kagakuotoko

@Redsox2009

 GL

@packersbackers

This is anecdotal.  I understand his perspective on empathy for people who commit crime, but he has a duty to protect the citizens he serves from repeat offenders no doubt.  So throwing criminals in jail is a starter according to you.  There are many urban US cities that throw criminals in jail and don't share this mayor's perspective on that matter.

Let's go with more in-depth analysis of the failed "liberal" policies and what you personally would replace them with.  For me, urban cities should invest tax money into  low economic areas to find ways to bolster economic growth.  Opportunities lower crime and will break the cycle of hopelessness.

@packersbackers

 I think you need to be specific in what policies you are referring to.  To make blanket statements leaves a lot to ascertain what you're getting at.  I don't want to assume your thoughts, but it does seem that people on the right side of the aisle believe there is a one size fits all to solution to everything.  When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Yes it is society's problem and I did provide solutions.  You might be too overzealous to read in between the lines.  First and foremost, yes you are correct in stating that once they crossed the threshold into criminality, it is too late.  As for your crass stereotypical statements, there was a long line of events that led to this but I doubt you're ready or willing to hear that.  The solution going forward is to invest in these communities and provide opportunities to build real skills to allow them to develop it further.  People don't turn too criminality because it's joyous, they usually do it out of desperation and ignorance.  Human beings love to make issues more complicated than it actually is.  If people have honest work and the skills to work them, they will absolutely go that route over criminality.

Could that be due to the fact that a majority of people live in urban areas and not many people live in rural areas?  More people = more opportunity for crime

The real reason crime is high is because people don't have jobs, hope, or direction.  Maybe instead of "disarming" blue cities, people should be finding out a way to bolster opportunities and give people direction?

Where is the neither option?

If you click your heels three times, it has a chance to come true.

The Comey surprise definitely had a factor in her loss no doubt.  If she would have worked harder and not underestimated Trump, the Comey surprise wouldn't have the impact it did.

The next democratic president needs to be bold! Expand the supreme courts and really work toward strengthening the guard rails of this country.  What Trump is doing now is an utter disgrace and needs to be reigned in for the future of the US!

OK bro, then I would have been boxed for a personal insult to another member if that were the case... but that being said, I see you decided to engage in ad hominem now instead of rebutting my points. 

This is a very good point.  Hillary lost because she was mired in scandals.  Her inability to connect with voters thinking DJT was a pushover was also a huge miscalculation.

@unplucked_gem

If you take it as a smear, that sounds like a personal problem.  It is simply what I was able to ascertain for the post you made.  You shared an anecdote and extrapolated your own thoughts that less qualified people were given jobs due to political correctness.  I cannot wrap my head around it but it makes sense to you, so it is what it is. 

People do make bad hires, but it does not have to do with pressure of hiring unqualified candidates to be politically correct... in fact I would go as far to say it's the opposite but I have already explained that ad nauseum in my previous post.

Your comment about who controls the purse strings makes no sense.  The US is not a vacuum, we have a global economy.  If the US doesn't adapt, it will simply be die off and be cast aside.  The clinging to the old ways without evolving is the reason why the US is in the position it is in today.

I don't know what industry your business falls into but I do know you will always get what you pay for.  There are plenty of people to fill roles if the conditions are right.  That being said, I know the purpose of business is to make money.  So finding that balance between taking care of your employee and your business is tough.  In my experience, business owners like to harp about noone wanting to work while offering poor pay and benefits.  If you offer poor pay and benefits, it sounds to me as the business owner needs to work harder to provide conditions that entice people to want to work for you.  Maybe having family help out is the way to go because they will probably be willing to put up with that subpar conditions for the sake of the family depending on the relationship.

The confirmation bias is strong within you.  You atleast admit.

On what planet would hiring unqualified individuals for a role be beneficial?  Hint: It never would...

I am sorry to tell you, but the real unqualified people are typically the ones that are screaming about how unfair DEI is.  DEI wouldn't be needed if people DID hire based on meritocracy.  The ones that created the atmosphere for DEI are the ones that kept hiring "mediocre" people that looked like them and refused to give the merit based person that didn't look like them, the job.

Maybe "mediocre" people should up their game and evolve instead of whining about how they can't get a job anymore based on how they look like back in the good ole' days.

In the end, this whining will amount to nothing because things are going to change whether people cry or not.  Capitalism only cares how more money can be made, not whether people hate DEI or not.

True meritocracy would not require DEI.

There would be no need for marginalized people months either if people knew how to get along.

Our society, especially in America is catered to lowest common denominator.  If people evolved, our society would flourish but alas it's not the case because people are delusional into thinking they are something they are not.

That Trump/Erdogan clip... jfc

Racism is subjective.  What a world we live in.  I bet you think Loomer's comments weren't either?

CK just googled facts and repeated them.  If they were "racist" that's just facts don't care about your feelings...  /s

I can't believe the pretzels people twist themselves into.  CK was allowed to be racist, and people are allowed to listen to him and agree.  You are not going to convince the masses that CK was something he wasn't and quite frankly it doesn't matter.  The pushback is because people know being a racist is abhorrent and don't want that stain on them or anything they associate with.  Stand on your ten toes and stop gas-lighting people! 

/end rant

I agree.  As I stated, people like to gaslight people that they are not racist when they are indeed racist.  I am not condoning the racist part but I can respect a person more for being honest instead of a gas-lighter.

You can just listen to a few videos and find  abhorrent rhetoric being spewed by CK.  It’s really insulting to gaslight people into believing it’s anything else.  The reality is, they know it’s frowned upon to be a racist so they have to deflect or risk the consequences of their beliefs.  I say, skip that nonsense and say it with your chest!  Freedom of speech! 

I have more respect for honest haters versus the mealy mouthed pretenders!