Thoughts and prayers for Sweden

[ComradeMilton]

Sweden isn't doing that, but IKEA sure has jammed it in there and broken off the end.

[Rozalia]

No,literally everything Trump does is bad. Just almost all the time.

 

I think we should look at which part removed the requirement of ensuring equal representation of all POVs.

 

Everything. Almost. Those words do not fit together in what you're saying. Is everything Trump does bad or simply most of it? Can't be both. If its all then you believe that the TPP is a good thing and Trump ripping it up was bad? Straight answer, TPP a good thing mate? 

 

One end of the scale was not reported on as much as it should. Now it will be reported much more to make up for it. Usually how such things work. 

 

Ah, ok. So "fluffed" is your euphemism for lying. Trump lied. 

 

And I've told you that you don't have any evidence for that either. If it were gradual, as you have said, the crime rate should have been steadily growing. Instead, it has been flat for at least the last 10 years, if not longer. 

 

No, I don't know fully well that Sweden has put an end to statistics gathering in 2010, because in the last link I gave you, 2010 was still on that board. This is bullshit. 

 

Again, you have no evidence for this. You don't even have a good reason, other than you think Sweden would "cook the books" to support their policies. Do you have evidence that Sweden has done this in the past? That could be grounds for potential suspicion. Do you have any leaked sources from the Swedish government that says "Sweden is cooking the books?" That could be grounds for potential suspicion. What isn't grounds for suspicion is you having a conclusion about Sweden and its crime, and upon being unable to find evidence for that conclusion, you claim Sweden has rigged its statistics. 

 

The statement on its own references no incident. Based on that its a lie yes. Considering Trump's well noted watching of Fox programs the word sent out that he was simply referencing that and not a singular incident (where he fluffed) checks out. What Fox did on it certainly was sensationalist yes, and ultimately Trump has missed out on a chance to do good as what he should have done is go after

 

You are arguing on Sweden and don't know such a basic thing? Simply embarrassing. They still indeed take statistics but the ones related to immigration they do not publish. The last time was in 2005 on the 1997 to 2001 period (that one I showed you before). In that immigrants were 4 times more likely to be suspects in murders and 4.5 in rape.

 

Not publishing statistics every other nation in the west publishes is certainly suspicious especially when data on immigrants is such a basic thing. I have been very honest and fair in how I have presented the case and your constant attempts to smear me only come back on you.

 

To sum up I cannot due to a lack of evidence prove that the tread continued how the 2001 numbers looked. Likewise however you can not prove they have changed from what they were, drastically at that, and I have already addressed the citation of the fall in crime in my previous post, its no evidence of such a change as the one you require here. So neither of us have the full information, simply scraps we've pieced together into an opinion. So to me its logical to want to Sweden to finally publish the relevant data so we can have a look at the scale of the matter. So as its something needed with you... I shall ask you again and please do answer this time. You agree that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward? Yes or no?

[fistofdoom]

@roz

 

he'll probably think of some way to refuse to acquiesce and keep droning on and on in an unbelievable way

 

i'm looking for bets

[Caecus]

Everything. Almost. Those words do not fit together in what you're saying. Is everything Trump does bad or simply most of it? Can't be both. If its all then you believe that the TPP is a good thing and Trump ripping it up was bad? Straight answer, TPP a good thing mate? 

 

One end of the scale was not reported on as much as it should. Now it will be reported much more to make up for it. Usually how such things work. 

 

 

The statement on its own references no incident. Based on that its a lie yes. Considering Trump's well noted watching of Fox programs the word sent out that he was simply referencing that and not a singular incident (where he fluffed) checks out. What Fox did on it certainly was sensationalist yes, and ultimately Trump has missed out on a chance to do good as what he should have done is go after

 

You are arguing on Sweden and don't know such a basic thing? Simply embarrassing. They still indeed take statistics but the ones related to immigration they do not publish. The last time was in 2005 on the 1997 to 2001 period (that one I showed you before). In that immigrants were 4 times more likely to be suspects in murders and 4.5 in rape.

 

Not publishing statistics every other nation in the west publishes is certainly suspicious especially when data on immigrants is such a basic thing. I have been very honest and fair in how I have presented the case and your constant attempts to smear me only come back on you.

 

To sum up I cannot due to a lack of evidence prove that the tread continued how the 2001 numbers looked. Likewise however you can not prove they have changed from what they were, drastically at that, and I have already addressed the citation of the fall in crime in my previous post, its no evidence of such a change as the one you require here. So neither of us have the full information, simply scraps we've pieced together into an opinion. So to me its logical to want to Sweden to finally publish the relevant data so we can have a look at the scale of the matter. So as its something needed with you... I shall ask you again and please do answer this time. You agree that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward? Yes or no?

 

argumentum ad lapidem. And nuts. Every single link I've posted before includes immigrants, not excludes them. Agreeing with you that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward implies Sweden hasn't been doing that, which is so far left out there and is simply not true.  

[Rozalia]

argumentum ad lapidem. And nuts. Every single link I've posted before includes immigrants, not excludes them. Agreeing with you that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward implies Sweden hasn't been doing that, which is so far left out there and is simply not true.  

 

Seems fistofdoom got it on the money as I also knew you would. Yes, what you have posted includes immigrants in the numbers... it doesn't however break them down like the one I provided so we know the full scale of what is going on. Out of % of A crime is immigrants X%? Y%? Z%? Who knows. Sweden would rather people not know. 

 

As far as I am aware the talk of the rise in violent crimes has indeed gone up. Mistakes made are people saying that such an increase has happened since the Syrian war which is wrong as it happened well before the refugees (they are unlikely to help though, that is true), or that the overall crime rate in Sweden has exploded which it hasn't as it instead has gone down (though not as much as other similar countries who all have reduced crime also). The increase since 40 years ago involving violent crimes and rape cited is accurate however and logically explaining it by the influx of immigrants Sweden took in for those decades sounds right... you might disagree perhaps? Well until Sweden lets us see the statistics then we won't know. For all we know those poor immigrants could all be angels and Swedish men are simply more rapey and violent then we could ever have known... won't know until the statistics are broken down by background like the 1997-2001 ones. 

 

The question I have asked you twice is like a rope. It gets thicker and tighter every time you fail to give the correct response. The next one, the third and final rope will undoubtedly break your neck and suffocate you of life. I appeal to you to not kill yourself with such a rope however so having explained it all to you so fairly and nicely I give you a way to stop the shame pilling up on you... You agree that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward? Yes or no?

[Vicente Martinez]

 

You said and I quote, "I consider the country already ruined until we get control back and undo all of Trump's actions". So undoing the ripping up of TPP and implementing it then? No,literally everything Trump does is bad. Just almost all the time.

 

That is naturally what happens when the media downplays it for a long time. When someone counter to them gets in he will want to simply do the action of the other end of the scale. Lesson in that is the media should have been fair and reported such things. Now Trump will be getting it all reported with heavy interest. I think we should look at which part removed the requirement of ensuring equal representation of all POVs.

So I guess saving thousands of jobs is a really evil thing to do.

[Caecus]

Seems fistofdoom got it on the money as I also knew you would. Yes, what you have posted includes immigrants in the numbers... it doesn't however break them down like the one I provided so we know the full scale of what is going on. Out of % of A crime is immigrants X%? Y%? Z%? Who knows. Sweden would rather people not know. 

 

As far as I am aware the talk of the rise in violent crimes has indeed gone up. Mistakes made are people saying that such an increase has happened since the Syrian war which is wrong as it happened well before the refugees (they are unlikely to help though, that is true), or that the overall crime rate in Sweden has exploded which it hasn't as it instead has gone down (though not as much as other similar countries who all have reduced crime also). The increase since 40 years ago involving violent crimes and rape cited is accurate however and logically explaining it by the influx of immigrants Sweden took in for those decades sounds right... you might disagree perhaps? Well until Sweden lets us see the statistics then we won't know. For all we know those poor immigrants could all be angels and Swedish men are simply more rapey and violent then we could ever have known... won't know until the statistics are broken down by background like the 1997-2001 ones. 

 

The question I have asked you twice is like a rope. It gets thicker and tighter every time you fail to give the correct response. The next one, the third and final rope will undoubtedly break your neck and suffocate you of life. I appeal to you to not kill yourself with such a rope however so having explained it all to you so fairly and nicely I give you a way to stop the shame pilling up on you... You agree that Sweden should publish the relevant immigrant crime data from 2002 onward? Yes or no?

 

I've taken the time to look more closely at your source. Your claim is that immigrant crime and violence is due to their unwillingness to "integrate" right? That by nature of being an immigrant, you are more likely to be crime-prone correct? 

 

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/2005-12-14-brottslighet-bland-personer-fodda-i-sverige-och-i-utlandet.html

 

If you actually bothered to read your own source, here is how it contradicts you. First, this was a study, not part of the normal statistics gathering process. Secondly, the study concludes that children of immigrants, not the immigrants themselves, are more crime-prone. On page 74 (which they so nicely translated into english for us), they conclude that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than natural-born Swedes, but their children are more likely to commit crime. I suppose you can make the correlation that the riots which largely involve youths could be linked to the conclusion of this study. 

 

Europe has had a drop in crime while Sweden has not? Present your evidence, please.

 

Your rope metaphor is stupid. The only person who has been chocking is you, grasping at any straw necessary to defend your statement that Sweden's acceptance of immigrants had devastating effects. It makes me wonder what would I actually find if I bothered to go through each of your sources with a more fine-tooth comb. If you are asking if Sweden should do another study, I don't know. The study justified itself through believing that the immigrants in the 1990s were somehow different and contributed to crime differently than the previous study done 20 years before. But the conclusion of the study on page 75 says that there has been no significant changes, despite Sweden having changed so much between their last study in the 1970s. Seeing as how the statistics haven't changed over that 20 year period despite Sweden's growth and change during that time frame, the National Council might rightly conclude it would be a waste of time and money. 

 

You still have no case. Want to fall back on Sweden is flubbing their stats without you having any evidence? By all means, go "break your neck and suffocate you of life."

[Caecus]

I am fairly confident, without looking this up and presenting evidence, that immigrants have in general an overall benefit to economies. In the day and age where the modern economy is based on mass consumption, any increase in the number of consumers (not to mention skilled labor/previous skills that immigrants could contribute to an economy) has an overall benefit to the economy. This, I assume, likely applies to the Swedes, who (again, fairly confident without having to look this up) probably had an increase in GDP corresponding to the influx of immigrants. 

 

The only thing you could possibly conclude, from the evidence you have gathered, is that you should castrate immigrants, because the immigrants themselves are a boon to the Swedes. Their children - from a narrow-minded, xenophobic, irrational view based only on crime statistics - are not. 

[Rozalia]

I've taken the time to look more closely at your source. Your claim is that immigrant crime and violence is due to their unwillingness to "integrate" right? That by nature of being an immigrant, you are more likely to be crime-prone correct? 

 

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/2005-12-14-brottslighet-bland-personer-fodda-i-sverige-och-i-utlandet.html

 

If you actually bothered to read your own source, here is how it contradicts you. First, this was a study, not part of the normal statistics gathering process. Secondly, the study concludes that children of immigrants, not the immigrants themselves, are more crime-prone. On page 74 (which they so nicely translated into english for us), they conclude that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than natural-born Swedes, but their children are more likely to commit crime. I suppose you can make the correlation that the riots which largely involve youths could be linked to the conclusion of this study. 

 

Europe has had a drop in crime while Sweden has not? Present your evidence, please.

 

Your rope metaphor is stupid. The only person who has been chocking is you, grasping at any straw necessary to defend your statement that Sweden's acceptance of immigrants had devastating effects. It makes me wonder what would I actually find if I bothered to go through each of your sources with a more fine-tooth comb. If you are asking if Sweden should do another study, I don't know. The study justified itself through believing that the immigrants in the 1990s were somehow different and contributed to crime differently than the previous study done 20 years before. But the conclusion of the study on page 75 says that there has been no significant changes, despite Sweden having changed so much between their last study in the 1970s. Seeing as how the statistics haven't changed over that 20 year period despite Sweden's growth and change during that time frame, the National Council might rightly conclude it would be a waste of time and money. 

 

You still have no case. Want to fall back on Sweden is flubbing their stats without you having any evidence? By all means, go "break your neck and suffocate you of life."

 

You are going back to an earlier statement I gave of a general cause for bad immigrants and then mixing it with here. I have no time for such tricks. 

 

And this hurts my position how? You know what, forget that. I'm not the insane caricature your coked out mind has produced and that is that.

 

??? You really are this bad apparently. I do believe you must rank right at the bottom of anyone I have faced on here in that regard. I.SAID.ALL.OF.EUROPE.HAS.SEEN.A.DECREASE. SWEDEN.HOWEVER.HAS.SEEN.LESS.OF.A.DECREASE.THAN.OTHER.SIMILAR.NATIONS. Are the big letters enough to get through? Stop and actually read what I bloody say as its damn embarrassing to have to constantly be having to correct such massive errors on your part. Its at the point it seems like every single post of yours contains some wildly off the mark statement.

 

I never said Sweden is messing with their stats actually, but considering you will take something and then claim I said the exact opposite I suppose you missed that... What I actually said was that those who believe such a thing, that is the people you clearly think I'm part of and are all ready to combat, have a case to be suspicious when Sweden has indeed done a suspicious thing by covering up certain vital statistics.

 

---

Anyway the above was just so you could not claim that I was running away from your latest piece of wrongness. The important part is below this point.

---

 

So you stopped avoiding it and basically stated... no. A waste you dare to even say. Your neck snapped, you were choked of life... and then the rope decapitated you. How foolish can a person be to be this obstinate and blind.

 

The correct answer is, and even you shouldn't miss this as I've made it nice and big, YES! It does not matter what side you have in this game for those stats would prove the matter once and for all. I, the most esteemed Roz-sama, happily say yes to such stats for I wish to know the full truth and yes, I do believe they would reveal exactly what I believe. For you Caecus, he who thinks counter to me, these stats would if they are as you believe show you correct and yet... you cannot shout YES! like I can. Not doing so reveals your fear and dishonesty. You should be demanding the publication of such stats far more than me, much more, for if good and just people are being demonized then we need the stats to prove that they aren't as claimed.

 

 

We are done here as like I said, that last post would finish you if you gave the wrong answer. Your head can gurgle out some nonsense if it wishes, but you're done. You can try and attack other areas but the refusal to give a yes on that last one has destroyed you completely.

[Caecus]

You are going back to an earlier statement I gave of a general cause for bad immigrants and then mixing it with here. I have no time for such tricks. 

 

And this hurts my position how? You know what, forget that. I'm not the insane caricature your coked out mind has produced and that is that.

 

??? You really are this bad apparently. I do believe you must rank right at the bottom of anyone I have faced on here in that regard. I.SAID.ALL.OF.EUROPE.HAS.SEEN.A.DECREASE. SWEDEN.HOWEVER.HAS.SEEN.LESS.OF.A.DECREASE.THAN.OTHER.SIMILAR.NATIONS. Are the big letters enough to get through? Stop and actually read what I bloody say as its damn embarrassing to have to constantly be having to correct such massive errors on your part. Its at the point it seems like every single post of yours contains some wildly off the mark statement.

 

I never said Sweden is messing with their stats actually, but considering you will take something and then claim I said the exact opposite I suppose you missed that... What I actually said was that those who believe such a thing, that is the people you clearly think I'm part of and are all ready to combat, have a case to be suspicious when Sweden has indeed done a suspicious thing by covering up certain vital statistics.

 

---

Anyway the above was just so you could not claim that I was running away from your latest piece of wrongness. The important part is below this point.

---

 

So you stopped avoiding it and basically stated... no. A waste you dare to even say. Your neck snapped, you were choked of life... and then the rope decapitated you. How foolish can a person be to be this obstinate and blind.

 

The correct answer is, and even you shouldn't miss this as I've made it nice and big, YES! It does not matter what side you have in this game for those stats would prove the matter once and for all. I, the most esteemed Roz-sama, happily say yes to such stats for I wish to know the full truth and yes, I do believe they would reveal exactly what I believe. For you Caecus, he who thinks counter to me, these stats would if they are as you believe show you correct and yet... you cannot shout YES! like I can. Not doing so reveals your fear and dishonesty. You should be demanding the publication of such stats far more than me, much more, for if good and just people are being demonized then we need the stats to prove that they aren't as claimed.

 

 

We are done here as like I said, that last post would finish you if you gave the wrong answer. Your head can gurgle out some nonsense if it wishes, but you're done. You can try and attack other areas but the refusal to give a yes on that last one has destroyed you completely.

 

Lol. 

 

All I see is ranting, and no evidence to back up any of your claims. I was wondering how you were going to squeeze your way out of this one. I even contemplated you getting some new, shocking evidence that would require me to do more research. But alas, I am disappointed. 

[ComradeMilton]

So I guess saving thousands of jobs is a really evil thing to do.

Getting 40 million uninsured people insurance is evil according to conservative rhetoric. Trump saves no jobs.

[fistofdoom]

any increase in the number of consumers has an overall benefit to the economy.

 

citation needed

 

Getting 40 million uninsured people insurance is evil according to conservative rhetoric. Trump saves no jobs.

 

wrecking the nation's finances is evil according to conservative rhetoric, but keep misrepresent anything you want, guy

[Rozalia]

Lol. 

 

All I see is ranting, and no evidence to back up any of your claims. I was wondering how you were going to squeeze your way out of this one. I even contemplated you getting some new, shocking evidence that would require me to do more research. But alas, I am disappointed. 

 

There was no rant don't be silly. I put it simply in such a way even you would have a hard time misunderstanding. You have what must be half a dozen times responded with some nonsense that claimed something the exact opposite of what I said so clearly there must be a language barrier here... wait... that's your thing ain't it? Odd. You mock Lightning on that and yet your own understanding seems to be far below his. 

 

Now even were I to be weak in all other areas, which I'm not as you don't even know basic details about the situation in Sweden, the fact you could not state a simple and emphatic yes to my question even after having been asked three times destroys you completely. Someone who does not state such a yes to such statistics which would prove their position correct clearly does not believe their position. I don't need to say that the stats would show your position to be wrong because you yourself have said it for me with your refusal to give a yes. So you have been craven in your behaviour but worse you are dishonest because even in your mind and heart believing you are wrong you will still persist. I don't think you're one of those zealots though like those they have in Sweden, which would make you doubly dishonest I suppose... but are simply being argumentative for argument's sake which is detestable. 

[ComradeMilton]

citation needed

 

 

wrecking the nation's finances is evil according to conservative rhetoric, but keep misrepresent anything you want, guy

Will do! Have you calculated how much it costs the government to pay off ER bills that the poor can't afford and have to forego cheaper preventative care? 

[Caecus]

There was no rant don't be silly. I put it simply in such a way even you would have a hard time misunderstanding. You have what must be half a dozen times responded with some nonsense that claimed something the exact opposite of what I said so clearly there must be a language barrier here... wait... that's your thing ain't it? Odd. You mock Lightning on that and yet your own understanding seems to be far below his. 

 

Now even were I to be weak in all other areas, which I'm not as you don't even know basic details about the situation in Sweden, the fact you could not state a simple and emphatic yes to my question even after having been asked three times destroys you completely. Someone who does not state such a yes to such statistics which would prove their position correct clearly does not believe their position. I don't need to say that the stats would show your position to be wrong because you yourself have said it for me with your refusal to give a yes. So you have been craven in your behaviour but worse you are dishonest because even in your mind and heart believing you are wrong you will still persist. I don't think you're one of those zealots though like those they have in Sweden, which would make you doubly dishonest I suppose... but are simply being argumentative for argument's sake which is detestable. 

 

It has been proven over and over again that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than native-born. What surprised me was that Sweden was no different from the US. Given the population size difference and time frame (not to mention the different kinds of immigrants), statistics has again and again proven you wrong. 

 

So my answer is no. The study would be a waste of time and money, something that a social state like Sweden needs. But don't take my word on it. Your source, the people doing the study and whom you cited as your evidence, also came to that same conclusion. But I'm not surprised you would want one of these studies done every year. Trump supporters seem to like the idea of wasting a lot of money on objectively stupid projects. 

 

Also, I still don't see any evidence for any of your claims. 

[Tali]

wrecking the nation's finances is evil according to conservative rhetoric, but keep misrepresent anything you want, guy

Considering the economy tends to fail each time a conservative takes control should be a sign your economics fail.

[Vicente Martinez]

Considering the economy tends to fail each time a conservative takes control should be a sign your economics fail.

No solid proof,conservatives and liberals use a similar economic system,capitalism.

[ComradeMilton]

Obama used socialism in his first term to salvage some massive industries from crashing and ended up also making the government a fair profit from that work.

[Tali]

No solid proof,conservatives and liberals use a similar economic system,capitalism.

It really is, conservative leadership has always deregulated the economy, which led to an economic instability.

 

Liberal leadership pushes for regulated capitalistic system that regulated how a business can work.

 

Thats the main difference from the conservatives and liberals.

 

Most liberals don't want communism, but we don't want a unregulated economy.

[Rozalia]

It has been proven over and over again that immigrants are less likely to commit crime than native-born. What surprised me was that Sweden was no different from the US. Given the population size difference and time frame (not to mention the different kinds of immigrants), statistics has again and again proven you wrong. 

 

So my answer is no. The study would be a waste of time and money, something that a social state like Sweden needs. But don't take my word on it. Your source, the people doing the study and whom you cited as your evidence, also came to that same conclusion. But I'm not surprised you would want one of these studies done every year. Trump supporters seem to like the idea of wasting a lot of money on objectively stupid projects. 

 

Also, I still don't see any evidence for any of your claims. 

 

Just talking utter damn lies. You know nothing of what you speak and have the gall to attack others for a lack of knowledge. 

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

 

Even places and people heavily supportive of Sweden do not peddle the garbage you are trying here. You think that if you put on a smart guy act and just say things that you can trick people into believing your garbage smells sweet. It doesn't. Historically they offend higher, not lower. Why is "historically" used? As clearly you do not understand like so much I shall explain. Because the last report on such a thing was for 1997 to 2001 and no newer report exists. So no, statistics don't prove me wrong but you.. and... you know this why is why you are afraid of new ones.

 

Also Caecus when you demean others you better be sure that you can hold firm yourself. I know what all this is as it exudes off you like a repugnant smell, the same type of supreme arrogance that the likes of Rahl possess. You think people who have supported Trump are all idiots of the highest order and that you are so much smarter so you post here and make threads to prey on these people you think below you. However what happens? Those you want to hit outsmart you and don't engage your nonsense while I, knowing I can handle your deceit, show that when engaged you can't debate your position at all. Stop embarrassing yourself and just stop posting on this matter. You're done and have been done for a long time now.

NOW, on to the important part.The last study, a vital one, was conducted for a period that will soon be two decades back. The statistics would show if everything is fine and dandy like some say or if it is all gone bad as others do. I can confidentially say that I want the statistics published because I am honest and even if they were likely to show counter to my views I'd want them out there. You however, being dishonest, do not for you know it'd show you wrong. 

 

I have presented evidence several times while you have presented none. You have no understanding on the situation in Sweden and are just talking out of your arse as can be easily seen every time you commit numerous blunders.

[Vicente Martinez]

It really is, conservative leadership has always deregulated the economy, which led to an economic instability.

 

Liberal leadership pushes for regulated capitalistic system that regulated how a business can work.

 

Thats the main difference from the conservatives and liberals.

 

Most liberals don't want communism, but we don't want a unregulated economy.

The fact that Reganomics exist completely disproves your statement.

[Caecus]

Just talking utter damn lies. You know nothing of what you speak and have the gall to attack others for a lack of knowledge. 

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

 

Even places and people heavily supportive of Sweden do not peddle the garbage you are trying here. You think that if you put on a smart guy act and just say things that you can trick people into believing your garbage smells sweet. It doesn't. Historically they offend higher, not lower. Why is "historically" used? As clearly you do not understand like so much I shall explain. Because the last report on such a thing was for 1997 to 2001 and no newer report exists. So no, statistics don't prove me wrong but you.. and... you know this why is why you are afraid of new ones.

 

Also Caecus when you demean others you better be sure that you can hold firm yourself. I know what all this is as it exudes off you like a repugnant smell, the same type of supreme arrogance that the likes of Rahl possess. You think people who have supported Trump are all idiots of the highest order and that you are so much smarter so you post here and make threads to prey on these people you think below you. However what happens? Those you want to hit outsmart you and don't engage your nonsense while I, knowing I can handle your deceit, show that when engaged you can't debate your position at all. Stop embarrassing yourself and just stop posting on this matter. You're done and have been done for a long time now.

NOW, on to the important part.The last study, a vital one, was conducted for a period that will soon be two decades back. The statistics would show if everything is fine and dandy like some say or if it is all gone bad as others do. I can confidentially say that I want the statistics published because I am honest and even if they were likely to show counter to my views I'd want them out there. You however, being dishonest, do not for you know it'd show you wrong. 

 

I have presented evidence several times while you have presented none. You have no understanding on the situation in Sweden and are just talking out of your arse as can be easily seen every time you commit numerous blunders.

 

Hahaha, this article still links to the same study, comes to the same conclusion, and ultimately refutes your own argument. This article supports my claims, not yours. Thanks for doing my research for me.  

 

Ironically, this article also features a study done to account the difference in crime due to poverty, something you were so desperately wanting me to argue. And this one is from 2013! Imagine that. 

 

https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article-abstract/53/3/456/542980/Crime-as-a-Price-of-Inequality-The-Gap-in?redirectedFrom=fulltext

 

Again, these "statistics" (including the link above) are not normally collected in the yearly data gathering. These are studies in which sociologist and criminologists spend time and money collecting and analyzing years of data. The study linked, again, has justified its existence (and its grant money) through believing the data would show a significant difference between 1970s and 1990s. When there was none, despite Sweden's social/economic culture changing drastically within those years, it was concluded that it would be a waste of time and money to do one anytime in the near future, much less every !@#$ing year. 

 

I think that people who support Trump are bringing drugs, they are bringing crime... and some, I assume, are good people. 

 

In all honesty, I can see why people voted for Trump. Some Trump voters voted for Obama in the election before, wanting to "change" Washington. Desperation and anxiety can push people to do irrational things. What I can't understand is how people would want to build a cult of personality around an internet troll. I mean, for god's sake, I can understand someone accomplished like Napoleon, or Alexander, or Augustus. You would think you would want to build a cult of personality around someone actually competent. So yes, I do think that Trump supporters who blindly continue to build him up into this figure of greatness despite daily evidence otherwise are idiots who objectively don't have a strong grasp of reality. 

[ComradeMilton]

The fact that Reganomics exist completely disproves your statement. 

Reaganonics completely failed. It's why nowhere but Kansas does that stuff anymore.

[Vicente Martinez]

Reaganonics completely failed. It's why nowhere but Kansas does that stuff anymore.

Stop,just stop

 

"The unemployment rate rose from 7% in 1980 to 11% in 1982, then declined to 5% in 1988. The inflation rate declined from 10% in 1980 to 4% in 1988.[2]

 

Some economists have stated that Reagan's policies were an important part of bringing about the second longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history.[29][30] During the Reagan administration, the American economy went from a GDP growth of -0.3% in 1980 to 4.1% in 1988 (in constant 2005 dollars), averaging 7.91% annual growth in current dollars.[31] This reduced the unemployment rate by 1.6%, from 7.1% in 1980 to 5.5% in 1988.[32][33] A net job increase of about 21 million also occurred through mid-1990. Reagan's administration is the only one not to have raised the minimum wage.[34] The inflation rate, 13.5% in 1980, fell to 4.1% in 1988"

[ComradeMilton]

Reaganomics is a failure. If you poll economists that agree you're naturally going to have their support.