Almost 1/3 of all homicides in my county 2010-16 were police killings

ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
I've been surrounded by western poverty and the mentality's of the most poor people here most of my life yet the more educated rich and poor people alike in this country are having two children on avg. Some poor people did have more kids but at a time when the benefit system was set up very bad to the point having more kids was a career choice for the under educated/lazy. I'm sorry to say it but most poor people (many are my friends) who have large family's are actually very under educated and have low IQ. They don't make calculated choices or think about the life they can't provide for their children, they just live by the day in an almost selfish state.

This Idea you have that people in genuine 3rd world country's only have children as a retirement fund is crackers on a few levels. The hard truths is that people have sexual desires. Mix that up with poor education/contraception, lack of hope yada yada. Having children is about the only ''good'' thing those people can hope to achieve in life. But they are blinded by the fact they are unable to provide for them. On another angle, remove the ready availability of contraception, the morning after pill etc from America today. You're an absolute idiot if you bet against a large spike in births by the same day next year. And I bet a lot of those would be under age parents.

In the west we choose not to have more kids because we have the luxury of giving 2 a good life. We can then concentrate on more self indulgence like driving a nice car, buying a nice house.. splashing out on nice clothes/food, new phone every year, etc.

Theirs a reason many of the best sportsmen come from third world or poor back grounds. They have very little else to do thus have no distractions other than the bare necessity's.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should find better neighbors and get to a library where you can read population statistics.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
I've been surrounded by western poverty and the mentality's of the most poor people here most of my life yet the more educated rich and poor people alike in this country are having two children on avg. Some poor people did have more kids but at a time when the benefit system was set up very bad to the point having more kids was a career choice for the under educated/lazy. I'm sorry to say it but most poor people (many are my friends) who have large family's are actually very under educated and have low IQ. They don't make calculated choices or think about the life they can't provide for their children, they just live by the day in an almost selfish state.

This Idea you have that people in genuine 3rd world country's only have children as a retirement fund is crackers on a few levels. The hard truths is that people have sexual desires. Mix that up with poor education/contraception, lack of hope yada yada. Having children is about the only ''good'' thing those people can hope to achieve in life. But they are blinded by the fact they are unable to provide for them. On another angle, remove the ready availability of contraception, the morning after pill etc from America today. You're an absolute idiot if you bet against a large spike in births by the same day next year. And I bet a lot of those would be under age parents.

In the west we choose not to have more kids because we have the luxury of giving 2 a good life. We can then concentrate on more self indulgence like driving a nice car, buying a nice house.. splashing out on nice clothes/food, new phone every year, etc.

Theirs a reason many of the best sportsmen come from third world or poor back grounds. They have very little else to do thus have no distractions other than the bare necessity's. Sex is one of those.
Click to expand...
The most effective way to reduce birth rates is to educate women.

Pretty much everything you said is devoid of facts, by the way.
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Maybe you should find better neighbors and get to a library where you can read population statistics.
Click to expand...
I've read and watched many videos on matters of sociology on top of working with poor people most of my life. I can tell you with certainty statistics are void of many complexity's.. and only take into account a population that derived from inequality and booming yet unsustainable industries. This is the problem, trying to look at the world population through a numerical lens. Don't believe for a second the figures on immigration though, you could add 20% to that in most western country's with safety.

You should but likely won't rethink what you've read on this matter from another perspective. I did make the same conclusion you did a few year back, I fully agree 'native' populations are dropping in said country's.. but it won't drop much past a sustainable level. Like over filling a life raft in calm seas. Good luck in the storm.

The deeper complexity is that very few western country's have a dominant age old native blood line. We are all mixing in the same pot and have been for centuries, drop that mentality if you want to understand deeper. What your statistics fail to take into account is that first wave immigration to a steady economy will lead to some 3rd generation mixed race children who on passport are considered native to said country. A western country that has work will never drop it's population below the countless idiotic doomsday predictions. I'd expect it to do some crazy things over the next 20 years though. The end of the oil and transition into renewable will no doubt create more boom in w/e country's spear head it. Hopefully poor country's are able to get a stake in it otherwise things will continue much the same as it has with oil, minus the wars (a small consolation I guess).

The only thing that will lead to a genuine alarming drop in any western country population is by fully closing the borders prior to suffering a large loss of life via war, famine, etc.

I'm holding out that you can give me some of your own insight into your conclusions rather than just telling me to go read.
 
Last edited:
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
I've read and watched many videos on matters of sociology on top of working with poor people most of my life. I can tell you with certainty statistics are void of many complexity's.. and only take into account a population that derived from inequality and booming yet unsustainable industries. This is the problem, trying to look at the world population through a numerical lens. Don't believe for a second the figures on immigration though, you could add 20% to that in most western country's with safety.

You should but likely won't rethink what you've read on this matter from another perspective. I did make the same conclusion you did a few year back, I fully agree 'native' populations are dropping in said country's.. but it won't drop much past a sustainable level. Like over filling a life raft in calm seas. Good luck in the storm.

The deeper complexity is that very few western country's have a dominant age old native blood line. We are all mixing in the same pot and have been for centuries, drop that mentality if you want to understand deeper. What your statistics fail to take into account is that first wave immigration to a steady economy will lead to some 3rd generation mixed race children who on passport are considered native to said country. A western country that has work will never drop it's population below the countless idiotic doomsday predictions. I'd expect it to do some crazy things over the next 20 years though. The end of the oil and transition into renewable will no doubt create more boom in w/e country's spear head it. Hopefully poor country's are able to get a stake in it otherwise things will continue much the same as it has with oil, minus the wars (a small consolation I guess).

The only thing that will lead to a genuine alarming drop in any western country population is by fully closing the borders prior to suffering a large loss of life via war, famine, etc.

I'm holding out that you can give me some of your own insight into your conclusions rather than just telling me to go read.
Click to expand...
I find your conclusions based on 'age old native bloodlines' to be potentially racist and irrelevant; many countries have experienced this fall in population, from Scandinavian ones to Japan.

Throwing renewable energy into the conversation is also irrelevant; this transition is as yet far too recent to correlate with pulsation trends and in any case you've utterly failed to draw any lines of cause and effect between them.

Since you've worked with poor people, surely you've noticed that poor and economically unstable families tend to have more children than those who are well off? THAT'S the relevant factor, a conclusion supported by many peer reviewed sociological studies.
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I find your conclusions based on 'age old native bloodlines' to be potentially racist and irrelevant; many countries have experienced this fall in population, from Scandinavian ones to Japan.

Throwing renewable energy into the conversation is also irrelevant; this transition is as yet far too recent to correlate with pulsation trends and in any case you've utterly failed to draw any lines of cause and effect between them.

Since you've worked with poor people, surely you've noticed that poor and economically unstable families tend to have more children than those who are well off? THAT'S the relevant factor, a conclusion supported by many peer reviewed sociological studies.
Click to expand...
You've missed the point on bloodlines entirely, It is the opposite of 'potentially racist'. I've also covered reasons why civilized country's see population drops.. other than your shallow assertion of ''because they are civilized''. I have also covered how the shift into renewable meaning the potential shuffle and balancing in world powers (or not) may or may not effect economy>population of said countries, why is that not relevant?. Some poor people have large family's and I gave some reasons why that happens, you missed that too. Ironically you need to read more ;p. But never mind it now, this is done.
 
Last edited:
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The most effective way to reduce birth rates is to educate women.

Pretty much everything you said is devoid of facts, by the way.
Click to expand...
Probably the most sexist thing I've read this year. Hopefully it was an intentional troll?.. or else that's one hell of a trench.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
Probably the most sexist thing I've read this year. Hopefully it was an intentional troll?.. or else that's one hell of a trench.
Click to expand...
I think smart and well educated women are sexy too.

Now you were saying something about poor people and contaminated bloodlines or was that earlier post of yours just a cry for help?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
Probably the most sexist thing I've read this year. Hopefully it was an intentional troll?.. or else that's one hell of a trench.
Click to expand...
No, he's actually quite right. Educating women in third world countries as to their reproductive options has been shown to be the single most effective way to reduce birth rates.

But you'd know that if you studied. Watching a few videos on YouTube doesn't qualify as research.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
No, he's actually quite right. Educating women in third world countries as to their reproductive options has been shown to be the single most effective way to reduce birth rates.

But you'd know that if you studied. Watching a few videos on YouTube doesn't qualify as research.
Click to expand...
It's more than sex education. Education. Educated women have fewer babies than uneducated. Several reasons, able to find higher paying work, know their rights, assert them too.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
Oh, please enlighten me, DF.
How will economic justice heal racial divides in our country?
Click to expand...
Which groups are disproportionately represented at the bottom of the economic scale? Minorites. Therefore, economic policies that aim to improve the financial situation of those at the bottom of the wealth and income scale are going to disproportionately benefit minorities. That's why helping the poor is a very pro-minority approach.

Do you ever think anymore before shooting off your mouth? Before you became a sycophant of the Buck 'let's hate on everyone who thinks for themselves' crowd, you used to actually have some good insights.
 
StonerCol

StonerCol

Well-Known Member
I think it is universally acknowledged that education can only ever be a good thing.
In places like Afghanistan and Pakistan the Taliban are doing as much as they can to stop education, particularly for girls, because they know that education gives empowerment. Replace ignorance with education and people start to realise what they can achieve. They then start to understand that the Taliban's view of how things should be - women/girls uneducated and kept at home - is a view they should reject. The Taliban hate that.
They shot Malala Yousafzai in the head because she was encouraging girls to get educated. Luckily she survived and is now studying at Oxford University. I bet the Taliban are very pissed off with that!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
StonerCol said:
I think it is universally acknowledged that education can only ever be a good thing.
In places like Afghanistan and Pakistan the Taliban are doing as much as they can to stop education, particularly for girls, because they know that education gives empowerment. Replace ignorance with education and people start to realise what they can achieve. They then start to understand that the Taliban's view of how things should be - women/girls uneducated and kept at home - is a view they should reject. The Taliban hate that.
They shot Malala Yousafzai in the head because she was encouraging girls to get educated. Luckily she survived and is now studying at Oxford University. I bet the Taliban are very pissed off with that!
Click to expand...
:clap: Excellent post! Hear, hear!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
@StonerCol makes a very strong argument in favour of education. The one caveat I'd add is that there is a big difference between education and indoctrination.

We need education, which brings awareness and enlightenment in the service of free will and personal agency.

We don't need indoctrination, which only seems to co-opt the individual into a certain, usually extreme, mode of thinking.
 
StonerCol

StonerCol

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
@StonerCol makes a very strong argument in favour of education. The one caveat I'd add is that there is a big difference between education and indoctrination.

We need education, which brings awareness and enlightenment in the service of free will and personal agency.

We don't need indoctrination, which only seems to co-opt the individual into a certain, usually extreme, mode of thinking.
Click to expand...
I agree. In countries such as Afghanistan & Pakistan the education is more pure. It's not indoctrination - religious education aside - it's about the basics and seems to be done with the 1 aim of empowerment.
In countries like the UK there is often the charge that kids are educated in order to pass exams. They are almost perpetually tested and start those tests at a very young age. There is an emphasis on exam results and those results often dictate how good the kids education will be in later years i.e. high school/college/university.
Having our education system more integrated into the overall economic system isn't always doing us favours. It becomes about protecting the economy instead of equipping kids with a wide range of skills. Some kids are never going to be brain-boxes and perhaps don't want to be but they are all lumped in together.

In Scandinavian countries they start education 2 or 3 years later and are given more time to play, develop social skills and enjoy being kids without the added pressure of exams at the age of 7.

It's always been my opinion that many black people in the US end up in prison because they don't get the education that most whites get. They remain uneducated and therefore unable to be earn a decent living. Being disadvantaged educationally translates into being economically disadvantaged. Often the result of that is crime and in a country where getting a gun is as easy as getting a haircut that's a recipe for disaster imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top