Are people of Jewish descent disproportionately affluent in America? (capitalist, world, capital)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, absolutely not. A 70% fatherless household rate is directly responsible for nearly all the problems. You can’t raise successful kids in a community with 70% single parent families. Nothing will ever change if that doesn’t change first. And that can only change when different choices are made, because having babies out of wedlock is a choice.
Pretending racism doesn't exist (and supporting such a supposition with a youtube video LOL!) or that single parent households are the single answer to a wildly complex problem is as irrational as being offended about the IQ level of a particular ethnic group.
In the video, a black preacher named Jesse Lee Peterson, a true American mensch, explains the fact that racism is a myth and why. Don’t watch it, you wouldn’t care anyway, as it violates your special little victim narrative.
Being black does not make him the sole arbitrator of whether or not racism exists. Beside the fact that you think a man who believes allowing women to vote is a "man of integrity" shows exactly how little credence should be give to his and your opinion.
I see your point but I think the fact that Judaism has always been more "worldly" than Christianity is another quirk in the sense that I doubt Jewish leaders could foresee how it would play out when it comes to global banking and economies.
I'm not really a conspiracy theorist when it comes to the Jews. And in fact, I make my friend angry all the time because he actually believes that all of the problems in the world are because of the Jews. And that if we just get rid of the Jews, everything will be perfect. I tell him, like you guys are telling me, that the Christians have become Jews, so even if you go wish the Jews away, not much would change.
I only mention the Jews because their culture laid the foundation/blueprint for mercantilism and then industrial/financial capitalism.
My position is that Pandora's box is already open, and there is nothing you can do about it. Money is the world power, and that isn't going to change. All you do by fighting against it is make yourself weak.
I only originally posted in this thread because someone was basically arguing that the only reason anyone was ever mad at the Jews was because they were jealous of their success.
Wrong. They were angry because their system of banking and usury is a kind of legalized theft. Every once in a while, people like you and me, get sick and tired of it, and start killing people(if they can't otherwise be dealt with). And not just the Jews.
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
"Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste-heap of Europe, for what they were considered: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews. . . . Antisemitism is really a hatred of capitalism." - Ulrike Meinhof
On this, I have no problem with statistics; however, I find it interesting, as I've noted that many people use IQ without knowing what it is measuring or identifying the fact that IQ tests are not widely given today.
IQ tests are not given widely today almost entirely because administering them is costly and time intensive. We can identify gifted students much more readily with other intelligence tests that can be given en masse.
As for what it measures, see my other post.
Quote:
Most studies about IQ are based on 30 year old data.
So what? Do you think the scientific method has an expiration date? Or is the data itself that went "bad"? As a scientist, I can tell you that 30 year old studies/data sets, particularly in a field like psychology that has not had rapid changes in technology (say like genetics) are still of use.
Quote:
And IQ in an of itself cannot determine how "smart" someone is. What you may view as important to being intelligent, another person/community may not find those things important. People focused on IQ are focused on correlating it with particular outcomes and categories.
I get that you REALLY need to get that point across. It is clearly VERY important to you. I get it, you really need to make sure everyone understands that high IQ does not equal "smart".
IQ is a quantitative measure, if you don't understand the utility of quantitative measures for speaking in factual terms then I don't know what to tell you.
Quote:
I'll also note in regards to the IQ and college thing - it is common knowledge in regards to the black demographic, that college was not a huge factor or something many black people felt they should pursue due to lack of career opportunities for black college graduates. See my other post about my 2nd great grandfather who got a college degree but couldn't find a job because he was black. This was VERY typical in America and caused a lot of black people to not focus on getting a college degree. So any sort of IQ correlation with college achievement, would include populations of this particular era where college just wasn't something that was worth anything to the majority of black Americans.
Cool, more anecdotes vs studies. Ok I can play too. My grandmother, a jewish woman, graduated from Harvard in a time when almost no women did, and as most women of her time also couldn't find a job in a scientific field readily. Strangely, she still pushed her children and grandchildren to go to college because despite your supposition that jews are only in it for the money, she valued an education for its own sake.
Quote:
Any sort of correlation summations or "at-risk" predictions should be taken as a grain of salt.
Correlations are not predictions. They are not meant for prediction weird that someone who was in a STEM program would not know that. They maybe used to make models/regressions, but no correlations (which inherently have a strength and statistical strength) do not need to be taken with a grain of salt. At least not by those who understand them.
Quote:
Often organizations attempt to make statistics seem more dire than they really are. Take autism for example. They always say 1 in 68 kids is on the autism spectrum ! Which makes it seem like it is a huge percent of children. Yet 1 in 68 kids on the spectrum means that 99% of kids aren't on the autism spectrum.
That isn't a correlation. Not even close.
Quote:
I agree that "averages" are just generalities; however, as evidenced in this thread, people try to generalize millions of people based on that generality. In regards to "more likely to" those I see like "at-risk" in that the vast majority of the demographic being spoken of often doesn't fall into that "likely" category
That is not what I said and is inaccurate. In fact you have it completely backwards. Averages and statistics are of most use when talking about millions of people. It is only when you talk about individuals that they are of no use.
Finally, "at risk" ? What are you even talking about?
Not for nothing. This has nothing to do with politics. This thread should be moved to religion form.
Why? "Being Jewish" isn't just about religion. We have an ethnicity and a culture. I have a Sephardic last name. My father (whose father was Jewish) is an atheist, but he listens to the music (I grew up listening to Theo Bikel and Miriam and Steven records), and is a walking encyclopedia on the Holocaust.
And protestantism? Do you really not know their views on faith and wealth?
To be honest, I'm not all that familiar with protestantism. My family is mostly Catholic, and my mother converted to Mormonism when I was young, but I've never really been a religious person(although I don't consider myself an atheist).
I have heard that Calvinism/Lutheranism puts a lot of value on a "work-ethic", but I don't know what they actually think about money/wealth. I would be interested if you could educate me. But I doubt I will change my position. Since I've already conceded that Christians aren't very Christ-like.
I listened to the video. I do want to clarify one point though. There is huge difference between "looking out for our own group", and "taking advantage of another group".
I don't see a problem with putting your family first. But, if your group is "living off the backs" of others, and you use your position to help "your group" at the expense of "other groups", that is a problem.
I wouldn't really call myself an AnCap(although I'm closer to it than almost everything else). Partly because I don't really think AnCap can work anyway. The outcome of AnCap would almost-certainly be the devolution of society into basically local families/communities, with very little trade. Cities would empty-out, almost all businesses would go bankrupt, and Wall-Street stocks, as well as most real-estate(except land itself), would become almost worthless.
Who was defending feudalism? You do realize that there is a real-world equivalent of the Christianity I am talking about, right here in America. The Amish. Not only do they not have Kings, they don't even have a church.
Fine, you think capitalism is good. I'm happy for you. I think capitalism is evil, and communism is even more evil.
Capitalism is globalism. It is anti-morality, and it is anti-god. It is materialistic and worldly, and it doesn't even make people happy. It turns people into selfish, narcissistic degenerates. And while the capitalist is terrified of death, life has no more meaning than today's pleasure.
So the Amish are your model society?
I prefer modern medicine, science, modern technology, modern transportation, and a whole host of other things that I believe extend our existence and add our comfort as human beings.
All of this is funded by, and accelerated through capitalism. Hardly evil in my eyes, in fact, the opposite of evil.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
! Which makes it seem like it is a huge percent of children. Yet 1 in 68 kids on the spectrum means that 99% of kids aren't on the autism spectrum.
