No mental health issue in america.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Who was the democratic candidate in 2016? June Cleaver? Because I thought it was Hilary Clinton, one of the very few people in the country who cannot claim the moral high ground in a debate with Trump.

Trump is POTUS, the most powerful politician in the country, no question. He isn't the Republican party, all republicans are the republican party, and plenty of us despise Trump as a person.

I am not going to take the time to respond to everything you said as I would rather watch the olympics, but the Republican high ground on morality is one of the greatest perpetual falsehoods of the last 50 years. I didn't claim Hilary had moral high ground, just as you shouldn't claim Republicans have moral high ground. It is 100% bogus.
By the way, democrat racism? That is your party now. I'm sure you are aware they changed parties, which is why the democrats don't win the south. They are in the red states, the same states that take more in taxes than they pay in taxes, the states with the rates of highest teen pregnancy, the highest rates of welfare and food stamp participation, the state with the lowest education levels, the lowest per capita income.

Murder rate per capita 1950- 4.6 per 100000.
Murder rate 2013 2014- 4.5. Bumped to 5.2 in 2016.
It is way more 1950's now than during the reign of Ronnie when it was 7.9-10.2.

Divorce rates changed when laws changed (1967). Thank God. An aunt of a high school friend was disowned by her father, a devout Catholic, for getting a divorce, even though her husband beat her repeatedly. Dad was a man of the 50's when America was "great. Thankful the law supporter her choice.

STD rates? I took a quick look: gonorrhea and syphilis lower now than 1950's. Chlamydia and HIV don't show up in the statistics until the 1980's so who knows. You literally make up things off the top of your head based on your perceptions rather than real data.

GOP in the white house- doesn't represent the will of the majority of voters. GOP in state legislatures- many places it gets 40% of the votes and ends up with 70% of the seats. The real voter fraud.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

By the way, democrat racism? That is your party now. I'm sure you are aware they changed parties, which is why the democrats don't win the south. They are in the red states, the same states that take more in taxes than they pay in taxes, the states with the rates of highest teen pregnancy, the highest rates of welfare and food stamp participation, the state with the lowest education levels, the lowest per capita income.

That is total BS. The racist Democrat politicians did not switch parties. With the exception of a very few, they all remained in the Democrat party. The racist culture of the South changed and voters began voting Republican. Since the South became Republican, it has become far less racist than it was when the South was solid racist Democrat.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

That is total BS. The racist Democrat politicians did not switch parties. With the exception of a very few, they all remained in the Democrat party. The racist culture of the South changed and voters began voting Republican. Since the South became Republican, it has become far less racist than it was when the South was solid racist Democrat.

Democrats and Republicans flipping parties (exactly as zimmy asserted) had less to do with racism and more to do with the expansion of Federal power. Republicans in the northern states wanted to invest and expand into the west. Democrats in the southern states opposed it just as they feared the erosion of states rights over slavery.

The flip happened a few decades later as some Democrats started pushing for Government expansion to attract voters as the western states became more populated. Naturally this created opposition up until the New Deal when the reverse in polarity was complete.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I am not going to take the time to respond to everything you said as I would rather watch the olympics, but the Republican high ground on morality is one of the greatest perpetual falsehoods of the last 50 years. I didn't claim Hilary had moral high ground, just as you shouldn't claim Republicans have moral high ground. It is 100% bogus.
By the way, democrat racism? That is your party now. I'm sure you are aware they changed parties, which is why the democrats don't win the south. They are in the red states, the same states that take more in taxes than they pay in taxes, the states with the rates of highest teen pregnancy, the highest rates of welfare and food stamp participation, the state with the lowest education levels, the lowest per capita income.

Murder rate per capita 1950- 4.6 per 100000.
Murder rate 2013 2014- 4.5. Bumped to 5.2 in 2016.
It is way more 1950's now than during the reign of Ronnie when it was 7.9-10.2.

Divorce rates changed when laws changed (1967). Thank God. An aunt of a high school friend was disowned by her father, a devout Catholic, for getting a divorce, even though her husband beat her repeatedly. Dad was a man of the 50's when America was "great. Thankful the law supporter her choice.

STD rates? I took a quick look: gonorrhea and syphilis lower now than 1950's. Chlamydia and HIV don't show up in the statistics until the 1980's so who knows. You literally make up things off the top of your head based on your perceptions rather than real data.

GOP in the white house- doesn't represent the will of the majority of voters. GOP in state legislatures- many places it gets 40% of the votes and ends up with 70% of the seats. The real voter fraud.

You are saying that std rates are lower now than they were in the 1980s. You somehow thinknthatvrejects my premise that stdbrates were lower in the 1950s. I have shocking news for you. The 1980s were not part of the 1950s.

I have more news for you. You cannot judge the morality of a large party’s agenda, by looking at the moral lapses in the personal life of that party’s president. I agree with democrats on gay marriage and the death penalty. The fact that the clintons are scumbags, doesn’t mean that democrats cannot have the right idea in some important issues.

You’re being so simpleminded thatbyoy cant concwdenthenother side has a point. You’ll point to anything to make conservatism look bad.

You can’t orive conservatism wrong, by pointing to personal lapses of conservatives.

And you were correct that trump lost the popular vote. What about the other 1,000 state and federal elections that the incumbent democrats list to republicans since obama was potus? That tells us nothing about the pulse of the country? Al that matters is that Hilary won, therefore the country is more liberal than conservative.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You’re being so simpleminded thatbyoy cant concwdenthenother side has a point. You’ll point to anything to make conservatism look bad.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Most ironic statement I have seen from you. Especially the simple minded part. You put out a bunch of points that are factually incorrect. Then when I give you actual available data,you say I will point out anything to make conservatism look bad. So are you saying conservatism is based on misinformation and inaccuracies? We could agree on that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Most ironic statement I have seen from you. Especially the simple minded part. You put out a bunch of points that are factually incorrect. Then when I give you actual available data,you say I will point out anything to make conservatism look bad. So are you saying conservatism is based on misinformation and inaccuracies? We could agree on that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your data was selective and misleading.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Your data was selective and misleading.

Ok, find where and give data that contradicts it, specifically your nonsense about lower birthrates due to higher rates of abortion.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Ok, find where and give data that contradicts it, specifically your nonsense about lower birthrates due to higher rates of abortion.

I did. The rates of abortion for blacks has risen, not only in your selective time range, but consistently from previous to that and after that. And that has happened consistently even under Democrat administrations, not just Republican as you suggest. In N.Y. city alone, more blacks are aborted than are born.

Here is a part of what I posted before:
"In 2010, the black population in the U.S. stood just shy of at 39 million. The CDC reports that during the 1970's, roughly 24% of all U.S. abortions were performed on black women. That percentage rose to 30% in the 1980's, 34% in the 1990's and 36% in the 2000's. That means that about 31% of all U.S. abortions since 1973 have been performed on African American women. Based on the January 2013 estimate that there have been 55.7 million abortions in the United States since 1973, we can deduce that approximately 17 million of the aborted babies were black.

"Despite an overall black population growth of 12% between 2000 and 2010, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that the black population "grew at a slower rate than most other major race and ethnic groups in the country." CBS News reported in 2009 that "Hispanics have surpassed blacks as the nation's largest minority group." Can there be any question about the role abortion has played in this demographic shift? Despite similar population numbers, Hispanic women account for approximately 19% of U.S. abortions whereas African-American women account for up to 36%. From 1973 to 2012, abortion reduced the black population by 30%, and that doesn't even factor in all the children that would have been born to those aborted a generation ago. To put it bluntly, abortion has thinned the black community in ways the Ku Klux Klan could have only dreamed of."

In 1950 the Black population in the U.S. was about 15 million. Since 1973 about 17 million Blacks (more than the entire Black population at the time we were discussing) were aborted. On average almost 1900 Blacks are aborted every day in the U.S. In N.Y. City more Blacks are aborted than are born. Blacks in the U.S. are aborted at 3 times the rate as whites."

The black population today would be exponentially much higher today if the rates of their abortions had not risen, or if it had lowered or approached zero. Without the higher rates of abortion, Blacks would not have been surpassed in population by Latinos.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I did. The rates of abortion for blacks has risen, not only in your selective time range, but consistently from previous to that and after that. And that has happened consistently even under Democrat administrations, not just Republican as you suggest. In N.Y. city alone, more blacks are aborted than are born.

Here is a part of what I posted before:
"In 2010, the black population in the U.S. stood just shy of at 39 million. The CDC reports that during the 1970's, roughly 24% of all U.S. abortions were performed on black women. That percentage rose to 30% in the 1980's, 34% in the 1990's and 36% in the 2000's. That means that about 31% of all U.S. abortions since 1973 have been performed on African American women. Based on the January 2013 estimate that there have been 55.7 million abortions in the United States since 1973, we can deduce that approximately 17 million of the aborted babies were black.

"Despite an overall black population growth of 12% between 2000 and 2010, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that the black population "grew at a slower rate than most other major race and ethnic groups in the country." CBS News reported in 2009 that "Hispanics have surpassed blacks as the nation's largest minority group." Can there be any question about the role abortion has played in this demographic shift? Despite similar population numbers, Hispanic women account for approximately 19% of U.S. abortions whereas African-American women account for up to 36%. From 1973 to 2012, abortion reduced the black population by 30%, and that doesn't even factor in all the children that would have been born to those aborted a generation ago. To put it bluntly, abortion has thinned the black community in ways the Ku Klux Klan could have only dreamed of."

In 1950 the Black population in the U.S. was about 15 million. Since 1973 about 17 million Blacks (more than the entire Black population at the time we were discussing) were aborted. On average almost 1900 Blacks are aborted every day in the U.S. In N.Y. City more Blacks are aborted than are born. Blacks in the U.S. are aborted at 3 times the rate as whites."

The black population today would be exponentially much higher today if the rates of their abortions had not risen, or if it had lowered or approached zero. Without the higher rates of abortion, Blacks would not have been surpassed in population by Latinos.

"In N.Y. city alone, more blacks are aborted than are born."

Which was the goal of Margaret Sanger, the racist/eugenicist, who was the fonder (I think) of Planned Parenthood.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I did. The rates of abortion for blacks has risen, not only in your selective time range, but consistently from previous to that and after that. And that has happened consistently even under Democrat administrations, not just Republican as you suggest. In N.Y. city alone, more blacks are aborted than are born.


In 1950 the Black population in the U.S. was about 15 million. Since 1973 about 17 million Blacks (more than the entire Black population at the time we were discussing) were aborted. On average almost 1900 Blacks are aborted every day in the U.S. In N.Y. City more Blacks are aborted than are born. Blacks in the U.S. are aborted at 3 times the rate as whites."

Your analysis of the data and your conclusions are fundamentally flawed. Abortion rate is number of abortions per 1000 women. It has fallen dramatically across all groups.
You are comparing abortions among ethnic groups as a percent of total number of abortions. It is correct to say it has fallen less for blacks than other groups. It is correct to say that it is higher in blacks as a percent of population and that the percentage of the total has increased. It is incorrect to say the rate has gone up. Factually incorrect.

If there were only three abortions last year and two were black and one white, you could say 66 percent of abortions were black. That would be a higher percent than ever. It would not mean there were more abortions than ever. It does not support your statement that birth rates have dropped due to abortions.

All else equal, a drop in abortion rates and a drop in birth rates means a drop in pregnancy rates, which refutes your statement.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Most ironic statement I have seen from you. Especially the simple minded part. You put out a bunch of points that are factually incorrect. Then when I give you actual available data,you say I will point out anything to make conservatism look bad. So are you saying conservatism is based on misinformation and inaccuracies? We could agree on that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Posting data comparing the 1980s to today, has nothing to do with my beliefs about the 1950s. The 1980s happened a long time after the 1950s. Look it up if you don't believe me.

I also never said the 1950s were utopia. You put stupid words in my mouth, which is what simpletons do when the other guy has a point, but you won't admit it.

In the 1950s, American culture had a view of what a "family" was, and how it was supposed to function, that I believe is far superior to the current view of what a family is. Two parents committed to the family and the kids, one parent staying home during the early years, not leaving 3 year-olds in daycare for 10 hours a day being raised by God knows who. Parents sticking together even when it's brutally hard. Eating dinner together and talking and listening, instead of everyone watching TV or on their phones.

Kooky ideas, I know. Those zany olden times!! Hell, I'm so old I remember when it wasn't considered controversial to suggest that if you have a wee wee, you go to the mens room. I know, I'm a dinosaur.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Posting data comparing the 1980s to today, has nothing to do with my beliefs about the 1950s. The 1980s happened a long time after the 1950s. Look it up if you don't believe me.

I also never said the 1950s were utopia. You put stupid words in my mouth, which is what simpletons do when the other guy has a point, but you won't admit it.

In the 1950s, American culture had a view of what a "family" was, and how it was supposed to function, that I believe is far superior to the current view of what a family is. Two parents committed to the family and the kids, one parent staying home during the early years, not leaving 3 year-olds in daycare for 10 hours a day being raised by God knows who. Parents sticking together even when it's brutally hard. Eating dinner together and talking and listening, instead of everyone watching TV or on their phones.

Kooky ideas, I know. Those zany olden times!! Hell, I'm so old I remember when it wasn't considered controversial to suggest that if you have a wee wee, you go to the mens room. I know, I'm a dinosaur.

You probably understand that my posts about the 1980's show how crime, abortion rates, childbirth rates, etc. have all declined dramatically- the point of 1950's levels, though many desperately want to make America something it never was again . It shows the changes over a long period of time, which is beneficial for analyzing data. Major ways today really is different from the 1950's: minimum wage adjusted for inflation- much lower today; top marginal top tax rate: 1/3 of what is was in the 1950's; spending power- lower today, attributed by some experts to the fact that 1/3 of workers were unionized in the 1950's.
We can agree then on higher top tax rates, more unions, and higher minimum wages?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

You probably understand that my posts about the 1980's show how crime, abortion rates, childbirth rates, etc. have all declined dramatically- the point of 1950's levels, though many desperately want to make America something it never was again . It shows the changes over a long period of time, which is beneficial for analyzing data. Major ways today really is different from the 1950's: minimum wage adjusted for inflation- much lower today; top marginal top tax rate: 1/3 of what is was in the 1950's; spending power- lower today, attributed by some experts to the fact that 1/3 of workers were unionized in the 1950's.
We can agree then on higher top tax rates, more unions, and higher minimum wages?

"You probably understand that my posts about the 1980's show how crime, abortion rates, childbirth rates, etc. have all declined dramatically"

They have declined since the 1980s. I didn't utter s syllable about the 1980s, nor did I utter a syllable suggesting that these things were at all time highs today. If I did, your stats from the 1980s would be relevant.

"Major ways today really is different from the 1950's: minimum wage adjusted for inflation- much lower today; top marginal top tax rate: 1/3 of what is was in the 1950's; spending power- lower today, attributed by some experts to the fact that 1/3 of workers were unionized in the 1950's.
We can agree then on higher top tax rates, more unions, and higher minimum wages?"

When you ignore all the things that I say were better in the 1950s, and you focus on the things you think were better in the 1950s, you aren't fooling anybody.

Yes, many things you say were different in the 1950s, were different in the manner you stated.

If I say family values were better in the 1950s than they are today, you cannot refute that by pointing pout that the 1980s were worse than today.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"
When you ignore all the things that I say were better in the 1950s, and you focus on the things you think were better in the 1950s, you aren't fooling anybody.

When you say ignore all the things, you say were better...everything I addressed about the 1980s, I concurrently addressed in reference to the 1950s.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device