Halubaris Maphotika Posted January 13, 2018 Report Share Posted January 13, 2018 sarcasmYou realize we're in the debates section right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rooster Posted January 13, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2018 You realize we're in the debates section right? Yes, I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted January 13, 2018 Report Share Posted January 13, 2018 no i'm zionist #FreeIsrael Nope. God's chosen people have stolen enough land. sarcasm Yes, I do. Then you realize you're breaking the rules. This is your verbal warning. I won't give you another. You will be punished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 14, 2018 Report Share Posted January 14, 2018 I'm not telling you that actually. It's about statistics, in general, people from Norway are better educated, richer etc. Sure there may be a Haitian who is better educated and richer (using only two measures, but extrapolate out for the case I'm trying to construct here) than a Norwegian, but on average they're not. It has little to do with individuals. POTUS wasn't singling out x from Haiti, but rather talking in broad strokes. In those regards he was objectively not incorrect. Why should they? Tangent, but that's why I noted the "Muslim Ban," I made the assumption that you and others of similar views would feel that's a banning simply on the prejudice. It's been temporarily upheld and likely will. Disclaimer, I don't agree with that view on the Travel ban. And disclaimer two, this isn't like a ban on prejudice, see P1 Since when do two wrongs make a right? I had a guy rip $20 off me last year, I'm going to jail if I get caught ripping $20 off a person today regardless. Yes, there has been sexism and racism. I don't necessarily agree with the existence of Institutional Racism post Jim Crow. But we might have different ideas on what IR consists of. Here's a pretty good discussion on that. It honestly does not matter even if IR exists today. IR in Texas does not justify revered IR in CA. Again this last para is bunch of garbage designed to strawman: "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument" I'm not denying a disabled person, or a person from central Africa can be more attractive to the US than a person from Norway, I'm saying on avg they are not. You're deliberately characterizing my point on the mean distribution as me saying there is not a single person in the tails who could overlap. Norway has a mean of 2, Haiti has a mean of 0. Look at the tails, there are people from Haiti who are more talented than the people from Norway, but on AVG and in most cases, that's simply not true. Stephen Hawkings fits into that green area. But stop pretending every disabled person is Hawkings Try again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCR_CAT Posted January 14, 2018 Report Share Posted January 14, 2018 I'm not telling you that actually. It's about statistics, in general, people from Norway are better educated, richer etc. Sure there may be a Haitian who is better educated and richer (using only two measures, but extrapolate out for the case I'm trying to construct here) than a Norwegian, but on average they're not. It has little to do with individuals. POTUS wasn't singling out x from Haiti, but rather talking in broad strokes. In those regards he was objectively not incorrect. Why should they? Tangent, but that's why I noted the "Muslim Ban," I made the assumption that you and others of similar views would feel that's a banning simply on the prejudice. It's been temporarily upheld and likely will. Disclaimer, I don't agree with that view on the Travel ban. And disclaimer two, this isn't like a ban on prejudice, see P1 Did you go back and read the part where I talked about how, with a proper immigration process and vetting, it shouldn't matter where someone comes from (outside of exceptions such as war-times or openly hostile nations such as North Korea? And the problem comes in "talking in broad strokes", that's how bad generalizations happen and that's what's happening. If you want to talk nuance, then talk about vetting and maybe choose your arguments and your words so it doesn't sound like you believe the process of immigration works as "Anyone who wants can just hop on a plane and become a citizen". I mean, if that's how it worked you wouldn't have so many illegal immigrants, huh. Also yes, I would classify the "Muslim Ban" as a ban on prejudice. I mean, just look at what it's named. If it wasn't a ban on prejudice, I'm positive the bill itself would look very different, and be named something that doesn't even try to not sound prejudiced at all. Since when do two wrongs make a right? I had a guy rip $20 off me last year, I'm going to jail if I get caught ripping $20 off a person today regardless. Yes, there has been sexism and racism. I don't necessarily agree with the existence of Institutional Racism post Jim Crow. But we might have different ideas on what IR consists of. Here's a pretty good discussion on that. It honestly does not matter even if IR exists today. IR in Texas does not justify revered IR in CA. Two wrongs doesn't make a right, at no point have I ever advocated for discrimination as the solution to discrimination. Have you even been reading what I've been posting? Again this last para is bunch of garbage designed to strawman: "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument" I'm not denying a disabled person, or a person from central Africa can be more attractive to the US than a person from Norway, I'm saying on avg they are not. You're deliberately characterizing my point on the mean distribution as me saying there is not a single person in the tails who could overlap. Norway has a mean of 2, Haiti has a mean of 0. Look at the tails, there are people from Haiti who are more talented than the people from Norway, but on AVG and in most cases, that's simply not true. Stephen Hawkings fits into that green area. But stop pretending every disabled person is Hawkings Again this last paragraph is a bunch of garbage designed to strawman where you say I'm pretending that every disabled person is Hawkings and not at all like I spent time talking about how people should be given an equal chance and opportunity. If you want to keep this up, you should start reading what I'm posting and taking it into consideration instead of trying to feed me a narrative that generalizations become true for every person from a place. If you want to be the person who's preaching nuance, you should try it for yourself and realize that individual persons are not defined by averages or statistics. Once again, back to my talking point that you've never read or considered where I talk about an immigration process being a lot more complicated than just letting anyone in willy-nilly and how, with proper vetting, it doesn't matter where a person is from within reason. Either spend the time to read and understand what I'm saying, or quit wasting my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.