent posts went on to identify black and Mexican street thugs as the bane of SoCal, then further expounded your point to tie Mexicans with crime in general.

It's not like people haven't seen this same bullshit rhetoric before. We've seen it and heard it a thousand times from the same harebrained teenagers who got banned from the Stormfront forums and have no where else to fit in. I'll give you credit for one thing, though; I, personally, had never seen or heard it from a trve kvlt Iranian Aryan before. Kudos to you, sir.

__________________

That's great; nobody is saying that black and Hispanic street gangs aren't responsible for a higher percentage of street crime than other street gangs in SoCal. You're simply wrong to associate street crime with blacks and Hispanics for no other reason than the fact that they are black and Hispanic (as you have done repeatedly), especially when poverty is the obvious issue (and one you continue to dismiss).

Where Asians live in poverty in California, there are violent Asian street gangs. Where whites live in poverty in California, there are violent white street gangs and biker gangs. They kill people, they rob people, they poison their own people with drugs and they perpetuate the endless cycle of poverty within their own people through intimidation and addiction. It just so happens that a smaller percentage of Asians and whites are forced to live in that perpetual state of poverty.


That's great. Enjoy the friends you've made here. Just don't post Archie Bunker style bullshit with no substance behind it and expect not to be called out on it.

__________________

This. Oh this, oh this, oh this. If I had a penny for every time I've been accused of being an enemy of my country's culture by someone who couldn't tell the difference between Gustav Fröding and Erik XIV if his life depended on it...

__________________

I could totally make my exam about the 3 axioms of communication with this debate here and show up what was going wrong during this debate/discussion/flooding


This. I guess this is one of those researches that explains the situation not only in the U.S. but in parts of the whole industry nations. EXACTLY the same is happening in Germany and the UK. I'm serious do a little research on that and you'll see even high-class jobs like being a prof at school aren't protected from poverty.


Mmd but :
Get to know the board and the members or fuck off :

__________________

I have a problem...

We know, but it's OK. We want you to stick around, for the entertainment value, see.

__________________

Chris, please, don't compare Archie with him. Archie may have been a lot of things, but the good ole red, white, and blue, and all it stands for, military included, was something he was extremely proud of. Besides, this guy's a dingbat if ever there was one.

Need another cup of coffee?

__________________

In summary: a foreign military presence is not comparable to foreigners who immigrate illegally with no love of that nation or intent of pursuing a descent living and end up contributing in large part to crime after crime, organizing gangs etc.

Further, if there exists a correlation between illegal immigrants and crime, it is largely based on poverty and the fact that you must resort to spray painting on walls when you can't become the CFO of a multinational firm with no education or hard work.
This environment has been perputated by the "coporate crimes" of select firms that have engaged in securities manipulation and effectively put guns in the hands the young aspiring criminals.

Behind all the personal analysis, my background, my perceived motivations and theories behind my psychology - this is basically the summary of the arguments here.

Any one who has opened up the lyric sheet to any Black Metal album worth viewing understands the misanthropy that stems forth is based on the weak directions of society and the lack of respect for what years of religious brainwashing has attempted to destroy: heritage.

These ideas are all inter-related and if you don't relate to them, you likely don't share the same values or have the same view of society and history.

You're better off creating an independent and well thought-out post instead of parsing your adversaries posts and retorting line by line like a child. I stand unimpressed.

__________________

And yet you're still here continuing to comment. Makes me no never mind, and it's keeping kids off the street and not soaking tampons in pcp, inserting them rectally like they were talking about on the news.

__________________

I'll agree your posts are well thought out, to the extent they are deliberately vague with unclear context, often with irrelevant referencing.

Take the following example:



This is a terrible argument for the following reasons:

1. Pretty much the entire statement is irrelevant as there can be so many other reasons for why black metal lyrics are misanthropic (being based in fiction, for one).

2. Just because a lyricist believes that misanthropy stems from "the weak directions of society..." does not make it true.

3. You are also taking - even if the lyrics reflect the writers' actual thoughts and beliefs - a very small section of society (i.e. black metal musicians and fans) and extrapolating their commentary to be representative of society as a whole.

4. The black metal community is carefully cherry-picked in an attempt to further your "argument". What about Christian rock or metalcore?

5. It is based on your opinion. Academics study this stuff all the time - can you find any studies that show the overwhelming consensus of society is that it has weak direction? Or that religion has destroyed heritage?

6. Your assertion that religious brainwashing has atempted to destroy heritage is devoid of context. Religious natives are destroying heritage? Religious immigrants are destroying heritage? Religious emmigrants are destroying heritage?

And that is just an analysis of one of your arguments.

__________________

Regarding your first point - it is entirely relevant inasmuch as bands like Drudkh, Blood Axis, Zyklon, Old Man's Child (and let's forgo the "can you actually call that true black metal" debate here) frequently refer to the disapproval in the direction of modern society, not least because of the weakness that Judeo-Christianity promotes and it's foreign origin.

It should go without saying that anything the lyricist writes are her personal belief and she does not present them as fact, i.e. making it necessarily true.

If you think I extrapolated black metal ideology (for the sake of a convenient term) to be representative of society's thinking - nothing can be further from the truth. I simply pointed out a consensus of view point that is common in Black Metal.

I reference Black Metal because that is the genre of metal I associate with the most.

Here is a very good summary of what judeo-christian religion has done in the way of uprooting paganism and encouraging the replacement of heritage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFxN00yRvcI

The context for your last question is broad - judeo-christianity and islam are belief systems foreign to areas outside modern palestine/israel where they had originated.

__________________

Setting aside John's completely logical argument, I don't really give a shit about the opinions on society from uneducated musicians who aren't particularly good at being musicians, either. If I care to read sociology, it will be written by actual experts. Fenriz and Galder aren't authorities that anybody intelligent or educated chooses to recognize.

Furthermore, with the exception of 80's Bathory, early Mayhem, and Emperor's entire catalogue, black metal is pure, fucking shit. Redundant, excruciatingly boring open tremolo picking over blastbeats and raspy grunting is only interesting for so long. It's shelf life expires even quicker when you butcher the mixing job so that it sounds as though the band is playing within the confines of a plywood shed in the backyard and intersperse that nonsense with pretentious and incredibly long ambient passages with very little variation.


Here's what that sounds like to anyone able to critically engage in logical discussion; Waaaaah! Waaaaah! You brokeded down everything I had to say and either proved it wrong or exposed logical fallacies within it! Big meanie! You're a poopie head!

You're better off not attempting to engage in debates with grown folk if you can't handle every piece of bullshit you spew systematically discredited line by line. Your continued reference to my ability to (easily) expose the gaping holes in your logic as "childish" only further exposes your true puerility. I stand amused by your abject failure in this discussion. Thanks for coming, kid.

__________________

Translated: diabtribe against musical value of Black Metal & diabtribe towards me personally yet again.

You should really stop congratulating yourself. There is been no logical fallacy you have pointed out. You merely reasserted your own explanation for causes of crime over and over, using circular reasoning and lots of insults. Then you laughably fail at presenting white collar crime and trying to link it gang activity. If you focused on the topic as much as you focused on trying to analyze me, you'd have more to show than a few lazy links to the first sociology papers you found on google.

Childish is the right word and I don't share your amusement.

I don't recommend insulting your way out of differences of opinion in the future.

Also, it's not very intelligent to dismiss the ideas of individuals when you don't know who they are or because you don't like the genre of music they create. For instance, one of the bands I listed was Blood Axis, which is run by Michael Moynihan who is a widely published author and editor. He is also unaffiliated with any political stance or movement.

You will be cutting yourself off from a lot of insight if you restrict yourself to who you call an "expert" on something as subjective as sociology. That is an extremely dogmatic and narrow minded way to go about things.

__________________

poop

__________________

Over and over again I have, and the objective readers of the thread seem to agree.


Lazily throwing around words like "circular reasoning" doesn't prove that circular reasoning actually occurred. All of my points were backed up with actual research. Exactly none of your points were.


Lazy and boring. Not a surprise. I certainly didn't fail to present corporate crime as a cause for higher poverty rates, nor did I fail to present high poverty rates as a cause for street crime.

So, you can keep saying these things over and over and over again, but my points and my points only are the ones backed up by research and experts. Thanks for your ignorant critique, however. I'll be sure to be disappointed that an uneducated novice remains unimpressed with their work.


What makes them lazy? The years of research that went into them for the authors or the fact that it was soooooo incredibly easy for me to find them to support my valid points?

Why haven't you been able to find "lazy links" that invalidate my points, as I've done to yours with such ease?


Childish is the correct word if we are to describe your constant failure to actually address the argument at hand with anything substantive other than your arrogant, ignorant, and extremely loud opinion. I remain amused by it, however.

I didn't insult my way out, sunshine. I may have insulted my way into the argument, but it was very clear from the get go you were here to loudly proclaim your thinly veiled racist bullshit and not to hear different opinions on the matter. Nobody was fooled by it, several people called you out on it, you got butthurt.

The point is that it's okay to insult you because you aren't here to engage in a genuine or serious debate. You've come in with a closed mind and a loud mouth and you will be mocked accordingly. You leave yourself open to further mockery with your arbitrary dismissal of facts, figures, and research and your constant reiteration of the logical fallacies you so hopelessly cling to as an ethos.


Ah, Moynihan is definitely an interesting figure, but had nothing to do with what I said. First of all, his band isn't black metal or particularly close to it. Second of all, even if I had mentioned him, it would have still been justified.

His BA is in language, not much to do with sociology. He is an intelligent guy for sure, but draws too much from the opinion of controversial fringe characters and cults of personality to take in anything he says with anything more than interesting curiosity. I'm not even really sure how or where his views would support yours beyond a shared interested in Nietzschian concepts. His ideas jibe more with neo-anarchic ideals than anything else.

I'll give you one thing; he would definitely be an interesting guy to have a drink and conversation with. I also enjoyed Lords of Chaos.

Actually, a much more narrow minded way to go about things is to arrogantly dismiss the decades worth of research put forth by sociological experts simply because their findings don't correspond to your close-minded world view.

I can hear and take into consideration the opinions of non-experts but they rightfully hold less weight than that of the experts, more so when the non-experts are also completely uneducated about the matter at hand and even more so when they arbitrarily brush aside the opinions of those who are. This is how I feel about sociology, psychology, biology, mathematics, chemistry, and every other science and philosophy known to man, and it's how anyone intelligent should feel. There simply isn't any logical reason to defer to the expertise of ignorant novices in the face of hard researched expert opinion.

__________________

I don't think its who he calls an expert, its more of who has dedicated their entire lives to studying something with published, unbiased, scientific research that makes them an expert. Who needs those "expert" medical doctors anyway? Homeopathy is the way for me!

Again, Chris has repeatedly given references, backed by years of research, as to where your ideas hare fallible. You continue to do nothing of that, just stating over and over that he is wrong. Show us why he is wrong with some hard evidence and not from some musicians fucking lyrics. If its so plain to see, surely it can't be that hard to show us something. Oh wait, it is, because this kind of thinking only works with ignorant, racist, or just uninformed ideology.

__________________

I never posted anyone's lyrics.

Years of research don't "prove" anything on any of the subjects we were dicusssing.

You can't simply point to an idea, and then point to four other people who wrote a book saying the same thing and call that proof.

The fact of the matter is that people who commit crimes are degenerate. They don't do it out of a last resort. They don't do it out of poverty. They don't do it because the White man kept them down. They do it because they want to be gangster, they want the easy way out and they want big money. Period.
And a huge reason people have the incentive to immigrate illegally is that they could be fugatives where they are from - wherever they are from. And that is just as much conjecture but it is undeniable that it can and does exist.
The fact that they are undocumented actually makes it impossible to prove they are not. Common sense will tell you that, just based on the amount of narcotics that flow over the border everyday.

This applies to many developed nations all over the world. Simply pointing to a few references that indicate poverty and social stratification exacerbate crime is completely useless.

Ideology has absolutely nothing to do with it all.

And no one gives a shit where anyone gets a bachelor's or says "this person has graduate coursework in this subject, let's suddenly give it more merit."
What matters is the substance of the material.

And the only reason you would call another man "sweetie" or "sunshine" is if you would like others to think you are a homosexual.

__________________

It has nothing to do with being "Black Metal."

And it wasn't a referenced to what you said, it was a reference to what I said regarding the general shape of society, it's embrace of weakness, perputated not least of which by judeo-christianity.

This was a secondary point in my post, and I indicated that authors such as these understand the link between downward directions of multicultural society and historically foreign, imposed religions which perpetuate them.

It doesn't have anything to do with you. You completely missed the context and lack any sense of appreciating it for what it is. This is the main reason why from the beginning I could tell you are a terrible person to have a discussion with.

__________________

Baaaaaaaaaahahahaha, god, you are a fucking riot. I want to be serious for a minute, though: I am actually a gay Jew Mexican. How does that make you feel? I bet pretty damn uncomfortable as you think about me taking all of your heritage deep into my dirty spic mouth. You're only scared because you like it and that Jew saliva makes those in contact gay Jews, kinda like Zombies, but with more lust for human flesh.

__________________

By the way you keep accusing me of being loud, except it's you using capital letters an exclamation points when I did no such thing. In fact I've tried to be as civil as possible under the circumstances.

Just so you understand, that the following is not considered proving a link between corporate crime and exacerbating poverty rates (and it is certainly no link to the type of violent crimes by gangs and individuals who don't give a shit about the society they chose to be a part of - that was the original point if you care to recall)

I'll present your brilliant writing individually as you love to do line by line:



Yes actually - you do have quite a substantial burden of proof upon you. The laws of competitive advantage have shown that the increased trade and the decreased trade restriction has actually led to a growth in Mexican GDP and the United States.

I'm not sure if you aware of this, but in April of 1995, the United States actually saved Mexico from defaulting on their sovereign debt. Mexico had used $13 billion of a total $50 billion aid package, including more than $5 billion from the United States Treasury, to pay off billions in debts it ran up in a risky financial strategy that collapsed in December of 1994.

This was particularly worrisome because it was worried then, and proven now, to have had a dramatic increase in illegal immigration.

Now take a step back and a deep breath - the United States actually bails out the Mexican government and it is the United States who has exploited Mexico?

Please keep in mind that I am just responding to these things you bring up that you "think" score you points - but I am fully cognizant that they are actually totally off-topic.

This is in no way goes against anything I said about the crime and attitudes by a visible population of immigrants who could care less about being productive in the societies they choose to live in.




That's it? This what you call "so fucking easy." You quote the bankruptcy pricetag of Enron and then move on.

There is no relevance to the disservice Enron did to their creditors and shareholders through their reporting fraud and their market manipluation and poverty rates - certianly no poverty rates that can be linked to crimes. Again, crimes committed by people who I identify as not giving a shit about their communities in the first place.

No descent individual turned to a life of crime becuase the rolling blackouts we experienced for a year became too much to handle.

You can't simply just say this had a "fiscal impact" and leave it like that. High school level writing, honestly. I can't believe you write like this and then you accuse me of being disingenuous about having a productive discussion.



In other words, there are unsafe workplaces in the united states as there is in every other part of the world.

This does nothing to contradict anything I am saying.



You do realize that health care fraud is not considered "white collar" crime necessarily and auto repair fraud is usually conducted by proprietorships, not corporations. I'm not sure if you mean to say "private business" or one of those people that like to call the private sector "corporate" anything because it's provocative.

Securities fraud on the other hand, last on your list is and it is almost always at the expense of other investors.

I don't think the individuals we are talking about committing crimes are the people carrying the counterparty risk in swap agreements exactly.

This does nothing to contradict my point.



Why don't you take your own pick?

Pick a company that has done something to excuse people who don't give a shit about the society they live in, see the US as a giant company that owes them something and potentially even came here illegaly.

I just want to remind you for the fourth time of the context of what I stated that was so deeply offensive to you - foreigners who have no regard or respect for the countries they choose to live in.
You can either deny these people exist or deny they commit crimes. You seem instead to want to tell me they commit just as much crime as anyone else, so much so that it serves no purpose to even isolate them beyond a racist agenda.

That's a pretty hard row to hoe.

Pretty overwhelming research from "experts" that have devoted their lives to the field. You're right, no Black Metal guys (who can actually read music) could never hold a candle talking about society to people like Richard Ingersoll, who has crafted wonderful charts showing the revolving door of teachers in lower class neighborhoods and in turn the "poor opportunities" of the poor "disenfranchised."

I'm sure the main reason the ghetto is the way it is, is because the local high school doesn't have classes where Myron Scholes is teaching economics there and because Salman Rushdie and Arthur Miller aren't teaching English.

At the end of the day you are making pathetic excuses for the weak, uncultured and degenerate.

"Life does not forgive weakness."

__________________

Wahhhhhh loses it's fervor if you just put a period after it. I scanned a bunch of Chris's writing and I guess you must be talking about the first words of sentences having capital letters because those are the only ones I saw. Just a little hint - they're supposed to be.

I cannot believe you're making comments about him being off topic when I made the initial comment and you have gone on and on about everything under the sun imaginable which is clearly off topic from anything originally mentioned. Don't you have a drum circle to attend or is everyone on vacation?

__________________

I haven't seen this amount of commotion here in a while! Mmmmm makes MT almost feel alive again

Looks like too much nonsense to fully sort through, but it sounds like its narrowing down to syntax, whining, and extreme tangents?

More importantly: I finally reached 2,000 posts after posting here for FIVE AND A HALF YEARS.

Sheesh...

__________________

Well, wahhh! Catch up, d0od.
Yeah, I was thinking that come next winter there's going to be new candidates in the awards. That is, if anyone remembers.

__________________

It's quality that matters, not quantity.

OK, bets are on: Is Soar in fact a totally ginger prankster? And if not, will this thread go on till it's normal limit and be closed, just to have said Soaririty throw a fit because he'll be convinced it's because of his unassailable expose on the evils of the zionist conspiracy? Stay tuned!

__________________

I don't think he's a ginger. His spelling is too good.

__________________

I don't think good spelling in and by itself requires a soul, actually.

__________________

You wanna argue about it?

__________________

Not really, I'm quite content with knowing that I'm right.

__________________

Okay.

See how easy that was?

__________________

Don't worry, Joe. Not many people join a forum just weeks after learning how to type!

Nomad also deletes old posts sometimes (or used to, when he existed) so I'm sure you would have passed that benchmark awhile ago if it wasn't for that.

__________________

Okay, sure. Maybe you just quoted the wrong portion of my text as a jumping off point, but that's the context it gave your post. My points still stand, Moynihan's musical output aside.



Your point is awful. Judeo-Christian ideals aren't any more foreign to this country (the main opus of this discussion) than white people are.

That's because there's nothing to appreciate. You don't have an open mind and can critically reason neither your own ideas nor mine. You simply dry heave your opinion redundantly and aggressively and hope that, eventually, everyone will suddenly agree with it.

__________________

What is going on? lol.

Anyways, I side with the forum regulars. WE DUNT LIKE DEM OUTSIDERS ROUND HER.

__________________

You weren't any more civil in your first post in this thread than you have been now that I've besmirched your fair sensibilities by daring to disagree with you in the same tone you barged into this thread using. I'm simply returning the favor, sunshine.


Sure, and it's a pretty easy link. White-collar crime directly causes lower wages and fewer jobs for everyone. How it escapes you that this could possibly contribute to the poverty rate is astounding and speaks a lot to your (in)ability to reason on a higher level.



Why? You've made far more controversial claims than I have with absolutely no data or research behind it, and you continue to do so. Nonetheless, I will hold myself to a higher standard than you are capable of and provide facts and data that you'll simply ignore.


The decreased trade restriction (which includes the repeal of Mexican constitutional law protecting tribal land from seizure[Article 27]) actually opened the floodgates to exploitation by US industry and agriculture.

According to Papademetriou et. al, "NAFTA has not helped the Mexican economy keep pace with the growing demand for jobs. Unprecedented growth in trade, increasing productivity, and a surge in both portfolio and foreign direct investment have led to an increase of 500,000 jobs in manufacturing from 1994 to 2002. The agricultural sector, where almost a fifth of Mexicans still work, has lost 1.3 million jobs since 1994."
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/nafta1.pdf


According to Carlos Heredia Zubieta (PhD in economics, former member of Mexican congress), "exports are growing... but the beneficiaries are only a small circle of corporations with ties to the international economy, to the detriment of the majority of small and medium-sized local companies and workers and citizens in general." He goes on to say "NAFTA aggravated the imbalances between the export sector and the rest of the Mexican economy."
http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/148.cfm

As far as industry is concerned, the exploitation had been steady long before (but grew with the advent of) NAFTA. US corporations set up manufacturing plants (maquiladoras) in other nations (a concept I'm sure you're already familiar with) in order to exploit cheap, desperate labor and/or weak labor laws of the host nation. Mexico actually has good labor laws for what basically amounts to a third world country (or close to it), but the advent of NAFTA, in addition to greatly increasing the number of this maquiladors, completely neuter those labor laws (Kamel, Rachel and Anya Hoffman. The Maquiladora Reader: Cross-Border Organizing Since NAFTA. p. 1). This, of course, helps keep much of the working class impoverished and disenfranchised.

According to Elvia Arriola (professor of law @ Northern Illinois) "The law and public policy that enliven the maquiladoras also sustain a widespread corporate practice of exploitative jobs and extreme low wages without providing protection from the unsafe or dangerous working conditions, against the sexual harassment, or the pregnancy discrimination." She further states that workers "feared losing their jobs, knew that sexual harassment and monitoring of their sexual lives was just a part of the job, and were constantly being pressured to meet arbitrary production quotas" and that supervisors at such plants "impose stiff penalties for workers who refuse to give into demands (whether sexual or otherwise)."
http://www.womenontheborder.org/Art...om%20Barbed.pdf

An agreement signed well before NAFTA requires that hazardous waste created by US corporations in Mexico be transported back to the US for proper disposal; instead, these companies save themselves money by simply dumping toxic waste into Mexico's deserts and rivers. Indeed, according our own EPA, only 91 of the 600 maquiladoras along the Texas border have returned to the US to properly dispose of the toxic waste they produce(Kelly, Mary E. Free Trade: The Politics of Toxic Waste. p. 48).

The environmental impacts on Mexico as a result of US agricultural exploitation via NAFTA have also been considerable. According to Papademetriou et al., "The Mexican government estimates that annual pollution damages over the past decade exceeded $36 billion per year. This damage to the environment is greater than the economic gains from the growth of trade and of the economy as a whole. More specifically, enactment of NAFTA accelerated changes in commercial farming practices that have put Mexico’s diverse ecosystem at great risk of contamination from concentrations of nitrogen and other chemicals commonly used in modern farming" and that, additionally, "Mexico's evolution toward a modern, export oriented agricultural sector has also failed to deliver the anticipated environmental benefits of reduced deforestation and tillage. Rural farmers have replaced lost income caused by the collapse in commodity prices by farming more marginal land, a practice that has resulted in an average deforestation rate of more than 630,000 hectares per year since 1993 in the biologically rich regions of southern Mexico."
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/nafta1.pdf

So, there you have it. I've provided actual data regarding exploitation of Mexico by the US in virtually every area a nation is or can be exploited. The environment is being destroyed and human beings are being regularly exploited economically, physically, and sexually. I'm sure you'll just ignore it, but there it all is, backed up with facts, figures, and research by experts.



Great. And since then, the cost to Mexican agriculture of U.S. export dumping practices made possible by NAFTA is estimated at close to $13 billion (between 1997-2005).
http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/...ilsonCenter.pdf


The poverty rates in Mexico are the largest factor in that. The first wave was their own fault (the peso inflation/collapse of the mid-90's) while the second wave was largely brought about by economic exploitation and subsequent job loss made possible by NAFTA. Immigration has actually tailed off in a huge way the past five years or so, largely because the poverty rate has gone up here and jobs have gone away; they have no reason to come here if they can't find work.

I know you already believe that the vast majority of Mexicans come to this country with dreams of subverting American culture (but not in a Nietzschian way, which is how you would personally prefer to subvert it) and starting a grand new gang so they can be the new John Gotti, Al Capone, or Scarface, but it simply isn't fact. They come here looking for work.


Absolutely. A one time economic package that isn't even worth half as much damage as this country has cost them in the subsequent years isn't particularly convincing to your argument. It would be like if I patted you on the head and gave you a $10 bill then beat the shit out of you a month later with a lead pipe and stole $25 from you. But, but... don't you remember when I helped you that one time? Right? I gave you TEN BUCKS, man! People have the nerve to complain, man...


No problem with going off topic for the moment, as you are clearly over-matched when it comes to sociology and I can see business and economy is the area in which you feel most comfortable. You aren't doing much
better here, either, but I suppose it was worth a shot.

Criminals to immigrate to this country just like everyone else. Do you honestly believe they make up the bulk of the immigrants? If so, provide some figures so back up your point. Otherwise, it's simply more of your loud, obnoxious, ignorant, and highly illogical pontificating.



No, crime increased because wages went down, jobs disappeared, social programs were cut, and neighborhoods got worse. It's a fairly easy connection to make, but your continued rejection of the most simple sociological principles makes any sort of reasonable sociological discussion with you impossible.


Maybe not, but I can certainly cite facts and figures that prove the fiscal impact, as I have done. If that is considered high school level, your complete inability to discredit any of it with facts and figures of your own would have to be considered preschool level, wouldn't it?



Yes, there are unsafe workplaces in the United States (we're supposed to capitalize this country that we supposedly have respect for, son of an immigrant!) directly resulting from the greed and/or negligence of white-collar criminals. The fact that this occurs elsewhere is as relevant to this conversation as the murder rate in Bulgaria.

Health care fraud and auto repair fraud are both characterized as white-collar crime. I'm not including them to be provocative (in fact, I'd already more than made my point without bringing up either); I'm bringing them up because they repeatedly appear on any list or study of white-collar crime in America. They are both frauds committed by trusted persons during the course of their normal jobs. You'd think someone has studied business would be more familiar with what constitutes white-collar crime, huh?

Ignoring the fact that the people committing the crimes regularly fall on both sides of counterparty risk, and the fact that those ON the counterparty risk side generally cause and are capable of causing MUCH more fiscal damage (see=ENRON, Madoff, etc.), it doesn't change the fact that crimes such as this continue to result in job losses and reduced wages for the average employee, which obviously contributes to the poverty rate.

Saying this every time I systematically discredit one of your points doesn't change the fact that I did.



Because I had already proven my point. If you care to challenge for additional examples, pick one yourself out of that rather sizable list I gave you.


Again, we're back to the presupposition of immigrants automatically coming over with criminal motives of disrespect, even contempt for, their host nation. This notion is laughable silly, unbelievably immature, and is backed with no facts, figures, or data. Continuing to use this moronic assumption as a counterpoint to the facts, figures, and data only further exposes your inability to critically reason against them.

By the way, that would be correct usage of the term "circular reasoning." Your only evidence that most immigrants come here with the intent of subverting our culture and indulging in criminal behavior is your presupposition that they are. They are because they are = circular reasoning. I know you have a little trouble with definitions, but you don't even have to thank me this time.



I can quite easily deny that these people make up the bulk of the immigrants who come over to this country, as you continuously and ignorantly presume. The fact that your entire argument hinges on this unfounded assumption (and that assumption is the only evidence of this assumption) is quite pathetic. If you feel so strongly about it, however, back it up with data that shows the majority of immigrants to be America hating criminals.

No, just that they commit as much crime as anyone else drowning in poverty, including blacks and whites who may have ancestors in this country dating back to the 18th century.

It can't be that difficult, considering how many other people in this thread independently came to the same conclusion. Your thinly veiled rhetoric isn't something any of us are new to, unfortunately for you. Even though, I doubt it would have fooled anyone.


Arrogantly mocking legitimate research ≠ discrediting said research. Again, if you had a point to make, you would be easily able to do so with one tenth the hard data I was able to make my point on education with, or my points on the exploitation of Mexico today.


Thank you for continuing to prove my point. Thinly veiled, racist rhetoric, backed up with nothing by presumptuous opinions, circular logic, and topped off with quotes by black metal bands who, in turn, borrowed said quote from Adolf Hitler. Yeah, that row just keeps getting harder and harder to hoe, sweetie. As long as we're just dropping random quotes from our favorite bands, though, I'll join in the fun.

"Puke, puke; I drank too much! Vomit on the chair!
Puke, puke; I drank too much! Even in my hair!"

__________________

Yiuuuuuh!!11!!1

__________________

Chris is the MASTER DEBATER.

__________________

This was the longest post ever made on MT, I guess. Someone please make a screenshot of it
EDIT: HOLY SHIT I ZOOMED ALL THE WAY OUT AND IT STILL DOESN'T FIT ON MY SCREEN

Chris, you got a shit load of time man

__________________

Nah, I think he just knows what he's talking about.

Fantastic post, Chris.

__________________

About time you scumbag!

__________________

YA SRSLY d00d.

I did not read any of Chris's post. I don't know if I could without at least a moderate dose of adderall and some booze. Definitely wins the longest post award, though. Hurrah!

__________________

It is irrelevant viz-a-viz points 2, 3 and 4 in my original response.



That's not how you presented it, though, is it? You presented it as if the lyrics are, or at least should be, indicative of society.

And this still falls foul of point 1 in my original response. Does Seth Putnam believe what he writes, or does he write it just to get a reaction?



You explicitly said, "Anybody who reads a Black Metal lyric sheet can see..." which is one way of saying that you believe the ideology contained therein - even if it is accepted that the lyrics are representative of the writer's belief -should be an argument accepted by any member of society capable of reading the lyrics. You statement was an appeal, with the implication being that if only the rest of society had access to black metal ideology then they would agree with your stance. Hence extrapolation.



It also happens to be the genre - along with punk - that seems to contain the largest element of national socialistic ideology. Indeed there is a whole sub-genre of black metal devoted to it, NSBM. Just an observation.

And this still falls foul of accusations of cherry-picking, with the added caveat that you would appear to be incapable of looking outside your own world-sphere. Reference back to my response to the third quototation above.



And what of Judeo-Christian heritage? Does that not count as heritage? Or is heritage the sole possession of those who settled in an area first?

The Beatles form a huge part of Liverpool's heritage; is this less valid than the culture that preceded Merseybeat?

The slave trade is part of Liverpool's heritage. While deplorable, it has had the knock-on effect of making Liverpool one of the most multi-cultural cities, certainly in the UK if not the world.



Yes it is broad, because your statement was broad.

This completely ignores the fact that humanity has migrated steadily over the course of its existence on this planet and that abstract concepts such as religion and culture can spread as a meme rather than by mass migration.

__________________

Once again Chris - the length of your posts is directly inversely related to its substance. And you incorrectly defined circular reasoning, for what I believe is the second time - what you attempt to define is simply a restatement.

You really are not very clever.

You also don't know the meaning of counterparty risk and you completely misused it. You should look this up if you are interested, but I would suggest avoiding it all together.

Grown-ups in the real world don't point to one buisness failing and say "this effects the average employee and increases the poverty rate."
That is a very stupid and childish statement.
There is this thing called market efficiency. When companies go bankrupt the talent from those firms goes to their competitors, often getting paid more. And yes, the low-skilled workers have mobility as long as the entire industry isn't impacted in a specific region (like auto manufacturing in Michigan). The demand has to be met by the competitors, if there is no demand than the field sucks and the workers should find something else anyway.
This isn't the Soviet Union where there are X number of jobs and when one firm goes out of business there are X-300 jobs the next day.
Idiot.

Sociology in and of itself is a practice largely devoted to the apology of criminal behaivior and weak therputic remedies instead of the actual solution for criminals, which is taking them out in the snow and executing them. Neither based in history or political theory at best, anyone who refers to this as "cold hard research" likely received their undergraduate degree from the growing number of institutions that should be disbarred from granting them.

A criminal is a criminal. He or she doesn't look to crime as a new profession because they got laid off. These kinds of connections are bitching and whining, plain and simple.

There has been no "proof" anywhere in this thread of anything and any attempt at claiming such is pure charlatanism. It's pretty clear that one of us hates criminal behavior and the other enjoys making apologies for it because they feel sensitivity to apparent demographic trends in crime statistics. This whole abortion of a discussion has only been indicative of value judgements.

What you fail to have seen in your hysterical enthusiasm for delivering any answer to every sentence I write is that from the very beginning, I never stated anything regarding "most" immigrants. When speaking very specifically about illegal immigrants, I made sure to clarify this.

You say things like


-- when I actually said no such thing. This is typical of your tactics.

You can point to poverty, and analyze the economic relationships between the US and Mexico - which you did absolutely poorly by the way -- It's pretty clear to me that you don't really read the papers you are quoting, you are likely looking for quotes in google and find a PDF to give the appearance that you have a scholarly command of your refrences. But if you did you completely didn't address the fact of illegal immigration rose during the time NAFTA was in place.

See page 47 of the Carnegie NAFTA piece. The page after will tell you


So you see, the efficacy of NAFTA from the beginning was offset by immigration trends. You cite that argiculture lost 1.3MM jobs. It is very clear to see that many of the illegal immigrants seek higher pay jobs across the border.

This is not the subset of immigrants I was ever referring to and the I'm not interested in a drawn out debate with you regarding North American trade relations --

The fact remains, and you will in no way, ever invalidate this point that a subset of immigrants EXISTS that do not care about being productive members of society.

I don't care if they come from El Salvador or if they come from Russia.

Their numbers are significant and they are identifiable.

Lastly, anyone who doesn't understand how judeo-christianity is completely foreign to the true origins of literally all modern-day nations it has touched outside the Dead Sea region has no understanding of pre-christian cultures of those nations, their pagan roots, and the method in which the majority of societies were introduced to the religion: Violence and subsequent hysteria, witch hunts, persecution.

That applies from the Caucasus to South America.

I'm not taking any more time on this fruitless exchange and I hope to keep the promise this time - I can't believe how much time you must have on your hands.

__________________

Lastly, here's something for your next "happy memorial day":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxB6wsBdRPs

__________________

An extract from the comments there:


Hahaha oh my god what a piece of shit, I love the U.S. for not banning right radical stuff.

__________________

The length of most was actually directly proportional to the amount of your bullshit that I easily discredit plus the amount of points I backed up with data provided by research from actual experts, which you are not.


This was a nice try the first time, but constantly stating that I define words incorrectly doesn't prove that I did. Interestingly, not only do I define these words quite accurately, but unlike you, actually have the logical capacity to apply them properly to real life scenarios. Reading comprehension clearly isn't a strong point for you, is it, princess?

By the bye; if I have been incorrectly defining and using as many words as you claim, it would be incredibly easy for you to show exactly how and why such words were misused. I had no problem doing that with the words you've continuously misused.


Maybe not, but what exactly would that make you? Still waiting for you to back up any of your points with expert opinions and researched data, by the way...


I understand what the term counterparty risk means, however, I chose to address the term in the context you used it in. Counterparty risk is a fairly generic term regarding the risk to either side of a contract or agreement that the other side won't live up to it's deal, especially in the context of failing to make payments (inc. incurred interest). Now, it quite easily understood that the counterparty risk is higher for lenders and intermediaries, and that was the context in which you appeared to use it. I was simply showing that lenders and intermediaries are also often (obvious not AS often) the perpetrators of fraud and other similar crime, and that WHEN they are, they cause considerably more damage.


No, but intelligent people, which you clearly are not, can easily point to many businesses failing simultaneously and the subsequently higher unemployment rates and lower wages for the average employee (along with reduced and cut benefits) as seriously affecting the poverty rate. I know it's harder to prove your point without mincing my words and trying to make it seem like I said something I didn't, but my text is there for anyone who cares to read it and it clearly doesn't say what you desperately want to imply.


Yes, we already know the wealthy don't suffer much in times like this. Total non-point, but thanks for sharing.


To your first point, no; low-skilled workers (or even highly skilled workers in a dying market, as you note) don't have much mobility. Why? It's simple arithmetic. There are far fewer jobs for these workers to compete for.

Interesting you begrudgingly acknowledge auto manufacturing in Michigan, considering the state of Detroit, Flint, and other such cities. But you are right; fewer jobs, lower wages, and lost benefits don't lead to poverty. Every grown up knows that!


There's a few problems with that. First, many of these workers are skilled in the area they work, even it's only a manufacturing job or something similar. Transitioning to something else isn't always easy. Second, many of these workers have been doing this type of work for 10 years or more. Again, transitioning isn't always easy. Third, this concept relies on the assumption that any jobs lost in one market are automatically replaced in a different one. That isn't always (in fact, usually isn't) the case. Fourth, the concept also relies on the assumption that any jobs lost in one market and replaced by another are going to be equal or better, which is almost never the case.


Good point. I forgot that here in the good old USA, when 300 jobs disappear, 300 automatically open up somewhere else. That must be why the unemployment rate never changes, except when people just get lazy and boring for a generation or two. Fucking immigrants!

Yeah, you got me there, bro.


Pathetically weak. Your desperate and failed attempt to discredit an entire field simply because no expert in it supports your laughably ignorant position only serves to further expose your prejudice and stupidity.


Any evidence for your position? I have plenty for mine, sunshine.

In a report done by three PhDs in economics (just so you won't cry that sociology hurts your feelings on this one!), "the strongest finding in this new study is a link between falling wages and property crimes such as burglary. However, the study also found a link between wages and some violent crimes - such as assault and robbery - in which money is often a motive.

The weakest relationship occurred with murder and rape - two crimes in which monetary gain is not usually a motive." However, "murders show a weak effect because some -- drug murders, mostly -- are economically motivated as gangs kill to expand their turf."
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive//crimwage.htm
http://www.bus.lsu.edu/mocan/WSJ.Crime_UR.pdf

According to research by two other unrelated economic professors, "unemployment was found to have a significant relationship to the number of dishonesty crimes committed. This is the category that includes the economic crimes of theft, fraud, car conversion, receiving and burglary..."
http://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/users/...nemployment.pdf

Well, that was easy. I'm sure you won't respond in kind, as you've yet to do any sort of research at all, but that probably won't stop you from ignoring fact and figures in favor of your loud, obnoxious opinion.


On your side there sure hasn't. No facts, no figures, no data, no research. You can keep claiming that my points aren't strong, but the data proffered begs to differ.

It's pretty clear that one of us is extremely comfortable making blanket generalizations about entire groups of people because they lack the logical capacity or reasoning capabilities to look beneath the surface and see the real issues at hand.

So, you just keep on denying that poverty leads to street crime while the data begs to differ. Keep insisting that immigrants only come here to rob America and throw it into a social state of upheaval, just cross your fingers and hope that your complete lack of evidence will eventually be ignored.


Maybe not all immigrants. Just those dirty, filthy, Mexican ones. Did you know the crime rate is higher in Mexico? Not that I'm saying they're born criminals or anything... wink, wink, nudge, nudge, saynomore, knowwhatimean?


You've been exaggeration and distorting my points throughout this entire discussion and now you want to complain that I responded in kind once? Funny stuff, kid. Funny stuff.

Maybe if your points had any facts or figures to back them up, or any logical basis at all, the average observer would buy it on it's own merit. So far, nobody here has.


What was to address? Hundreds of thousands of people lost jobs that were never replaced in the market. People got desperate and tried (many successfully) to sneak over here for better employment opportunities. Not a whole lot to analyze, really.


Great. Immigration rose. Point?


How many get higher paying jobs once they get here? Maybe if you could show (i.e. facts, data) that such jobs are easily secured and that the bulk of these people do, in fact, escape a life of abject poverty once they reach the states, you might have a decent counterpoint here. In fact, 71.4% of illegal Mexican immigrants live below or around the poverty line.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/mexico/poverty.html


Good, because you already lost that debate quite handily.


The assumption remains by morons such as yourself that a large portion of immigrants come to this country for the sole purpose of subverting American culture and victimizing the people who are already here and each other. Evidence?


You do care, however, if they come from Mexico, since you already made it a point to bring up Mexico's crime rate when I objected to your original point. Yeah, everyone saw what you did there.


Yet you've continuously failed to actually cite any of these easily identifiable and extremely significant numbers.


Again; Judeo-Christian values aren't any more foreign to this entire hemisphere than white people are. I know you're desperate to make some convoluted point that I don't even care about that the spread of Judeo-Christianity somehow corrupted all the cultures it touched. I get that. We all get that. The fact remains, however, that American culture is unique and has a very short history. That history does not predate Judeo-Christian values, and even if it did, the burden of proof would still be on you to show how those values HAD corrupted our nation.


It's a bit too late now to run away with your tail between your legs. Your ignorant fringe ideology has already been exposed, as has your pathetic inability to critically reason, or even properly use words in a sentence. My continuous challenges for you to back up your points have gone ignored, as have the voluminous amounts of data that wholly contradict your points.

What we have gotten from you are nothing but repeatedly loud opinions. No facts. No figures. No data. No research. No logic. No credibility. Not even a challenge, I'm afraid.

Thanks again for coming, kid.

__________________

Takes two to tango, bub. Besides, Chris apparently spends his oodles of black-man time on reading scientific, peer-reviewed materials whereas you spend your oodles of delusional-man time operating a forum where you regurgitate KKK pamphlets and pass them off as evidence of something or other about Spics and Jews not having enough reverence for the country you'd rather they had never visited to begin with.

But don't worry, we've all posted shit here that we later learned to keep to ourselves and we all still get along fine, even though we now know for sure that Dyldo is a sexual predator with a penchant for fat children and that I once kissed a Protestant.

They weren't protesting until you tried to kiss them.

__________________

I'm still trying to figure out what a "direct inverse relationship" between two sets of data can mean. Let's think about it logically: a direct relationship means the two data sets increase with each other in defined proprtionality and an inverse relationship means one set decreases in defined proportionality as the other increases. So for any defined proportionality a "direct inverse relationship" would imply no relationship. Indeed, both sets would have equal elements of equal value.

__________________

They didn't teach you that in your Quantum Physics classes?!

__________________

Now you're just teasing, John.

To be fair to his originally point Paddington, I actually DID have a ton of free time the past week and a half. I generally make it a point, though, when I have so much free time, of spending much of it challenging myself intellectually and physically in order to prevent sloth. The intellectual part consists of one of two things; A. exploring new areas within fields I already have an intense interest in (or those fields on the periphery thereof) and keeping myself abreast of updates in the areas I'm already strong and B. challenging my own beliefs by taking a look at available data and research.

The cornerstone of science, indeed, of the scientific mind, is the ability to constantly challenge the established belief systems already in place. In this way we clean out the outdated presumptions and falsehoods of yesteryear and strengthen our confidence in that which is repeatedly upheld by new evidence. And since, of course, there is far more money and prestige in challenging the establishment and turning an entire field on it's proverbial ear than there is in simply adding bits and pieces to what is already known, all fields of science exist as a self-cleansing belief system.

Those of an unscientific mind are simply those who are too weak to challenge their own logic and beliefs. Such people are prone to utter dependence upon those ethos with more holes in it than particle board.

__________________

Chris, you are easily the stupidest, most self-congratulatory idiot I have ever interacted with - it is impossible going back and forth with you, every attempt ends with mischaracterization, high school level of scope shifting and pathetic attempts at distorting anything someone writes to you.

For the third time I don't need any facts and figures to tell you that some people come to other countries to use all they can and don't care about anything or anyone there. Period. That's the end of the discussion. If you don't agree, then you have the priviledge of living somewhere where all immigrants are nice law-abiding people.

I don't give a shit about your apologies for criminal behavior from poverty.

You don't need any "figures" to back this up and I could give a shit what you think I am implying by who or what is more guilty. So take your "sunshines" and your "sweeties" and your hours of time on your hands and find something better to do - you obviously have no real obligations or friends that could stand you in real life so that you can spend forever verbally masturbating and creating debate-awards when you can't even follow the fucking topic.

__________________

A direct relationship just means that one item is affected by another. Turning up the heater causes the temperature of the room to increase - direct relationship. Turning on some Slayer gets the kids in the rooms moving, which in turn increases the ambient temperature - indirect relationship.

There is no necessary inference from a "direct relationship" that both increase and there is no inference that it is porportional. But it is often assumed that when someone says a direct relationship it is a positive movement, inverse meaning it is negatively correlated.

__________________

I've been telling him this for years.

Well, I don't really want to get involved in the shitstorm, and I'm not racist in any way at all. But I do have to say this. Fuck Zionism. I have nothing against Jews, but I fucking hate Zionism.

Even some Jews hate Zionism.

__________________

What's interesting is that even when you read Haaretz, you actually get a much more sober view of what is going on over there. It's largely American big media that paints the most apologetic depiction of any zionist-related activity.

__________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c-Ijky95dc


For a little double post here and a change of subject, the ex lieutenant governor of South Carolina made some statements in the following You Tube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpb4nwfiaPY

He may have went about it all the wrong way(for the mass media), but I have to agree with the guy. I don't think he planned on a reelection, so he decided to go balls out in that last speech. I would like to think the guy was mostly being aggressive towards people who are using the system to sit on their ass and not using it to move forward.

__________________

Maybe I could give you a few pointers here, no strings attached. Speaking for my own country, I do know that there are a number of immigrants who've come here to use our highly generous social system. Yes, it's way more generous than yours, I can assure you. Or at least it was. They've been corrosive to our society, no doubt. Unlike you, however, this is something I can back up with data (in my own language though, if anyone's really interested I might be able to find it in English) and I also realize that I have to. This is the foundation for a responsible handling of government. Using facts and data to separate and quantify the various components of issues and problems at hand. See, here's the thing - while we do get a portion like that, to a very large extent our problems with street crime and the like can indeed be clearly linked to poverty rates and the fact that the average time for a non-European immigrant to get his first job is seven years. This is the effect of very badly run (note, partially subjective view from a party member) immigration and economic politics. See what I'm getting at? Both factors exist. And only data, statistics and in-depth research could tell you which one is the dominant one - only that could point the way for us and show that indeed lack of jobs is the core of the problem. In areas where our policies are having their full effect, what you see is that as unemployment rates go down, everything, including integration of new citizens into society, works far better.
Now, I'm not qualified to comment on the job market in your country. But at least here, the acknowledgment of the importance of jobs and poverty in the context of street crime and social ills have led to a fairly successful five years of my party in office, so far.

__________________

SoreAssIncision, what's your view on head measurements? And what's your view on intelligence levels across races?

Here's some information with zero data involved from third parties. When I was growing up there was a city near by that was booming manufacturing, farming, and service jobs were all around. I moved away and didn't go back to that city for several years. I kept hearing about a lot of the manufacturing jobs leaving that city through the news. One day I had a friend of mine ask for some help at a convenient store over that way because his mother was general manager over the corporation. When I drove into that town nothing I mean nothing looked the same it looked as if I hadn't seen that town in 30 years. That place now holds one of the highest unemployment rates in the state. Building's were falling apart, Grass and vines were growing up around old factories, and nothing at all looked like it had been touched with a coat of paint since the day I moved. It was way different socially, a lot of punks walking the streets. It has a pretty high crime rate now compared to the 90's when it was still booming.

See the poorer people get stuck in the catch 22, they don't have enough money to move away with family and find the jobs. They don't have the education needed to find a better job if it exist. The man with the money is educated(it least the paper he has says so) and able to get up and move any time he may please or and no shit stay at that company. I know first hand senior executives who still work for companies that have moved over sea's in the late 90's, they fly over check to see if things are going good, fly back and over see the shipping and handling part of the corporation in America. The factory that moved didn't make it here because of just worker wages, they just couldn't keep paying executives and CEO's the same million a year so they moved instead of decreasing there own wages, Greed. They had no use for the little man who pulled that 8-5 for 20 years, lost all of his benefits, and if he is lucky to even find a job and not have to hit up the welfare system. Think about their kids man how some of these people just got down and out. Some walked away from family, others may even become abusive. The type of stress said people must feel has to distort life beyond belief and for their kids who see it going on. When a family is ruined a child at a young age can be ruined no guidance.

The county I'm referring to is now a majority black. Guess who was the poorest and uneducated...come on I'll give you a second....that's right the blacks in that area. This all goes back to one point, their mentality. People who are uneducated do dumb shit at the end of the day, it's all they've ever known and until something better comes along it's all they'll ever do.

You need to be put through the grind and get educated. Show me the poorest town and I'll show you some of the most impetuous people no matter what race or where there from. Think if you don't have crap what do you have to loose?

It's also to blame on our impulsive government and big corporations as Chris has written one hundred times over.

Think our government representatives waste and steals money like it will not be there tomorrow(which may be the case soon). My state will pay a man to sit on his ass and become a welfare statistic. Go in hopes of starting a new business and see what incentive they give you even to do it. Nothing, except some solid advice pay for your business license and pay your taxes. Taxes are outrageous here they tax your money, turn around and charge you a sales tax on bought objects, charge you property tax and with a house its by square feet, tax the value of your car yearly, and then tax the gas that they claim is a road tax yet the roads we drive on are the third worst in the nation. Then they give their self's raise's, no shit the new governor just gave every one a big ass raise some(some ten+ thousand raises).

We have criminals at the top who cause criminals at the bottom, because both are impulsive. Both only care about the well being of self.

By now if you can't see the point only one thing could be attributed to your naive belief's, and that's because either you or someone you loved has had a run in with these colored gangs. Blinded by hate.

__________________

I can disagree with that statement in one word. Weiner.

__________________

It's always the weiners with you, isn't it? You're a woman obsessed!

Although he is living up to his name.

Frickin' frackin' 120 second rule!

__________________

Every non-African on earth has Neanderthal genes. From my own overwrought and naive views the Africans are lesser beings. Please no one disprove me with facts such as George Washington Carver or Philip Emeagwali existed, I do not believe it and the holocaust never happened.


There's his reply.

On another note one search of Google for the ladder scientist above one of the oddest top searches popped up "black scientist created white people"....

__________________