Author Topic: #CHAZ  (Read 11187 times)

meiroy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1121
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #170 on: July 07, 2020, 08:51:49 PM »
Not sure what the confusion is here, itís one thing to despise a country for its actions vs. despising itís people.

Many folks across the world hate America for its international policy (war, war, and more war!). That doesnít mean they hate Americans. Happy 4th!


Far more people around the world hate America because they live in countries ruled by regimes that the USA opposes. These regimes control what kids learn in school about America. They control the media. On the other hand,  kids in Vietnam learn about history, about the war, but they don't learn to hate America, so they don't.

The second main reason is due to the openness of the USA where everything is out in the open, like what we see these days.  How much do you really know about what's going on in Iran or North Korea?  The media is flooded with news from the USA.

Life is not a Disney movie where the bad guy is us because there aren't really any bad guys out there.





LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5357
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #171 on: July 07, 2020, 09:03:29 PM »
I think you are attributing more than what I was saying. I was simply drawing a distinction between criticizing the actions of a nation vs. the people of that nation (or in the case of Israel, the religion)
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 09:07:54 PM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

meiroy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1121
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #172 on: July 07, 2020, 09:09:43 PM »
I'll reiterate my point again, this time really simply for you:

PUTIN BAD. NOT ALL RUSSIANS BAD

Yes, your point was clear.  That's the generic reply. I'm saying it's disingenuous and I have shown why.






meiroy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1121
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #173 on: July 07, 2020, 09:15:51 PM »
I think you are attributing more than what I was saying. I was simply drawing a distinction between criticizing the actions of a nation vs. the people of that nation (or in the case of Israel, the religion)

And it's necessary to point that out?  Maybe because in reality, these anti-Israel-obsessive movements harbor a lot of anti-Semitism which they can't help but leak out now and then.

Why does BLM need to get involved with foreign policy right now? That's just stupid. I mean, don't you think it's silly they went and demonstrated against Putin, in support of the Russian opposition?

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5357
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #174 on: July 07, 2020, 09:24:28 PM »
Quote
And it's necessary to point that out?
Yes it was, and apparently it still is.

Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

meiroy

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1121
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #175 on: July 07, 2020, 09:37:02 PM »
Quote
And it's necessary to point that out?
Yes it was, and apparently it still is.

Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic.


Of course, criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic.  Again, you are being disingenuous.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5357
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #176 on: July 07, 2020, 09:42:33 PM »
And how am I being disingenuous? I fail to see the link between UN resolutions against Israel and racist twitter posts from a football player, and the BLM organization.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5357
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #177 on: July 07, 2020, 09:57:29 PM »

It is an attempt at thoughtful commentary. I find criticism in two areas - first, I have done the work myself - we can show with reasonable certainty that blacks are killed disproportionately by police.
So again I'll reiterate my criticisms- on the data I find those who claim police violence effects all races "equally" as performing sloppy work (I am a statistician by trade if it means anything) and on the somewhat more subjective argument regarding the validity of types of protest, I again find the article you referenced to be superficial. Just my 2 cents.

I appreciate your review and response. However, two things. You state that you have done the work yourself, and yet the academic papers (four cited by the author) do not show that "reasonable certainty." While published research can be very wrong, since we can't see your work (or can we?), perhaps you could point out the specific problems with it that you perceive. Also on the destruction and violence, if it was "BLM" acting against any actual "oppressors" than your perspective (or adaptation of MLK's) might stand. But the prevalence of white troublemakers acting a bit more indiscriminately and then their actions somehow being considered "defensible" doesn't really fit.

I'll try and dig it up - essentially we take the WashPo database and supplement with FBI data and the "best" state and city reporting data. There are issues with much of the analysis done on this topic, almost all due to poor reporting from police departments (as each state has different reporting standards). Therefore how data proxies are selected (used to control for the various factors I described in my previous post) play a large role.

On the second point, I disagree. I don't think it's necessary that BLM be the antagonist party. I take the point that certainly most of looters (both white and black) were not intending to make a symbolic gesture - but again I think focusing on individual motives misses the major point of a systematic problem with police culture.

Is the 22 year old homeless person throwing a rock through a storefront to philosophically create a symbol of defiance against these injustices? No. But you don't see 56 year old bank executives feeling the need to vandalize, either.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5357
Re: #CHAZ
« Reply #178 on: July 07, 2020, 10:09:55 PM »
This was one such post (you may need to read the post above it for full context):

https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/politics/absolutely-love-this-guy!/msg310835/#msg310835

But IIRC there was a really long thread about this topic a year or so ago where for a few pages some posters went back-and-forth using various datasets to draw their respective conclusions. Like I said I remember compiling WaPo data and overlayed with FBI reporting data, then used a few city/state datasets to factor out environmental variables. If you're really interested, that would be the way to reperform the analysis to see what factors are impacting the overall result and from there to draw your own conclusion.

Additionally I took a look at one such study referenced (https://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf)

The authors conclude significant racial bias in any-use-of-force encounters; but lack of bias in shootings (as distinct from any lethal engagements). The study admittedly suffers from data quality issues. 1- Data suitability (self reported data also used by FBI through 2015, the year in which the FBI admitted data quality problems and determined to re-define their DQ standards) and 2- Data collection (was hand-tabulated by grad students albeit with some 2nd layer control, but again self-reported from POs themselves). Finally, the main dataset used to conclude no racial bias in shootings (Houston data Table2c - was not available in the paper and frankly I am not digging around online to find it)

This is not to dismiss the conclusions outright, but to understand we have (1) a narrow definition of police killings i.e. shootings only; and (2) compromises made to determine suitable datasets which I personally would disagree with.

This was 1/4 studies mentioned - as seen here the choices particularly in how you build your dataset are very important, hence my earlier suggestion to seek out these sources yourself, understand each source's reporting methodology, and perform your own analysis. This way you at least understand the implicit compromises which must be made to draw any conclusion.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 10:45:40 PM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom