Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (204670)	7/9/2021 3:14:21 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 362760

It looked impressive at first but then deteriorated into lower quality analysis that simply compared these numbers which, of course, doesn't tell the whole story. Speaking of "lower quality analysis," Blacks are more likely to commit crimes and hence be engaged with system. Yes, Blacks seem more likely to be engaged with the system. But is it because they are more likely to commit crimes as you assert? What is the quality of the analysis that you think proves that conclusion? I'm not trying to argue that they aren't more likely to commit crimes, or not. I'm addressing your notion of the quality of the analysis. This is a complicated subject. There are beaucoup confounding variables. There is limited data. We use only the data that is under the street lamp because that's what we have. There is no way to prove much of anything with the data we have. It's easy to claim that conclusions we prefer are based on quality analysis while the analysis of contradictory ones is of poorer quality. I submit that you cannot demonstrate with any more quality that Blacks are more likely to commit crimes than the conclusion you disparaged. (Please feel free to try if you like.) You simply prefer that conclusion. It could just as easily be the converse--that Blacks are more engaged with the system, thus they have more exposure to being tagged as criminals, thus included in the statistics. Again, I'm not arguing substance, only the dearth of evidence and the existence of confirmation bias.