|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total) |
| |
anil dahar | |
Total: 919,511 Year: 6,768/9,624 Month: 108/238 Week: 25/83 Day: 1/3 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Phat Unplugged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
If one sees an increase in theft but no strict punishment then it can snowball, especially when combined with higher rates of homelessness.
Do you have real world examples? Where is theft not prosecuted?What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22954 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
Phat is once again bringing random YouTube videos into the debate. In the case of Jay Martin he's also using the Argument from Authority fallacy. What Jay Martin or his guests think aren't what matters.
Phat must instead offer evidence and arguments built from that evidence. This he has never done, and Jay Martin should never even have been mentioned. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10302 Joined: Member Rating: 7.1
|
How it played out in SF:
quote: In this atmosphere, petty theft (a misdemeanor) became endemic in SF.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22954 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
I wish I had time to research this a little more, but I don't so just a couple quick thoughts.
The limit on what constitutes a felony being raised to $950, it feels like that had to happen because of all the inflation that had occurred since the limit was set to $400 in 1982. It feels like one of those issues where a lot has been written, both pro and con, and so studies and articles can be found that endorse whatever side one happens to be on. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18653 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
Percy writes: I am not using random anything. I listen to a select group of people all involved in finance and investing and I read and listen towhat they have to say. All that you have managed to source are government websites with limited information. You likely trust them. I question them. Phat is once again bringing random YouTube videos into the debate. In the case of Jay Martin he's also using the Argument from Authority fallacy. What Jay Martin or his guests think isn't what matters. Percy writes: Phat must instead offer evidence and arguments built from that evidence Lets start with a few charts. From Yahoo Finance. (Look at the ten-year Bond and tell me that treasuries are continuing to be a secure future and bedrock for global financial investing!Yahoo Finance - Stock Market Live, Quotes, Business & Finance News As of this morning, before the markets have opened, Gold is at an all-time high. My so-called "YouTube" conmen mentioned that Gold was being used more and more often on a global market as a hedge and as a primary trade rather than using the traditional mode of settling with US Treasuries. The sources also mentioned that BRICS was expanding from the original 5 nations to as many as 43. They mentioned that a BRICS currency backed by gold would in time challenge the US Dollar. This is happening. Silver lags behind Gold historically, but silver has outperformed Gold in 2024. Many think a bull run in silver will begin as early as October and continue into 2025.
2 Narratives - 1 Truth . This article was written by Roger, otherwise known as Bald Guy Money on YouTube. Roger is no con nor is he clueless about the events happening in the world at this point. Granted Peter Schiff is shifty, just as Irwin was. There are rubes out there, but not everyone who attempts to link global events with finance is automatically a con or a grifter. I have been challenged here before about my concerns about the BRICS, but I am finding more and more evidence that they are a genuine challenge to US Dollar dominance. The shift will happen quicker than you think.
The Battle for the BRICS Why the Future of the Bloc Will Shape Global Order In this article from Foreign Affairs magazine, the rapid growth of the BRICS trading bloc is now challenging the G7. quote: Critics may point out that the values of BRICS members are much more at odds than the solidarity of the G7. Still, the evidence shows that Putin has stirred this thing into an economic war against the United States and its interests and that the strategy is slowly working.
quote:Also in the news lately is the pronouncement that China is having a large economic crisis that may be too late to stop. Regarding your subtitle, Jay Martin talks about many of these events on his podcast. You really should get out more.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18653 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
Theo writes: For starters, right here in Denver! We see a group of around 20 people who do the majority of the theft in our store. They usually walk out (daily) with around $500.00 a pop. Two of them are well known (infamous) in the neighborhood of businesses around our store. Loss Prevention (LP) even knows their names! Keith and Kenneth Childs. Our Loss prevention even tried to build a case on them, but it eventually got shut down. I'm not sure whether or not Corporate itself shut the indictment down to avoid negative publicity or not, but the police are rarely directly involved except to "Trespass" someone, telling them that they cannot return to the store. This effort also fails. These people are small-time organized crime. As to your data that indicates a preponderance of employee theft, I don't see it as big as you claim. Many of us are disgusted with these criminals. Im sure the bleeding hearts will ask for decriminalization of shoplifting and some sort of government program to bring them help. In my opinion, this approach wont work on most of them either.
Do you have real world examples? Where is theft not prosecuted?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
Source or is all you have anecdotal evidence?
Im sure the bleeding hearts will ask for decriminalization of shoplifting and some sort of government program to bring them help.
Show an example of this. Oh yeah, fuck you.
As to your data that indicates a preponderance of employee theft, I don't see it as big as you claim.
Lie? Strawman? Inability to understand basic argument and data?I never made such a claim and data I presented does not make such a claim. What was said is that employee theft and jnternal operations issues are responsible for the preponderance of shrink. According to the National Retail Federation in 2022 that accounted for 63% of shrink. 36% of shrink was from outside. Shoplifting is only a portion of that. I am not denying there is shoplifting. I am not denying there are gangs of shoplifters. I do not deny that some states and areas need to do more. I am questioning your figures and your vilification of whole groups of people based upon your prejudices and racism. I am questioning your claim that it is some sort of progressive plot. You are not allowed to make up your own facts. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts. Here are the facts and data. 7 reasons why everyone’s confused about shrink and theft | Retail DiveWhat can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10302 Joined: Member Rating: 7.1 |
Phat writes: As of this morning, before the markets have opened, Gold is at an all-time high. My so-called "YouTube" conmen mentioned that Gold was being used more and more often on a global market as a hedge and as a primary trade rather than using the traditional mode of settling with US Treasuries. The sources also mentioned that BRICS was expanding from the original 5 nations to as many as 43. They mentioned that a BRICS currency backed by gold would in time challenge the US Dollar. This is happening. The US has the most gold in its reserves, more than double the next closest country which is Germany. What we do know is that there isn't enough gold in the world to replace the US dollar in global reserves. They are going to have to go to something other than gold if they don't want to use dollars. This means they are going to have to trust some other entity that controls whatever other currency they want to use. In the case of BRICS, if they create something internally then it will be controlled by China given its dominance within BRICS. I don't think the other BRICS countries will agree to this. One of the main reasons people use dollars, other than its volume, is the stability and fairness of the US. The US doesn't manipulate its currency to improve trade. China does. The US is transparent. China isn't. Also, other countries are not able to manipulate the US through favors or threats. Other countries aren't as immune to manipulation. If you are looking for a high volume currency backed by a trustworthy nation there is only one currency that ticks all the boxes, and that is the US dollar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
So explain how gold is going to be used to settle accounts internationally. Explain how gold is going to be used to back this fantastical BRICS currency.
BRICS actually has 7 members and have extended invites to 7 more countries. Argentina has formally turned down that invite. Diana Mondino confirm? que la Argentina no ingresar? a los BRICS - El Cronista Also, India and Brazil have been reaching out to the west. Here are examples. OECD takes first step in accession discussions with Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia, Peru and Romania | OECD https://www.nbcnews.com/...ukraine-ally-russia-wa-rcna167704What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22954 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
I'm not sure why I'm replying, because the same issues that keep making you believe you're making effective arguments will also keep you from understanding my comments, none of which you'll ever actually respond to anyway. But what the heck, here goes.
Phat writes in Message 455: Percy writes: I am not using random anything. I listen to a select group of people all involved in finance and investing and I read and listen to what they have to say. Phat is once again bringing random YouTube videos into the debate. In the case of Jay Martin he's also using the Argument from Authority fallacy. What Jay Martin or his guests think isn't what matters. After reading and listening to what they have to say, then you have to come here and present their evidence and arguments in your own words. You never do this.
All that you have managed to source are government websites with limited information. You likely trust them. I question them. Then you're questioning ephemera, because I have never done this. What led you to speak falsely? Percy writes: Phat must instead offer evidence and arguments built from that evidence Lets start with a few charts. From Yahoo Finance. (Look at the ten-year Bond and tell me that treasuries are continuing to be a secure future and bedrock for global financial investing!Yahoo Finance - Stock Market Live, Quotes, Business & Finance News Find the evidence on that webpage that supports your case and present it here.
As of this morning, before the markets have opened, Gold is at an all-time high. My so-called "YouTube" conmen mentioned that Gold was being used more and more often on a global market as a hedge and as a primary trade rather than using the traditional mode of settling with US Treasuries. You're stating conclusions without evidence or argument.
The sources also mentioned that BRICS was expanding from the original 5 nations to as many as 43. What sources? You haven't provided any, and even if you had they would only be as supporting references. You must present the evidence yourself.
They mentioned that a BRICS currency backed by gold would in time challenge the US Dollar. This is happening. Instead of just declaring that "this is happening", you must instead present evidence and argument for that position.
Silver lags behind Gold historically, but silver has outperformed Gold in 2024. Many think a bull run in silver will begin as early as October and continue into 2025. This statement about silver lacks any explanation for how it ties to gold. Also, "many think" is not a valid argument.
2 Narratives - 1 Truth . This article was written by Roger, otherwise known as Bald Guy Money on YouTube. Roger is no con nor is he clueless about the events happening in the world at this point. Granted Peter Schiff is shifty, just as Irwin was. There are rubes out there, but not everyone who attempts to link global events with finance is automatically a con or a grifter. We don't care what Roger the Bald Guy says. Tell us the evidence and arguments behind his conclusions.
I have been challenged here before about my concerns about the BRICS, but I am finding more and more evidence that they are a genuine challenge to US Dollar dominance. So you're finding all this evidence but never presenting it here? Why not?
The shift will happen quicker than you think. And you think so why?
The Battle for the BRICS Why the Future of the Bloc Will Shape Global Order In this article from Foreign Affairs magazine, the rapid growth of the BRICS trading bloc is now challenging the G7. quote: Do you even know what "GDP in purchasing power parity terms" means? Anyway, how does the rest of the world becoming more competitive economically while growing in population lead to the demise of the dollar as the preferred currency? You never explain.
Critics may point out that the values of BRICS members are much more at odds than the solidarity of the G7. Still, the evidence shows that Putin has stirred this thing into an economic war against the United States and its interests and that the strategy is slowly working. There's "an economic war against the United States and it's interests" stirred up by Putin? And it's working? Are you planning to back that up with any evidence or argument? Your quote from the article certainly doesn't do that:
quote: Moving on:
Also in the news lately is the pronouncement that China is having a large economic crisis that may be too late to stop. A declining Chinese economy would seem to argue against the dollar's demise.
Regarding your subtitle, Jay Martin talks about many of these events on his podcast. You really should get out more. You should support your positions with evidence and arguments. If Jay Martin is providing you with these then you should include them in your messages. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18653 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
Tangle writes: Percy always asks me to put stuff in my own words but its hard to do. If I agree with a particular point made by someone else what am I supposed to do? Plagarize them? They usually state the (obvious) point better than I could.
Believers are probably as intelligent on average as the general population, though atheists tend to be above average. You're not particularly smart Phat so don't get carried away with yourself. But it's not IQ that's your problem; it's your thinking skills - they're generally absent.Tangle writes: Having a professor like that would inspire or frustrate me. You don't know how often I make what I think to be a decent post only to have it criticized by the Peanut Gallery. One of the most evidence-driven people I ever met was Professor Sir Anthony Bottoms (yes, really!)' professor of criminology at Cambridge University. Speaking to him was an intellectual minefield, he had a mind like a trap and you had to weigh up every word you said to him and justify your assertions with supporting evidence. A very, very clever man. I could tie him up in knots without breaking into a sweat. Very odd. He compartmentalized his belief from his rational mind... Did it ever occur to you that if in fact, a given belief had any intrinsic validity your rational response would be irrelevant? Edited by Phat, : edit. Thanks David
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
If I agree with a particular point made by someone else what am I supposed to do? Plagarize them? They usually state the (obvious) point better than I could.
If you can't put it in your own words, then you don't understand it. Just because you think something sounds good doesn't mean you understand it.
You don't know how often I make what I think to be a decent post only to have it exacerbated by the Peanut Gallery.
That should speak volumes to you. It shows you just aren't that smart.
given belief had any intrinsic validity
What do you mean by this? Examples? What kind of "given belief had any intrinsic validity", would a professor of criminology have that could make a rational response irrelevant?Do you think irrationality is preferable to rationality? If you are not going to actually address this post, please do not bother responding.What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9583 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.5 |
Phat writes: Having a professor like that would either inspire me or frustrate me. It makes you very careful. You have to think about whether what you're saying can be backed up if challenged. That makes him sound cold and hard but he was/is an incredibly kind man.
You don't know how often I make what I think to be a decent post only to have it exacerbated by the Peanut Gallery. That's because you have almost zero critical thinking skills and refuse to learn any. You don't know how to work out whether what you're reading/watching is information/misinformation/propaganda or simple self-serving fraud. You come at everything through a pre-existing lens of beliefs that you've picked up off conservative YouTube and apply them uncritically because you want to believe them. Did it ever occur to you that if in fact, a given belief had any intrinsic validity your rational response would be irrelevant? You see, you are incapable of thinking rationally. If a 'given belief had any intrinsic validity' it would be capable of being demonstrated as such. And he would be the first person to insist on that - in any other context. The fact was, he'd never applied his rational mind to his Christian beliefs so when asked simple factual questions about evidencing what is taken as fact in the bible such as who wrote them and when, whether Jesus actually made the sermon on the mount, whether Moses existed etc etc he had no answers. Of course he could have been as expert on the bible as he is on criminology and still been a believing Christian - some are - but he'd just never bothered to apply his mind to his beliefs. A very strange contradiction. Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
Oh yeah. You shouldn't use big words if you don't know what they mean.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 6077 Joined: Member Rating: 7.1
|
If you can't put it in your own words, then you don't understand it. Just because you think something sounds good doesn't mean you understand it. Not just that, but when you explain something to someone else, then that requires you to think it through. If you cannot explain it to someone else then you don't understand it, especially if you are unable to even begin to explain it. If you put an honest effort into writing that explanation then you will learn more about the subject yourself because writing that explanation requires you to organize your thoughts about the subject. It will also make you aware of the parts that you don't understand which requires you to research those parts more deeply. A side-benefit of that evolution (Navy-speak) is that you are also verifying that claim. If the claim turns out to be BS (eg, just about any creationist claim), then your questions should uncover that fact. For example, if the claim requires certain assumptions, then your research into those assumptions should show their weaknesses or even that they are totally unfounded. OTOH, if the assumptions turn out to be sound and the claim well reasoned, then would strengthen your confidence in that claim. Furthermore, going through that evolution would put you in a far better position to defend or discuss that claim. For example, Phat complains:
Phat writes in Message 461: You don't know how often I make what I think to be a decent post only to have it exacerbated by the Peanut Gallery. First, word choice. "exacerbate" means to make worse. I think he meant "excoriate" which means to censure scathingly. Second, if he had performed the evolution described above then he would have been well prepared to defend and discuss his "decent post." He had not, so he could not. That is also so sadly typical of creationists who repeat claims that they had heard without understanding them and so are completely incapable of discussing them. It took me so long in the beginning to understand why my good faith attempts to discuss creationists' claims with them was almost universally met with anger and vitriol. Finally I realized that they quite literally had absolutely no clue what they were talking about and so they had to resort to extreme unpleasantness in order to avoid discussion: it's their only defense. And indeed, one of the best ways to learn a subject is to teach it. I discovered that while helping a fellow German student with German grammar -- as parodied by Mark Twain in his "The Awful German Language", learning German feels like having to memorize multiple tables of case endings ("You speak German, Herr Twain? Please decline this adjective for me." "I'd rather decline two drinks than a damned German adjective!"), which is more true with German than with Romance languages but less so than with Russian. As a result of reviewing and drilling with my friend, my own expertise became greater. Part of that comes from constantly reviewing the material and part comes from answering the students' questions which often requires finding different ways to explain the material, which of course requires you to think it through even more. I should note here that my typically overly didactic writing style is itself an exercise in studying and trying to understand a subject. And there have been several posts that I started but never finished because during the writing I came to realize that I was wrong about parts (or all) of it.
PS
Here's an example of my approach having led to changing my mind. I prefer working in the metric system than in the "English" system. One of my favorite pertinent scenes in Jerry Seinfeld's interview series, Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, was his initial phone conversation with Christoph Waltz who was shopping in a Santa Monica hardware store for a measuring tape:
quote: My father was a master carpenter and a general contractor and I worked for him for eight years in high school and college (every day I wasn't in class I was on the job site, so my first big adjustment to life in the military was having weekends free). Being able to read 16ths and 32nds of an inch on a steel tape on sight requires constant daily practice, which my work schedule did not provide me, so every time I had to figure it out. That meant that I had to repeatedly calculate fractions and do fraction arithmetic in my head, then forget what I had learned until the next time I had to do the same weeks or even months later. IOW, I never learned, but had to always do it the hard way. Then I worked construction for one summer in West Germany. The first day on the job I was handed a Meterstock and told to get a board of a specific width. I could read that measurement immediately. Verily, centimeters do indeed make more sense than inches do. University physics class used metric which made a lot of sense; we did cover "English" units briefly, but that felt too messy to work with (eg, mass having to be measured in slugs since the pound is a unit of force, so many hybrid units, etc). Half a century ago I learned the metric equivalences (1 cubic centimeter == 1 milliliter and 1 ml water masses at one gram), but until a year ago I didn't know that one fluid ounce of water weighs about one ounce avoirdupois. I also do not understand fluid ounces which only come up when ordering a drink (in the kitchen it's always cups and tablespoons and teaspoons). Since my only history of ordering drinks was half a century ago in West Germany, I have to convert from fluid ounces to milliliters in order to have any idea how big the drink will be (1 fl.oz. ≈ 30 ml, the subject of a webpage I've been working on). So my webpage on approximating converting from metric to "English" in order to learn to visualize the metric measurement started out as an examination of why we haven't switched over already. I'm in favor of switching over to using metric and couldn't understand the opposition to it, thinking that opposition to be irrational. But as I started writing that page and researching I learned that there are rational reasons for not switching and I was able to better understand the opposing opinions. As such, that is a case where explaining my position in writing led to my learning more and to understanding the opposing position better. That page has been superseded by another describing simple methods for approximating metric measurements into "English". In typical apologetic style, I found a quote which justifies my approach:
quote: Although I had already decided on that approach of devising simple approximations easy to calculate mentally, that quote expressed it well. That page is far from ready for publication (even retired I have too little free time), but if anyone is curious I could share a few.
Edited by dwise1, : PS
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024