• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The Ferguson thread / additional race discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
The emigrants coming from areas with high political instability are going to be poorer and less educated, and thus more prone to crime. Contrast that with Poland, a country with a highly educated population but with little economic opportunity-- their emigrants to the UK are obviously going to be less prone to crime.

Are these levels of crime really that high? Consider that in Florida, 23% of black males can't vote because of prior felonies.

Wouldn't it make sense based on the chart, in the name of the health and safety of the British people to limit immigration from areas with higher percentages of criminals? Keep in mind these is a decent portion of these crimes are murders, rapes, and terrorism offences.
 
^Or perhaps reallocate their security forces to places that need them? Wherever I've lived (downtown areas, decent), police are everywhere. Drive 10 minutes into a ghettoized neighborhood and call the police. See how long it takes them to get there. The police are there to protect the rich. Period.

I don't see how migrant worker's would cause an upward pressure on wages. I just don't. You think they would not work for minimum wage or below in America when they desperately need a job and they are earning significantly more than their native countries. For service industry work and manual labour even workers knowing their are hundreds are out of work and have a similar skillset is enough for them to know they won't be expecting a rise in pay anytime soon.

You talked about opening the flood gates the immigration, not keeping it on paramilitary lockdown. If it were opened and immigrants were nationalized, then yes, employers would have to compete with each other to deal with this new surge of demand. If we're talking about illegal migrant workers, then there's really nothing to discuss. They would just compete with each other for the lowest available wages.

A rise in federal minimum wage in top of this would drive up skilled labor wages while the new migrants/refugees would still be stuck at the bottom of the ladder, but in a much better position.

You don't expect a raise. You don't hope for one. You don't work hard enough for one. Meritocracy does not exist on a widespread scale in America.
 
^Or perhaps reallocate their security forces to places that need them? Wherever I've lived (downtown areas, decent), police are everywhere. Drive 10 minutes into a ghettoized neighborhood and call the police. See how long it takes them to get there. The police are there to protect the rich. Period.

On the contrary we have NYC where police concentrate on "ghetto" areas and people complain that they disproportionately "stop and frisk" minorities despite the crime rate dropping as a result of this. You would think after these recent protests that people would rather not have police in their communities at all.



You talked about opening the flood gates the immigration, not keeping it on paramilitary lockdown. If it were opened and immigrants were nationalized, then yes, employers would have to compete with each other. If we're talking about illegal migrant workers, then there's really nothing to discuss. They would just compete with each other for the lowest available wages

A rise in federal minimum wage in top of this would drive up skilled labor wages while the new migrants/refugees would still be stuck at the bottom of the ladder, but in a much better position.

You don't expect a raise. You don't hope for one. You don't work hard enough for one. Meritocracy does not exist on a widespread scale in America.

I'm pretty sure there will always be enough workers going around in manual labour and service industry. Someone can be trained to landscape in the matter of a few days, or take orders at McDonalds. That's why there is little job security, especially when there's thousands of other's in the area ready to replace you.

Most "skilled labour" isn't minimum wage to begin with so it doesn't rely at all on a minimum wage. I don't see how it drives up skilled labour wages, if a company has minimum wage workers and suddenly has to pay them more, they will just randomly say hey let's make our costs even higher and give the skilled labourers a pay rise as well? I think you are woefully ignorant as to how business operates and functions.
 
This is a bit out of sequence, but I was having some thoughts last night.

Would there be some kind of selective pressure for traits, possibly? I'm not saying it is a hard rule, but is it just chance that the East Asian developed as they did? Certainly a gene that helped certain people utilize oxygen better in areas was "selected for", though perhaps that was one of the more unconscious ones. Maybe those people simply survived better, or maybe strength was seen as desirable. But this is just one example of how selective 'inbreeding' can create a stronger specimen.

And the fold in many of the eyes of them, and all of these traits unique somewhat to the 'races'... Have they not some function?

Blue eyes are correlated with less neuromelanin. Neuromelanin is used in neurons and I think it may facilitate communications between neurons. It is necessary. Its highly concentrated in areas close to the brain stem I think, and the brain is actually very dark in these regions. In some observation, those with blue eyes were found to be more strategic thinkers, and those with brown eyes have faster processing speed, and faster reaction time. This when I mentioned it had so many people up in arms. I wouldn't say the study revealed a hard rule, I don't know, but it shouldn't be dismissed. Blue eyes are a mutation, and a handicap in ways. They are deviations, and come with weakness. But they are selected for to such a degree that more than half of some European populations have them. Maybe they offered some, even if subtle in some resolution, benefits?

I just think that there might be a reason for identifying with and mating with people like us. Environments and 'cultures' put selective pressures on peoples... Even if unconscious. And it seems that there might be pressure for a white to mate with a white. There is more chance that their genes will be expressed if they marry (mate with) someone somewhat close to them. If they mate with someone from a more different population, with a different set of genes/different frequency, such as a white Northwest European with a Subsaharan African, they run the risk of their genes going off into obscurity. Many black white mixes, like Obama, identify with Black more than White... Because of how genes are expressed they often look like them, or enough not like the White.

Aren't genes competitive? Isn't life competitive?

Certain degrees of 'inbreeding' is good, for various reasons. It can be.
 
Last edited:
camarota-immigrant-gains-native-losses-f1.jpg


camarota-immigrant-gains-native-losses-f2.jpg


camarota-immigrant-gains-native-losses-f3.jpg
 
On the contrary we have NYC where police concentrate on "ghetto" areas and people complain that they disproportionately "stop and frisk" minorities despite the crime rate dropping as a result of this. You would think after these recent protests that people would rather not have police in their communities at all.

I'm entirely unfamiliar with NYC, so can't really comment. A New Yorker's opinion might help here.



Most "skilled labour" isn't minimum wage to begin with so it doesn't rely at all on a minimum wage. I don't see how it drives up skilled labour wages, if a company has minimum wage workers and suddenly has to pay them more, they will just randomly say hey let's make our costs even higher and give the skilled labourers a pay rise as well? I think you are woefully ignorant as to how business operates and functions.

You don't believe a rise in a minimum wage would affect higher wage jobs? How would it not? A plumber isn't going to go to work everyday when he could flip burgers for the same wage. I've lived in countries with minimum wages upwards of $17, a rise in a minimum has an affect in the rest of the wages. A welder isn't going to spend the money on training when he can just be a walmart cashier instead. Think about it. It's not woeful ignorance, it's common sense.

Again, it's "labor" in America. "Labour" is used in other countries, say, Australia ;)
 
Wouldn't it make sense based on the chart, in the name of the health and safety of the British people to limit immigration from areas with higher percentages of criminals? Keep in mind these is a decent portion of these crimes are murders, rapes, and terrorism offences.

What's the comparative crime rate of native UK residents? It looks like it's around 8-9% nationwide... I'm thinking a closer look at the data may be needed for an apples-to-apples comparison, but if the numbers in your chart are indeed figured the same way as the nationwide average, then I think this points to the immigration process as being pretty effective in weeding out criminals considering that the crime rates of immigrants are lower than the UK average.

My personal opinion is that allowing a diverse mix of immigrants is both necessary and ethical, and if the goal is to prevent criminals from entering the country, screening them closely is what needs to happen (which appears to be happening).
 
You don't believe a rise in a minimum wage would affect higher wage jobs? How would it not? A plumber isn't going to go to work everyday when he could flip burgers for the same wage. I've lived in countries with minimum wages upwards of $17, a rise in a minimum has an affect in the rest of the wages. A welder isn't going to spend the money on training when he can just be a walmart cashier instead. Think about it. It's not woeful ignorance, it's common sense.

Again, it's "labor" in America. "Labour" is used in other countries, say, Australia ;)

Obviously if minimum wage is raised to $15 then skilled labour at that pay would rise but skilled labour is typically already dictated by the market and pays out much more than that already. Plumbers earn much more than that, construction workers as well, welders, ect.

There are places in America where Walmart cashier's earn $18 an hour (they're right by oil fields) so generally letting the market dictate demand for labour isn't always bad for the workers.
 
Obviously if minimum wage is raised to $15 then skilled labour at that pay would rise but skilled labour is typically already dictated by the market and pays out much more than that already. Plumbers earn much more than that, construction workers as well, welders, ect.

The problem being?

There are places in America where Walmart cashier's earn $18 an hour (they're right by oil fields) so generally letting the market dictate demand for labour isn't always bad for the workers.

Well the overwhelmingly vast majority of national median income for Walmart cashiers is minimum wage at part time. Sometimes it isn't the best idea to let the lieges of capital dictate the wages and allocation of it's vassals.

I've worked for these chain retail stores. The ones working full time aren't the cashiers, stockers, warehouse workers etc. It's management, it's corporate, it's leadership.
 
Last edited:
The problem being?

No problem. Just an example that we don't need the nanny-state government propping up wages and tinkering with the market.

Minimum wage hikes appear to cause higher unemployment at least for the short-term (consult the graph dear sir) but logically thinking they could also cause rapid inflation and the cost of goods going up (if McDonald's workers all get a pay rise to $15 an hour soon a BigMac might double in price).
 
example of losblancos's specious reasoning:

90% of people living in a "black ghetto" in america are black
therefore they belong there and/or choose to live there.

the prejudiced loser has no critical thought capacity, and no comprehension that forces beyond the control of the individuals in question are coercing them to be that statistic. the fallacy of equal footing is his unquestionable law of nature, his personal own buy-bull.

i'm totally bored of this nonsense. how many times do we need to say the same shit, point out the same fallacy to this troll?
 
example of losblancos's specious reasoning:

90% of people living in a "black ghetto" in america are black
therefore they belong there and/or choose to live there.

the prejudiced loser has no critical thought capacity, and no comprehension that forces beyond the control of the individuals in question are coercing them to be that statistic. the fallacy of equal footing is his unquestionable law of nature, his personal own buy-bull.

i'm totally bored of this nonsense. how many times do we need to say the same shit, point out the same fallacy to this troll?

There you have it folks, those that commit crime are coerced by forces outside of their control!

Sounds like something out of the Excorcist.

What use is a debate if there's just one side to the argument. You have your side that says people cannot control their own actions, and then myself which says people have free-will, choices, and a chance at upwards mobility.

I think alot of people in the "ghetto" do enjoy it indeed. If you choose to have numerous children out of wedlock and drop out of school you're essentially making a choice to do so. When we have people speaking out about gentrification (i.e. less crime, more businesses moving in) it's as if people do enjoy the ghetto.
 
derp on, soldier boy.

being born white and in a socially enabling circumstance is an amazing accomplishment. you deserve a fucking nobel prize for it. you get ten extra xbox points, you idiot.
 
derp on, soldier boy.

being born white and in a socially enabling circumstance is an amazing accomplishment. you deserve a fucking nobel prize for it. you get ten extra xbox points, you idiot.

I do not accuse those who “check” me and my perspective of overt racism, although the phrase, which assumes that simply because I belong to a certain ethnic group I should be judged collectively with it, toes that line. But I do condemn them for diminishing everything I have personally accomplished, all the hard work I have done in my life, and for ascribing all the fruit I reap not to the seeds I sow but to some invisible patron saint of white maleness who places it out for me before I even arrive. Furthermore, I condemn them for casting the equal protection clause, indeed the very idea of a meritocracy, as a myth, and for declaring that we are all governed by invisible forces (some would call them “stigmas” or “societal norms”), that our nation runs on racist and sexist conspiracies. Forget “you didn’t build that;” check your privilege and realize that nothing you have accomplished is real.

 
Minimum wage hikes appear to cause higher unemployment at least for the short-term (consult the graph dear sir)

I'm trying to find a graph with the unemployment rate and minimum wage going back fifty years or so. Obviously taking recent unemployment rates during and after the great recession is comingling a pretty big variable.

Just looking at the scholarship, minimum wage hikes' effects on unemployment can be argued either way. Some studies find a small effect. Other studies do not.
 

I do not accuse those who “check” me and my perspective of overt racism, although the phrase, which assumes that simply because I belong to a certain ethnic group I should be judged collectively with it, toes that line. But I do condemn them for diminishing everything I have personally accomplished, all the hard work I have done in my life, and for ascribing all the fruit I reap not to the seeds I sow but to some invisible patron saint of white maleness who places it out for me before I even arrive. Furthermore, I condemn them for casting the equal protection clause, indeed the very idea of a meritocracy, as a myth, and for declaring that we are all governed by invisible forces (some would call them “stigmas” or “societal norms”), that our nation runs on racist and sexist conspiracies. Forget “you didn’t build that;” check your privilege and realize that nothing you have accomplished is real.


tumblr_static_9ogplps.gif
 
No problem. Just an example that we don't need the nanny-state government propping up wages and tinkering with the market.

Right, but at the exact same time you're explaining why a raise is necessary for those who aren't tradesmen. More revenue for the service worker, the more revenue for the tradesman. Markets aren't free. They don't run by invisible hands, they're going to be tinkered with regardless of who is doing the tinkering.

Minimum wage hikes appear to cause higher unemployment at least for the short-term (consult the graph dear sir)

The short term is the short term and it's all we think about, the long term effects of anything should be of primary concern.


but logically thinking they could also cause rapid inflation and the cost of goods going up (if McDonald's workers all get a pay rise to $15 an hour soon a BigMac might double in price).
What's the price of a Big Mac in Australia where the federal minimum wage is somewhere around $17?

Inflation rates aren't static, they fluctuate. We could look at a country like Australia, whose inflation rate was up to 17% in the mid-70s, after falling from 51% during the war to reaching an all time low in the 60s (actual deflation) , a rapid gain to 5.5 at the turn of the century, to 2.3 in the last quarter recorded. It's projected to be lower than ours within the next year or so whether we raise the wage or not.
 
You've handled yourselves well my sons, but this isn't your fight to finish, Losblancos is my concern.



KAAAAA MEEEEEHHHHHHH HAAAAAAAAAAAAA MEEEEEEEEEHHHHHH HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

tumblr_n5w40f959u1rlyqzfo1_400.gif
 
Inflation rates aren't static, they fluctuate. We could look at a country like Australia, whose inflation rate was up to 17% in the mid-70s, after falling from 51% during the war to reaching an all time low in the 60s (actual deflation) , a rapid gain to 5.5 at the turn of the century, to 2.3 in the last quarter recorded. It's projected to be lower than ours within the next year or so whether we raise the wage or not.

Germany approved it's first ever minimum wage of this year. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28140594

They must have magically managed to be the strongest economy of Europe without it prior to this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top