Black Culture Pathology, What to do?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Moi621, Aug 24, 2013.

  1. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because that doesn't take understanding of economics, just a talent for separating people from their money -- and lack of scruple regarding how one does so.
    It doesn't take a lot of economic theory to understand that having a license to print money is like having a license to print money....
    Success at what, though? Other than separating others from their money...
    There is a difference -- of which you seem to be unaware -- between doing "it" right and doing right, between doing "it" wrong and doing wrong.
    Some people fight against the reality of systematic, institutionalized injustice, while others are content to "navigate" it, and thus arrange to make themselves its beneficiaries. The latter are what you call, "successful" -- but the former are responsible for all humanity's progress towards civilized society, while the latter have only impeded it.
    No, because the truth is not congenial to the narrow financial interests of the rich, greedy, privileged parasites who actually own and control everything. That is why economics has never been able to join the ranks of the genuine empirical sciences: that would be too inconvenient to the takers.
     
  2. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When we ask, "Why?" it always leads to more fundamental issues. a better world thinks the fundamental issue is a lack of government spending, and that MMT and a job guarantee can solve the problem. spiritgide seems to think it is a matter of individual choice, family values, etc. Some say genetics is involved to one degree or another; others blame the education system; still others blame leaded gasoline and other sources of environmental toxins. Personally, I think the problem is extremely complex, and all of the above play some role -- but the real problem, the most important factor, is privilege, and the associated massive, systematic, institutionalized, and wholly gratuitous injustice.
     
  3. ToddWB

    ToddWB Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,169
    Likes Received:
    4,271
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    well, along the lines bringiton is conveying, I'd note that there are estimated 10% of the population, IQ lower than 80, that cannot completely or even sometimes just partially , take care of themselves. We used to have institutions that tended and cared for them, those institutions have been lost due to bad policy, intentional or not.
     
  4. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True enough. As our world becomes more complex, such people are less and less able to manage, or even to stay out of trouble (in the USA, the institutions that "tend and care for" a lot of them are prisons). a better world's notion that they can have guaranteed jobs courtesy of MMT is as absurd as spiritgide's notion that it's up to them, and they just have to man up and decide to be productive, or pick up the phone and schmooze their way into a job. Just giving them money and hoping they don't spend it too unwisely, as we currently do, is perhaps the most idiotic notion of all. Consigning them to institutions, however benign (and history tells us how that is more likely to turn out), is not going to fly constitutionally, but it might be possible to arrange some level of supervision as a condition of getting a safe place to sleep, three square meals a day, and opportunities for suitable employment or at least occupation.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  5. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"

    What you want to hear is that your much-bruited business success -- which sounds more and more like MLM or pyramid schemes of some sort -- is all due to your own personal virtues and merit, that you have earned every dime, no government or taxpayer has ever helped you, blah, blah, blah. So when the tricksters fill your head with such drivel, you eagerly believe it, and even evangelize it for them.
    No it isn't. It's the effort of the privileged to create a system that legally entitles them to steal from everyone else -- and to prevent their victims from defending themselves, which you are pleased to call "keeping things orderly."
    I could do better on my worst day.
    Liberty and justice have worked everywhere they have ever been tried, as long as and to the extent that they have been tried. Rich, greedy, privileged parasites just don't care for the results.
    Or, even more, what we had before it.
    a better world is indeed a Marxist. But I am not. I am aware that socialism is even worse than capitalism, and I know why.
    No it isn't. That is just neoclassical bull$#!+. The real basis of economics is relief of scarcity through production, allocation and exchange.
    Unfortunately, you do not know the first thing about the modern debt money system. You can't even define the different kinds of money.
    Wrong. As long as you make money useful for settling debts and restrict its supply, it will have value. And FYI, most government spending is not giving money away. It is paying suppliers for desirable public services and infrastructure (give or take a bombing run over some poor country on the other side of the world).
    Oh, really? Tell it to the prison inmates who are given a "choice" between working for a pittance in some corporate factory and staying in their cells.
    Ah, no, Venezuela was never the monopoly issuer of the world's reserve currency, the HQ and owner of the biggest international banks, the issuer and enforcer of IP monopolies, etc., etc.
    The fact that socialism is even worse than capitalism is not an argument for capitalism.
    You mean like taxing working people's wages and putchases to pay for desirable public services and infrastructure whose value is all taken by landowners?
    You mean as landowners do...?
    That and the fact that if they sell their oil for payment through an international bank, the US government just goes to the bank and confiscates the money....
    Then why does the US government think it is necessary to blockade and embargo them (and Cuba) and stop them from trading with other countries, hmmmmm?
    Mirror time.
     
  6. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,944
    Likes Received:
    709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Re my references to "trickery", my purpose is to illustrate the extent of fraud open to private bankers - usurers - who have the sole privilege of creating money (because that's the way its been since the middle ages); not that they ARE always fraudulent.

    That's why Bill Mitchell was at pains to point out ""Helping ease food insecurity and starvation requires governments to ban bankers speculating on food prices".

    iow, lack of government regulation enables banksters to emerge from within the ranks of ordinary garden-variety bankers (usurers) who charge interest on loans.

    Which has nothing to do with "those who tell me what (me) what (I) want to hear"; I am capable of thinking for myself. The point is - as bringiton as pointed out - you are a willing, blind foot-soldier for the debt-money system, because it benefits you...while entire nations fail under debt burdens, despite the grinding daily labor of their citizens.

    Your debt-money's days are limited, the use by date is here now.

    Get out of the way of the progress to the new system, the necessity for which central bankers are now facing up to.

    True, but usury is immoral, and as we are finding out as governments go broke, impratical.

    Which proves you will have as much of a battle to preserve your dysfunctional money as debt system, as I do in introducing a better system, though rationality is on my side (since money is always created out of money).

    Guess what: Marx forced himself to study economics for 10 years, because classical economics (Adam Smith et al) was creating the most egregious economic injustices, as the industrial revolution chugged on with its excruciating outcomes for the working class, who's children were forced to work in coal mines so the family could eat.

    And guess what: people are competitive, self-interested and sometimes downright greedy (not to mention sometimes criminal), and have vastly different capacities to compete in markets, or as you euphemistically put it, to " trade in values" .....


    Refuted above.

    That's partly because greedy capitalists WANT them to be compliant consumers of junk; hence all the crap advertising, and rejection of government intervention in markets on behalf of consumer' health and well-being.

    Examined and refuted previously. Money created the legal currency issuer is not
    "given away for free".


    You can keep restating the same argument over and over, won't make it true.

    All examined and refuted above: value according to private greed determined in markets.

    You will need to stop merely repeating your inadequate theory of value, based on "willing" exchanges between greedy individuals.

    See, you are turning reality upside-down; people starving and entire nation's failing under debt burdens - aka slavery - while banksters are 'laughing all the way to the bank'.

    ...another victim of an evil debt money system enforced by the IMF; global oil prices should be maintained in an orderly fashion, not subject to wild gyrations amid the influence of greedy oil cartels.


    A system collapse would be a good thing; it's a pity covid didn't have enough grunt to close down the global economy for a year or more. Then central bankers would have had no choice but to change the digits in the bank accounts of locked-down non-essential workers, to enable them to pay essential bills, while the free market was necessarily suspended.

    Then the whole world would have learnt that the debt money system - "taxpayers' money", "government debt is a burden on our grandchildren", "government's must balance their budgets - is a fraud.

    As for incentive, people can and will still work for money whether in competitive markets or non-market jobs, whether money is created and spent by the legal currency issuer, or by usurers when they write loans for 'credit worthy' customers.

    Pathetic, you keep citing hyperinflation because you don't understand the nature of money, as revealed many times now.

    As bringiton noted: "it's mirror time......"
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2022
  7. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    16,494
    Likes Received:
    13,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I already answered all that when I said you couldn't grasp it. All you are doing is proving so.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  8. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not so. The classical economists -- Smith, Ricardo, Mill, et al. -- as well as their predecessors, the French physiocrats, had clearly and irrefutably identified the fact that the landowner is a pure parasite whose sole economic function as wealth extractor impoverishes all of society -- especially, of course, those least able to pay landowners full market value just for permission to live. Landowners just wouldn't let governments implement the basic policy solution classical economics had correctly determined to be the rational, efficient, and just precondition for general prosperity: repayment of land's publicly created value by its exclusive holders to the community of those whom they deprived of the land, and which created its value. Marx completely misapprehended the nature of capitalism and capitalist exploitation of working people, because he did not understand economics well enough to tell the difference between land and factories, and conflated the two as "the means of production."
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2022
  9. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,944
    Likes Received:
    709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's say you succeed Jerome Powell, operating alongside a Georgist president.

    What is your policy to eradicate the black ghettos?
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2022
  10. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    16,494
    Likes Received:
    13,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The most successful social entity in all history- is that produced by mother nature. That success produced millions of species that thrived for millions of years, living in the same world together. Aside from a giant meteor striking the earth, that thriving was the continuous norm. Nature had no governments, no welfare- all those things thrived using only the gifts nature provided. That worked very well, until man came along. Unlike all other species, man would aggressively interfere with the other species lives, destroy them, their habitats and eventually- cause their extinction. Man invariably failed to recognize or care that this was harmful, thus it remained uncontrolled. The key word is "Interfere". Most things reach a balance that allows them to be successful on their own terms if we don't interfere; don't try to make them something that they are not or do not want to be. We seem compelled to "fix" things that are not broken, especially people- when in fact we can only do damage.
     
  11. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is nothing the Fed can do to eradicate black ghettos; but I would propose that private commercial banks be required to hold 100% reserves for their demand deposit liabilities and maturity-matched assets to cover all their other liabilities. The task of directly managing the money supply and thus stabilizing prices would thus fall to the Treasury and Mint; the Fed would have a much smaller role, mainly ensuring the financial soundness of the private commercial banking system.

    As a price stability target for the Mint, I would propose 0% average long-term change in a commodity price index weighted by value of final deliveries. The Mint would issue sufficient debt- and interest-free money to the Treasury for Congress to spend into circulation to achieve this price stability target. These measures would break the economy's addiction to debt, and thus permit Congress to address the problem of privilege-based assets, especially land titles, that has largely created the black ghettos. That's about all the Fed could do.
     
    a better world likes this.
  12. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,944
    Likes Received:
    709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You better stick to revealing your ignorance of the nature of money. "Mother nature" is infinitely more inscrutable than described by you above - for a start, most of those species were engaged in mutual predation, not my definition of "success" or "living in the same world together". Is being born, then immediately slaughtered, in any way successfully "living in the same world"? Certainly not for the individuals concerned.

    Refuted above; you must like slaughterhouses....

    Well, Man was originally nowhere near the top of the food-chain, but by dint of intelligence, has indeed achieved status as 'top predator'. eg, crocodiles have always predated on anything that moves, even their own young.... and us), but now we have tuned the tables on crocodiles (unless we are careless or unlucky...).

    Man failed to recognize his natural "interference" (by using his intelligence) in nature would eventually threaten not only other species, but all life on the planet.

    This is where the economics of sustainable prosperity are required; and crocodiles have little to teach us, as we seek the technologies required to 'reach for the stars'.

    Which segues into why and how the human species must outlaw war (from another debate):

    "A world which agrees to establishment of international law (via an ICJ backed by UNSC without veto). Many delegates present at the founding of the UN in 1946 resisted the forced adoption of the veto - which of course crippled the UNSC from its inception.

    But the fact remains: many delegates were prepared to forgo the obsolete concept of absolute nation sovereignty, to ensure protection by the UNSC (by virtually outlawing war), so reform IS possible.

    Certainly the Chinese are likely to view such reform favorably, because China has the most to gain from the criminalization of war (to avoid an insane nuclear arms race with the US, as China's economy surpasses the US - because it has 4 times the population).

    Note: beware the unconscious, yet catastrophic, effects of the vestigial reptilian part of the human brain, which makes us all complicit in the murder of children and babies in Ukraine, and all wars....all in the absurd notion of the "freedom" to wage war. Self-extinction of the species awaits such delusional "freedom" ideology, in the age of MAD, often expressed as "if we want peace, we have to prepare for war".

    So we must move beyond the paranoid support for the absurd concept of "legal" war. There are always some mad-men or groups who will find a reason to go to war. We must do better, or we will all deserve to be terrorized by the spirits of murdered children, because the machinery to establish real international law is at hand.

    Note: murder is illegal yet cannot be prevented, but if war is illegal it can be prevented via the enforcement mechanism of a UNSC without veto. Note a UNSC without veto has 99% of the world' military force, meaning such a UNSC can guarantee the security of all nations., given the logistics of mounting a war by any one nation. And the logistics required for a nation to wage war are huge and observable, unlike for an individual who wishes to harm someone.

    In fact we would have general disarmament of all nations with security guaranteed by the UNSC acting as a unified voice (ie, without veto). In such as scenario NATO of course is obsolete, and the issue of disputes over occupation of land is a matter for decision by the ICJ, since the age of empire building in now over.

    Now, beware the unconscious influence of your vestigial reptilian brain which will cause you to believe the "freedom" to make war is the only "practical" way to ensure your "freedom" and security, regardless of the ongoing slaughter of children in all modern warfare - slaughter which your vestigial reptilian brain will cause you to consider as subordinate to your own 'security'.


     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2022
  13. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    16,494
    Likes Received:
    13,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've continued to reply here mostly just for the amusement- to see how detached a person can be from reality. You continue to amaze me- with the utter arrogance of your tunnel vision.

    Yes, much of the animal world is predatory- almost totally for the purpose of not starving. In nature, predation serves to keep the species strong as well, and there is a balance that results in all species thriving, and the environment healthy..
    Man is also predatory, but not for such fundamental or respectable needs. Man kills for any reason- including just because he can. Right now- science says that about a million species are threatened with extinction because of human activity. You don't have to be very smart to understand that all the living things except man in this world combined are far less of a threat to the survival of all life on the planet than the human species. We- are a threat to the existence of everything, including ourselves.

    You have read too many books. Accumulated too much "knowledge"- and understand none of it. Send me your picture, I'll make you the poster boy for Kettering's quote.
     
  14. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,944
    Likes Received:
    709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So far so good, But Man's technological prowess (for good or bad) changes all that,

    There always are reasons: war results from competition for resources (a competition which no longer NEEDS to result in war, because scarcity is mostly artificial in our post-industrial economy). And 'culture'/'values'; fighting over competing descriptions of reality.

    Correct(!). (I love it when two people with entirely different perspectives on reality agree on something...).
    Don't you think eliminating war and poverty would be a good indication of our responsibilities to Mother Earth?


    I understand children are being slaughtered in war tonight, and starving in countries with collapsing economies, regardless of the state of my 'knowledge'.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2022
  15. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    16,494
    Likes Received:
    13,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    I haven't taken you for a total fool; of course you know there are wars. But the toll of human carnage from non-war weaknesses is far greater, and not something in the hands of just a small number of people like those deciding to wage wars. 100,000 drug overdoses last year- and every year for example.
    You are determined to hold our systems responsible for what happens to us- but fail to understand that we are responsible for the systems flaws in the first place. Until we can fix people, the systems people create will be clumsy and plagued with problems. Your solution- throw out the system and replace it with another produced by the same flawed mentality.
    That is "doing something"- but not really changing anything except the way the damage is done. Only results measure the value of what we do.
    You have the orders of magnitude inverted; reversed, backwards.
     
  16. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,944
    Likes Received:
    709
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Fixing people" has a number of elements, including understanding who we are, ie creatures influenced by unconscious, primitive survival instincts evolved over eons, instincts that can work against the well-being of the collective eg in the insistence of the 'right' to make 'legal' war.

    And education re the basics of healthy living:

    The U.S. Opioid Epidemic | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

    "Opioid addiction in the United States has become a prolonged epidemic, threatening not only public health but economic output and national security".

    " Opioid overdoses killed nearly fifty thousand people, or more than seven times the number of U.S. military service members killed in the post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."

    (though the Iraqi war/sanctions caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Iraq).

    Rather, a more advanced and understanding mentality.

    A 'top down', rather than your preferred 'bottom up' approach?

    "Civilization is a race between education and catastrophe" HG Wells.

    Admittedly the 'correct' education is key.....
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2022
  17. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    16,494
    Likes Received:
    13,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Understanding who we are- partly. Mostly- understanding who YOU are, and knowing how that fits into the nature of everything. Few people have that.
    Few people can control their own lives and destinies- because the have no power.
    They have no power- because they give it away. Like passengers on a bus that have no idea where it's going- they refuse to get in the drivers seat.
    You absolutely must know where your power lies, and must recognize what you have the power to change- and what you do not have power over.
    My life is not your responsibility- YOURS IS. And YOU are the only person that can control you.

    Because all that starts at the bottom- "Top Down" is the reverse of what can work. You didn't learn to run before you learned to crawl, did you?
    Or- do you think that society should be like your parents, and take care of us like children all our lives?
    As I said- your priorities are upside down.
     
  18. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is in the public domain and can be downloaded from Project Gutenberg and searched. The printed book can cost you $15 and take a lot of effort to search. Has Smith's "Invisible Hand" been used as a propaganda tool for decades since most people would never read WoN?

    Smith used the word 'invisible' six times but only once as "invisible hand". It is really curious that we hear about the 'invisible hand' so much.

    Smith used the word 'education' EIGHTY TIMES. We are not told about that. Search for "and account" and you will find multiple instances of "read, write, and account", not "read, write and arithmetic". Double entry accounting was more than 300 years old when Smith wrote Wealth of Nations, but 50% of Brits were illiterate and public schools did not exist in 1776.

    The United States could have made accounting/finance mandatory in the schools since Sputnik. Wouldn't that have helped everyone best serve their own self interest? But we do not hear the people who propagandize us about the "invisible hand" advocating mandatory accounting because that might make their invisible rip-offs more difficult.

    Adam Smith never used the word 'depreciation'. He mentioned paper money being depreciated one time. Marx wrote about 'depreciation' a number of times in Das Kapital, sometimes regarding the depreciation of machines.

    Consumers did not buy automobiles and air conditioners and televisions before 1885.
    Marx died in 1883.

    But it's OK! Our brilliant economists do not talk about the depreciation of under engineered consumer trash today either. Every time you buy a replacement the purchase is added to GDP. What about NDP? Oh sorry, you never heard an economist explain NDP. That's OK too, they only depreciate the Capital Goods and ignore the depreciation of consumer junk anyway.

    Wealth of Nations was probably in the public domain for a very long time but cheap computing did not make it available in Project Gutenberg until 3/17/2001. Milton Friedman died in 2006. Was Friedman giving us the straight dope or treating us like dopes?
     
  19. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I see this thread started in 2013.

    To get back to the original topic I would suggest reading:

    Born A Crime by Trevor Noah

    I am half way through it. It is hysterically disturbing and did not exist in 2013.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2022
  20. Starcastle

    Starcastle Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    WTF are you talking about? Blacks kill 2X more whites every year than whites kill blacks. The numbers are roughly 500 whites killed by blacks every year and 250 blacks killed by whites.

    I'm reporting this post. Where do you get off saying that anybody, anybody does not care about 7 year olds being murdered? It is democrats trying to make political gains off the deaths of kids.
     
  21. Starcastle

    Starcastle Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    5,534
    Likes Received:
    3,118
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for serving the shut up juice. Blacks are by far, by far the most violent people in our society. Poor Hispanics are not even half as violent. El Paso is 80% Spanish speaking and has one of the lowest murder rates in the country.
     
    Moi621 likes this.
  22. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Statistics are so interesting.

    If the percentages of the population for whites vs blacks were equal then those numbers would be meaningful. But if there are 4 times as many whites as blacks the then whites must be doing more killing in proportion.

    Of course since most white people are not very bright this complex analysis goes over their heads.
     
  23. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    9,434
    Likes Received:
    1,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you know anything about them...
    They are meaningful regardless. But exactly what they mean is very much the point.
    No, that's just nonsense with no basis in fact or statistical reasoning. Obviously, if blacks and whites were equally likely to kill people regardless of their race, and there are four times as many whites as blacks, then both blacks and whites should be killing four times as many whites as blacks. They aren't. Likewise, if blacks and whites were equally likely to kill, four times as many perpetrators would be white as black. They aren't.
    Oh, the irony....
     
  24. RoanokeIllinois

    RoanokeIllinois Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2022
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    412
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male

    The Truth? Black Lives Don't Matter! Black Lives Don't Matter! Black Lies Matter!

    but wait? If Black Lives, really did matter to Democrat Politicians, then why wouldn't they actually do more, about Black on Black Crime? It's because they don't care, and it's part of their Socialist Agenda!
     
  25. Mr.Incognito

    Mr.Incognito Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    514
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe because whites commit more crime. And per capita don't matter when we're talking about overall crime. So don't try that Bullstink !!!
     

Share This Page