Active Shooter With Hostages in Amarillo, TX Walmart

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

When you take every black and every white and calculate using real data, blacks are almost 4x more like to be on food stamps than whites. The calculations don't lie. Only liars like you refuse to accept facts.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Blacks

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

When you take every black and every white and calculate using real data, blacks are almost 4x more like to be on food stamps than whites. The calculations don't lie. Only liars like you refuse to accept facts.

Don't waste your time with him.

 

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

Someone needs to explain to that dumbass that the larger the sample, the more accurate the end result. Since my sample included every black and every white, you can't get more accurate than what I proved.

 

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Hey, stupid. The larger the same, the more accurate the results. You only want to use 100 cherry picked from each group. I used them all.

 

[JQPublic1]

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

Disagreed on the murder statistics. This is fact: Leading Causes of Death in Males - Men's Health - CDC

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/blackmales2013.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/whitemen2013.pdf


Tell me there isn't something very wrong with those numbers.


As for poverty, that's obvious; the more people in poverty, the more likely they are on welfare or other public assistance.

Are you sure that page is the one you want to show? Tables showing percentages with no totals is useless!.

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Since I took the entire black population and white population to get my numbers, they are valid. Cherry picking certain areas proves nothing. When it applies to ALL blacks vs. ALL whites, my statement stands as the only valid one between the two of us.

Trying not do what you did doesn't change the real world one bit.

Your premise doesn't make sense ini the real world because if you arbitrarily line 100 Blacks and 100 Whites up in 10 different random locations you will get different numbers every time; and, in some cases, there will be more Whites on welfare in some lines.

If you arbitrarily line blacks and whites up 100 at a time and do so until you've included all 41 million blacks and over 200 million whites, the ratios I gave will be the total. One can make a cherry picked selection say a lot of things that are, when taken as a whole, are incorrect. My premise is that on an OVERALL basis 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks is on food stamps and only 1 in every 12 1/2 whites it. It's a statistically proven fact.

Ok, we have heard that for decades. What has been done about it? There are almost equal numbers of Whites and Blacks on welfare and on food stamps and they and the price tag for that is coming out of our pockets in REAL numbers not proportional numbers.

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Hey, stupid. The larger the same, the more accurate the results. You only want to use 100 cherry picked from each group. I used them all.

Hey stupid, the raw numbers is what count when budget time rolls around. Proportional statistics do not mean a thing. The RAW numbers =raw dollars not proportional dollars. the problem that needs to be addressed?…How to get everyone off of welfare and stop paying so much attention to proportional statistics for political agendas.

 

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Since I took the entire black population and white population to get my numbers, they are valid. Cherry picking certain areas proves nothing. When it applies to ALL blacks vs. ALL whites, my statement stands as the only valid one between the two of us.

Trying not do what you did doesn't change the real world one bit.

Your premise doesn't make sense ini the real world because if you arbitrarily line 100 Blacks and 100 Whites up in 10 different random locations you will get different numbers every time; and, in some cases, there will be more Whites on welfare in some lines.

If you arbitrarily line blacks and whites up 100 at a time and do so until you've included all 41 million blacks and over 200 million whites, the ratios I gave will be the total. One can make a cherry picked selection say a lot of things that are, when taken as a whole, are incorrect. My premise is that on an OVERALL basis 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks is on food stamps and only 1 in every 12 1/2 whites it. It's a statistically proven fact.

Ok, we have heard that for decades. What has been done about it? There are almost equal numbers of Whites and Blacks on welfare and on food stamps and they and the price tag for that is coming out of our pockets in REAL numbers not proportional numbers.

Trillions of dollars have been wasted on social welfare programs designed to eradicate poverty only to have the same percentage of the population today in poverty as was prior to the spending of the trillions.

What you fail to take into account is that while the raw data numbers may be about the same, that same number was achieved by blacks from a smaller pot than whites. In fact, the pot from which the numbers came includes 5 1/2 times as many whites. Why aren't there 5 1/2 times more whites using raw data on welfare.

 

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Hey, stupid. The larger the same, the more accurate the results. You only want to use 100 cherry picked from each group. I used them all.

Hey stupid, the raw numbers is what count when budget time rolls around. Proportional statistics do not mean a thing. The RAW numbers =raw dollars not proportional dollars. the problem that needs to be addressed?…How to get everyone off of welfare and stop paying so much attention to proportional statistics for political agendas.

If blacks, as a proportion to their race, would get down to the same level as whites, the problem you say needs to be addressed would be addressed. By getting the proportions even, that would mean only 3.5 million blacks instead of 11 million would be on food stamps. Thats a decrease of 7.5 million people receiving handouts. See how easy that is?

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

Someone needs to explain to that dumbass that the larger the sample, the more accurate the end result. Since my sample included every black and every white, you can't get more accurate than what I proved.

You haven't proved or said anything that hasn't been said 1000s of times before you brought your flaky arse in here. So what if proportionally more Blacks are on welfare than Whites? How has the knowledge of that helped ANYbody over the past several decades. All it has done is fuel arseholes like you to come here slobbering the same old worn STATISTICAL morass to make you feel better about having white skin. Nothing else has ever been accomplished by those statistics. NOTHING. EXCEPT> The White people on welfare are affected by the backlash aimed at Blacks on welfare.

 

[Conservative65]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

Someone needs to explain to that dumbass that the larger the sample, the more accurate the end result. Since my sample included every black and every white, you can't get more accurate than what I proved.

You haven't proved or said anything that hasn't been said 1000s of times before you brought your flaky arse in here. So what if proportionally more Blacks are on welfare than Whites? How has the knowledge of that helped ANYbody over the past several decades. All it has done is fuel arseholes like you to come here slobbering the same old worn STATISTICAL morass to make you feel better about having white skin. Nothing else has ever been accomplished by those statistics. NOTHING. EXCEPT> The White people on welfare are affected by the backlash aimed at Blacks on welfare.

It's important because it shows where numbers on welfare can be reduced.

Are you one of those chip on your shoulder blacks that can't stand the truth and blame white people because your kind can't make as well as whites have?

 

[JQPublic1]

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Since I took the entire black population and white population to get my numbers, they are valid. Cherry picking certain areas proves nothing. When it applies to ALL blacks vs. ALL whites, my statement stands as the only valid one between the two of us.

Trying not do what you did doesn't change the real world one bit.

Your premise doesn't make sense ini the real world because if you arbitrarily line 100 Blacks and 100 Whites up in 10 different random locations you will get different numbers every time; and, in some cases, there will be more Whites on welfare in some lines.

If you arbitrarily line blacks and whites up 100 at a time and do so until you've included all 41 million blacks and over 200 million whites, the ratios I gave will be the total. One can make a cherry picked selection say a lot of things that are, when taken as a whole, are incorrect. My premise is that on an OVERALL basis 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks is on food stamps and only 1 in every 12 1/2 whites it. It's a statistically proven fact.

Ok, we have heard that for decades. What has been done about it? There are almost equal numbers of Whites and Blacks on welfare and on food stamps and they and the price tag for that is coming out of our pockets in REAL numbers not proportional numbers.

Trillions of dollars have been wasted on social welfare programs designed to eradicate poverty only to have the same percentage of the population today in poverty as was prior to the spending of the trillions.

What you fail to take into account is that while the raw data numbers may be about the same, that same number was achieved by blacks from a smaller pot than whites. In fact, the pot from which the numbers came includes 5 1/2 times as many whites. Why aren't there 5 1/2 times more whites using raw data on welfare.

I have heard all of that before more ties thanI can count. OK so what? Why hasn't the problem been addressed by ALL of us. What do you attribute as the cause the racial disparity in welfare recipient statistics? Are the whites on welfare j invisible or do you see people who started out far ahead of blacks socio-economically as having fewer issues with being on welfare? Ae you aware that most Blacks are NOT on welfare? How did s those Blacks forge ahead of millions of Whites who had an advantage for hundreds of years.

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

Someone needs to explain to that dumbass that the larger the sample, the more accurate the end result. Since my sample included every black and every white, you can't get more accurate than what I proved.

You haven't proved or said anything that hasn't been said 1000s of times before you brought your flaky arse in here. So what if proportionally more Blacks are on welfare than Whites? How has the knowledge of that helped ANYbody over the past several decades. All it has done is fuel arseholes like you to come here slobbering the same old worn STATISTICAL morass to make you feel better about having white skin. Nothing else has ever been accomplished by those statistics. NOTHING. EXCEPT> The White people on welfare are affected by the backlash aimed at Blacks on welfare.

It's important because it shows where numbers on welfare can be reduced.

Are you one of those chip on your shoulder blacks that can't stand the truth and blame white people because your kind can't make as well as whites have?

Who said I am Black? But even if I was I wouldn't be poor by any standard. No, I am no Donald Trump but your statistical diagnosis doesn't include millions of upwardly mobile Blacks. BTW I have to wonder WHICH whites you are referring to that Blacks ought to be envious of? Millions of Whites are as poor or poorer than they are. See how distorted your worldview is when you rely on statistics to make your judgements.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Yet another Mohammed.

 

[JQPublic1]

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Since I took the entire black population and white population to get my numbers, they are valid. Cherry picking certain areas proves nothing. When it applies to ALL blacks vs. ALL whites, my statement stands as the only valid one between the two of us.

Trying not do what you did doesn't change the real world one bit.

Your premise doesn't make sense ini the real world because if you arbitrarily line 100 Blacks and 100 Whites up in 10 different random locations you will get different numbers every time; and, in some cases, there will be more Whites on welfare in some lines.

If you arbitrarily line blacks and whites up 100 at a time and do so until you've included all 41 million blacks and over 200 million whites, the ratios I gave will be the total. One can make a cherry picked selection say a lot of things that are, when taken as a whole, are incorrect. My premise is that on an OVERALL basis 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks is on food stamps and only 1 in every 12 1/2 whites it. It's a statistically proven fact.

Ok, we have heard that for decades. What has been done about it? There are almost equal numbers of Whites and Blacks on welfare and on food stamps and they and the price tag for that is coming out of our pockets in REAL numbers not proportional numbers.

Trillions of dollars have been wasted on social welfare programs designed to eradicate poverty only to have the same percentage of the population today in poverty as was prior to the spending of the trillions.

What you fail to take into account is that while the raw data numbers may be about the same, that same number was achieved by blacks from a smaller pot than whites. In fact, the pot from which the numbers came includes 5 1/2 times as many whites. Why aren't there 5 1/2 times more whites using raw data on welfare.

I know what the statistics indicate but I am not too trusting of data collected and disseminated by White controlled agencies. There are just too many prejudiced bastards out there. However, for the purpose of this debate I will reluctantly accept the long tradition of Blacks being statistically demonized without professional Black oversight at the input source. Agreed? Now my question is this: if 40 million Whites are on welfare why isn't that an issue? Solve that issue and Blacks on welfare will follow your example…OK?

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

Hey, stupid. The larger the same, the more accurate the results. You only want to use 100 cherry picked from each group. I used them all.

Hey stupid, the raw numbers is what count when budget time rolls around. Proportional statistics do not mean a thing. The RAW numbers =raw dollars not proportional dollars. the problem that needs to be addressed?…How to get everyone off of welfare and stop paying so much attention to proportional statistics for political agendas.

If blacks, as a proportion to their race, would get down to the same level as whites, the problem you say needs to be addressed would be addressed. By getting the proportions even, that would mean only 3.5 million blacks instead of 11 million would be on food stamps. Thats a decrease of 7.5 million people receiving handouts. See how easy that is?

How do you propose that Blacks "get down to the same (poverty) levels as Whites? Whites aren't eager to hire Blacks especially with so many poor White people vying for jobs.. I think I have the answer: Blacks need to come together and establish their own businesses on a national and international scale. iDuring segregation, there were several places where Blacks prospered and thrived beyond the white towns around them. The only viable answer is autonomy and loyalty to their own businesses. Look what depending on White people for employment has done-to them.

 

[JQPublic1]

ou could line up 100 blacks and 100 whites and start counting. Before you got to 1 white, you would already have statistically counted 3 blacks on food stamps.

That would depend on the blacks and whites you line up. Line up 100 Black sports figures and none will be on welfare. Line up 100 Appalachian Whites and probably all of them would be on welfare.

While true, I think C65's point was that, overall, the statistics show more blacks are on welfare than whites in proportion to their population. Same goes for murders. This isn't a race thing, it's a cultural thing which had it's beginnings with racism prior to 1964.

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

When you take every black and every white and calculate using real data, blacks are almost 4x more like to be on food stamps than whites. The calculations don't lie. Only liars like you refuse to accept facts.

Why is it so important to you that more Blacks are proportionally on welfare than Whites? Why aren't you just as concerned about ALL people on welfare. Again, I ask what is gained by public knowledge of this statistical disparity? In another post you said it is important because it shows where welfare numbers can be reduced. So people like YOU need to know that information ? Why? You aren't going to do a damn thing except to bray loudly when you equate welfare to a Black face and start wanting to cut it. You don't even see the millions of Whites on welfare, all you see is that proportional statistic. It takes a life of its own and becomes the essence of Blackness… GAWD, they must be stopped before they take ALL of my tax dollahz!"

 

[Divine Wind]

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

Disagreed on the murder statistics. This is fact: Leading Causes of Death in Males - Men's Health - CDC

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/blackmales2013.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/whitemen2013.pdf


Tell me there isn't something very wrong with those numbers.


As for poverty, that's obvious; the more people in poverty, the more likely they are on welfare or other public assistance.

Are you sure that page is the one you want to show? Tables showing percentages with no totals is useless!.

Not useless. Compare the #1 cause of death for black males age 15-34 to white males in those categories. This is a national tragedy. I don't know the solution, but know it's cultural, not genetic.

As for total numbers, those are listed elsewhere on the website. You can also look at the FBI website for violent crime stats by race.

 

[JQPublic1]

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

As I have long maintained, proportional statistics mean nothing to the victims of murder. And welfare, when controlled for poverty, has proportional equity with Whites in the same socio-economic level mirroring Blacks on welfare in the same SE level.

Disagreed on the murder statistics. This is fact: Leading Causes of Death in Males - Men's Health - CDC

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/blackmales2013.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/whitemen2013.pdf


Tell me there isn't something very wrong with those numbers.


As for poverty, that's obvious; the more people in poverty, the more likely they are on welfare or other public assistance.

Are you sure that page is the one you want to show? Tables showing percentages with no totals is useless!.

Not useless. Compare the #1 cause of death for black males age 15-34 to white males in those categories. This is a national tragedy. I don't know the solution, but know it's cultural, not genetic.

As for total numbers, those are listed elsewhere on the website. You can also look at the FBI website for violent crime stats by race.

Disagreed on the murder statistics. This is fact: Leading Causes of Death in Males - Men's Health - CDC

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/blackmales2013.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/2013/whitemen2013.pdf


Tell me there isn't something very wrong with those numbers.


As for poverty, that's obvious; the more people in poverty, the more likely they are on welfare or other public assistance.

Are you sure that page is the one you want to show? Tables showing percentages with no totals is useless!.

Not useless. Compare the #1 cause of death for black males age 15-34 to white males in those categories. This is a national tragedy. I don't know the solution, but know it's cultural, not genetic.

As for total numbers, those are listed elsewhere on the website. You can also look at the FBI website for violent crime stats by race.

We have been lead to believe that urban or metropolitan violence is the domain of Black drug dealers and black gangs. We all have been told how dangerous Black neighborhoods are based on proportional statistics. But table 55A of the FBI UCR strips away the proportional mask and shows the raw truth: Whites are committing the most crime and murders (raw numbers ) in Metropolitan counties. More than TWICE as many homicides are committed by Whites in metro areas . Now I understand the proportional disparity ad that young black men appear to be killing each other at alarming rates but whites are killing each other too.

 

[Conservative65]

Since I took the entire black population and white population to get my numbers, they are valid. Cherry picking certain areas proves nothing. When it applies to ALL blacks vs. ALL whites, my statement stands as the only valid one between the two of us.

Trying not do what you did doesn't change the real world one bit.

Your premise doesn't make sense ini the real world because if you arbitrarily line 100 Blacks and 100 Whites up in 10 different random locations you will get different numbers every time; and, in some cases, there will be more Whites on welfare in some lines.

If you arbitrarily line blacks and whites up 100 at a time and do so until you've included all 41 million blacks and over 200 million whites, the ratios I gave will be the total. One can make a cherry picked selection say a lot of things that are, when taken as a whole, are incorrect. My premise is that on an OVERALL basis 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks is on food stamps and only 1 in every 12 1/2 whites it. It's a statistically proven fact.

Ok, we have heard that for decades. What has been done about it? There are almost equal numbers of Whites and Blacks on welfare and on food stamps and they and the price tag for that is coming out of our pockets in REAL numbers not proportional numbers.

Trillions of dollars have been wasted on social welfare programs designed to eradicate poverty only to have the same percentage of the population today in poverty as was prior to the spending of the trillions.

What you fail to take into account is that while the raw data numbers may be about the same, that same number was achieved by blacks from a smaller pot than whites. In fact, the pot from which the numbers came includes 5 1/2 times as many whites. Why aren't there 5 1/2 times more whites using raw data on welfare.

I have heard all of that before more ties thanI can count. OK so what? Why hasn't the problem been addressed by ALL of us. What do you attribute as the cause the racial disparity in welfare recipient statistics? Are the whites on welfare j invisible or do you see people who started out far ahead of blacks socio-economically as having fewer issues with being on welfare? Ae you aware that most Blacks are NOT on welfare? How did s those Blacks forge ahead of millions of Whites who had an advantage for hundreds of years.

I'm aware that a far greater proportion of blacks related to their population in society are on welfare compared to whites. You don't seem to think that means anything.

What contributes to the cause? Blacks have a higher dropout rate from school than whites. Blacks have over a 2x higher illegitimate birth rate than whites. Blacks graduate from college on a far less level than whites. Blacks have a 2x higher unemployment rate than whites. All of those things result in a lower economic situation producing a higher proportional to the population number on welfare.