What is to blame for/the cause of the recent spate of robberies and looting and ransacking of businesses in America?

[supermist]

What point did you have? Are you denying how much damage those riots caused? Can you show me any positive result that came from them, as far as crime statistics?

THAT criminality wasn't due to poverty. And a lot of the people involved were like Meatball from TikTok of recent infamy. They just wanted to jump on the bandwagon. I mean, fuck; if Best Buy is blown wide open, let's get justice for Floyd by stealing a new TV. THAT'LL learn 'em.

You still need to show me what I said that is racist. You can't try to ask me to make your argument for you. You already think I am stupid, so let's pretend I'm as dumb as you are. Explain to me EXACTLY, using small words, what I said that is racist.

I will CashApp you fifty dollars right now if you can actually prove I said something racist. Do it now, boy.

Given the unhinged comments you've made about how you hoped covid would wipe out the world's population, I have zero interest in giving you any identifiable information

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Given the unhinged comments you've made about how you hoped covid would wipe out the world's population, I have zero interest in giving you any identifiable information

LMFAO. Sooo.. nothing?

Bounty is still open. I know you watch everything I post because of that raging hate boner you have for me. The day you catch me saying something racist, you can claim it. Until then, stop embarrassing yourself.

"If I make a false accusation, and you don't agree with it because it's false, that means that you ARE what I said you are!"

Do you even see how stupid that sounds? Fucking idiot.

 

[Xzi]

What point did you have?

We were discussing the state of the nation before Trump's influence on politics, so you're the one who decided to stray from that. Presumably we can agree that divisions only got worse after Floyd's murder, which reinforces my assertion that we had more to unite us before 2017.

 

[supermist]

We were discussing the state of the nation before Trump's influence on politics, so you're the one who decided to stray from that. Presumably we can agree that divisions only got worse after Floyd's murder, which reinforces my assertion that we had more to unite us before 2017.

2017 was when that large Unite the Right rally happened. You had numerous KKK and Nazi members march alongside conservatives who didn't express concern. Then you have Trump quoted saying that there were fine people on both sides.

But a side cannot have any Nazis or KKK members and be considered good. Then you have the right cry about Antfia and BLM as if those groups are equivalent to the KKK and Nazis.

That's the defining moment of the division we've seen. I see no logical reason to differentiate MAGAs from the KKK or Nazis as they continue to stand by their side. We continue to see this at MAGA rallies and even DeSantis rallies.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

We were discussing the state of the nation before Trump's influence on politics, so you're the one who decided to stray from that. Presumably we can agree that divisions only got worse after Floyd's murder, which reinforces my assertion that we had more to unite us before 2017.

We were discussing the state of the nation BEFORE Trump, right after the smartphone was invented. Scroll back. In fact, that's been a huge part of my argument on this topic from the beginning, to get back on topic, finally.

I think a huge component to the increase in criminality is the smartphone era. It STARTED under Obama, and got worse under Trump. (Remember, a few posts back, me saying this is what lit the fuse on your buddy's manpon, over there, and now he's sulking because he can't show anything I said that is racist). Now it's the worst it's ever been. I believe that the copycat/bandwagon bullshit that started when the first social media platforms started taking off has become worse now than ever, and people who normally wouldn't do shit like this ARE doing it, for social clout or approval, followers or clicks.

I don't think people are intrinsically bad or evil. I think people are easily influenced, now more than ever. We had more to unite us before 2007. Before the first iPhone.

 

[supermist]

It's not smartphones. Smartphones are why we know how George Floyd was actually killed.

It's quite simply, Trump. His remarks emboldened racists who had been in the closet for decades.

 

[Xzi]

I think a huge component to the increase in criminality is the smartphone era. It STARTED under Obama, and got worse under Trump. Now it's the worst it's ever been. I believe that the copycat/bandwagon bullshit that started when the first social media platforms started taking off has become worse now than ever, and people who normally wouldn't do shit like this ARE doing it, for social clout or approval, followers or clicks.

I don't think people are intrinsically bad or evil. I think people are easily influenced, now more than ever. We had more to unite us before 2007. Before the first iPhone.

Crime has overall been falling for several decades now, we just have a lot more sensationalist media trying to highlight it than before. Where the internet is concerned, the issue is lack of online literacy and critical thinking skills, and studies have shown the right to be far more susceptible to disinformation and confirmation bias than everyone else.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Crime has overall been falling for several decades now, we just have a lot more sensationalist media trying to highlight it than before. Where the internet is concerned, the issue is lack of online literacy and critical thinking skills, and studies have shown the right to be far more susceptible to disinformation and confirmation bias than everyone else.

I'd love to see your sources. That's a pretty broad claim. I trust you are better than "If you don't already know, that proves that you're a racist". You made a claim. I've never seen any information to support that claim. I would like to see your evidence if you are willing to provide it. Until then, I have no reason to believe you. Surely you understand. I'd be stupid to accept a baseless claim without evidence, just because you said it, and you believe it. Show me your facts, please.

Here's something I found from a Forbes article on June 28th of this year.

"Those who consumed social media as their primary source of news fared worse than those who used legacy sources: 53% of those getting news from Snapchat got low scores, while former President Donald Trump’s social media platform Truth Social was second worst with 45%, followed by WhatsApp with 44%, TikTok with 41% and Instagram with 38%."

Which pretty much supports my argument. MOST people go online for news, and almost half of all of them are subject to "fake news" that they cannot identify. Can't really pin this one on the mean old GOP, when it's across the board.

 

[supermist]

I'd love to see your sources. That's a pretty broad claim. I trust you are better than "If you don't already know, that proves that you're a racist". You made a claim. I've never seen any information to support that claim. I would like to see your evidence if you are willing to provide it. Until then, I have no reason to believe you. Surely you understand. I'd be stupid to accept a baseless claim without evidence, just because you said it, and you believe it. Show me your facts, please.

You don't ever budge when proof that debunks claims is provided.

Why would this time be any different?

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

You don't ever budge when proof that debunks claims is provided.

Why would this time be any different?

You haven't offered any proof. Ever. Not once, not ever. Still waiting.

You have a purty mouth when you're angry.

 

[Xzi]

I'd love to see your sources. That's a pretty broad claim. I trust you are better than "If you don't already know, that proves that you're a racist". You made a claim. I've never seen any information to support that claim. I would like to see your evidence if you are willing to provide it. Until then, I have no reason to believe you. Surely you understand. I'd be stupid to accept a baseless claim without evidence, just because you said it, and you believe it. Show me your facts, please.

Was hoping you'd ask. This was the most recent of several studies which all came to the same conclusion:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abf1234

Personally I'd say electing a known conman who fulfilled none of his campaign promises and used the presidency solely to enrich himself was already evidence enough. More supporting data is always nice though.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Was hoping you'd deliver. Counted on it, actually. You might be suffering from being a liberal, but I forgive you for that, since you are not an immature fuckhole like some other people here.

This was something I found that is also a pretty recent study, and it looks at this from a different angle.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/conorm...than-older-people-test-finds/?sh=966fdfd58857

I believe both sources to be reputable. Neither has the same result. So... where does that leave us?

 

[Veho]

Anyway, back on topic.

What is to blame for/the cause of the recent spate of robberies and looting and ransacking of businesses in America?​

Self-checkout, apparently.

http://www.jard.me/source/brochure/11_1509469025.pdf

"Theft accounts for nearly 4% of inventory for retailers with self-checkout, compared to just 1.5% for traditional checkout"

Well, there you go.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Self-checkout, apparently.

http://www.jard.me/source/brochure/11_1509469025.pdf

"Theft accounts for nearly 4% of inventory for retailers with self-checkout, compared to just 1.5% for traditional checkout"

Well, there you go.

This is also why stores are locking up SHAMPOO, though, in places like California. You have to get a clerk to unlock the case to get a razor.

I stole a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup when I was like 8 or so, and my mom caught me eating it in the backseat. She turned right around and went back to the store and made me apologize and pay for it. She made me keep the second cup until my dad got home from work and I had to eat it in front of him while he spun the paddle he used in front of me. Got my ass blistered and never stole again.

Being tough on crime was a great deterrent, for me. That's why I support public flogging.

 

[supermist]

You haven't offered any proof. Ever. Not once, not ever. Still waiting.

As you're dismissing literal voting breakdown as proof, or the Trump appointed judge blocking Biden's initiative to raise the wages of federally employed Americans making less than $15/hr, all you're doing here is reinforcing my statement that an intelligent or reasonable discussion with you simply isn't possible.

Most of our exchanges have been like this:

You: pOsT pRoOf

Me: Here's proof

You: THAT'S NOT PROOF

 

[Xzi]

I believe both sources to be reputable. Neither has the same result. So... where does that leave us?

In agreement apparently. From your Forbes article: "Democrats also fared better than Republicans: 33% of Democrats earned high scores, compared to 14% of Republicans, but both had about a quarter of respondents earn low scores."

Susceptibility to fake gossip or celebrity news is one thing, but easily-deceived voters electing authoritarians who speak at a first-grade level is entirely another.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

In agreement apparently. From your Forbes article: "Democrats also fared better than Republicans: 33% of Democrats earned high scores, compared to 14% of Republicans, but both had about a quarter of respondents earn low scores."

Susceptibility to fake gossip or celebrity news is one thing, but easily-deceived voters electing authoritarians who speak at a first-grade level is entirely another.

We can't be talking about politicans and authoritarians who speak at a first grade level without mentioning the, uh... mentioning the ummmm... you know, THE THING!

Democrats might have scored "higher" but as you quoted, a quarter of both sides receiving low scores doesn't bode well for either side. I also offer that the news source plays a factor. Name a NON-BIASED news source. I offer Reuter's as pretty much the only one I can think of. Can you name any?

Remember that Biden believes that poor kids are just as bright as White kids.

 

[Xzi]

We can't be talking about politicans and authoritarians who speak at a first grade level without mentioning the, uh... mentioning the ummmm... you know, THE THING!

Remember that Biden believes that poor kids are just as bright as White kids.

Biden wasn't my first, second, or third choice, but there's no equating him to Trump either. Gaffes do not make a person authoritarian, that's demonstrated through actions only.

 

[supermist]

Biden wasn't my first, second, or third choice, but there's no equating him to Trump either. Gaffes do not make a person authoritarian, that's demonstrated through actions only.

Biden has a documented stutter and this accounts for the gaffes. This is not uncommon for anyone with a stutter.

I don't know how widely known that fact is.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Biden wasn't my first, second, or third choice, but there's no equating him to Trump either. Gaffes do not make a person authoritarian, that's demonstrated through actions only.

I cannot think of anything Biden has done that has reduced crime, or helped people dealing with unjust laws.

Trump reauthorized the Second Chance Act, pardoned Jack Johnson, and opened a pathway for millions of Americans prosecuted under unjust drug laws (that Kamala Harris enforced when she was sending black men to for-profit prisons for minor drug offenses). I believe the war on drugs to be one of the greatest injustices in American history, and I am proud of what Trump did to help unjustly prosecuted minorities in this country who tended to be on the receiving end of the worst of the sentences.

Can you even give him credit for that? Can you stretch across the aisle at least for that?