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.
OOW births have nothing to do with gun violence. Sweden has a higher rate of OOW births than the U.S. People don't kill other people because Mommy and Daddy weren't married when they were born.
And teen births/low income births/African American births have all been plummeting in recent years.
The lack of a family and social structure is a major cause of gun violence, I'd submit.
When young men don’t have fathers, they don’t learn to control their masculine impulses. They don’t have fathers to teach them how to channel their masculine impulses in productive ways.
When young men don’t have fathers, those men will seek out masculine love — masculine acceptance — where they can find it. Often, they find it in gangs.
In my little town, if some boys tried to form a gang and do violence on our streets, the fathers wouldn’t bother calling the sheriff. Those boys would face a gang of fathers hell bent on establishing order in our community. And if that meant using physical force, so be it.”
OOW births have nothing to do with gun violence. Sweden has a higher rate of OOW births than the U.S. People don't kill other people because Mommy and Daddy weren't married when they were born.
And teen births/low income births/African American births have all been plummeting in recent years.
Guy, I'm just going to blow you out of the water and leave you grasping for straws, so hold on...
First, it's hilarious that lolberals ALWAYS reference Sweden when talking about government programs or social dynamics, as if that model is in any way, shape or form applicable to the US (hint: it's not).
1) Sweden is an extremely small, homogeneous country when compared to the US. Economies of scale are a HUGE factor in understanding why Sweden can run like it does, and why the US won't ever be able to copy that formula. If you don't understand the concept of "economies of scale" I suggest you look into the research area.
2) As I said before, Sweden has generally been homogeneous. It is well known in sociology, psychology and economics that in-group trust dynamics play a major factor in allowing for a well run, less violent, higher social welfare state. This dynamic CAN NOT be scaled up to a country like the US that is defined by heterogeneity of demographics. To boot, Sweden is finding out the hard way that "enrichment though diversity" doesn't always go as planned based on violent crime, rape and welfare stats that are extremely high amongst their immigrants/refugees when compared to native Swedes.
3) Birth rates in Sweden (1.9) are actually below replacement level (2.1) (this is a different topic that is interesting on it's own, but I digress), so a lot of people are actually NOT having children in that country, or are consciously having few children. Fewer children and high social trust allow for a more robust welfare state as resources can be spread around more efficiently when the population is productive, which native Swedes are.
4) FOR THE KILLSHOT (clever huh?): In Sweden, while marriage rates might be low and OOW birth rates might be disproportionately high, the percentage of Swedish children raised in a 2 PARENT HOUSEHOLD is near 80%! This is in stark contrast to the celebration of single motherhood in the US, where OOW births have a very very strong correlation with single parenthood.
So for the love of God, NEVER EVER EVER again reference Sweden when comparing stats to the US. At best you sound ignorant of stats and facts, and at worst you make yourself out to be dumb.
As for your "teen births/low income births/African American births have all been plummeting in recent years" I say, so what? The people who are committing crimes NOW (aged 15-30 males) weren't born "in recent years" and I'd even argue that since birthrates and teen pregnancy is down, it's even MORE of a shame that the OOW birthrate for the black community is what it currently is (70-80%, which btw is still WAY higher than your favorite Nordic country). Like I said before, OOW birth is highly correlated with single parenthood in the US, this goes double for the black community, and it is well documented that children of single parents are more likely to be less educated, be poor, have more emotional/mental problems, be more violent and commit more crimes.
So YES, OOW births have A LOT to do with gun violence and violent crime in AMERICA (not Sweden).
Last edited by EffortPoaster; 05-23-2016 at 02:58 PM..
Guy, I'm just going to blow you out of the water and leave you grasping for straws, so hold on...
First, it's hilarious that lolberals ALWAYS reference Sweden when talking about government programs or social dynamics, as if that model is in any way, shape or form applicable to the US (hint: it's not).
1) Sweden is an extremely small, homogeneous country when compared to the US. Economies of scale are a HUGE factor in understanding why Sweden can run like it does, and why the US won't ever be able to copy that formula. If you don't understand the concept of "economies of scale" I suggest you look into the research area.
2) As I said before, Sweden has generally been homogeneous. It is well known in sociology, psychology and economics that in-group trust dynamics play a major factor in allowing for a well run, less violent, higher social welfare state. This dynamic CAN NOT be scaled up to a country like the US that is defined by heterogeneity of demographics. To boot, Sweden is finding out the hard way that "enrichment though diversity" doesn't always go as planned based on violent crime, rape and welfare stats that are extremely high amongst their immigrants/refugees when compared to native Swedes.
3) Birth rates in Sweden (1.9) are actually below replacement level (2.1) (this is a different topic that is interesting on it's own, but I digress), so a lot of people are actually NOT having children in that country, or are consciously having few children. Fewer children and high social trust allow for a more robust welfare state as resources can be spread around more efficiently when the population is productive, which native Swedes are.
4) FOR THE KILLSHOT (clever huh?): In Sweden, while marriage rates might be low and OOW birth rates might be disproportionately high, the percentage of Swedish children raised in a 2 PARENT HOUSEHOLD is near 80%! This is in stark contrast to the celebration of single motherhood in the US, where OOW births have a very very strong correlation with single parenthood.
So for the love of God, NEVER EVER EVER again reference Sweden when comparing stats to the US. At best you sound ignorant of stats and facts, and at worst you make yourself out to be dumb.
As for your "teen births/low income births/African American births have all been plummeting in recent years" I say, so what? The people who are committing crimes NOW (aged 15-30 males) weren't born "in recent years" and I'd even argue that since birthrates and teen pregnancy is down, it's even MORE of a shame that the OOW birthrate for the black community is what it currently is (70-80%, which btw is still WAY higher than your favorite Nordic country). Like I said before, OOW birth is highly correlated with single parenthood in the US, this goes double for the black community, and it is well documented that children of single parents are more likely to be less educated, be poor, have more emotional/mental problems, be more violent and commit more crimes.
So YES, OOW births have A LOT to do with gun violence and violent crime in AMERICA (not Sweden).
The lack of a family and social structure is a major cause of gun violence, I'd submit.
When young men don’t have fathers, they don’t learn to control their masculine impulses. They don’t have fathers to teach them how to channel their masculine impulses in productive ways.
When young men don’t have fathers, those men will seek out masculine love — masculine acceptance — where they can find it. Often, they find it in gangs.
In my little town, if some boys tried to form a gang and do violence on our streets, the fathers wouldn’t bother calling the sheriff. Those boys would face a gang of fathers hell bent on establishing order in our community. And if that meant using physical force, so be it.”
Despite any data and most of all common sense, as well as obvious biology, the far left is increasingly obstinate in a complete rejection of any traditional norms.
None of this is ultimately demonstrable through hard science, and even if it was they would find a caveat to negate the results, so we are likely to see a continued bifurcation of society, if the left really wants to take this tack further. Ultimately, people who do believe in personal responsibility may be forced to go their own way while the rest of the country reverts to a third-world mob.
Democracy is a historical anamoly that doesn't tend to last long.
Despite any data and most of all common sense, as well as obvious biology, the far left is increasingly obstinate in a complete rejection of any traditional norms.
None of this is ultimately demonstrable through hard science, and even if it was they would find a caveat to negate the results, so we are likely to see a continued bifurcation of society, if the left really wants to take this tack further. Ultimately, people who do believe in personal responsibility may be forced to go their own way while the rest of the country reverts to a third-world mob.
Democracy is a historical anamoly that doesn't tend to last long.
It's weird, and actually quite scary, what's been happening on the left. The amount of pandering that has been coming from the left has reached fever pitch. As you point out, it seems that anything that hints at personal responsibility or condemns bad behavior is considered racist. Of course, with that there's been a growing backlash against liberalism, as we're seeing this election cycle.
It's weird, and actually quite scary, what's been happening on the left. The amount of pandering that has been coming from the left has reached fever pitch. As you point out, it seems that anything that hints at personal responsibility or condemns bad behavior is considered racist. Of course, with that there's been a growing backlash against liberalism, as we're seeing this election cycle.
Have you listened to Donald Trump campaign? The GOP is just as guilty as the democrats in that regard. There is no "growing backlash" against liberalism. There's a growing backlash against certain candidates (both parties very much included).
The GOP is a dying breed in the U.S. because they refuse to adapt their platform, at least on a social aspect. They'll lose a large percentage of the vote if the continue to fight social progression. If the GOP adopted a socially progressive, fiscally conservative platform, I believe they would be far more popular than the democrats. Finding that balance is difficult though, resulting in Hillary Clinton likely being the 45th POTUS.
Despite any data and most of all common sense, as well as obvious biology, the far left is increasingly obstinate in a complete rejection of any traditional norms.
None of this is ultimately demonstrable through hard science, and even if it was they would find a caveat to negate the results, so we are likely to see a continued bifurcation of society, if the left really wants to take this tack further. Ultimately, people who do believe in personal responsibility may be forced to go their own way while the rest of the country reverts to a third-world mob.
Democracy is a historical anamoly that doesn't tend to last long.
Actually, I'm going to have to disagree with you here concerning who is to blame. While I am absolutely no fan of left leaning politics (pandering of the highest form) and liberalism, in my view I've come to understand that the left's "true believers" simply can't help themselves. Most have idealistic, quite childlike views regarding humanity and it's various classifications, and they literally "wow, just wow" themselves into a state of blissful ignorance regarding reality.
But IMO, the true blame lies with the right and "conservatives". Every time I talk to a conservative I ask them "what exactly has your side 'conserved' over the last 40-50 years?" wherein their head usually explodes.
Kept traditional family roles? Nope.
Culled divorce? Nope.
Safeguarded traditional marriage? Nope.
Stopped abortion? Nope.
Protected middle class jobs and industry, i.e. the backbone that allowed for traditionalism? Nope.
Conservatives, by their nature, are ALWAYS 10 years late to the party du jour, and then they have the nerve to behave like those dopey parents who leave their troublemaker son home alone for a weekend only to realize that he threw a gigantic party, wrecked the house and got arrested. How could OUR son do something like this, to us, his parents!? Well, all the signs were there you morons, plus you fostered your son's current behavior through the last decade of your 'head in the sand' parenting job.
Traditional GOP 'conservative' (wo)men are some of the most weak-willed, self serving people to ever grace this Earth, and the GOP's motto for the last few decades could have simply been "got mine! so who cares about everybody else!"
In short: "If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it." -Corneliu Zelea Codreanu
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini
Have you listened to Donald Trump campaign? The GOP is just as guilty as the democrats in that regard. There is no "growing backlash" against liberalism. There's a growing backlash against certain candidates (both parties very much included).
The GOP is a dying breed in the U.S. because they refuse to adapt their platform, at least on a social aspect. They'll lose a large percentage of the vote if the continue to fight social progression. If the GOP adopted a socially progressive, fiscally conservative platform, I believe they would be far more popular than the democrats. Finding that balance is difficult though, resulting in Hillary Clinton likely being the 45th POTUS.
Stop drinking the hipster liberal kool-aid bro. "Socially liberal/fiscally conservative" is just a myth that douche liberals smugly spout to their friends while they laugh at something 'snarky' from The Daily Show. Social/fiscal policy in this country has been and forever will be intimately intertwined because they are codependent based on the the identity/demographics/economics of this country (this is an entire poast on it's own).
The problem with most educated "socially liberal/fiscally conservative" liberals (the absolute worst kind of liberal) is that they never seem to realize that not everyone is smart enough and/or motivated enough and/or capable enough of being able to buy a $400k house in a gentrifying neighborhood, while they also ignore their own hypocrisy when pricing out those blacks and latinos that they so desperately care about. This goes back to the childish blank-slate/equalist mentality that liberals incorrectly have, but at least that kind of cognitive dissonance allows them to sleep at night, because it's just the free market right?
Now with that said, it still doesn't mean that those less capable people should be pandered to and handed free chit at the drop of a hat. What they need is REALISTIC opportunity, something that has been decreasing in this country for decades, and that can only be brought back by way of American industry, less immigration (especially illegal immigration) and a better sense of community/American identity, the latter point sending shivers down the spines of the Huffington 'melting pot' Post editorial board. If I hear one more liberal or LOLbertarian talk about immigration and "muh muh National GDP!" in the same sentence again, I'm going to absolutely rip my hair out. Does no one realize that a vast vast majority of these GDP gains over the last few decades have gone to the top 10%, and especially the top 1%, of the population, while lower classes have been absolutely gutted? Sure, I guess both out-of-work Billy-Bob and and Jamal can now buy cheap plastic trinkets from Walmart at rock-bottom prices, but I personally think it would nice to either a) not need to buy that cheap crap in the first place, or even better, b) pay higher prices for that cheap crap because I know that my fellow countrymen were able to provide for their families by making it in America.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a healthy dose of nationalism and national identity in a country that absolutely needs this kind of direction. The United States IS NOT and SHOULD NOT be the world's savior, and we have no mandate what so ever to take in the world's poor while not first providing for our own. Globalism has absolutely CRUSHED the lower and middle classes in this country, and while BernOuts are crying foul about GloboCorps (this has some merit), what they fail to realize is that many of their other "socially liberal" policies have directly contributed to the current cut throat marketplace.
But whatever, I could write an entire thesis paper on this topic. That's enough effort poasting for one night.
So you're blaming the gun when people are shooting each other?
With your gun logic, gun violence outside of places which have strict gun control would be out of control. Where are the mass shootings in places that have less gun control? Look at where shootings typically happen: in places where guns are outlawed and therefore only the outlaws have guns. Schools, movie theaters, etc.
Yep. The question is not the gun so much as why Americans, especially urban African-Americans, kill each other at such high rates.
Guy, I'm just going to blow you out of the water and leave you grasping for straws, so hold on...
First, it's hilarious that lolberals ALWAYS reference Sweden when talking about government programs or social dynamics, as if that model is in any way, shape or form applicable to the US (hint: it's not).
1) Sweden is an extremely small, homogeneous country when compared to the US. Economies of scale are a HUGE factor in understanding why Sweden can run like it does, and why the US won't ever be able to copy that formula. If you don't understand the concept of "economies of scale" I suggest you look into the research area.
2) As I said before, Sweden has generally been homogeneous. It is well known in sociology, psychology and economics that in-group trust dynamics play a major factor in allowing for a well run, less violent, higher social welfare state. This dynamic CAN NOT be scaled up to a country like the US that is defined by heterogeneity of demographics. To boot, Sweden is finding out the hard way that "enrichment though diversity" doesn't always go as planned based on violent crime, rape and welfare stats that are extremely high amongst their immigrants/refugees when compared to native Swedes.
3) Birth rates in Sweden (1.9) are actually below replacement level (2.1) (this is a different topic that is interesting on it's own, but I digress), so a lot of people are actually NOT having children in that country, or are consciously having few children. Fewer children and high social trust allow for a more robust welfare state as resources can be spread around more efficiently when the population is productive, which native Swedes are.
4) FOR THE KILLSHOT (clever huh?): In Sweden, while marriage rates might be low and OOW birth rates might be disproportionately high, the percentage of Swedish children raised in a 2 PARENT HOUSEHOLD is near 80%! This is in stark contrast to the celebration of single motherhood in the US, where OOW births have a very very strong correlation with single parenthood.
So for the love of God, NEVER EVER EVER again reference Sweden when comparing stats to the US. At best you sound ignorant of stats and facts, and at worst you make yourself out to be dumb.
As for your "teen births/low income births/African American births have all been plummeting in recent years" I say, so what? The people who are committing crimes NOW (aged 15-30 males) weren't born "in recent years" and I'd even argue that since birthrates and teen pregnancy is down, it's even MORE of a shame that the OOW birthrate for the black community is what it currently is (70-80%, which btw is still WAY higher than your favorite Nordic country). Like I said before, OOW birth is highly correlated with single parenthood in the US, this goes double for the black community, and it is well documented that children of single parents are more likely to be less educated, be poor, have more emotional/mental problems, be more violent and commit more crimes.
So YES, OOW births have A LOT to do with gun violence and violent crime in AMERICA (not Sweden).
It's akin to Bernie Sanders trying to use his Vermont model on a national scale. It ain't gonna work.
People love to be righteous until they actually have to step up and deliver results. Then it is someone else's problem.
High level rant:
There are serious issues effecting the black community in Chicago and the U.S. in general. Centuries of slavery and oppression have resulted in black Americans in positions of poverty and without the tools to escape. Everyone always says "Group X from Y European Country did it, they should be able to too!" The fact of the matter is when you look like the person in a position of power, it's much easier to become the individual in the position of power. Institutionalized racism and deindustrialization have prevented blacks from climbing the social latter.
This is insulting to the millions of middle class African-American citizens that left these neighborhoods and the city in pursuit of a better life. Just like the white middle class did. Many African-American people have used the tools to escape.
The African-Americans stuck in these bad areas of Chicago, the ones left behind by the black middle class, need to get it together.
Having Obama in the White House at least did one good thing, according to you: when you look like the person in a position of power (both Obamas) it's much easier to become the individual in the position of power. There are many African-Americans in positions of power in 2016.
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.
