• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Trump wants to air mass executions on TV.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
eikelbijter said:
Keywords: Violent and REPORTED. Trust me, in LA it's going downhill FAST. A new restaurant that opened up here Ventura Blvd got broken into and robbed 7 times in 7 months. There is a HUGE increase in cars broken into etc. etc.

And listen, I'm not the one who thinks we need to have MORE police, tougher crimes. Quite the opposite, I'm advocating for trying to figure out how to keep more people on the rails to begin with.
Click to expand...
Robbery is a violent crime so your example makes no sense.
 
eikelbijter said:
So all research is by definition correct? You guys are delusional....
Click to expand...

No, but research is better than the opinion of some guy on the internet. I'd more likely accept a critique of the research from someone with expertise to explain what is incorrect about the methodology. Unless you are hiding something about your education and experience, that isn't you.
 
woolfe9998 said:
No, but research is better than the opinion of some guy on the internet. I'd more likely accept a critique of the research from someone with expertise to explain what is incorrect about the methodology. Unless you are hiding something about your education and experience, that isn't you.
Click to expand...
When an article asks what the "cause" is, specifically looking for a SINGULAR answer, you've lost me. There simply is not one cause, there rarely is. You cannot put ALL the homeless in one category, there is no ONE solution. Don't you get that?

Hell, it even says it in the article: "....they are not suggesting that mental illness, addictions and other issues are not contributing factors to homelessness. "
 
eikelbijter said:
When an article asks what the "cause" is, specifically looking for a SINGULAR answer, you've lost me. There simply is not one cause, there rarely is. You cannot put ALL the homeless in one category, there is no ONE solution. Don't you get that?

Hell, it even says it in the article: "....they are not suggesting that mental illness, addictions and other issues are not contributing factors to homelessness. "
Click to expand...
So in other words you didn't even bother to read the article you dismissed:

Aldern, a data scientist and policy analyst in Seattle, and Colburn, an assistant professor of real estate at the University of Washington’s College of Built Environments, said they are not suggesting that mental illness, addictions and other issues are not contributing factors to homelessness.

“That’s certainly not the point of the book,” Colburn said. “But I firmly believe that we can’t treat our way out of this problem. You could fix all the addiction in San Diego right now and you’d still have a problem with homelessness because there just aren’t places for people to go who have lower levels of income.”
Click to expand...

The point of their research is lack of affordable housing housing is the most important cause, not the sole cause.
 
fskimospy said:
So in other words you didn't even bother to read the article you dismissed:



The point of their research is lack of affordable housing housing is the most important cause, not the sole cause.
Click to expand...
Again, I DID read the article when it first came out and found it pretty useless. Correlation is NOT causation, and it definitely doesn't apply to the kind of homeless we've been discussing in this thread. Why can't you knuckleheads stop wanting to put ALL homeless in the same category?
 
eikelbijter said:
Again, I DID read the article when it first came out and found it quite pretty useless. Correlation is NOT causation, and it definitely doesn't apply to the kind of homeless we've been discussing in this thread. Why can't you knuckleheads stop wanting to put ALL homeless in the same category?
Click to expand...
Then why did you mischaracterize our arguments and their research? Not a single person here claimed homelessness was solely caused by a lack of affordable housing.

Also when people say 'correlation is not causation' that is a giant red flag that they don't understand quantitative research. Correlation is EVIDENCE of causation. When you get enough evidence to support a hypothesis you eventually conclude it is most likely correct. After all, smoking is only CORRELATED with lung cancer - we cannot say with certainty it causes it.

Again though, if you have research to back up your claims we are open to looking at it.
 
eikelbijter said:
There comes the name-calling in typical American fashion. Your damn country is falling apart, and all you can do is insult. It's pathetic.
Click to expand...
Nice excuse to handwave away the rest of my post and disregard it, not responding to anything of substance. 🙄

And you imbeciles wonder why you rarely get anything more than insults from me. Sorry I bothered putting any thought into the rest. I'll refrain in the future since it's obviously a waste of time with you.
eikelbijter said:
....your cherry-picking statistic doesn't really add anything to this discussion, as usual.
Click to expand...
Here's a cherry-pick too. You're projecting again.
Meghan54 said:
So, who reads his name as “anklebiter?” 🤪
Click to expand...
It's actually dick-biter AFAIK. Fitting, no?
 
Pohemi said:
Nice excuse to handwave away the rest of my post and disregard it, not responding to anything of substance. 🙄

And you imbeciles wonder why you rarely get anything more than insults from me. Sorry I bothered putting any thought into the rest. I'll refrain in the future since it's obviously a waste of time with you.

Here's a cherry-pick too. You're projecting again.

It's actually dick-biter AFAIK. Fitting, no?
Click to expand...
It's hard to take someone who resorts to name-calling as readily as you seriously.
 
fskimospy said:
Then why did you mischaracterize our arguments and their research? Not a single person here claimed homelessness was solely caused by a lack of affordable housing.

Also when people say 'correlation is not causation' that is a giant red flag that they don't understand quantitative research. Correlation is EVIDENCE of causation. When you get enough evidence to support a hypothesis you eventually conclude it is most likely correct. After all, smoking is only CORRELATED with lung cancer - we cannot say with certainty it causes it.

Again though, if you have research to back up your claims we are open to looking at it.
Click to expand...
How exactly did I "mischaracterize" their research?

Correlation CAN be evidence of causation, and of course if housing were free nobody would be homeless. That's not what we were talking about though; in a thread about Trump's insane suggestion, which inherently is about solving crime if you will, at least I was talking about a subset of the homeless that are causing a noticeable increase in crime, here in LA and in quite a few other cities too.

Let's read back what you wrote in the beginning of this discussion:

"The reason homelessness has risen so much in CA is because the price of housing has shot up. No greater explanation needed "

That right there is a GROSS oversimplification that I have a real problem with.
 
Last edited:
eikelbijter said:
How exactly did I "mischaracterize" their research?

Correlation CAN be evidence of causation, and of course if housing were free nobody would be homeless. That's not what we were talking about though; in a thread about Trump's insane suggestion, which inherently is about solving crime if you will, at least I was talking about a subset of the homeless that are causing a noticeable increase in crime, here in LA and in quite a few other cities too.
Click to expand...
You repeatedly criticized the idea that lack of affordable housing was the sole cause of homelessness despite no one ever making that argument.

Regardless, you still have not provided any evidence to support your point despite being asked repeatedly. My guess would be you haven’t provided it because you don’t have any.
 
eikelbijter said:
It's hard to take someone who resorts to name-calling as readily as you seriously.
Click to expand...
No one (here) can take you seriously, as you are constantly misconstruing what others say, projecting that behavior on others, acting like you're the only knowledgeable one in the discussion (based on anecdotal evidence), assuming "facts" based on your subjective feels in lieu of actual studies and expert opinions on the topic, speaking of homeless as "parasites", etc. etc.

Keep projecting though, clown.
 
eikelbijter said:
How exactly did I "mischaracterize" their research?

Correlation CAN be evidence of causation, and of course if housing were free nobody would be homeless. That's not what we were talking about though; in a thread about Trump's insane suggestion, which inherently is about solving crime if you will, at least I was talking about a subset of the homeless that are causing a noticeable increase in crime, here in LA and in quite a few other cities too.

Let's read back what you wrote in the beginning of this discussion:

"The reason homelessness has risen so much in CA is because the price of housing has shot up. No greater explanation needed "

That right there is a GROSS oversimplification that I have a real problem with.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the cause of the delta in homelessness. The cause of a change in something does not mean it is the sole cause. To use lung cancer as an analogy if you went from a place where nobody smoked to everyone smoking and lung cancer went up it would be logical to attribute that change to smoking. It would not mean lung cancer didn’t exist before or that only smoking causes it. Do you understand the concept better now?

Regardless, in case there was any confusion on your part I stated repeatedly it was not the sole cause and yet you continued making that claim anyway.
 
Pohemi said:
No one (here) can take you seriously, as you are constantly misconstruing what others say, projecting that behavior on others, acting like you're the only knowledgeable one in the discussion (based on anecdotal evidence), assuming "facts" based on your subjective feels in lieu of actual studies and expert opinions on the topic, speaking of homeless as "parasites", etc. etc.

Keep projecting though, clown.
Click to expand...
You're doing EXACTLY what you're accusing me of doing. I didn't call the homeless "parasites", and I certainly would never consider myself the only knowledgeable one.
 
fskimospy said:
Yes, that is the cause of the delta in homelessness. The cause of a change in something does not mean it is the sole cause. To use lung cancer as an analogy if you went from a place where nobody smoked to everyone smoking and lung cancer went up it would be logical to attribute that change to smoking. It would not mean lung cancer didn’t exist before or that only smoking causes it. Do you understand the concept better now?

Regardless, in case there was any confusion on your part I stated repeatedly it was not the sole cause and yet you continued making that claim anyway.
Click to expand...
Now we're getting somewhere. The whole point I was trying to make is that the cause of the Delta is NOT mostly the change is housing costs, especially when we're talking about the criminal subset of the homeless. That article that you guys so proudly found doesn't even begin to talk about that.
 
eikelbijter said:
Now we're getting somewhere. The whole point I was trying to make is that the cause of the Delta is NOT mostly the change is housing costs, especially when we're talking about the criminal subset of the homeless. That article that you guys so proudly found doesn't even begin to talk about that.
Click to expand...

I have asked you repeatedly to provide even a single shred of evidence for this position and you haven’t.

I provided evidence for my position and honestly the data is obvious. Now it’s your turn. When can we expect it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top