Should a parent not have empathy?

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
18,971
Reaction score
263
Points
83
Jake, if 90% of a 100K population, otherwise expressed as 90,000 people, are committing 4 murders, and 3% of 100K, or 3,000 people, are committing 3 murders, who is committing murders at a higher rate, 4 in 90K or 3 in 3K?
Are you saying this in regard to the "conviction rates per 100,000 population" chart that JTF posted? Just want to make sure so that I know how much to make fun of you in my response.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
9,752
Reaction score
1,426
Points
113
This ain't 2000 or even 2006 anymore. FOX News is far more Talk Radio-Pseudo-Fascism than Conservatism these days. You want real Conservatism, you're looking in the wrong place. Read George Will. Listen to David Brooks. Follow John McCain. Remember Ronald Reagan.
I've suspected this before but this HAS to be a bit, right?
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,930
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
Are you saying this in regard to the "conviction rates per 100,000 population" chart that JTF posted? Just want to make sure so that I know how much to make fun of you in my response.
Yeah. From what I was able to see in the chart, I don’t see where I’m wrong. Explain it to me.

JTF and Jake don’t seem to be responding and I don’t have access to the article.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,190
Reaction score
713
Points
113
Jake, if 90% of a 100K population, otherwise expressed as 90,000 people, are committing 4 murders, and 3% of 100K, or 3,000 people, are committing 3 murders, who is committing murders at a higher rate, 4 in 90K or 3 in 3K?
Yer good at reading charts.
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,049
Points
113
There are tough decisions to make. That's why every president continues to kick the can to the next administrations. But at some point somebody needs to be the grown up and make the tough decisions.

All the people crying foul of children getting separated from their parents dont shed a tear when the US kills children overseas as a part of "collateral damage."
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
18,971
Reaction score
263
Points
83
Yeah. From what I was able to see in the chart, I don’t see where I’m wrong. Explain it to me.

JTF and Jake don’t seem to be responding
All of the statistics cited are "per 100,000 population". In other words, it's all apples to apples - all of the data is normalized. You said:

"these rates are per 100,000 population of Texans. In other words, absolute totals, not per capita."

"Per 100,000" and "per capita" are two different ways of saying the same thing - it's just changing the size of the numerator and denominator in a ratio. "Per capita" means "per person." Saying "1,750 convictions per 100,000 population" or ".0175 convictions per capita" are the exact same thing.

Assuming the data is correct, the chart shows that conviction rates among Texans are higher for native-born individuals than legal or illegal immigrants for all crimes, homicide, and larceny.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,190
Reaction score
713
Points
113
There are tough decisions to make. That's why every president continues to kick the can to the next administrations. But at some point somebody needs to be the grown up and make the tough decisions.

All the people crying foul of children getting separated from their parents dont shed a tear when the US kills children overseas as a part of "collateral damage."
We don't? I think it's total garbage and have stated so many, many times. We are hated around the world because we are so sloppy militarily.
 

El Amin Fan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
2,459
Reaction score
157
Points
63
We don't? I think it's total garbage and have stated so many, many times. We are hated around the world because we are so sloppy militarily.
He was talking about Republicans, clearly. They don't care about kid collateral damage or kids being separated at the border.
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,049
Points
113
We don't? I think it's total garbage and have stated so many, many times. We are hated around the world because we are so sloppy militarily.
You do. Sure. The majority of people? Nope. This isn't a party line issue. The majority of people DO NOT care. You see all the media coverage and interest this story is bringing. I literally have zero memory of a majority of US citizens care about the destruction and loss of life our military has caused. Different hemisphere..........out of mind
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
If I’m understanding your first chart correctly (I couldn’t access the Wapo article), these rates are per 100,000 population of Texans. In other words, absolute totals, not per capita.
You're really struggling with the basics lately. I understand live monitoring Fox News all day every day and defending heartless incompetence must be exhausting but still.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,565
Reaction score
2,551
Points
113
It's just not even close. This is insane.
It's not the I think the admin is blameless, this is clearly not well thought out or well communicated. If you take the least charitable view, they deliberately separated children from parents to set an example for future illegal immigrants. And again, unless they are claiming amnesty, that separation is going to be a day or two.
Good, caring, empathetic? No.

Worst abuse of humanity in history? Cmon, it's not even in the ballpark.
Context: those are Schmidt's words.

He chose them carefully. He didn't say that this is one of the worst; he wrote that there is a connection to the worst, which there is both stylistically and administratively.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
Longtime GOP strategist and McCain campaign manager has left the Party of Trump

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And the # of decent Republicans left drops by about 10%. Good for him.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
Everything is Hitler.
Everything? No. But yanking innocent kids away from their parents and putting them in detention camps kind of reminds one of that era, doesn't it? But never mind that, get a good hearty chuckle at the "lefty meltdown".
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,930
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
The stats are per 100,000 (which, first off, makes them not absolute figures, as you boldly asserted). Secondly, they aren't per 100,000 of each group listed. They are per 100,000 period. Take a break.
Per 100,000 simplifies and standardizes the statistic instead of listing it as a total for Texas. I’m fully aware that that means 100,000 period. That enables someone to compare it to another state or region.

It is not as useful to comparing rates of crime per category of person. To do that, you need to know what portion of the population those categories of people represent. I’m saying, of the population, native born citizens represent over 90% of the total population, whether it’s all or using the standardized figure of 100,000, it’s still 90%. The same goes for undocumented immigrants. If they are 3% of the total, they are 3% of the 100K.

If the murder rate for native born is 4 in 100K and they are 90% of the population, that means that there are 4 murders committed by native born per 90K. Or 1 murder per 22.5K. If the murder rate for undocumented in 3 in 100K and they are 3% of the population, that means that there are 3 murders committed by undocumented immigrants per 3K. Or 1 murder per 1K.

So the per capita rate is 1 murder per 22.5K vs 1 murder per 1K. Which do you think is better?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
There are tough decisions to make. That's why every president continues to kick the can to the next administrations. But at some point somebody needs to be the grown up and make the tough decisions.

All the people crying foul of children getting separated from their parents dont shed a tear when the US kills children overseas as a part of "collateral damage."
That isn't close to true and you know it.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
It's just not even close. This is insane.
It's not the I think the admin is blameless, this is clearly not well thought out or well communicated. If you take the least charitable view, they deliberately separated children from parents to set an example for future illegal immigrants. And again, unless they are claiming amnesty, that separation is going to be a day or two.
Good, caring, empathetic? No.

Worst abuse of humanity in history? Cmon, it's not even in the ballpark.
Would you say that the Japanese internment camps are among our worst abuses in history?
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,565
Reaction score
2,551
Points
113
Everything? No. But yanking innocent kids away from their parents and putting them in detention camps kind of reminds one of that era, doesn't it? But never mind that, get a good hearty chuckle at the "lefty meltdown".
The Nazis didn't start with concentration camps. They worked up to that. Trump's rhetoric in his unhinged speech the other day referring to dark-skinned immigrants ("People that come in violate the law, they endanger their children in the process, and frankly, they endanger all of our children. You see what happens with MS-13 where your sons and daughters are attacked violently. Kids that never even heard of such a thing are being attacked violently. Not with guns but with knives because it’s much more painful.") does sound like something you might have heard German officials say to scare German citizens about foreigners, Gypsies or Jews.
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,049
Points
113
That isn't close to true and you know it.
Its very true. I know its tough to admit to, so you won't. I'm not saying people don't think its bad. What I'm saying is most people might give an aw, shucks and then move on with their day.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
Its very true. I know its tough to admit to, so you won't. I'm not saying people don't think its bad. What I'm saying is most people might give an aw, shucks and then move on with their day.
All? Not even close. Don't be an absolutist fool like 2. No one will dispute that people care far more about this. But to say that none of these same people care when we kill innocent kids in other countries is a lie.
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,049
Points
113
All? Not even close. Don't be an absolutist fool like 2. No one will dispute that people care far more about this. But to say that none of these same people care when we kill innocent kids in other countries is a lie.
I'm not making an absolute claim, I'm making a general claim. I care about it. I try and bring it up on this board plenty.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,302
Points
113
I'm not making an absolute claim, I'm making a general claim. I care about it. I try and bring it up on this board plenty.
Fine. But you did make an absolutist claim. Thanks for clarifying.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,190
Reaction score
713
Points
113
Per 100,000 simplifies and standardizes the statistic instead of listing it as a total for Texas. I’m fully aware that that means 100,000 period. That enables someone to compare it to another state or region.

It is not as useful to comparing rates of crime per category of person. To do that, you need to know what portion of the population those categories of people represent. I’m saying, of the population, native born citizens represent over 90% of the total population, whether it’s all or using the standardized figure of 100,000, it’s still 90%. The same goes for undocumented immigrants. If they are 3% of the total, they are 3% of the 100K.

If the murder rate for native born is 4 in 100K and they are 90% of the population, that means that there are 4 murders committed by native born per 90K. Or 1 murder per 22.5K. If the murder rate for undocumented in 3 in 100K and they are 3% of the population, that means that there are 3 murders committed by undocumented immigrants per 3K. Or 1 murder per 1K.

So the per capita rate is 1 murder per 22.5K vs 1 murder per 1K. Which do you think is better?
KFC, the chart lists per 100,000 of the respective populations. The bars are apples-to-apples. DPO explained the whole thing to you very clearly. I'm not going to do it again.

From the article (use incognito or private mode to view the GD thing, KFC):

"As a percentage of their respective populations, there were 56 percent fewer criminal convictions of illegal immigrants than of native-born Americans in Texas in 2015," author Alex Nowrasteh writes. "The criminal conviction rate for legal immigrants was about 85 percent below the native-born rate."
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,930
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
KFC, the chart lists per 100,000 of the respective populations. The bars are apples-to-apples. DPO explained the whole thing to you very clearly. I'm not going to do it again.

From the article (use incognito or private mode to view the GD thing, KFC):

"As a percentage of their respective populations, there were 56 percent fewer criminal convictions of illegal immigrants than of native-born Americans in Texas in 2015," author Alex Nowrasteh writes. "The criminal conviction rate for legal immigrants was about 85 percent below the native-born rate."
As I said, that wasn’t made clear in the chart and I didn’t have access to the article. I found the data on the CATO website. You’ll notice that that chart clearly states: “per 100,000 of each subpopulation”. The chart that JTF used didn’t say that at all, but it was apparently in the article that I didn’t have access to.

I was wrong, but without the article to clarify the poorly worded chart that JTFs used, there was no way for me to know.

https://www.cato.org/publications/i...f/criminal-immigrants-texas-illegal-immigrant
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
17,190
Reaction score
713
Points
113
As I said, that wasn’t made clear in the chart and I didn’t have access to the article. I found the data on the CATO website. You’ll notice that that chart clearly states: “per 100,000 of each subpopulation”. The chart that JTF used didn’t say that at all, but it was apparently in the article that I didn’t have access to.

I was wrong, but without the article to clarify the poorly worded chart that JTFs used, there was no way for me to know.

https://www.cato.org/publications/i...f/criminal-immigrants-texas-illegal-immigrant
But sure, come on here, make a bunch of idiotic statements anyway. I stand by my original comments. Take a break.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,930
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
But sure, come on here, make a bunch of idiotic statements anyway. I stand by my original comments. Take a break.
I made my assumptions clear on the first post. My assumption was as the JTF chart showed, 100,000 population, when in fact, it was 100,000 for each subpopulation.

I don’t stand by my conclusions from the incorrect assumption. I do stand by my assumption from the incorrect chart.

Whatever. You won.

The data does beg the question, if this is true, why is there such a high rate of illegal immigrants in Federal prisons? I don’t know the answer.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
20,250
Reaction score
1,629
Points
113
I'm not making an absolute claim, I'm making a general claim. I care about it. I try and bring it up on this board plenty.
Agreed. The US has been killing children for years. It's despicable. Let's not start the abuse in our own country.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Top Bottom