Kaitlyn

I stated "Some UBI "experiments" seemed to make people happier" and you asked  "Which ones?".

Finland.

"Where does the money come from to pay all these people ?"

If you stopped the racial quotas for universities, there would be virtually zero Blacks at university. 

That’s very true. 

Have you heard of or read the book “The End of Racism” by Dinesh D’Souza?  Great books!! Incredibly well researched, as are all his books. And more to your point, he wrote “Illiberal Education.” Another well researched book of his. 

It would actually be much better for Germany if Hitler didnt:

1) Attack other countries

2) Attack Jews

2) is what made trade difficult, and it is what increased hate towards Hitler.

1) is what brought Germany into unwinnable world war and ended up giving German territory to USSR which is about as bad as it gets because Russians arent famous for treating others well.

I did hear arguments that Hitler was acting in self-defense when he attacked all those countries. However, sometimes self-defense turns into self-destruction.

Blacks such at education.

*suck

So, we do need another explanation for the 76% who aren't committing suicide and having suicidal thoughts due to victimization. 

Not having an explanation for something simply means we don't have an explanation. The problem is that you do have another explanation - mental illness, hence my point about argument from ignorance and the burden of proof.

I get that you posted this point in response to my point about about victimization being the explanation, but that was just an example of me offering an alternative, not an attempt to cite a full study of the underlying issues. You're the one trying to accomplish that.

You're attempting to contest something that isn't contestable.

You didn't hear a word I said, or maybe are just pretending you didn't. 76% respondents said what exactly? Do you know? No, because all you're doing is relying on the characterization of what they said by the people who actually talked to them.

Like I pointed out earlier, numbers are not always that simple. In one Harvard survey amongst self professed politically engaged individuals, 56% of respondents approved of the Affordable Care Act. Only 33% approved of Obamacare. How you ask a question matters.

So again, this doesn't mean we chuck the numbers out the window, but it does (or at least should) raise a red flag to those who draw conclusions from any study that contradict the conclusions of the people who conducted them.

I didn't call them the same. I argued that they were the same in some regard. That's what an analogy is.

In my previous post I went through why these two things are not the same. You responded with:

Both transgender people and schizophrenics are humans who have mental illness -- that's apples to apples.

You then went on to declare that we could treat them with dignity without pandering to their mental illness. So yes, you absolutely did just call them both mental illnesses and them declare them the same in that regard (apples to apples).

To reiterate my point, again, schizophrenia is where an individual contains multiple personalities, while trans people are just telling you that the one person you see is in fact who they are. These are not the same, not even close. 

There is nothing about these two conditions that are analogous to each other. You can call them both mental illnesses, but calling something a mental illness is not the same as demonstrating why your characterization matters in any meaningful way.

There are a lot of people who think CBT is a relic of the past and that ONLY pharmacology and surgical medical science has the solutions, whether it is with hormone replacement or with the surgical knife. Some also believe it's more important and necessary to fundamentally change the systemic framework of a society than engage in the archaic practice of CBT in EVERY case.

Fortunately we have seen a microcosm of such thinking with the recent "defund the police" movements and a societal shift away from behavior correctional facilities. Over the past few years, we have witnessed a growing movement advocating for the defunding of police departments and a shift away from traditional behavior correctional facilities. This has been fueled by concerns over police brutality, racial profiling, and the disproportionate incarceration of minorities. Lots of people believe that traditional law enforcement and correctional institutions are not effective in addressing the root causes of crime, and that a more "modern" approach that addresses social and economic factors is needed. I really think it is important to recognize that CBT will always play an important role in maintaining public safety and providing rehabilitation for offenders. Ultimately, the key to addressing these issues will be to find a balance between traditional law enforcement and correctional institutions and more progressive approaches that address underlying social and economic factors.

Trying to change  society to accommodate aberrant behavior in EVERY case isn't sustainable. If you are interested, you should look into the recent (short lived) formation of CHAZ/CHOP as an example of a society that went full steam in that direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWe9NQOFs4U

Kaitlyn

She’s a self declared white supremacist. So I don’t have to be polite to her.

With other companies for example Gillette they probably get as many new customers as they lose when they go woke. However budlight is primarily for blue collar people. 

Besides that, the woke crowd they are looking to attract are hipsters who drink craft beer, homos that prefer wine coolers and the scummy people who buy those energy drink alcohol mixed drinks. 

This is the same reason why nascar is playing with fire when they want to piss on their main demographic, fortunately for nascar they seem to intuitively know exactly where that line is and take it right to the edge. They have a great marketing team

I bet you masturbate to Hitler's speeches.

Deprived of what Kaitlyn.

Ley's be honest [...] Gotta keep those gas guzzlers running at any cost.

OK, but with that said every country on earth is up to their eyeballs in debt. So my point still stands. Where does all this magical money come from? 

If UBI makes "poor people work less", then the UBI might be too high.

Some UBI "experiments" seemed to make people happier

Many plans have strict requirements such as abiding by the law as a condition to receive UBI.

Probably UBI would have to be highly tailored to cultural  mind sets. 

The large majority of transgender people are not committing suicide, thinking about suicide or feeling bad due to victimization -- you need another explanation for the 76%.

Actually I don't. This is a classic argument from ignorance fallacy. It is not my responsibility to come up with alternative explanations for why they commit suicide, it is your responsibility as the person making this claim to demonstrate that their "mental illness" is the culprit.

Cite the part of the study saying this, because I just looked again and it says this:

"Evidence demonstrated high prevalence of victimisation (36%) and mental health difficulties (39%) within these populations. Our review shows that these experiences were respectively 3.74 times and 2.67 times higher among young LGBTQ+ people than their cisgender, heterosexual counterparts."

At the end of the day, the arguments I'm making are either right or wrong.

Actually, let's be a bit more precise; the arguments you're making are either valid or invalid. That matters in how we go about assessing this because validity is merely the result of the conclusion following from the premises, but that's meaningless when it's the premises that I'm challenging you on in the first place.

Again, the point I brought up here is that the authors who actually conducted the studies are in a much better position to explain the take away because they understand the full extent of what methods and controls were used to get to their results.

So either you fully understand the controls and methods or you don't. Which is it? If I were to challenge you on any random study you cited and ask you about them would you, without having to cheat, be able to explain it?

Both transgender people and schizophrenics are humans who have mental illness -- that's apples to apples.

Taking two entirely different things and calling them the same doesn't make them the same.

I already explained the fundamental difference between these two things and why it matters here. Do you have a response to that, or are you just going to pretend I didn't explain it?

How will the wack jobs blame this shooting on the Democrats this time?

A gunman shoots his neighbors, including an 8 year old boy because they asked him to stop shooting his rifle in his front yard. 5 killed 3 injured.

He was a good guy with a gun, a law abiding citizen until he killed his neighbors.

Spot on. It's so fucking daft to have these clowns crying intolerance at you for impeding their intolerance. 

The US is 31 trillion in debt with 287 trillion in unfunded mandates years into the future. Where will these magical dollars come from to pay all theses people? And will the current welfare system be abolished or will this just be added to it?

"None of the studies I read suggested giving them free money with no strings attached."  That will immediately be shot down using the race card. 

The poor and minorities cant do what you ask.  Just like they cant get an ID to vote.

Human genetics exist, diverse genetics is the basis of species diversity.

We know that.

Skin tone and anatomical variations are a reality relative to genetics and species development.

We know that.

Europeans Africans Americans, Asians are people who reside/resided  within certain continental land areas.

Though migration from the epicentre of humanity has resulted in a diversely populated planet.

A planet where all humans are related, but vary as dictated by genetic variability relative to human migration and tribal segregation over a period of some 300000 years.

All that you are doing is showing yourself up to be a bit of a White Supremacist/Isolationist.

And if the basis of your defence relies upon ignoring the reality of the human condition, then you will inevitably dismiss the truth as vague word salad.

Come to the UK and you will find that we have very little room in which to isolate communities.

Which is not to say that communities do not still segregate relative to inherited conditioning and genetic variation.

Nonetheless the UK as a Nation is wholly multi-cultural and integrating steadily.

A reality that I  have become accustomed to and not afraid of.

In other words, this "largely ostracized" group doesn't appear to be killing itself because of the ostracization -- this contradicts your argument.

Except that as I have already pointed out to you, your own source disagrees...

Victimisation and mental health were key risk factors across the dimension self-harm and suicide identified through all analyses.

We're not talking about medical advice which I don't know a whole lot about, wherein I have to trust others because I don't understand much. We're talking about the highly politicized topic of transgenderism and the fact that I think the narrative from the "experts" doesn't fit the data.

If you know anything about how data works you know it can be interpreted many different ways based on many different factors. Think of a poll where 80% of respondents answer a certain way, but then they ask the same question differently and suddenly it's a 50/50 split. You need to understand the full extent of the experiment to understand the take away.

This doesn't mean we should blindly trust the conclusions of the experiments authors, but unless you have a complete understanding of what questions were asked and what methods of control were established, you're in a pretty weak position to claim you understand the data better than they do, and based on your ignorance of what the authors were even concluding, I have no reason to believe you've done any of that. And even if you did, that might be worse, because seriously, do you really have nothing better to do with yourself?

It's possible to treat schizophrenics with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder. Therefore, it should be possible to treat transgender people with dignity without appeasing their impulses that extend from mental disorder.

 You're comparing apples to oranges.

"Transgenderism" is where a person says "this is who I am". Schizophrenia is where one person creates two or more "different people" within their own mind.

Treating a schizophrenic with dignity would mean embracing each personality as a legitimate person. The parallel to that with transgender people use to do just that which you are vehemently arguing against.

We treat schizophrenia as a serious condition because those suffering from it are either a danger to themselves or others, or because the patient does not wish to continue being subjected to their condition.

None of this applies to transgendered people. There is no evidence they are a danger to others any more than the average person regardless of how much manufactured nonsense the political right concocts, and they clearly do not wish to be treated.

Of course they would be better off if you give them  money, any one would. The point is permanent ever increasing  unsustainable dependence on govt. They will never be satisfied and will demand more and more money. Old as time itself. The US Govt welfare system as exhibit A.

I'll tell you what we have in Ireland. We have a whole bunch of Polish, highest employment rate in Ireland, they look like a dangerous bunch of bastards but I never had any trouble with them. Few fine women. Whole bunch of Brazilians, fine women there too. Lived with one for a while till she caught me in bed with another woman. That's a story. Play soccer with a bunch of Brazilian lads everything Thursday night. They are an absolutely sound bunch of lads. Been drinking with them many a night. Would probably count one of them among my closest friends, at least he texts me way too much. His girlfriend's a cute thing too. I work with a bunch of Indians, you couldn't meet a nicer bunch of lads, having to fend off invites to dinner daily because I can't deal with spicy food. 

If the Muslims try to bring Sharia law to Ireland, I'll join the IRA.

Sub-races are a concept relative to human social development.

But even within that context "white" is not a sub-race.

White is an assumption relative to a perceivable difference........Skin tone and certain facial features at the lighter end of the colour range.

Europeanism is broad spectrum of sub-races exhibiting a broad range of facial features, and formerly Britishness was no more than a development of Europeanism as was Americanism. Though ongoing migration and development  has further changed what it is to be British or American....For ever.

So, human social development has not ceased, neither here nor in the USA. Nor did it not occur prior to the establishment of Europeanism.

In fact human social development migrated outwards from the singular establishment of the Human Race, and from there on in, we anatomically and physiologically sub-divided.

Your white Americanism really is just a very recent cherry picked bit of human history relative to social development, human migration and human distribution.

And also your inbuilt concerns relative to your formative conditioning.

If we teach our kids that they are different and special, that is what they will grow up believing.

And of course the same principle applies to all human sub-groups who teach the same misleading stuff to their kids. Which as we are patently aware, leads to all sorts of problems in terms of how we do or don't interact within our local communities and the wider global community. 

And for sure, along the way we can attribute specific aspects of material development to specific sub-groups, which will obviously also relate to a certain temporary slowing down of genetic diversification

Looking to govt to solve this issue would be the first step into abject failure and even more poverty. But then again isn't that the plan, equal suffering.

You only need experimental/statistical data if you use that as a premise in an argument. If your premises are axiomatic

universally observable there is no need

We don't have a huge Muslim presence in Ireland - there's your start. 

I personally have no race other than the human race.

And I suppose that I have what might be described as pride in modern British multi-culturalism.

I'm also fully aware of how modern Britishness was arrived at.

And also fully aware that the USA was arrived at in exactly the same way.

And so why do you continue to refer to your whiteness when you know that it doesn't actually represent whiteness.

Especially when there is a wide spectrum of skin tone relative your European Heredity.

An heredity that was thousands of years in the making, rather than the few hundred years of the USA.

I would suggest that you pride in your whiteness is just a temporary psychological prop in response to the oppressive reality of change.

Fortunately the USA is big enough to still afford you the isolationism that your fearfulness craves.

And of course you've also got all those lovely guns....But so has Blackie.

Insightful observations are nearly useless until they are verified. The best they can do is give us an idea of what to test/study. Any conclusion you draw from observations is inductive in nature and isn't reliable.

Saying that black people dominate certain sports doesnt need any kind of evidence, it's just a matter of observation. 

I don't see the point in arguing chicken vs egg. Suffice to say that it hardly matters where it started because the system has had plenty of time to occupy any possible state ten times over.

Would you not agree that humans create culture?

I would agree to that.

Would you agree that human genes create this culture?

Human genes created the biology which granted the capacity to think which allowed for the development of culture.

All those degrees of separation mean full decoupling except on the most foundational of terms. e.g. every human culture will involve concepts of food, friends, family, sexual reproduction, etc...

Observations can spark you to test something, but they should never be the conclusion.

I don't think Charles Darwin would agree with you, but it's right that most of the time thoughtful observations lead to further research with controlled variables.

So, me asking for studies/data for the points you make is an "argument trap". We should just believe whatever you think you observe.

For the millionth time, you don't need evidence to make your point. If you can't stand it, it's because you're clueless about how to refute a logical argument based on simple observations. It's very simplistic to say "you have no evidence so your argument is invalid". Many famous people in the past were mocked to show their insighful observations that saved the world later, like Pasteur for example.

What do you think of this statistical finding? 

That it's identifying a culture, not a race.

What do you think produces culture?

The extraordinarily chaotic system whose general study is known as "history"

You're reversing cause and effect. History isn't creating culture. Culture creates history.

Causality can flow both ways and form a feedback loop. It's a profoundly common and important class of phenomenon. You may have heard of differential equations?

Would you not agree that humans create culture?

I would agree to that.

You don't really have to respond to me like that. I do really find you very uninteresting.

Oh boo who 😢 

I'll just take up your racist points as I like. 

typical libtard emotive response when they know they cannot beat you in the debate/discussion. They cry/scream “racist” at you. 

As I see it there is nothing nationally white about the USA.

Not that in any real sense is anyone white...Albino's maybe, but this would include "black" albino's.

So you're pride is probably relative to an ambiguous European heredity. In so much as Europe was and is a mish mash of all sorts, divided by ever changing borders.

So, do you think all human races are perfectly the same?

[ignored by IWantRooseveltAgain]

You don’t know a whole lot about Transgenderism either. You just think you do. 

Your data is garbage. Your ability to understand real data if you had some, is questionable at best.

You do the same thing on race. You find these quack, pseudoscience reports, skim them, and declare, “ya I agree with that”. You fail to exercise critical thinking skills because you don’t examine the credibility of the data or the people offering it.  Conservatives are notorious for this. They accept opinions on climate science from people who are not climate scientists.

You admit here there are experts in medicine whose advice you would accept if you were ill. The only difference on Transgenderism is you want a different answer than the experts are giving you.

You don't seem so proud. You seem perennially bothered.

Or is a catfish your animal?

I really am as proud as an Irishman can be.

Guns create too much distance between people

Ireland's politics is made in close quarters. 

Freedom of speech is not about opinions, it's about people. It affords us an ownership in our own circumstances. No person will be denied that in Ireland. Where your speech encroaches on that same ownership of others, then you can get a kick in the head. 

We here in Ireland have a culture of knocking obnoxious fucks in the head.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean what it used to. The detestable American right have picked it up as a shield.

If the issue with transgender people was merely that they were bullied/harassed, we would expect 100%, not sub-50%.

We would never expect 100% of anything.

The claim was never that bullying is the only difference, the point is that there's nothing odd about the fact that a group which has been largely ostracized by society (which the bullying statistics support) would have a higher suicide rate. It would be absurd to expect any other result.

I'm not interested in appeals to authority. Authority used to think that the Earth was flat.

I'm interested in data and interpretation of it. That's how good, logically valid arguments are constructed.

If it's not an appeal to authority fallacy (appealing to something that's not an authority) then dismissing it out of hand is the opposite of being rational. 

If you go to a doctor and he tells you that you need surgery to live, then unless you have expertise in the field yourself you are being irrational to dismiss his assessment. If you go to 9 other doctors and they all tell you that you will live without it, you are on clear solid grounds to reject the first doctor's assessment.

Appeal to authority is not about validity, it's about strength. When you disagree with the majority of experts in a field, that weakens your case.

I'm certainly not an expert on schizophrenia, but from what I'm reading, a lot of schizophrenics seem to be able to live normal lives 10 Facts You Should Know About Schizophrenia | Mental Floss . Would you not consider that dignified? 

I don't see how any of this matters with regards to the topic we are addressing.

You asked me if we should treat trans people liked schizophrenics, now you're showing me extremely mild cases that have no harmful impact. If there's no harm involved or not enough harm to warrant intervention then I fail to see your point.

We only had some data to establish that they were the most bullied in post #287. You were making a lot of unsupported claims until then.

Have you never heard of hyperboli?

So, do you think all human races are perfectly the same?

Yes. All races are human. Cranial shapes and politics do not vary by race. Nobody, not even you, is born a stupid racist right winger. 

Cranial volumetric capacity varies from race to race Brain size, IQ, and racial-group differences: Evidence from musculoskeletal traits - ScienceDirect . Craniometry uses the phenotypic traits of racial skulls to determine someone's race (often used in forensic science) Racial variations in different skulls (researchgate.net) 

Politics vary by race. The proportion to which a race is individualistic/collectivistic can be accounted for by a great deal of the allele frequencies at A118Gand MAOA-uVNTR gene locations (see Figure 1 and 2) Wayback Machine (archive.org) 

I could provide plenty more data/examples for both. All of this proves that divergent human evolution is happened and that humans races exist.

You just have no idea what you are talking about and are completely wrong.

[ad hom attacks of *some* of the study's authors; other study/argument I presented was dropped by IWantRooseveltAgain]

That's why we have notions like 'non-practicing Jew'.

No, it’s not. If that were true, what is a non- practicing Christian or non-practicing  Catholic. It’s someone who claims a certain religion but doesn’t put any time into it. You are not smart Kaitlyn.

You're being very silly.

No, just calling out a racist for her stupid ideas.

Only in relation to some activities, such as sport.

Ya, women are physically inferior in relation to activities that are physical in nature.

Do you have any evidence?

Does it have to be real evidence or can it be the kind of pseudoscience you use to claim as evidence?

Math and investing, both academically and professionally are fields dominated by men.

Forbes, Bloomberg, JP Morgan, Peter Lynch, Archimedes, Euclid. All men

Why are you comparing 21st century nation data to 20th century black crime data?  What is relevant about black homicide rates from 1965-1995 compared to the 28 years after 1995? Almost nothing.  

Profound decreases in homicide rates  took place over that time which you ignore because using those 21st century numbers falsifies your comparisons.

• Using different standards in order to dramatically exagerate the undeniable problem of black homicide is poor conduct and by itself, quite racist.
  

You've changed your argument from causation to mere correlation, so my argument here doesn't apply anymore.

No, it's causation with low elasticity.

U.S. public opinion actually negatively correlates with U.S. policy

Um, no. Policy positively correlates with the interests of the wealthy, but people voting for a law does not make that law less likely to get passed. People don't support rape, and rape is illegal, to give one example.

Poverty is a consistent predictor of crime: https://hilo.hawaii.edu/campuscenter/hohonu/volumes/documents/Vol07x03TheCauseofCrime.pdf

How much are you claiming? What correlation effect are you referring to?

[dropped by Savant]

You also still haven't addressed how race is a better predictor of poverty than crime

I gave the most likely explanations for why race correlates with crime. You seem to be arguing for a "criminal gene" for which there's no evidence (essentially,  God of the gaps). The factors I listed are known to be the strongest predictors of crime.