# Ignore this at your peril: The USA is going down



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

Am going to throw this out there, as this is what I think. Take it as you will.
I see this event as a willful and intended attack on the US financial system.
All previous well known market crashes have not gone as hard and as fast as this one.
Alan Kohler had a graph on the ABC a few days ago, can't find it right now. It compared the big crashes for the last century.
We're only a bit past halfway down thus far in comparison to the other crashes.
I expect to see a few really good sucker rallies and dumps over the next few days /weeks, before the 2nd wave hits.
I expect the 2nd wave to take us around the bottom of the previous crashes which were all similar in depth.
Wash, rinse, repeat of the sucker rallies...then there's the 3rd wave which I expect to breach all previous
bottoms. The new low will be the norm.
After that, the US won't be a financial super power anymore. Their money printing and lack of gold standard and backing will force the chickens home to roost, in broad daylight.
They will be left as a nuclear super power only... with a near worthless dollar.
I remain optimistic but consider the above to be a potential scenario.

F.Rock
PS: Hopefully I am just pissing in the wind... but with little to no manufacturing here, it's going to get ugly.


----------



## gartley (25 March 2020)

This has been a high momentum leg down so far. I think it would be fair to compare it to the first leg down if not depth ( 29 crash in US was 47% for first leg down), but faster in terms of time.
Ofcourse at some point we will get a more sustained counter trend rally ( it may have already started) which may carry to 38.2 to 50% upward retracememt.
The next leg down I don't will be as high momentum as this leg. It will take longer and be deeper, probably more painful ( death by a thousand cuts decline) .  Similar in structure to 1929-32 , NASDAQ dot.com and Nikkei 225 bears but in a different time length.


----------



## So_Cynical (25 March 2020)

Today Trump was saying that they will save the economy, let the oldies die basically - in 15 days its back to normal.
¬


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

Quite uncanny you mentioned death by a thousand cuts... @gartley if you know the history of it....
F.Rock


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 March 2020)

So_Cynical said:


> Today Trump was saying that they will save the economy, let the oldies die basically - in 15 days its back to normal.



I ponder how all this will play out?

From a market perspective it seems like the sort of thing that could turn suddenly perhaps? 

So a rally starts, all going well then there's a spike in deaths and a panic that would signal the end of a bounce and the next leg down?

I'm just thinking out loud there really.


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> death by a thousand cuts



I assume you're referring to torture not the song.


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> I assume you're referring to torture not the song.



The torture thing. 
They used to steam them too, break ankles with monkey poles, kneel for days/ nights on end etc. Very creative...
Not a fan of Taylor.... not quite my generation


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 March 2020)

A question for those who've lived in the US - what are the main media sources that the average American would be getting information from at present?

I'm not looking for those which are necessarily the best or even truthful, I just want to see what the average person would be looking at and what they're saying about all this.

I'm looking for things online obviously and only the mainstream nothing niche. What news does the average American actually look at?


----------



## wayneL (25 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> Am going to throw this out there, as this is what I think. Take it as you will.
> I see this event as a willful and intended attack on the US financial system.
> All previous well known market crashes have not gone as hard and as fast as this one.
> Alan Kohler had a graph on the ABC a few days ago, can't find it right now. It compared the big crashes for the last century.
> ...



My punt is on a reset, engineered by The Fed, possibly a new currency, probably  still called the dollar, with massive economic changes based loosely around the *original meaning of fascism*, and most of the liberties we are willingly giving away right now will not fully be  given back.

I'm punting on competing totalitarian blocks. Western liberalism as we know it will be dead.


----------



## InsvestoBoy (25 March 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> A question for those who've lived in the US - what are the main media sources that the average American would be getting information from at present?
> 
> I'm not looking for those which are necessarily the best or even truthful, I just want to see what the average person would be looking at and what they're saying about all this.
> 
> I'm looking for things online obviously and only the mainstream nothing niche. What news does the average American actually look at?




I don't currently live there but have spent quite a lot of time there for work, including several months long stints.

There is a big split, depending on your political leanings and conversely your information diet feeds into your political leanings. It is *crazy* how pronounced this politicised information landscape has become over time in the US. Really crazy.

The main thing I would say is on the right, Fox is huge. And they do this thing where during the day it's not that bad journalism, but at night when most people watch it's insane the stuff they say. I know Sky is trying to bring that same platform to Australia, and I am so glad it isn't here yet.

The funniest thing I think, by far, is how people who lean right think that centrist neoliberal stuff like NYT and CNN are basically raving hard left communists.

I think this chart is pretty good depiction.


----------



## MovingAverage (25 March 2020)

Suggest you keep an eye on Breitbart if you want the extreme right view. It has a reasonable level of influence in the US


----------



## sptrawler (25 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> My punt is on a reset, engineered by The Fed, possibly a new currency, probably  still called the dollar, with massive economic changes based loosely around the *original meaning of fascism*, and most of the liberties we are willingly giving away right now will not fully be  given back.
> 
> I'm punting on competing totalitarian blocks. Western liberalism as we know it will be dead.



I think that is pretty well on the money wayne, the police will be given permission to track individuals with electronic surveillance IMO and some form of money consolidation will have to happen this time.
How it is sorted is way beyond my pay grade, but the credibility of fiat money is getting way too shaky.


----------



## explod (25 March 2020)

The world is certainly turning away:-
-
"
The European Union will send €20 million in humanitarian aid to Iran, which is subject to US sanctions, to help alleviate the coronavirus outbreak, and will support Tehran's request for IMF financial help, the EU's top diplomat said Monday. "

https://www.france24.com/en/2020032...o-aid-sanctions-hit-iran-in-coronavirus-fight


"We've not been able to provide a lot of humanitarian help but there is some €20 million in the pipeline ... that we expect to be delivered over the next weeks," EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said in a video news conference on Monday."


----------



## sptrawler (25 March 2020)

explod said:


> The world is certainly turning away:-
> -
> "
> The European Union will send €20 million in humanitarian aid to Iran, which is subject to US sanctions, to help alleviate the coronavirus outbreak, and will support Tehran's request for IMF financial help, the EU's top diplomat said Monday. "
> ...



China will fill the vacuum left.


----------



## satanoperca (25 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> My punt is on a reset, engineered by The Fed, possibly a new currency, probably  still called the dollar, with massive economic changes based loosely around the *original meaning of fascism*, and most of the liberties we are willingly giving away right now will not fully be  given back.
> 
> I'm punting on competing totalitarian blocks. Western liberalism as we know it will be dead.




What the f-k, engineered by the FED, did you get kicked in the head by a horse.


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

Some more out loud thinking.,., historically, the US, is supposed to be an ally to Australia, however I would consider there's a large disconnect in values. 
Have personally witnessed the transformation of China from 3rd world style standards to modern western standards over the last 15 year's, still a work in progress though as it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks.
Food hygiene, in particular, has been largely improved with every restaurant/take away now having a hygiene grading certificate plastered on their wall, after official inspection.
I believe the program was accelerated after the melamine in baby formula fiasco, which caused the death of many infants.
That incident alone also brought about greater scrutiny and legislation in regards to what they accepted in the way of imports.
Thus the rise of milk products from Aus and NZ in particular, they didn't trust their own industry for a while, but also needed to fix it, due to wealth leaving the country.

Both China and the US have influence here both economically and in physical presence, but obviously, China is our biggest trading partner. 
If it ever comes to physical war between those 2 powers, I don't see how we can be allies with either country?
We are neutral fence sitters, otherwise our economy would fall in a heap if China decided it be that way. I don't think the US has that sort of controlling power anymore.
Media, always let's us know about the AUD to USD, why? 
What's the relevance anymore?
Time for a different benchmark, the financial world (outside of the US) has desired a more neutral benchmark for quite a while now...

F.Rock


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> What the f-k, engineered by the FED, did you get kicked in the head by a horse.



I value others opinions, what's your stance devil fish? Cheers.
F.Rock


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> Media, always let's us know about the AUD to USD, why?



The USD is still notionally the world's reserve currency and even China currently accepts that to considerable extent. 

For how much longer is another matter......


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

I don't get why our dollar has fallen so much against all the major economies. 
Just see it as we're an easy target.
The sudden drop has to be hurting our producers... having to provide more for the same etc.
F.Rock


----------



## wayneL (25 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> What the f-k, engineered by the FED, did you get kicked in the head by a horse.



It's my opinion bro. It might be right, it might be wrong. 

We'll see.

Just watch their actions... and don't be a tosser.


----------



## satanoperca (25 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> I value others opinions, what's your stance devil fish? Cheers.
> F.Rock



This wasn't engineered by the US, but rather the challenger in the global stacks for being the global super power.
Join the dots


----------



## wayneL (25 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> This wasn't engineered by the US, but rather the challenger in the global stacks for being the global super power.
> Join the dots



Which dots?
There are a lot of dots, mate.


----------



## frugal.rock (25 March 2020)

Dots = timelines of events....
Makes things a bit more obvious when compared to charts.
Have noticed particular events that impacted our markets.
Eg, 3 day blip early October 2019 etc... need to go back way further than that though to get the picture...

F.Rock


----------



## moXJO (25 March 2020)

My next worry would be war. 
China wasn't arming the South China sea for shts  and giggles. The also own a lot of ports after their debt traps with micro nations, almost all the way to Australia. 

US is pissed they have to spend trillions.  Will be a lot of insults and cold war tactics from here.


----------



## satanoperca (25 March 2020)

moXJO said:


> My next worry would be war.
> China wasn't arming the South China sea for shts  and giggles. The also own a lot of ports after their debt traps with micro nations, almost all the way to Australia.
> 
> US is pissed they have to spend trillions.  Will be a lot of insults and cold war tactics from here.




Ah, some of the dots


----------



## satanoperca (25 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> Which dots?
> There are a lot of dots, mate.



You are wise enough, just join them together.


----------



## moXJO (25 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Ah, some of the dots



I'm aware of their 300 year plan....


----------



## satanoperca (25 March 2020)

moXJO said:


> I'm aware of their 300 year plan....



The dots get closer.


----------



## frugal.rock (26 March 2020)

So I am not the only one wishing to tread carefully, walking on eggshells..

F.Rock


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> I don't get why our dollar has fallen so much against all the major economies.
> Just see it as we're an easy target.
> The sudden drop has to be hurting our producers... having to provide more for the same etc.
> F.Rock



This is our first time at the QE party, maybe the money markets think we wont recover, as well as a first world economy?


----------



## frugal.rock (26 March 2020)

I think, they think...
"Our land abounds in nature's gifts, of beauty rich and rare..."
and want a piece of it for themselves.


----------



## Humid (26 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> I think, they think...
> "Our land abounds in nature's gifts, of beauty rich and rare..."
> and want a piece of it for themselves.




Who are they going to sell their junk to.....themselves?


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2020)

Humid said:


> Who are they going to sell their junk to.....themselves?



So true Humid, but maybe that is what they want to do, nothing wrong with having a holiday home in the South Pacific.


----------



## Humid (26 March 2020)

They should annex Japan and learn how to build a car


----------



## frugal.rock (26 March 2020)

Humid said:


> Who are they going to sell their junk to.....themselves?



?
Say company A buys a substantial quantity of its raw product from company B.
Company A is huge. Company B tiny and an easy target and ignorant but with massive underlying value.
Takeover.... rocket science?

F.Rock


----------



## jbocker (26 March 2020)

Go Easy guys, I am just trying to worry about not catching a cold.


----------



## Humid (26 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> ?
> Say company A buys a substantial quantity of its raw product from company B.
> Company A is huge. Company B tiny and an easy target and ignorant but with massive underlying value.
> Takeover.... rocket science?
> ...



Or they could build their own
Like Citic


----------



## PZ99 (26 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> This is our first time at the QE party, maybe the money markets think we wont recover, as well as a first world economy?



We hardly ever do. Australia is historically one of the slowest nations to recover from economic down turns. The recession we had to have didn't really end until the late 90's for many people in the very industries that have been shut down this time.

One fears all govt narrative will be about job creation for the next decade or more. And govt debt.


----------



## frugal.rock (26 March 2020)

"She'll be right, mate. Just tie it up with wire."
"Oi, Sheila, where's the wire gone"
"We ran out, waiting for the next slow boat from ...."

Really hope we bring back some manufacturing out of this, process our own ore concentrate etc.
F.Rock


----------



## PZ99 (26 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> "She'll be right, mate. Just tie it up with wire."
> "Oi, Sheila, where's the wire gone"
> "We ran out, waiting for the next slow boat from ...."
> 
> ...



Agreed. We need to diversify more. Funny thing is when you go back through some of the political debates from around 10 years ago leaders from both sides warned us of the perilous nature of having too many eggs in one basket(case).


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> "She'll be right, mate. Just tie it up with wire."
> "Oi, Sheila, where's the wire gone"
> "We ran out, waiting for the next slow boat from ...."
> 
> ...



That’ll never happen unless we are prepared to accepted paying those that work in manufacturing $2 per/hr


----------



## Knobby22 (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> That’ll never happen unless we are prepared to accepted paying those that work in manufacturing $2 per/hr



Unlike Germany, with 6 weeks annual leave a year? Just have to be smart about it.
New Zealand also has a large manufacturing component that competes internationaly.


----------



## Humid (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> That’ll never happen unless we are prepared to accepted paying those that work in manufacturing $2 per/hr



Maybe build homes and not investment property


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Unlike Germany, with 6 weeks annual leave a year? Just have to be smart about it.
> New Zealand also has a large manufacturing component that competes internationaly.



That’s an interesting point...China has a massive manufacturing industry which has basically been built off the back of cheap and exploitive labour and and almost complete distress for OH&S. Yet as you point out Germany does to but it hasn’t been built on the same basis as China. Why has Germany managed to do this surely there are massive government incentives and subsidies?


----------



## qldfrog (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> That’s an interesting point...China has a massive manufacturing industry which has basically been built off the back of cheap and exploitive labour and and almost complete distress for OH&S. Yet as you point out Germany does to but it hasn’t been built on the same basis as China. Why has Germany managed to do this surely there are massive government incentives and subsidies?



Germany: intelligence, technical education and priority engineer is a title like Doctor or Professor here, the multitude of advanced SME
Hard working mentality, no class warface spirit and Unions working with the management not against, so reasonable compromises and real sharing of both profit but also hard times when required
Here we had a british class warfare mind :see the number of union and labour straight of British background 
Thugs vs posh arrogant piece of crap top business figures a la Bond Packer
Does not matter much anymore as we have no union or industry left...


----------



## jbocker (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> That’s an interesting point...China has a massive manufacturing industry which has basically been built off the back of cheap and exploitive labour and and almost complete distress for OH&S. Yet as you point out Germany does to but it hasn’t been built on the same basis as China. Why has Germany managed to do this surely there are massive government incentives and subsidies?



Quality. Loyalty. Ownership. Employment of my kids. Pride. Reputation. Trust. Reliability. Proximity.
Some None All of the above I don't really know. Just guessing what the market expects.


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Germany: intelligence, technical education and priority engineer is a title like Doctor or Professor here, the multitude of advanced SME
> Hard working mentality, no class warface spirit and Unions working with the management not against, so reasonable compromises and real sharing of both profit but also hard times when required
> Here we had a british class warfare mind :see the number of union and labour straight of British background
> Thugs vs posh arrogant piece of crap top business figures a la Bond Packer
> Does not matter much anymore as we have no union or industry left...




Good points Frog, while this certainly hasn't helped us build a world class manufacturing industry I'm not sure it is entirely at fault for the demise of our manufacturing industry. Maybe I'm right may be I'm wrong who knows, but I suspect a large part of our manufacturing decline has been the result of companies chasing a lower manufacturing cost base and to be more cost competitive in the face of increased global competition. Sometimes I wonder whether this is the result of us as consumers demanding lower prices and always shopping based on price. How often to you hear people in Australia complaining about the cost of goods here compared to say for example the US. We are a society that is very mindful of price. Not saying there is anything wrong with that, but the simple fact of the matter is that if Australia is to build up a local manufacturing industry in which workers are paid a good wages,  strong OH&S practices and high product quality standards we will pay more for it that its Chinese counterpart. I think the responsibility of building up a solid manufacturing industry doesn't just lay at the feet of government, but us as consumers play a big part. I think expecting the government to pump in lots of dollars to prop up a manufacturing industry is the wrong way to go (sure the government can offer tax incentives etc) but we can't have our cake and eat it--you can't have low price points on goods if you want great wages, great OH&S, great quality etc. Just my two cents and remember....Holden shut its doors here in Australia because Australian consumers (and parts of the rest of the world) didn't want to buy their cars anymore. No point owning the world's best Chinese restaurant if everyone wants Italian food


----------



## CBerg (26 March 2020)

Most people don't think outside the box so a high labour cost stops most people right there.

I don't understand given how cheap solar & wind power can be, not to mention less ongoing pollution once installed, that we haven't thought about bringing back a lot of high energy intense industries such as smelting raw materials into semi-finished form.

Smurf might understand the economics better than me but from a laymans thinking, I'd think a large upfront investment for practically zero cost on going electricity could be utilised very effectively by a lot of industries. I just don't think many people have sat down & thought what's possible if electricity effectively became a once off cost.


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2020)

CBerg said:


> Most people don't think outside the box so a high labour cost stops most people right there.
> 
> I don't understand given how cheap solar & wind power can be, not to mention less ongoing pollution once installed, that we haven't thought about bringing back a lot of high energy intense industries such as smelting raw materials into semi-finished form.
> 
> Smurf might understand the economics better than me but from a laymans thinking, I'd think a large upfront investment for practically zero cost on going electricity could be utilised very effectively by a lot of industries. I just don't think many people have sat down & thought what's possible if electricity effectively became a once off cost.



We have discussed it a lot in the 'the future of energy generation and storage' thread.


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

CBerg said:


> I'd think a large upfront investment




You're probably right, but large upfront investments mean long term strategic vision, strategy and execution which is something many public companies and governments struggle with in today short term environment


----------



## qldfrog (26 March 2020)

Indeed Australia has no planning.
Back to the germany vs here.. Think education even at lower level, tafe like.german university uni is not to get more profit from more chinese chinese students, i would also bet that their chancellor are earning less adjusted of course then here.
Lastly, australian on min wages and welfare recipients here have got it vety very good.i know the left will shout but with real estate costs here..a main performance issue..min wages and welfare are too high against world standards and higher salaries..not ceo but top middle class too low to be competitive internationally
So a taxation issue 
If you want s flat society with low difference between bottom and top.. And not talking 1pc,
You end up woth a lowest society
Add to this no support for entrepreneurs..i mean real.. entrepreneurs are tomorrow business, here we mostly have big international corporations
We can show off the Jira and other startups but i would like to see someone starting a mill, a food manufacturing, it companies to do a proper job of centerlink systems etc
Bank attitude to loan tax rate etc
As people following my thread now, when planning to open a second branch of our Chinese startup, i i discarded the Australian option, and we went Japan.yet i was
commuting to china 3weeks a month so personally would have been better by far.
If tax, regulations are not changed we will remain stuck and head toward the Chile of China, slave to the master


----------



## Smurf1976 (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> That’ll never happen unless we are prepared to accepted paying those that work in manufacturing $2 per/hr



Or we stop demanding that manufactured goods are cheap and designed to fail. 

The world didn't end when things were built to last but cost twice what they do today.


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Or we stop demanding that manufactured goods are cheap and designed to fail.



Indeed and a good point, I think consumers have definitely moved to a mindset of cheaper lower cost disposable items instead of quality goods built to last but at a higher cost. China v Germany: China is the cheap disposable model and I think Germany is the quality items built to last


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> Indeed and a good point, I think consumers have definitely moved to a mindset of cheaper lower cost disposable items instead of quality goods built to last but at a higher cost.



The other thing is a lot of manufacturing now, isn't labour intensive, so wages become a very small cost in the process.
Take for example making a lithium ion battery manufacturing plant, we have all the materials required, why would it be cheaper to send the raw materials than to send completed batteries?
The fact is, we in reality get a pittance for the raw materials, when you consider the price of a battery cell.


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The other thing is a lot of manufacturing now, isn't labour intensive, so wages become a very small cost in the process.
> Take for example making a lithium ion battery manufacturing plant, we have all the materials required, why would it be cheaper to send the raw materials than to send completed batteries?
> The fact is, we in reality get a pittance for the raw materials, when you consider the price of a battery cell.



Yup, Australia is pretty good and shipping raw materials overseas and letting someone else add serious value to those raw materials to push it up the value chain.


----------



## qldfrog (26 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The other thing is a lot of manufacturing now, isn't labour intensive, so wages become a very small cost in the process.
> Take for example making a lithium ion battery manufacturing plant, we have all the materials required, why would it be cheaper to send the raw materials than to send completed batteries?
> The fact is, we in reality get a pittance for the raw materials, when you consider the price of a battery cell.



In case like that, we miss a technical ecosystem: technician to repair maintain, provide a new bord maybe built specifically, then away from market..these batteries are used in stuff that we do not produce here either
And lastly tax
30pc profit tax  does not allow you to attract funders, nor potential owners to jump and go into entrepreneurships...
We are a heavily taxed country which might be ok for established business but not for creating ones


----------



## satanoperca (26 March 2020)

Also add in the mix we do not have a fixed currency.
How many manufacturers that exported went to the wall when the dollar went above 0.90 USD
China has played a brilliant plan.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (26 March 2020)

not going to read the thread  ... too many agendas, i would think. But in the spirit of its title, this could be USA's Suez moment, some think
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-03-18/coronavirus-could-reshape-global-order


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> not going to read the thread  ... too many agendas, i would think. But in the spirit of its title, this could be USA's Suez moment, some think
> https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-03-18/coronavirus-could-reshape-global-order



That Dona,IMO is probably the most pertinent article yet, with regard the virus.
Meanwhile everyone runs around in ever decreasing circles finger pointing, this has been caused by globalisation and it hasn't happened in the last couple of years.
We can't respond to any external threat, because we have offshored all our industries, that goes for most western countries.


----------



## qldfrog (26 March 2020)

no agenda just stating facts, tax rate and paperwork regulations to start a business..this is not a left right issue or should not
I just found a very good in my opinion article not so much about the virus but the virus as a trigger to something which would have come anyway
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/changing-world-order-ray-dalio-1f
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/changing-world-order-ray-dalio-1f
A bit heavy but looking at cycle of empire, low interest rates and parallel with the 1930's


----------



## MovingAverage (26 March 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> not going to read the thread  ... too many agendas, i would think. But in the spirit of its title, this could be USA's Suez moment, some think
> https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-03-18/coronavirus-could-reshape-global-order




how do you know there are agendas if you aren’t going to read it


----------



## kahuna1 (11 April 2020)

Despite this ....

Trump likely will get elected 2020 ..... America is run by the few ...




Even this ....

Awful footage at 500 per pit .... 2 pits ... 1000 being buried 




Not much makes the news




Then again WE .... Australia is NO better in some ways ...

Media .... 



Then with 10 times as many cases...

Same thing ...




Jones who is a Murdoch media stooge ,,,, at best.
Science denier ...

Despite some things ... that would make a guilty Catholic priest blanch ...  even on his Wikipedia page 
John Howard ... fellow climate denier and Morrison's closest confidant ... gave him an AO ... Order Of Australia.

Morrison who took coal into parliament has had his values and beliefs ... on climate issues shaken to the ground. Fellow denier Andrew Constance member for Bega who wanted to debate climate science, well his views changed as Bega electorate was torched.

Morrison listened to science with CV19, Boris in the UK like Trump denied and acted late or not at all for Trump till March,

Morrison has done a good job. Credit where its due. Not so good on bush fires .... he will of course change as he still denied ... or disputed the fires went from bad, to well shocking.

With CV19 .... no issues. Little BS and well Trump.

Far out. Expecting the USA to change ? They all drink the same cool aid and thump their chest about USA and how good it is when Canada next door with 105 of the population will have adjusted for size likely 10% the cases and deaths.

No Trump . USA political system will not change overnight. Choices for 2020 are the same and Biden is a leader of donation driven corporate party and so too Trump, 

I do not doubt in the future anger will replace the shock and fear for many in the USA and radical change will occur not in 2020 but 2024/

Another 4 years of Trump ? A man who scored his actions at 10 out of 10 ? When USA had done 2,000 tests for 329 million by March 2nd or 1% of Canada or Australia adjusted for population ?

Sadly, my question is will the world make it to 2024 ? Not CV19 , but Trumps need to cover up an event that could have been reduced by a lot. He now plans for the peasants to go back to work May 1st when two republican states Florida and Texas did not even enforce stay inside till April 4th.

These states, with barely any testing and well .... they dont care about the peasants, have infection rates 5 times Australia and with 3 weeks inside, all is fine !!

This too will be needed to be covered up and USA people distracted from what is an appalling result.
CV19 is NOT anyone's fault. How nations have dealt with it and Germany and their efficiency tested and contact traced and isolated .... like they would be expected. Others with social norms of kissing on cheeks which, NOT their fault ... spread it twice as fast so Italy and France and Spain ... it is what it is.

Calling it the flu as right wing cretins do, and still do whilst claiming science or their version of it is whatever you like. Trump only likes the 1% mortality rate and when say Italy of the serious infected and tested is around 11% ... France not far behind and those two normally ranked 1 and 2 globally for healthcare systems, heaven help the USA.

That in NY alone instead of 20 deaths at home are now 200 at home, not tested a day .... well ... we will never know.

Lets go back to work with no health insurance in the USA for most, and at $9- an hour to deal with the public. 

Bravo .... Time will change the USA I have no doubt, and likely I expect Ivanka to be on the back to work Peasants USA team and well ... they dont isolate and have much chance of it not spreading for a second wave for the simple reason their LEADER ... is a MORON.

His mixed messaging and downplaying the virus whilst claiming USA is at war and victory was achieved at 15 cases and then 100 and NOW at 500k its safe ? 

USA as a global leader has ended. Tolerance and not laughing outright was in the past Trump reign concealed, will not be the case going forward.

Empire USA is well .... over ... in its dying days with a sociopath in charge it sadly is possibly its most dangerous for its people and the rest of the world. That 100,000 people died in Yemen in 2019 alone under USA actions, this is a mere 5% of those in the middle east killed post 2003. 

Be afraid. Sociopaths have no remorse or even understanding of it.


----------



## $20shoes (13 April 2020)

Saw this on Tumblr this morning. From Carl Sagan in 1995 when the the term "world wide web" would have just started slipping into the minds of most Americans. As general as it is, still quite prescient.


----------



## basilio (13 April 2020)

$20shoes said:


> Saw this on Tumblr this morning. From Carl Sagan in 1995 when the the term "world wide web" would have just started slipping into the minds of most Americans. As general as it is, still quite prescient.
> View attachment 102225



Chilling beyond belief. 
Couldn't have a more accurate description of USA 2020 .


----------



## Investoradam (13 April 2020)

kahuna1 said:


> Despite this ....
> 
> Trump likely will get elected 2020 ..... America is run by the few ...
> 
> ...




Given your terminology science deniers & rants about the Howard government one will automatically assume your an ignorant idiot


----------



## Dona Ferentes (13 April 2020)

After travelling nineteenth-century America, de Tocqueville came to believe one result of democracy was a concentration of each man's attention upon himself.


----------



## frugal.rock (13 April 2020)

Investoradam said:


> Given your terminology science deniers & rants about the Howard government one will automatically assume your an ignorant idiot



Mate, you are entitled to your opinion on the subject. 
How about you voice it rather than go down the denigrating path, especially if it's hit a chord/dis-chord in your outlook?
Please don't look at this as an attack, I would like to have your opinion on the table.


----------



## qldfrog (13 April 2020)

basilio said:


> Chilling beyond belief.
> Couldn't have a more accurate description of USA 2020 .



The whole West inc Australia


----------



## kahuna1 (13 April 2020)

Investoradam said:


> Given your terminology science deniers & rants about the Howard government one will automatically assume your an ignorant idiot




Please dont breed .... keep doing what your doing alone, and staining various socks.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (23 May 2020)

Reflections on what was.... Logistics FAIL

https://www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproj...0/05/22/business/logistics-supply-chains.html


----------



## frugal.rock (31 May 2020)

Link contains mild expletives.


----------



## Bill M (1 June 2020)

This kind of explains the current situation in the USA pretty well.


----------



## qldfrog (1 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> This kind of explains the current situation in the USA pretty well.




But Bill, simple facts are:
Black communities are poorer,
Black citizens are more involved in crime than others, probably due to the first fact.
Sad but is anyone contesting this?
As a result randomly controlling people and NOT controlling blacks more often would then voluntarily not applying law.they do that in France....
Is it sad for law abiding black citizen, yes of course.
But not doing it would discriminate against non black by targeting them more and letting crime go.
Stats can tell what you want them to say.
Context is everything.after we can add the 
wall street are the real crooks blabla bla 
Same at home with aboriginal overrepresentation in criminal system, or drug users...
do we really want 20pc of prisoners to be retired grannies because that is their share in society?


----------



## Knobby22 (1 June 2020)

Shouldn't the President be looking for solutions? Instead he is making it worse.
Give them some hope. In reality he is working out ways to make it harder for them to vote and whipping up his sheep.


----------



## Bill M (1 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Is it sad for law abiding black citizen, yes of course.



The problem is that the Police are so racist in the USA that it is beyond belief that it still goes on today. Each person should be treated the same but this is clearly not the case in the USA. This guy was just picking up rubbish outside his residence. Total unwarranted harassment and then when the white guy turned up he was not checked and everything was alright. When the government and their Police Forces **** on their own people then that's when the kind of riots we are seeing now happens. Enjoy the video.


----------



## rederob (1 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> But Bill, simple facts are:
> Black communities are poorer,
> Black citizens are more involved in crime than others, probably due to the first fact.
> Sad but is anyone contesting this?
> ...



There is no logical equivalence between systemic inequality and morality.
Women doing the same work in Australia are paid less than men - that's a systemic issue.
Blacks being poorer in the USA is equally systemic.
Bleeding the air of another's life from their body without reasonable cause (given we are talking about what a police officer did) is morally reprehensible at every level.
What you have done is present a justification for immoral behaviours because you did not think through the meaning of your post.


----------



## qldfrog (1 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> The problem is that the Police are so racist in the USA that it is beyond belief that it still goes on today. Each person should be treated the same but this is clearly not the case in the USA. This guy was just picking up rubbish outside his residence. Total unwarranted harassment and then when the white guy turned up he was not checked and everything was alright. When the government and their Police Forces **** on their own people then that's when the kind of riots we are seeing now happens. Enjoy the video.




The riots are here because the left wants war with Trump, the cop involved there did a murder, i would not deny that, hundreds of people most of them not black are killed by police, often in imho not reasonable way.they were killed under Obama and the US was not in riots.
From memory, cops kill more than one person a day in the US, most of them once again, not black.
The problem is not black death, it is police death

Do you want to check how many people were killed in Australia by our police?
Police all over the world are turning into swat teams , and ours as well ,and are above the Law.
With technology now, if goverments want to, they can control this thru head cameras.but governments need to control the 99.9%, you me us
Police to control; hatred,races, left /right to divide and conquer.
The Bezos and Soros of the world , basically the Davos clique can be happy and sleep well while we fight Trump China or covid19,ourselves
Slaves and masters, and the puppets seem to be happy playing their roles.do not be fooled


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> The problem is that the Police are so racist in the USA that it is beyond belief that it still goes on today. Each person should be treated the same but this is clearly not the case in the USA. This guy was just picking up rubbish outside his residence. Total unwarranted harassment and then when the white guy turned up he was not checked and everything was alright. When the government and their Police Forces **** on their own people then that's when the kind of riots we are seeing now happens. Enjoy the video.





As much as I agree with you that police there are racists this video isn't a good example of it.

It was a random ID check which happens all the time where I live in Mt Druitt. It's compulsory to comply with it and if you've done nothing wrong you're on your way so who cares ?
That guy had his own reason to be obstructive and the aggro ensued. Most other people would've complied but this guy chose to be different and was therefore treated as such.

If anything, it's the video uploader who is using reverse racism because s/he is saying this only happened because the guy was black.

If you want to be like everybody else, then do it.


----------



## rederob (1 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> The riots are here because the left wants war with Trump



George Floyd had nothing to do with any political movement, and the riots have occurred because of a continuing injustice which the President refuses to recognise after many days now.
It is a failure of leadership which did not occur under previous administrations. 


qldfrog said:


> The problem is not black death, it is police death



Zero evidence, which is what you are good at!


qldfrog said:


> Do you want to check how many people were killed in Australia by our police?



How is that relevant?


qldfrog said:


> Police all over the world are turning into swat teams , and ours as well ,and are above the Law.



Sorry, policy are definitely *NOT* above the law: that thinking is what precipitated the US riots.


qldfrog said:


> Police to control; hatred,races, left /right to divide and conquer.



You have no idea what policing involves, do you.  That's not the role of police at all!


----------



## Knobby22 (1 June 2020)

The riots are here because of many factors.


----------



## qldfrog (1 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> The riots are here because of many factors.



That summarises it well, anti trump,generation of media and school endoctrinement, poverty, social escalator stopped, replaced by welfare, and lately covid crisis and restriction, police state,loss of thevindividual and real community, tribalisation ,left right divide


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Women doing the same work in Australia are paid less than men - that's a systemic issue.




That is not true. It is illegal in Australia.


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2020)

basilio said:


> Chilling beyond belief.
> Couldn't have a more accurate description of USA 2020 .



Its true of most first World countries, not just America, it is just the media is so America centric that we dont think it is happening here.


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> The problem is that the Police are so racist in the USA that it is beyond belief that it still goes on today. Each person should be treated the same but this is clearly not the case in the USA. This guy was just picking up rubbish outside his residence. Total unwarranted harassment and then when the white guy turned up he was not checked and everything was alright. When the government and their Police Forces **** on their own people then that's when the kind of riots we are seeing now happens. Enjoy the video.




I watched a good movie on Friday, which highlighted the problem, based on factual incidents, called Just Mercy, worth a watch


----------



## rederob (1 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> That summarises it well, anti trump,generation of media and school endoctrinement, poverty, social escalator stopped, replaced by welfare, and lately covid crisis and restriction, police state,loss of thevindividual and real community, tribalisation ,left right divide



Why not use data to make a claim.
You are wrong again - and you have a healthy club of followers who also fail to use data or logic.
Awards provide a basis for equal pay, but not all employers pay their workers basic award rates.


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Women doing the same work in Australia are paid less than men - that's a systemic issue.
> .



That would be a breach of Australian law and subject to prosecution, I'd be interested if you could supply any evidence of such


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Why not use data to make a claim.
> You are wrong again - and you have a healthy club of followers who also fail to use data or logic.
> Awards provide a basis for equal pay, but not all employers pay their workers basic award rates.



Oh my, Robbie, your lack of understanding of statistics, which you have accused others of, is profound.

if you do not understand the factors in bit statistic you have quoted then I'm sorry there is no hope for you.


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> That would be a breach of Australian law and subject to prosecution, I'd be interested if you could supply any evidence of such



Your right a lot of Australian companies are paying men and women the wrong amount lol


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> Your right a lot of Australian companies are paying men and women the wrong amount lol



Apart from being puerile and ideologically opposed just for the hell of it, what are you even talking about?

If incorrect amounts are being paid there is recourse through the law, whether male or female.


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

It's called wage theft.....you won't see it on Sky
Think of large restaurants, grocery stores as a clue you won't find it under your rock


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> It's called wage theft.....you won't see it on Sky
> Think of large restaurants, grocery stores as a clue you won't find it under your rock



Oh it's even under my rock, bud. There are of course remedies for those who have been underpaid. but that hasn't got much to do with the purported gender pay Gap has it?


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> Oh it's even under my rock, bud. There are of course remedies for those who have been underpaid. but that hasn't got much to do with the gender pay Gap has it?



Which has what to do with the thread title
Einstein


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> Which has what to do with the thread title
> Einstein



Robbee bright it up, bro.


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Why not use data to make a claim.
> You are wrong again - and you have a healthy club of followers who also fail to use data or logic.
> Awards provide a basis for equal pay, but not all employers pay their workers basic award rates.





rederob said: ↑
Women doing the same work in Australia are paid less than men - that's a systemic issue.


From that article that you base your statement on   https://www.wgea.gov.au/data/fact-sheets/australias-gender-pay-gap-statistics

" The gender pay gap (GPG) is the difference between women’s and men’s average weekly full-time equivalent earnings, expressed as a percentage of men’s earnings. It is a measure of women’s overall position in the paid workforce and *does not compare like roles*.

You are so full of sh@t!


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> Robbee bright it up, bro.





wayneL said:


> Robbee bright it up, bro.



And you call me puerile.......he started it lol
I bet that was you in the class of the all boys school


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> And you call me puerile.......he started it lol
> I bet that was you in the class of the all boys school



It's puerile to counter an inaccurate point that was brought up in a debate?


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> It's puerile to counter an inaccurate point that was brought up in a debate?




What was inaccurate again?


----------



## rederob (1 June 2020)

dutchie said:


> rederob said: ↑
> Women doing the same work in Australia are paid less than men - that's a systemic issue.
> 
> 
> ...



Read the link and don't jump to ill informed conclusions.
For a gender pay gap to exist at the level in the chart will require many occupational areas to pay men more than women.  That's a statistical triviality that any competent person should understand, and was made clear had you read further:
"*WGEA data for non-manager occupations shows a gender pay gap in favour of men across all occupational categories.*"​Furthermore:
*"Overall, WGEA data shows that in 2018-19 the gender pay gap was higher among managers compared to non-managers."
*​


----------



## dutchie (1 June 2020)

A black female Doctor is paid more than a white male supermarket check out operator.
Not only a gender pay gap but a race pay gap.


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Read the link and don't jump to ill informed conclusions.
> For a gender pay gap to exist at the level in the chart will require many occupational areas to pay men more than women.  That's a statistical triviality that any competent person should understand, and was made clear had you read further:
> "*WGEA data for non-manager occupations shows a gender pay gap in favour of men across all occupational categories.*"​Furthermore:
> *"Overall, WGEA data shows that in 2018-19 the gender pay gap was higher among managers compared to non-managers."
> *​



Again, that would be illegal. Give me just one example of where like-for-like, performance for performance, hour for hour, where women are legally paid less than men.

It simply does not exist and for the third time now, it would be illegal.


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> What was inaccurate again?



Have you moved on oh puerile one
Even more childish is to label people and not be prepared for a good old fashioned labelling
The smell of horse $hit has once again clouded you horsebox


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Zzz...zzz....zzz


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> Zzz...zzz....zzz





wayneL said:


> Zzz...zzz....zzz



The ultimate childish answer from a over educated flog


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

A whole life spent playing with the rich peoples toys gives you zero street cred.......
BRO


----------



## Smurf1976 (1 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> It was a random ID check which happens all the time where I live in Mt Druitt.



Assuming you mean Mt Druitt in Sydney, I question how someone would check ID?

Sure, a Police Officer could ask to see some ID and you are perfectly entitled to not have or be carrying any. End of story.


----------



## Bill M (1 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Assuming you mean Mt Druitt in Sydney, I question how someone would check ID?
> 
> Sure, a Police Officer could ask to see some ID and you are perfectly entitled to not have or be carrying any. End of story.



That's exactly right. We do not have ID's in Australia, that idea got thrown out decades ago. My wife has never had a license and apart from her passport she has no other ID and she never carries her passport and even that "does not show where you live" like that Officer was demanding. 

In all my years from birth until now I have never ever been asked for my ID, other than for when I was driving a car. Harassing someone for picking up trash outside the place where they live is nothing but police harassment. That video shown was from the Officers on body cam. He got stood down with pay and then he left his job. Apparently he broke 2 codes of conduct "no probable cause and he had no right to ask for the guys age" so they said. Is USA really the land of the free? I think not.....


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> The ultimate childish answer from a over educated flog



I'm living rent free in your head buddy


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

In your jodhpurs complaining about the dark 
and no smell of horse $hit


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Assuming you mean Mt Druitt in Sydney, I question how someone would check ID?
> 
> Sure, a Police Officer could ask to see some ID and you are perfectly entitled to not have or be carrying any. End of story.




Mate if the cops want to bang you up they will bang you up and collude with others at the station to make it fit
Come Monday you have the option to fight it and waste months of your life or pay a fine and move on


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> In your jodhpurs complaining about the dark
> and no smell of horse $hit



Let's take it to p.m., bro.

I can play with your mind there without us p1ssing everybody else off


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> Let's take it to p.m., bro.
> 
> I can play with your mind there without us p1ssing everybody else off



Is like behind the library after school.....
You tried before 
I’m still not your friend 
Your a flog mate who tries to use big words to belittle people
Keep posting here so people can see your true colours


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> Mate if the cops want to bang you up they will bang you up and collude with others at the station to make it fit
> Come Monday you have the option to fight it and waste months of your life or pay a fine and move on



https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11...wa-police-win-fight-for-compensation/10548772
Here’s an example and look at their cred
Try that on as a nobody


----------



## wayneL (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> Is like behind the library after school.....
> You tried before
> I’m still not your friend
> Your a flog mate who tries to use big words to belittle people
> Keep posting here so people can see your true colours



Wait, so you're a sesquipedalianophobe? What happened to diversity and tolerance?


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> Wait, so you're a sesquipedalianophobe? What happened to diversity and tolerance?







Humid said:


> A whole life spent playing with the rich peoples toys gives you zero street cred.......
> BRO



In case you missed it


----------



## Knobby22 (1 June 2020)

Humid, cool down.


----------



## frugal.rock (1 June 2020)




----------



## Smurf1976 (1 June 2020)

Humid said:


> Mate if the cops want to bang you up they will bang you up and collude with others at the station to make it fit



That has nothing to do with the fact that someone living in Australia is under no obligation to carry, or even have, any form of ID except under very specific circumstances (eg some states require having your drivers licence with you when driving or an employer may require that employers carry company issued ID whilst at work).

In any other situation though, well you're entitled to walk the streets all day and night if you wish without carrying ID. As such, there's no obligation to produce something you aren't required to have in the first place. That's in Australia but the comment I'm responding to refers to a suburb of Sydney.


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Humid, cool down.



Only on my 4th IPA
Just getting started
Something about the heat and the kitchen


----------



## Humid (1 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> That has nothing to do with the fact that someone living in Australia is under no obligation to carry, or even have, any form of ID except under very specific circumstances (eg some states require having your drivers licence with you when driving or an employer may require that employers carry company issued ID whilst at work).
> 
> In any other situation though, well you're entitled to walk the streets all day and night if you wish without carrying ID. As such, there's no obligation to produce something you aren't required to have in the first place. That's in Australia but the comment I'm responding to refers to a suburb of Sydney.




Well you have lived a sheltered life if you haven’t seen that


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Assuming you mean Mt Druitt in Sydney, I question how someone would check ID?
> 
> Sure, a Police Officer could ask to see some ID and you are perfectly entitled to not have or be carrying any. End of story.



No one said you have to carry ID. You still have to provide your details on request from a police officer.

That guy blatantly refused to comply with what sounded like a reasonable request from the law.

Police in Mt Druitt are far less tolerant. Handcuffs wouldn't been out after 2 minutes of that crap.

Double stabbing here over the weekend - there's a reason the police do what they do.

If we can't respect the law - we end up like the US. No thanks.


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> That's exactly right. We do not have ID's in Australia, that idea got thrown out decades ago. My wife has never had a license and apart from her passport she has no other ID and she never carries her passport and even that "does not show where you live" like that Officer was demanding.
> 
> In all my years from birth until now I have never ever been asked for my ID, other than for when I was driving a car. Harassing someone for picking up trash outside the place where they live is nothing but police harassment. That video shown was from the Officers on body cam. He got stood down with pay and then he left his job. Apparently he broke 2 codes of conduct "no probable cause and he had no right to ask for the guys age" so they said. Is USA really the land of the free? I think not.....



Nothing wrong with what you're saying but no part of that video convinced me the guy was being harassed simply because he was black.


----------



## Smurf1976 (1 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> No one said you have to carry ID. You still have to provide your details on request from a police officer.




Point taken but ultimately all you're doing in giving ID is making a statement. It's an offence to provide inaccurate information but there's no requirement to be carrying any official proof except under very specific circumstances.

In my life thus far, the only times I've been asked for ID are in circumstances where the reason seemed entirely legitimate: Entering a country, checking in to fly or board a ship or long distance train, entering nightclubs etc, to an employer, to a bank, police, post office, government authority etc in dealings initiated by me, checking into hotels, etc.

If anyone, uniformed police included, were to just randomly stop me in the street and ask who I am without there being some apparent circumstance that would justify needing to know then I'd be immediately suspicious as to both their legitimacy and as to my own safety being in that location. It's not at all common, at least not anywhere I've ever been, indeed I've never had it happen.

Simply asking people who they are is pointless unless they're checking that against some database or are looking for a specific answer which triggers some sort of response. Just knowing that I'm Joe Bloggs isn't much use in itself.


----------



## PZ99 (1 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Point taken but ultimately all you're doing in giving ID is making a statement. It's an offence to provide inaccurate information but there's no requirement to be carrying any official proof except under very specific circumstances.
> 
> In my life thus far, the only times I've been asked for ID are in circumstances where the reason seemed entirely legitimate: Entering a country, checking in to fly or board a ship or long distance train, entering nightclubs etc, to an employer, to a bank, police, post office, government authority etc in dealings initiated by me, checking into hotels, etc.
> 
> ...



Well put it this way. If you had been walking outside anywhere during the lockdown you would've been asked to identify yourself


----------



## Joe90 (2 June 2020)




----------



## jbocker (2 June 2020)




----------



## aus_trader (2 June 2020)

Phew , I read nearly 3 pages mostly off topic with a lot of personal attacks in between... 

With regards to off-topic gender pay differences, let me just say it used to be the case years ago, but women have fought hard for their rights and these days it's pretty par for most professions. I say most professions because it's fixed/award pay for the role e.g. a teacher, nurse or retail assistant, regardless of gender.

However there are circumstances where I see it differs, but it's not because of gender discrimination but due to areas that women are just entering into i.e. young industries, which will equalise once mature. I am talking about woman cricketers and footy players that represent the country for example who would be paid less than the equivalent male at national level...at the moment.

Anyway getting back on the topic @frugal.rock had started, looks like our A$ is gaining ground against the US$


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> If you had been walking outside anywhere during the lockdown you would've been asked to identify yourself



Around here at least no such thing occurred and for the record yes I walk down the street most days. Not once did anyone ask me who I was, and I wouldn't expect them to given there's no law precluding walking on a footpath so long as social distancing is maintained.

If that sort of thing is going on in the US then the chaos is starting to make more sense since randomly asking people who they are isn't going to fix any actual problem. It's a visible exercise of power and control for the sake of it and that tends to end badly.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> Anyway getting back on the topic @frugal.rock had started, looks like our A$ is gaining ground against the US$



I take that as a bullish sign for the stock market too.

Risk on.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> With regards to off-topic gender pay differences, let me just say it used to be the case years ago, but women have fought hard for their rights and these days it's pretty par for most professions.



Others may vary but where I've worked, gender simply hasn't been an input to the process of determining what someone gets paid. Zero difference male versus female doing the same work.

At a guess though it probably does matter more in small business which in general wouldn't have the same level of formality around pay rates etc as big business or government tends to have.

Even as a tourist though I've seen some seriously dodgy things in the US in terms of employer versus employee relations. Couldn't not see it when it's happening right in front of the customer.

Add that sort of thing to the list of things which raises stress and tensions among the masses just waiting for a spark.....


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Around here at least no such thing occurred and for the record yes I walk down the street most days. Not once did anyone ask me who I was, and I wouldn't expect them to given there's no law precluding walking on a footpath so long as social distancing is maintained.
> 
> If that sort of thing is going on in the US then the chaos is starting to make more sense since randomly asking people who they are isn't going to fix any actual problem but it's a sure way to stir people up if it's being done routinely. It's an exercise of power and control for the sake of it and that tends to end badly.



It's definitely a power trip. No argument there. Where I live it's the lesser of two evils 

PS... where I work, the gender pay gap is gone but the gender *work* gap is still there.

Favouritism with the bosses is the real discrimination and that ranges from the workplace to the family court


----------



## Bill M (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Well put it this way. If you had been walking outside anywhere during the lockdown you would've been asked to identify yourself



No exactly right. I am an exercise walker and I walked everyday in different directions and locations, including malls, streets, post office, the park, on the main highway and not once was I asked or harassed by police for ID. It is not something Australian Police do. I just wasn't allowed to sit down anywhere or congregate but otherwise life was normal for me. They gave us much more leeway than what I could ever expect.


----------



## Bill M (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Nothing wrong with what you're saying but no part of that video convinced me the guy was being harassed simply because he was black.



Looking at that video ask yourself this question. If the older nice white guy employee at the end of the video was picking up the trash like the student was do you think the Police would even bother stopping and questioning him? I don't think so. As soon as he appeared at the end and vouched for the student everything was ok, no ID checks, no nothing. Why is it no ID checks were made on the older white guy but for the student the Officer had his hands on weapon ready to shoot him and had to call for back up?


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> Looking at that video ask yourself this question. If the older nice white guy employee at the end of the video was picking up the trash like the student was do you think the Police would even bother stopping and questioning him? I don't think so. As soon as he appeared at the end and vouched for the student everything was ok, no ID checks, no nothing. Why is it no ID checks were made on the older white guy but for the student the Officer had his hands on weapon ready to shoot him and had to call for back up?



The older white guy was called in to verify the student so it's fair to assume they already knew who he was. And he was far more cooperative than the student.  The student was obstructionist and became aggressive. It's a massive red flag. I'm also curious why the issues of people hurling abuse at the police isn't condemned every time this debate is raised ?

It's the dick puseys of this world who abuse dying police doing their duty that cause me to avoid joining the hate bandwagon of one sided views as encouraged by the media and lapped up by the sympathisers of law breakers.

The question you didn't ask is why were the police even there in the first place ?
Did someone complain about the student loitering or something ? Was the complainant racist ?

The other thing I'm surprised about is why the frequently misused "Woke" moniker hasn't been put into this debate because this is the very subject that the word was associated with to start with.

One suspects if these Warriors of Woke get their hands on Trumpy they'll give him the Gaddafi bayonet right up the backside and open him up like a tin of baked beans


----------



## Junior (2 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> Others may vary but where I've worked, gender simply hasn't been an input to the process of determining what someone gets paid. Zero difference male versus female doing the same work.
> 
> At a guess though it probably does matter more in small business which in general wouldn't have the same level of formality around pay rates etc as big business or government tends to have.




I've been in small to medium-sized financial planning business for 15 years.  I've never witnessed or known of any gender discrimination when it comes to pay.  In fact, female advisers are in high demand and have significant bargaining power these days, I would say it's swung in the other direction.

From what I see it's the same in most industries.  

Average pay across the board will always be imbalanced, there are biological differences between men and women.  Women have babies, men do not, and this has an impact on career.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 June 2020)

Junior said:


> I've been in small to medium-sized financial planning business for 15 years.  I've never witnessed or known of any gender discrimination when it comes to pay.  In fact, female advisers are in high demand and have significant bargaining power these days, I would say it's swung in the other direction.
> 
> From what I see it's the same in most industries.
> 
> Average pay across the board will always be imbalanced, there are biological differences between men and women.  Women have babies, men do not, and this has an impact on career.



In my industry it is the same, if you are a woman graduate in Engineering to improve gender diversity, companies will fight to get you, it is the male graduates having trouble getting jobs.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> As much as I agree with you that police there are racists this video isn't a good example of it.
> *It was a random ID check* which happens all the time where I live in Mt Druitt.



You did not pay attention to what went on.
The officer had earlier seen the student sitting on his dormitory patio, then confronted him when he went *collecting trash in front his premises.*
The student provided his name, address and his student card *AND *offered to buzz the officer in to talk to the building superintendent.
This was still not enough, apparently.
You went on to add today that "The student was obstructionist and became aggressive," whereas the student actually went on doing his job peacefully.  
It was the officer who escalated matters *and *failed to take the student up on the offer to talk to someone who could confirm his story.
No reasonable person could have determined that the officer was going to arrest the student for trespass as not only was it blindingly obvious the student was collecting trash, there had been no reports of concern that a trespass was being committed in broad daylight. 
The fact that a student card was presented and work was being done in front of the student dormitory apparently informed the officer of .... absolutely *nothing.
*
As @Bill M  points out, had a white person been doing the same, the white officer would not have blinked.
The level of stupidity that was shown by the officer reflects why so many in America are concerned about the ingrained injustice that needs to be ridden of.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

@rederob
_"had a white person been doing the same, the white officer would not have blinked."_

I don't believe that in this case. Please provide unequivocal proof


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> @rederob
> _"had a white person been doing the same, the white officer would not have blinked."_
> 
> I don't believe that in this case. Please provide unequivocal proof



If you do not believe it, then you need to offer a justification for the officer's actions.  Alternatively, find another case that is similar for a white person.
The police department knew he stuffed up and made statements as to his poor handling of the situation.
The unequivocal proof lies in what *did *happen.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

The only thing proven was the cop didn't handle the situation properly.

That does not mean he was being racist.

He asked "What unit are you in".  Response: "I don't have to tell you that". Red flag.
_
"If you have ID with an address that would be great"
"F*cking unbelievable man"
_
No sympathy from me and nothing remotely racist. Just pointless obstruction from dude.

" An internal investigation found the officer violated 2 department policies but did not conclude he was racially biased."

Yep that sums it up for me as well.


----------



## qldfrog (2 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> In my industry it is the same, if you are a woman graduate in Engineering to improve gender diversity, companies will fight to get you, it is the male graduates having trouble getting jobs.



Exactly, to name one major, the mining giant wants equality of gender in the workplace, which means as we have a higher proportion of site miners being male by far, it is very hard for a male to find employment in the brisbane head office which are favouring females by far..but hey on the company overall number they are bridging the gap...
Obviously at no point does anyone care about abilities, just sex..
Which in itself is a huge warning sign in term of overall performance of these giants in term of long term investment


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> The only thing proven was the cop didn't handle the situation properly.
> 
> That does not mean he was being racist.
> 
> ...



Again, you refuse to address the issue what prompted the officer's actions.  
There was no crime in progress, nor reported.

You seem to want to base your defence on other actions, so how is providing your address *not* adequate?  There is only one door into the dormitory!
What other actions did the officer take to determine the student might be trespassing?
Finally, as many here already pointed out, ID's don't necessarily have an address - I have over a dozen cards with my photo and other information, but none have an address.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Again, you refuse to address the issue what prompted the officer's actions.
> There was no crime in progress, nor reported.
> 
> You seem to want to base your defence on other actions, so how is providing your address *not* adequate?  There is only one door into the dormitory!
> ...



Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?

All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.

I don't buy it.


----------



## Junior (2 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Exactly, to name one major, the mining giant wants equality of gender in the workplace, which means as we have a higher proportion of site miners being male by far, it is very hard for a male to find employment in the brisbane head office which are favouring females by far..but hey on the company overall number they are bridging the gap...
> Obviously at no point does anyone care about abilities, just sex..
> Which in itself is a huge warning sign in term of overall performance of these giants in term of long term investment




A friend of mine is working on major Rail projects in Melbourne...they are desperate for gender equality.  Any woman who applies for a job in rail is a shoe-in, amongst a sea of male applicants.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?
> 
> All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.
> 
> I don't buy it.



I know what you want to see.
Police react to reports of crime, or crimes in progress.
*Neither was in play.*
Moreover, none of your points hold water.
Continuing to lawfully work as required as part of the student's work-study program meets no sane person's definition of "someone wanting to be a tough guy."
Being told the means to collect rubbish constitutes carrying a weapon was farcical, as was the number of police who came to back up the demented officer.
You seem to share Trump's grip on reality.


----------



## Austwide (2 June 2020)

Well I thought it was age related, not color.


----------



## Bill M (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.



Except that it was the Police Officers body cam video. The student made no videos, all he wanted to do was pick up the rubbish around his accommodations and he nearly got shot for doing it.


----------



## sptrawler (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?
> 
> All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.
> 
> I don't buy it.



The problem I see is the only ones expected to behave civilly are the police, when mobs wreak havoc day after day and police who are just getting paid a wage are being physically abused every day by lawbreakers, eventually a policeman will crack.

A lot of people just want an excuse to behave badly, when that goes wrong, well laying blame becomes difficult. Is it the agitator for agitating, or the agitated for reacting?

I've had my fair share of trouble with the police, but never envied their position, when a certain group of people cause 90% of your troubles your expectation of trouble increases when dealing with them.
The other point people forget is, the police are trained to be assertive and not take crap, this is done to avoid situations escalating and more severe force being required.
PZ99 is spot on, answer the question if the question isn't unreasonable, then get on your way, you can't have police being assertive when acting on your behalf, then not being assertive when you feel like abusing them.
Just my opinion.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> *You* seem to share Trump's grip on reality.



First of all rederob, I respect your point of view on this so there's no need for you to lose this debate by resorting to a personal attack against me - like others before you, you'll only look like a goose if you go down that path. Stick to the point.

I didn't link being a tough guy with continuing to lawfully work.
I linked being a tough with the potty language that was coming out of his mouth.

My grip on reality is based on living in a high crime area where stuff like that video content happens all the time and the police are treated with contempt because there are kids running around thinking they are immune from the law and cry foul when getting pulled up for it. There are frequent ID checks around here and they are random. I have nothing to hide so I just produce it and get on with my day. Too easy.

That guy had two choices - comply with the request and if it felt unreasonable complain to the authorities later or stand there holding his ground and being a dickhead merely because he had a right to be a dickhead. He chose the latter.

Nothing in the video was about skin colour. That's just an unproven assertion from a youtube subscriber.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> That guy had two choices - comply with the request and if it felt unreasonable complain to the authorities later or stand there holding his ground and being a dickhead merely because he had a right to be a dickhead. He chose the latter.



Again, he did as requested.
How many times does that need to be pointed out?
Then he continued to do his job, but was further harassed by the officer who had *zero reasonable cause*.
The matter was initiated and escalated at the officer's instigation on a notion that "trespass" occurs, even though it was not evident.
I have an inkling that if you were confronted by an officer for collecting rubbish in front of your place of residence, after the officer had seen you on your patio, that you might be a bit annoyed.
After providing all the necessary information about yourself and your place of residence how would you feel about being told you had to stop collecting the rubbish as you were now obstructing the police!!!
The officer was so stupid, aside from insistent in his deluded presumption, that he was going to arrest the student for obstruction in relation to an offence that did not happen!!!
Nothing the officer did was rational, by any standard.

Your points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.
You need to respond to the basic issue of what prompted the officer's action, and despite being asked you keep avoiding the issue.

As to "reality," I am amused you might think that what transpired was reasonable.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Again, he did as requested.
> How many times does that need to be pointed out?
> Then he continued to do his job, but was further harassed by the officer who had *zero reasonable cause*.
> The matter was initiated and escalated at the officer's instigation on a notion that "trespass" occurs, even though it was not evident.
> ...



You keep accusing me of avoiding the issue when you are avoiding the issue yourself.

The issue is about how the behaviour in that video was racist.

I'm not addressing anything else you've said until you respond to this basic issue of racism.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> You keep accusing me of avoiding the issue when you are avoiding the issue yourself.
> 
> The issue is about how the behaviour in that video was racist.
> 
> I'm not addressing anything else you've said until you respond to this basic issue of racism.



I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!


----------



## sptrawler (2 June 2020)

It doesn't just happen to black people in the U.S, a white woman was walking up to a police officer and was SHOT dead and she was Australian.
https://www.9news.com.au/justine-ruszczyk

Mohamed Noor shot Justine Ruszczyk Damond as she approached his patrol car to report a possible rape behind her Minneapolis home on 15 July 2017.

Ms Damond, 40, was unarmed and the former policeman was found guilty of her murder on Tuesday.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

Yeah I remember that one but sadly I can't offer an accurate description of the guilty party without being accused of something that I'm not. Good find 



rederob said:


> I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!



But you don't *know* that it's racist. You're just assuming it but there isn't any proof. It's just your opinion right? Similarly, the cop had an opinion the student was doing something wrong. Can you see the folly in both assumptions instead of just one assumption ?

You said my other points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area. They have everything to do with living in a high crime area because it leads to heat of moment errors of judgement akin to the content in that video. That's the reality you find amusing.

The reality I find amusing is some smartarse playing verbal Russian roulette with the police. All that was asked originally was what unit did he live in and he refused to answer so he didn't all as requested.

So yeah - I'm happy to agree the cop got it all wrong but still not convinced it was racist.


----------



## sptrawler (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> So yeah - I'm happy to agree the cop got it all wrong but still not convinced it was racist.



The media is sympathetic to the rioters and if one is injured there will be a public outcry, yet the rioters are throwing bricks, molotov cocktails and other missiles at the police, if a policeman is injured of killed that just comes with the job.
We are certainly becoming a weird society, in most aspects of life today the media dictates what is acceptable, whether it is legal or socially responsible doesn't seem to matter anymore.
Big brother is indeed coming, one just wonders whether it will be in the form of a computer, or a morning show on t.v.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The media is sympathetic to the rioters and if one is injured there will be a public outcry, yet the rioters are throwing bricks, molotov cocktails and other missiles at the police, if a policeman is injured of killed that just comes with the job.
> We are certainly becoming a weird society, in most aspects of life today the media dictates what is acceptable, whether it is legal or socially responsible doesn't seem to matter anymore.
> Big brother is indeed coming, one just wonders whether it will be in the form of a computer, or a morning show on t.v.



I remember the Star Hotel riot shown by the media was without favour or prejudice and demonstrated what the media should be portraying - exactly what happened and nothing else.

Things have changed for the worse since 1979 except for one thing. The rioters and cops went over the whole thing about 40 years later over a few beers


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> But you don't *know* that it's racist. You're just assuming it but there isn't any proof. It's just your opinion right?



Again, you need to provide a basis for the action of the officer.
What makes sense?







PZ99 said:


> Can you see the folly in both assumptions instead of just one assumption ?



Police need probable cause to act as the do.
I do not assume anything.
There was no probable cause - the officer's bodycam and microphone are clear.


PZ99 said:


> You said my other points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.



If police suspect (or know) a crime may be occurring they have a duty to act, and in areas of high crime rates, they will act more often.
That's a fact.


PZ99 said:


> They have everything to do with living in a high crime area because it leads to heat of moment errors of judgement akin to the content in that video.



Watch the video.
The officer saw the student on the patio *before *he acted.
He acted after the student clearly began collecting rubbish.
What on this planet suggests that might be suspicious?
It is a delusion that the officer made "heat of moment errors of judgement."
After being informed about what was necessary the officer chose not to believe the student.  Why?
What reasonable "suspicion" could the officer have  had at any point?
Did the student try to do other than what he was paid to do after informing the officer of his address and providing ID?
What prompted the officer to continue to harass the student?
Ultimately the officer believed another person - a white male - despite at no time there being any evidence of that person's credibility!
What makes that a sensible stance?

The officer displayed every characteristic pattern of behaviour that can be attributed to racism.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Again, you need to provide a basis for the action of the officer.What makes sense?
> Police need probable cause to act as the do.
> I do not assume anything.
> There was no probable cause - the officer's bodycam and microphone are clear.



You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.



> If police *suspect* (or know) a crime may be occurring they have a duty to act, and in areas of high crime rates, they will act more often.
> That's a fact.



That's exactly what happened. You clearly hear the officer saying "We've had some stuff going on in this area"



> Watch the video.



I did.



> The officer saw the student on the patio *before *he acted.
> He acted after the student clearly began collecting rubbish.
> What on this planet suggests that might be suspicious?
> It is a delusion that the officer made "heat of moment errors of judgement."



Oldest trick in the book - pretend you live or work there when a copper drives past.
Officer suspects some level of foul play and acts. Up to this point - perfectly entitled to do so.
Comes with the territory.



> After being informed about what was necessary the officer chose not to believe the student.  Why?
> What reasonable "suspicion" could the officer have  had at any point?



The fact that the student started getting overly defensive after being asked a very basic harmless question as to what unit he was in and refusing to give his date of birth. He doesn't have to give his date of birth but it does nothing to lull the officers' suspicion... particularly given the F words coming out of his mouth.



> Did the student try to do other than what he was paid to do after informing the officer of his address and providing ID?
> What prompted the officer to continue to harass the student?



As above. No unit number - just potty language.



> Ultimately the officer believed another person - a white male - despite at no time there being any evidence of that person's credibility!
> What makes that a sensible stance?



How do you know the officer believed that other person? There were other police there by that time but we don't know prior to this if he was IDed or not because the video was edited before this appearance.

It seems clear the white male turned up after being requested to turn up by either the police or the dude himself. Why else would he be there? I find it improbable that some nobody turns up for the sake of nothing.



> The officer displayed every characteristic pattern of behaviour that can be attributed to racism.



I disagree. The officer displayed an error of judgement but no racism and that's backed up by the investigation.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.



I make no assumptions.
This is textbook "pattern behaviour" of racism.  There are thousands of academic papers that covers this topic.
You have shown no capacity to appreciate what probable cause involves. Instead, the idea that because an officer says "We've had some stuff going on in this area" seems to be adequate for you.  
Racism involves *nonrandom victimization *and this was evident. 
Much of your post was fabrication: there was at no time any reasonable ground to suspect anything.

You cannot offer a valid reason for the officer's initial actions and have consistently clutched at straws.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

Clutching at straws is your resort to semantics by going with a probable cause whilst saying you make no assumptions. My post is exactly what is in the video. By suggesting much of it is fabrication you are displaying the same judgmental errors as the officer did.

"We've had some stuff going on in this area" seems adequate to me and unless you live there or have some telepathic link with people who live there I don't think you have a basis for brushing it off as an "idea".

Racism involves *nonrandom victimization. *Agreed. It also happens without involving racism.

The only difference is nonrandom victimization isn't bolded


----------



## qldfrog (2 June 2020)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/us-riots-america-at-war-with-itself/12309196
Interesting article from , can't  believe it the ABC
Obviously not one of their journos but kudos
Interesting to see Rederob now popping in here: is that the official soundbox of the BJ master?
Next Joeno will join and we won't need to read the China Daily


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Clutching at straws is your resort to semantics by going with a probable cause whilst saying you make no assumptions. My post is exactly what is in the video. By suggesting much of it is fabrication you are displaying the same judgmental errors as the officer did.
> 
> "We've had some stuff going on in this area" seems adequate to me and unless you live there or have some telepathic link with people who live there I don't think you have a basis for brushing it off as an "idea".
> 
> ...



"*Probable cause*" should have been what led to the officer's actions.  It is the most basic tenet of *lawful *policing and in the USA is borne out of the Fourth Amendment of the  Constitution.
What you suggest instead is a recipe for disaster, and this video shows how badly things came undone.

*Nonrandom victimisation* is definitionally consistent with racism, and *cannot *happen unless some form of discrimination is in play.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

Discrimination yes. Not confined to racism. Remember the independent review of the police investigation found there was no racism which makes perfect sense to me because I didn't see it in the video and neither did they.

What I suggest instead might be a recipe for disaster for career victims but not real victims.
Where I live, I'll take the recipe for disaster over a crime any day of the week.

Like I said - we had a double stabbing murder here over the weekend. If the murderer had been known to police the debate would've been about why nothing was done to prevent it.


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Discrimination yes. Not confined to racism. Remember the independent review of the police investigation found there was no racism which makes perfect sense to me because I didn't see it in the video and neither did they.
> 
> What I suggest instead might be a recipe for disaster for career victims but not real victims.
> Where I live, I'll take the recipe for disaster over a crime any day of the week.
> ...



You can believe what you want.
It was patently clear from the bodycam from the outset that the student was collecting rubbish (the originally linked video does not show the first sighting by the officer).
While this was clear, the report from all all officers read as though he carried a bucket and some kind of *blunt weapon* - a comedic claim, given everyone would have immediately recognised it was a tool used specifically to pick up trash!
No evidence was provided by the white male (a facilities diractor called Aaron Cooke) who came running out to the student.  Aaron eventually calmed the student and said "You`re angry and escalated. *It`s likely you got profiled.* Okay. So well pick it up at a different time. Not here, not now."

Your claim that the independent review found no racism is incorrect.  Their exact words were *"As explained below, neither the PSU investigation nor our review revealed a preponderance of evidence that this contact was based on Mr. Atkinson’s race."*
In legal parlance it means that race was a likely factor, but other factors contributed to the greater problem. Namely that Officer Smyly continued the contact because (1) he misunderstood the law about what information a citizen must provide, and (2) he erred in believing he had reasonable suspicion that a trespass was occurring.
Aside from the above, the independent review was asked to considered the information it was offered by BPD's PSU, and its terms did not require "race" to be addressed.  So the investigation never considered what informed the officer that he should do what he did.
In simple English, the issue of *WHY *was never addressed.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> You can believe what you want.
> It was patently clear from the bodycam from the outset that the student was collecting rubbish (the originally linked video does not show the first sighting by the officer).
> While this was clear, the report from all all officers read as though he carried a bucket and some kind of *blunt weapon* - a comedic claim, given everyone would have immediately recognised it was a tool used specifically to pick up trash!
> No evidence was provided by the white male (a facilities diractor called Aaron Cooke) who came running out to the student.  Aaron eventually calmed the student and said "You`re angry and escalated. *It`s likely you got profiled.* Okay. So well pick it up at a different time. Not here, not now."
> ...



Thankyou for letting me know I can believe what I want.

I believe that your claim about my claim of no racism being incorrect is incorrect.

To quote their exact words on page 14:
"At no point in the entire Incident did anyone use racial language, slurs, or innuendo"

(other than the Naropa University employee mentioning "profiling")

Nothing from the police officer.

In legal parlance or any other parlance it means that race was no factor.

I'll tell what was said though...

Mr. Atkinson was aware he was being filmed by multiple cameras, and he gestured and narrated specifically for the camera being used by the fellow student filming from inside the dormitory. As that video and the BWCs demonstrate, Mr. Atkinson referred to the officers as "murderers," called them dumbasses, asked them "what are you going to do?", demanded that they get off "his property," told them they were wasting resources, and told them to "go solve some real crimes."

Yeppers... a real keeper of the peace there


----------



## macca (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> I remember the Star Hotel riot shown by the media was without favour or prejudice and demonstrated what the media should be portraying - exactly what happened and nothing else.
> 
> Things have changed for the worse since 1979 except for one thing. The rioters and cops went over the whole thing about 40 years later over a few beers




Well, as I sat and watched the whole Star thing unfold right in front of me all those years ago, I can assure you what you see is actually what happened.

The Star was situated on a 6 lane road with a grass median strip in the centre, the other side of the road is higher than the Star side so the median strip provided a natural sloping viewing point.

By the end of the riot there would have been 300-400 people all sitting on the grass watching.

My mate and I were actually heading for the Star for one last drink when all these people came "boiling out" into the street. We stayed where we were on the median strip for the whole show.

Unbelievable to us then that it could happen in Newcastle


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

macca said:


> Well, as I sat and watched the whole Star thing unfold right in front of me all those years ago, I can assure you what you see is actually what happened.
> 
> The Star was situated on a 6 lane road with a grass median strip in the centre, the other side of the road is higher than the Star side so the median strip provided a natural sloping viewing point.
> 
> ...



Wow - good one! Did you see yourself in the footage? I remember the big guy (Bill) that let everyone out of the paddy wagon. They couldn't hold him. lol


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 June 2020)

Junior said:


> A friend of mine is working on major Rail projects in Melbourne...they are desperate for gender equality. Any woman who applies for a job in rail is a shoe-in, amongst a sea of male applicants.



On one hand it's a separate topic to the thread.

On the other hand, tolerating blatant discrimination anywhere ultimately leads to it being tolerated everywhere which leads down a rather nasty path. Once it's accepted that men and women, or whites and blacks, are not equal and need to be seen differently then it's a slippery slope that doesn't end well.

People are people and apart from a small minority of things such as acting where physical appearance needs to reasonably match the character role, gender and race shouldn't be factors in who gets the job.


----------



## macca (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Wow - good one! Did you see yourself in the footage? I remember the big guy (Bill) that let everyone out of the paddy wagon. They couldn't hold him. lol




The camera man (Barry Nancarrow) did not have time to pan across the "audience" there was too much happening !

I remember when the mob turned the cop car over and lit it everyone around me suddenly thought Oh ****, this is getting serious. 

Up until then it was all a bit of fun, we were chuckling at all the blokes going in and out of the paddy wagon. Even some of the cops thought it was all a bit of a game, they were being reasonably gentle on most of the people.

That changed when the car caught on fire, the crowd started thinning quick smart after that.

The ratbags stayed but a lot of the people on the footpath among the rioters bolted, a lot of the people on the median strip went back across the road to the Workers Club.

It fizzled out soon after that, no audience


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Thankyou for letting me know I can believe what I want.
> 
> I believe that your claim about my claim of no racism being incorrect is incorrect.
> 
> ...



At no point have you addressed the rationale for the officer's initial actions.
That's because they are textbook pattern behaviours showing how race underpinned everything the officer did.
It is barely credible that a US police officer would not know 4th Amendment rights, and less credible again that he would not understand what constituted a "reasonable suspicion."
It has never been more clear than now that in the USA you do *not *have to make any racial comment to kill a black man in front of our eyes.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

The initial actions are all covered in the investigation in your link.

"As Mr. Atkinson sat there, BPD patrol officer John Smyly was on routine patrol driving his police cruiser northbound on Folsom Street. After crossing Arapahoe Avenue, he looked across two small parking lots to his left and saw Mr. Atkinson sitting on the patio. Mr. Atkinson was approximately *287 feet awa*y. Officer Smyly was aware of a number of recent crimes committed in that general area, including attempted bike theft and trespassing. He turned left after passing the parking lots, drove back around, parked approximately *80 fee*t northeast of the patio, and sat in his cruiser for about a minute watching Mr. Atkinson. This pre-contact phase lasted approximately two minutes."

I don't buy it. You can't read that and conclude it was race motivated and that's why it was never asserted as such.

Wouldn't mind what you think of this though - bit closer to home.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06...ficer-over-arrest-of-indigenous-teen/12310758

Was this a racist police officer ?

Gotta admit it was a decent decking


----------



## Bill M (2 June 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> On the other hand, tolerating blatant discrimination anywhere ultimately leads to it being tolerated everywhere which leads down a rather nasty path. Once it's accepted that men and women, or whites and blacks, are not equal and need to be seen differently then it's a slippery slope that doesn't end well.
> 
> People are people and apart from a small minority of things such as acting where physical appearance needs to reasonably match the character role, gender and race shouldn't be factors in who gets the job.




I could not have said it better, thanks Smurf!


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> The initial actions are all covered in the investigation in your link.



As has been made clear many times there were no *lawful *motivations for the police officer's actions.
Those were also the conclusions of the Professional Standards Unit.
The idea that because there have been crimes in an area justifies anything a police officer subsequently does is an absurdity.
I appreciate you do not understand these things so won't comment further.


----------



## PZ99 (2 June 2020)

rederob said:


> As has been made clear many times there were no *lawful *motivations for the police officer's actions.
> Those were also the conclusions of the Professional Standards Unit.
> The idea that because there have been crimes in an area justifies anything a police officer subsequently does is an absurdity.
> I appreciate you do not understand these things so won't comment further.



The Boulder City Attorney was quoted as saying there was “no proof that racial bias was a *motivating* factor” in the incident.

The investigation and subsequent report found that, “At no point in the entire incident did anyone use racial language, slurs or innuendo.”

I appreciate you do not understand this so yep, thanks for the fun


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 June 2020)

Peter Hartcher in the SMH says it all about the Decline of the American Empire. Will it recover? My guess is yes, but I'm not a seer. 

https://www.smh.com.au/national/the...l-system-has-failed-20200531-p54y6a.html?btis

gg


----------



## rederob (2 June 2020)

Back on the topic proper.
There are no economic forecasters that place the USA ahead of China by 2050.
The only issue is how many years before 2050 China becomes the dominant global economy.
China is already the world's biggest manufacturer of goods and on PPP terms dominates all nations, meaning that its reliance on the USA diminishes each year.
China has been emerging from the COV19 pandemic for 2 months, while the USA remains in disarray.  Like it or not, China will be gaining market share from the USA until such time the USA can reassert itself.  That looks months away at best.
On the diplomatic front China has sent medical emergency response teams to dozens of nations, having got in early to a number of European nations.  The USA has instead continued to indulge in a blame game.
And topping off everything, China's belt and road initiative is assisting the developing world to unlock its potential.  America's response is to regard their initiatives as subservisive, and is countering only with megaphone economics, ie China *bad *America good!
If Australia adopts the Switzerland approach to global affairs it will prosper more than any other western nation.


----------



## qldfrog (2 June 2020)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Peter Hartcher in the SMH says it all about the Decline of the American Empire. Will it recover? My guess is yes, but I'm not a seer.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/national/the...l-system-has-failed-20200531-p54y6a.html?btis
> 
> gg



Yes it is sick and there is no real news there but another article which still manages to add weapon ownership as another major cause of problem there..seriously? What next?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Yes it is sick and there is no real news there but another article which still manages to add weapon ownership as another major cause of problem there..seriously? What next?



It  bad at present but it was similar in 1968.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (2 June 2020)

It will certainly be an interesting Australia, when we are finally a part of China, it will be good to see how the left and right wings fly.


----------



## frugal.rock (2 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> It will certainly be an interesting Australia, when we are finally a part of China, it will be good to see how the left and right wings fly.



That's not funny. Haven't you seen a duck with a broken wing? Utter cruelty...


----------



## Value Collector (2 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> The Boulder City Attorney was quoted as saying there was “no proof that racial bias was a *motivating* factor” in the incident.
> 
> The investigation and subsequent report found that, “At no point in the entire incident did anyone use racial language, slurs or innuendo.”
> 
> I appreciate you do not understand this so yep, thanks for the fun




I find it weird that the attorney would think there needs to be racial language, slurs or innuendo to mean race was a motivating factor.

You don't have to be blatantly calling some one a N****r to have actions that are motivated by race, thats what makes the problem so sinister, it is far more subconscious than that, that people don't even realise the race aspects are motivating their behaviour.

The simple fact is that studies have shown that the Darker the skin, the more likely people (including police) are to think that a persons actions are threatening, aggressive and dangerous.

Police need to be trained to over come these bias if we have any hope to stop what is happening.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I find it weird that the attorney would think there needs to be racial language, slurs or innuendo to mean race was a motivating factor.
> 
> You don't have to be blatantly calling some one a N****r to have actions that are motivated by race, thats what makes the problem so sinister, it is far more subconscious than that, that people don't even realise the race aspects are motivating their behaviour.
> 
> ...




Check out this simple test, it has been repeated many times and sadly the results are always similar, Some how as a society we have negative bias to black people and positive bias to whites.

The heart breaking part is that even by the age of 5 little black children already have picked up these bias against them selves.


----------



## jbocker (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> Check out this simple test, it has been repeated many times and sadly the results are always similar, Some how as a society we have negative bias to black people and positive bias to whites.
> 
> The heart breaking part is that even by the age of 5 little black children already have picked up these bias against them selves.




That is horrid. I do wonder how much of an influence of being afraid of the dark (night and not well lit places). I wonder what more subtle differences might reveal, like red heads and blonds. Grey hair vs dark hair.
All the same we need to watch how we communicate in front of kids. I am mindful of the lack of aboriginal representation there is in advertising for example.


----------



## aus_trader (3 June 2020)

I bow to Kevin Rudd. He has started the healing in this country, while many others before him couldn't ! 

Some made lame excuses like: I didn't do it, so I don't have to apologise. I mean seriously !! Some people have to take a good look at themselves before taking the decision to enter politics. Politics is not about yourself, it's about putting the nation and it's people first. So when you say "Sorry", it's not about you are personally being sorry for all the abuse, all the stolen children and land, but it's about being sorry as a nation for all the injustices that has happened to the indigenous people of our country.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I find it weird that the attorney would think there needs to be racial language, slurs or innuendo to mean race was a motivating factor.
> 
> You don't have to be blatantly calling some one a N****r to have actions that are motivated by race, thats what makes the problem so sinister, it is far more subconscious than that, that people don't even realise the race aspects are motivating their behaviour.
> 
> ...



Sadly - it's this way of thinking that makes the problem worse and harder to solve.

Cop arrests someone with dark skin - therefore cop is racist. It's that faulty logic driven by reverse subconscious racial bias from the masses who are brainwashed by propaganda from activists and the biased media outlets who want more bang for their buck.

Have a look at the ABC headline in post #170

"NSW Police investigate officer filmed kicking, pinning down Indigenous teen during arrest"

Why did they say he was Indigenous? Why didn't they just say:

"NSW Police investigate officer filmed kicking, pinning down teen during arrest" ????

Because the story wouldn't have been worth reporting. They want you to focus on the fact he was Indigenous, or Aboriginal, or dark skinned, or *different.*

And therefore that cop will now be looked upon as some racist pig. Faulty logic. And that's why these violent reactions will never end. People are far too easily brainwashed. And it's getting worse. 

Ignore it at your peril


----------



## aus_trader (3 June 2020)

Regardless of whether the teen was indigenous or not, the cop did use too much unnecessary force, you said it yourself PZ99:



PZ99 said:


> Gotta admit it was a decent decking


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> Regardless of whether the teen was indigenous or not, the cop did use too much unnecessary force, you said it yourself PZ99:



No argument there. I just hope he gets done for just that and not the other stuff as discussed.

But the headline suggests a trial by media is likely... and that ain't right.


----------



## Bill M (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> "NSW Police investigate officer filmed kicking, pinning down Indigenous teen during arrest"
> 
> Why did they say he was Indigenous? Why didn't they just say:
> 
> "NSW Police investigate officer filmed kicking, pinning down teen during arrest" ????




In that particular case I did not notice the kid was Aboriginal. My wife and I watched it together and we both had the same reaction, the Officer used excessive force for no reason at all. It was reported that the kid was foul mouthing the officer, does that require aggressively walking over to a teenager and deliberately kicking his feet out from under him and making him fall flat on his face sustaining injuries and hospital admittance? Both my wife and I said no way. People have called me a f****ng idiot and much more all my life but I don't around assaulting them for it and putting them in hospital. They are doing the right thing by standing down the Officer pending an internal investigation. But the boys club will let him off without consequences, wait and see.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

@Bill M  - I agree. However others will say race was a motivating factor in that case.


----------



## qldfrog (3 June 2020)

Bill M said:


> In that particular case I did not notice the kid was Aboriginal. My wife and I watched it together and we both had the same reaction, the Officer used excessive force for no reason at all. It was reported that the kid was foul mouthing the officer, does that require aggressively walking over to a teenager and deliberately kicking his feet out from under him and making him fall flat on his face sustaining injuries and hospital admittance? Both my wife and I said no way. People have called me a f****ng idiot and much more all my life but I don't around assaulting them for it and putting them in hospital. They are doing the right thing by standing down the Officer pending an internal investigation. But the boys club will let him off without consequences, wait and see.



Fully agree but using indigenous in the headline is irrelevant and mass brain washing
Cause do you often see stats like:
Aboriginal men are committing xx% of all rape, death etc in Australia..no
So one way only.race/sex/religion factor in a country is bad.it always discriminate and law should be the same
There is no reason aborigines should have any special treatment negative or positive, abstudy etc should be dismantled
A poor white trash kid: i can say that but can not say black trash in a paper... deserve as much help, or asian, arab background whatever.
We should all be citizens
I would even say that this elevation of race above behaviour is the cause of much frustration n law enforcers probably causing more knee jerk reaction.
Justice is not even handed:why would police bother arrest offenders when they are released within hours based on skin colours.
This is true in all the West.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Sadly - it's this way of thinking that makes the problem worse and harder to solve.
> 
> Cop arrests someone with dark skin - therefore cop is racist. It's that faulty logic driven by reverse subconscious racial bias from the masses who are brainwashed by propaganda from activists and the biased media outlets who want more bang for their buck.
> 
> ...




No one is saying the cops were racist for arresting George Floyd.

Where they made the mistake is completely over estimating how dangerous he was and being far to aggressive with him even as they were slowly killing him.

Do a bit of research mate, you will see study after study that under the exact same conditions research groups are more likely to pull the trigger on a black guy, more likely to convict a black guy, and more likely to give harsher sentence.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> No one is saying the cops were racist for arresting George Floyd.



You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather ?



Value Collector said:


> Do a bit of research mate, you will see study after study that under the exact same conditions research groups are more likely to pull the trigger on a black guy, more likely to convict a black guy, and more likely to give harsher sentence.



Maybe they are but you can't overlay that on every single case. Attempting to do so reveals a bias in itself - hence the debate in this thread about that video. Bias or prejudism distorts the outcome of any trial and makes the problem worse.

I don't care about research group studies... research groups are frequently motivated or sponsored by third parties with ulterior motives.


----------



## rederob (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Sadly - it's this way of thinking that makes the problem worse and harder to solve.
> 
> Cop arrests someone with dark skin - therefore cop is racist. It's that faulty logic driven by reverse subconscious racial bias from the masses who are brainwashed by propaganda from activists and the biased media outlets who want more bang for their buck.
> 
> ...



You have made "excuses" for racism into an artform.
Blacks/aboriginals get profiled - it's a fact of social science!
What you cannot explain, and have not been able to via reasoning skills, is what leads to the *police acting unlawfully* as they do from the outset.  These are people who are supposed to be trained to uphold the law, but instead are choosing to use their badges to do the very opposite.
They have a mentality that people of colour are lesser humans, so kicking, choking or shooting them to death becomes acceptable behaviour in the USA.  While in Australia it's more subtle, as we see through the number of deaths in custody.
In your mind it seems people are only racists if they use words to announce their intent, as that's the proof you accept.
In real life the proof plays out every day to people of colour, especially in the USA.
It's now 8 days on and people in the USA are still taking to the streets in tens of thousands to protest the injustice of George Floyd's murder.  And despite what we all saw, of the 4 police officers involved, 3 remain to be charged.


----------



## rederob (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather ?



He was arrested for alleged fraud - uttering a $20 note to be precise.
He was then murdered in front of our eyes.
And you think that was for a dodgy $20 note...really?


PZ99 said:


> I don't care about research group studies... research groups are frequently motivated or sponsored by third parties with ulterior motives.



It is abundantly clear that you do not use data, logic or social science to guide your thinking.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

rederob said:


> He was arrested for alleged fraud - uttering a $20 note to be precise.
> He was then murdered in front of our eyes.
> And you think that was for a dodgy $20 note...really?



Better take that one up with VC mate...

He says no one is saying the cops were racist for arresting George Floyd.



rederob said:


> You have made "excuses" for racism into an artform.
> Blacks/aboriginals get profiled - it's a fact of social science!
> What you cannot explain, and have not been able to via reasoning skills, is what leads to the *police acting unlawfully* as they do from the outset.  These are people who are supposed to be trained to uphold the law, but instead are choosing to use their badges to do the very opposite.
> They have a mentality that people of colour are lesser humans, so kicking, choking or shooting them to death becomes acceptable behaviour in the USA.  While in Australia it's more subtle, as we see through the number of deaths in custody.
> ...



It is abundantly clear that it is actually you that didn't use logic to guide your thinking exemplified by stating your totally erroneous view that racism confined to words is accepted by me as proof.

I've noticed with the vast majority of your replies on this subject you spend the first half of your post creating some invention about what I said or think and then spend the second half discrediting your own invention because I hadn't said what you frequently accuse me of saying or thinking.

You also habitually ignore the independent review of the police investigation finding there was no racism.

Until you get your head around that mate, you're merely wasting your time and mine.


----------



## rederob (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> It is abundantly clear that it is actually you that didn't use logic to guide your thinking exemplified by stating your totally erroneous view that racism confined to words is accepted by me as proof.
> 
> I've noticed with the vast majority of your replies on this subject you spend the first half of your post creating some invention about what I said or think and then spend the second half discrediting your own invention because I hadn't said what you frequently accuse me of saying or thinking.
> 
> ...



I was trained in logic so I don't need to argue the toss on that score with you.
We have been over the other matter, and your claim about the independent review is plain and simple false, as per the attribution I quoted from that very review.
Until you can explain what prompts police officers to act unlawfully against people of colour more often than it would occur for whites you remain a sad apologist for unacceptable behaviours.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

rederob said:


> I was trained in logic so I don't need to argue the toss on that score with you.
> We have been over the other matter, and your claim about the independent review is plain and simple false, as per the attribution I quoted from that very review.
> Until you can explain what prompts police officers to act unlawfully against people of colour more often than it would occur for whites you remain a sad apologist for unacceptable behaviours.



I suggest you get retrained then because your logic is faulty. Does it come with a warranty?
My claim about the independent review is totally correct despite your attempts to distort it to support your disconnection. I really don't care if you think I'm a sad apologist - it says more about you than it does about me. These days I can't even say G'day to an Aboriginal without the Orwellian doublethink of civil libertarians like yourself accusing me of racism.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather ?
> 
> 
> Maybe they are but you can't overlay that on every single case. Attempting to do so reveals a bias in itself - hence the debate in this thread about that video. Bias or prejudism distorts the outcome of any trial and makes the problem worse.
> ...




The protesting is about the cops Murdering a guy after he was arrested.

If the cops hadn’t killed him and instead treated him with basic human respect there would be no protest.

—————-

you know I really think you are not seeing things clearly, if you can’t see what the cops did wrong on this arrest and so many others.

there is clearly racial bias in society, but it could be overcome with proper training, ignoring it does nothing


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Better take that one up with VC mate...
> 
> He says no one is saying the cops were racist for arresting George Floyd.
> 
> ...




you should be arrested for a $20 counterfeit notes, no body disagrees with that.

But you shouldn’t be choked to death.

I really don’t understand why you can’t see that.

I seriously doubt they would have treated a white dude in that way, the thing is without even realizing it there prejudices lead them to over react to the situation.

they felt he was a threat even after he had died, and continued pressing on his neck.

——————
how do you feel about the situation?


----------



## sptrawler (3 June 2020)

My personal belief is that a lot of the police agression is due to the widespread ownership of firearms.
I know a workmate was sent on a technical course to Fort Worth, he was pulled over by a highway patrol on the way obviously struggling with U.S left hand driving lol, as he went to get out of the car he said the police started screaming at him to get face down on the road.
This was in the 1980s and it scared him $hitless, but it is obvious that when the police are dealing with people that could be quite possibly armed, things dont become tense they are tense before it all starts.
Like Ive said before, dont judge the U.S with an Australian expectation, I bet more police have been killed in these riots, than rioters.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> The protesting is about the cops Murdering a guy after he was arrested.
> 
> If the cops hadn’t killed him and instead treated him with basic human respect there would be no protest.
> 
> ...







Value Collector said:


> you should be arrested for a $20 counterfeit notes, no body disagrees with that.
> 
> But you shouldn’t be choked to death.
> 
> ...




——————


> how do you feel about the situation?




VC... I don't think you should bother asking me how I feel about that situation.

If you are already going to assert that I didn’t understand what the cops did wrong with the George Floyd arrest when I haven't discussed that event then nothing I say will be satisfactory for you.

You have just taken blind prejudism to a level that is irretrievable which is kinda ironic doncha think ?

I'll talk about the George Floyd case when I'm ready.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> If you are already going to assert that I didn’t understand what the cops did wrong with the George Floyd arrest when I haven't discussed that event then nothing I say will be satisfactory for you.
> 
> .




The reason I said you didn't understand is because when I said "_*nobody is saying that he shouldn't have been arrested*_" you said this - "_*You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather*_ ?"

This of course made me believe you thought the protest was about whether he should have been arrested or not, and that you didn't understand that people were protesting his harsh treatment that lead to his death and not the actual reason for the arrest. It wasn't the actual arrest that was the problem, it was the the brutality that was completely uncalled for.

You don't see to understand that there is a long history of excessive brutality towards people of colour, and you seem to think suggesting there is means that we are suggesting people are overtly racist, this is not what is happening.

What I am saying is that there is subconscious Bias that leads people to over react to situations, and this needs to be dealt with by better training for police.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2020)

Seems to me the only solution is to have the numerical proportions of the police force reflect the proportions of the society in which they operate.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Seems to me the only solution is to have the numerical proportions of the police force reflect the proportions of the society in which they operate.




Unfortunately Black people also suffer from the same problems, Watch that doll test video I linked above, you can see even by the age of 5 the black kids are already thinking negatively about Blacks and positively about whites.

Its something that will take along time to change on a societal level, but in the mean time we need to make sure the guys carrying guns and making arrests have better training.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> The reason I said you didn't understand is because when I said "_*nobody is saying that he shouldn't have been arrested*_" you said this - "_*You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather*_ ?"
> 
> This of course made me believe you thought the protest was about whether he should have been arrested or not, and that you didn't understand that people were protesting his harsh treatment that lead to his death and not the actual reason for the arrest. It wasn't the actual arrest that was the problem, it was the the brutality that was completely uncalled for.
> 
> ...



Mate..... how can you say I don't understand when you can't even quote yourself accurately ?

What a weird post.

You didn't say "nobody is saying that he *shouldn't have been arrested*"

You DID say "*No one is saying the cops were racist* for arresting George Floyd"

There are plenty of people saying the cops were racist hence my response.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

There is a show on Netflix called 100 humans ( I Think ).

They did a great experiment where they gave each subject of the test a hand gun and told them two people would jump out from behind cars about 20 metres infront of them, and that 1 would point a gun at them and one would point a phone, and they had to shoot the guy with the gun and not the innocent with his phone.

The innocent guy with the phone was black the guy with the gun was white, but over 90% of people including the black people instinctively shot at the black guy with the phone rather than the white guy with the gun.

It just seems in the heat of the moment a black guy looks scarier even when what he is doing is innocent.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Mate..... how can you say I don't understand when you can't even quote yourself accurately ?
> 
> What a weird post.
> 
> ...




Ok I miss quoted my self slightly, however the point is exactly the same though, Nobody is saying they were racist for conducting the arrest.

So you saying "_*You joking mate ? What is all the protesting about then ? Bad weather*_ ?" still makes me think you are confused about which part of the ordeal people have a problem with.

As I said no body would care about him being arrested if the arrest was handled properly and he was shown some basic human respect instead of being killed.

And, I believe the reason he was treated so harshly is because of the Bias people have where they are more likely to assume black men are dangerous and aggressive.


----------



## PZ99 (3 June 2020)

After reading your last several posts VC I can safely say there's no confusion on my part


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> And, I believe the reason he was treated so harshly is because of the Bias people have where they are more likely to assume black men are dangerous and aggressive.




Probably right, but the guy was handcuffed so the danger was essentially eliminated. Why the excessive violence then ? It seems to be more sadism than trying to contain a threat.


----------



## macca (3 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Probably right, but the guy was handcuffed so the danger was essentially eliminated. Why the excessive violence then ? It seems to be more sadism than trying to contain a threat.




Power trip IMO plus the fact that Cops in USA live on the edge all the time, when they get the opportunity to get square they take it, unfortunately.

To go to work and know that every time you need to talk to someone they may pull a gun and shoot you would be very stressful. It almost has a ring of "guerilla warfare" doesn't it, you never know which person is going to pull and shoot.

Drugs mean that folk are out there completely off the planet with a gun in there pocket, dangerous situation for everyone but especially the cops.

If someone is acting crazy the first thing people do is ring the cops, cops arrive, people expect them to arrest the nutter but to do that they have to use force and then we have trouble


----------



## sptrawler (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> There is a show on Netflix called 100 humans ( I Think ).
> 
> They did a great experiment where they gave each subject of the test a hand gun and told them two people would jump out from behind cars about 20 metres infront of them, and that 1 would point a gun at them and one would point a phone, and they had to shoot the guy with the gun and not the innocent with his phone.
> 
> ...



I don't know if there is a link to violent crime and black people in the U.S, maybe due to the high poverty rates, there may be high crime rates associated with black people over there?

That appears to be the case in Africa, also there appears to be a high proportion of idigenous representation as a proportion of population incarcerated in Australian institutions.

That may in some way affect peoples perceptions, I could be wrong and it all could be as you say, just be a reflection of their skin colour in certain light conditions.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I don't know if there is a link to violent crime and black people in the U.S, maybe due to the high poverty rates, there may be high crime rates associated with black people over there?
> 
> That appears to be the case in Africa, also there appears to be a high proportion of idigenous representation as a proportion of population incarcerated in Australian institutions.
> 
> That may in some way affect peoples perceptions, I could be wrong and it all could be as you say, just be a reflection of their skin colour in certain light conditions.




It may be the other way around too.

Lack of respect by indigenous people of white institutions like schools. Don't send the kids to a white school or they will become whites and lose their culture. Better to let them run around on the streets.


----------



## sptrawler (3 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> It may be the other way around too.
> 
> Lack of respect by indigenous people of white institutions like schools. Don't send the kids to a white school or they will become whites and lose their culture. Better to let them run around on the streets.



Who knows, but there are some things you can't say.
I've lived in Kalgoorlie, Roeburne, Collie, Meekatharra, Cue, Mt Magnet, Kununurra, Derby and Broome.
It is very difficult to get some people to do as they are told, when they are throwing missiles at you, asking nicely doesn't cut it.
So you either don't get involved and let them get on with it, or try to get them to stop, doing whatever they are doing.
If the police turn a blind eye to it, the public doesn't like it , because either they or their property gets damaged.
I can see this ending up as career for women only, similar to what has happened with teaching, now we have classrooms where teachers are being bashed.
Well I know a lot of people will not be pursuing a career in policing after this, the whole structure of society is being tested ATM, it will lead to interesting outcomes. Also a lot more walled communities IMO.


----------



## macca (3 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> It may be the other way around too.
> 
> Lack of respect by indigenous people of white institutions like schools. Don't send the kids to a white school or they will become whites and lose their culture. Better to let them run around on the streets.




Unfortunately peer pressure is very strong as family ties are very strong in Aboriginal life.

In many places it is only acceptable to progress if you are good at sport, if you are scholastic you are not as popular.

For many years aboriginal kids received payment if they went to school yet white people got a bill for some schools but at the very least they were expected to contribute school fees.

I found it interesting at Cape York that the Islander towns have strong expectations of their children to do well at school and have full time employment after leaving school.

Seisia is a cooperative and everyone there is expected to do something to keep the place running, no loafing around if you live there.


----------



## qldfrog (3 June 2020)

I am going to put forward a weird idea:
We are a mostly financial economic forum, at least in purpose.
Am i the only one in seing a parallel between the economic management post GFC and the global western socialisation.
Victimisation, refusal to assume responsibility, denial of evidence when not matching the accepted story, and collectivisation
->translated in national debt ,unrestrained with government pushing in to avoid any kind of recession even slowdown.
Collectivisation of economy, debt transfered ultimately in gov owned shares


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Am i the only one in seing a parallel between the economic management post GFC and the global western socialisation.
> Victimisation, refusal to assume responsibility, denial of evidence when not matching the accepted story, and collectivisation




It goes back to the early 00's in my opinion. Could be wrong but that's my perception of it.

The world in 2020 is just too serious with everything I think. Too many people willing to jump on someone else for expressing an opinion or even just accidentally saying something in error that's deemed offensive. Too many who can't take a joke and have a laugh. Too many looking to sue someone for things which are their own fault and plenty who can't take a joke.

Popular culture's much the same. Go back to the 1960's - 90's and music was mostly either serious and focused on something real or it was sheer ridiculousness for the sake of having fun. Now in 2020 an awful lot of mainstream music is decidedly "down" in it's overall sound and even more depressing if you listen to the lyrics. In the space of a couple of decades we've gone from poking fun at ourselves and partying in the streets to jumping off cliffs and slashing our wrists it seems. 

As for your examples, well anyone who takes responsibility these days is a freak basically since the mainstream approach has become one of blaming someone else, expecting others to pick up the pieces and denying what's standing right in front of you. 

Technology has improved beyond belief, 2020 everyday reality now exceeds 1980's science fiction, and there's been a massive improvement in attitudes toward human health and safety. Other than that though, I think we're going backwards not forwards as a society overall. Even with things like race discrimination, it seemed to be sorted back in the 1990's with "everyone's equal" but now we're back to discriminating on all sorts of things once again.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Probably right, but the guy was handcuffed so the danger was essentially eliminated. Why the excessive violence then ? It seems to be more sadism than trying to contain a threat.




I think it just comes down to 3 things.

1, their internal risk meters were telling them he was big black and dangerous, so they over reacted.

2, they thought he was bullet proof and wouldn’t die regardless of what they did.

3, their pride didn’t let them take the bystanders advice, and give the guy a break.

You can see in the video as the public are yelling at him to remove his knee he gets a stiff upper lip and stubbornly refuses to do what they say.


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I don't know if there is a link to violent crime and black people in the U.S, maybe due to the high poverty rates, there may be high crime rates associated with black people over there?
> 
> That appears to be the case in Africa, also there appears to be a high proportion of idigenous representation as a proportion of population incarcerated in Australian institutions.
> 
> That may in some way affect peoples perceptions, I could be wrong and it all could be as you say, just be a reflection of their skin colour in certain light conditions.




Even numbers like that can be flawed.

Studies have shown that when presented with exactly the same evidence, but just shown different mug shots, Juries are more likely to convict Blacks, and give harsher sentences.

So higher crimes rates can just mean higher conviction rates where whites were given the benefit of the doubt and let of.

but also as you said poverty rates also lead to higher crime, as 2pac said 


“I'm tired of bein' poor and even worse I'm black
My stomach hurts, so I'm lookin' for a purse to snatch
Cops give a damn about a negro
Pull the trigger, kill a nigga, he's a hero“


----------



## Value Collector (3 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> After reading your last several posts VC I can safely say there's no confusion on my part




So you now understand that nobody cares that he was arrested, and it was just the way the arrest was conducted that is being protested, good.

Now that you understand that, maybe next you might be able to see that race played a part either overtly or subconsciously in his treatment being much harsher than you would expect anybody to receive, especially for a non violent crime.


----------



## sptrawler (3 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> Even numbers like that can be flawed.
> 
> Studies have shown that when presented with exactly the same evidence, but just shown different mug shots, Juries are more likely to convict Blacks, and give harsher sentences.
> 
> ...



That may be correct I certainly couldn't make that conclusion, when indigenous Australians make up 33% of prisoners and 3.3% of the population, you may be right but I feel studies are like statistics any conclusion can be derived.


----------



## aus_trader (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Australians make up 33% of prisoners and 3.3% of the population



Struth !
Pretty scary stats mate...

Err... Forget Houston, Australia... we have a problem !


----------



## PZ99 (4 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> So you now understand that nobody cares that he was arrested, and it was just the way the arrest was conducted that is being protested, good.
> 
> Now that you understand that, maybe next you might be able to see that race played a part either overtly or subconsciously in his treatment being much harsher than you would expect anybody to receive, especially for a non violent crime.



It's got nothing to do with what I understand VC. The misunderstanding from yourself began when you used the George Floyd case to break into a debate I was having with another member about why some other dark skinned guy was questioned in a video a few pages back.

I did say I'll talk about the George Floyd case when I'm ready - maybe you didn't understand that?

In any case I don't agree with you. As previously mentioned, attempting to overlay racial discrimination - overtly or otherwise - on every police case involving dark skinned people reveals a subconscious bias in itself. 

If I was to apply your logic in reverse, I could just as easily suggest you have a subconscious bias against police for doing their job.


----------



## qldfrog (4 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> Struth !
> Pretty scary stats mate...
> 
> Err... Forget Houston, Australia... we have a problem !



Problem indeed, but the solution can not be to just put a quota of 3.3% prisoners of aboriginal background yet that is the brain-dead solution now seriously pushed by these "social movements", mirrored by "positive discrimination" (seriously???)  from university entries to a job in a mining company headquarter.
Reverse discrimination is a fact and has a bigger negative impact than "historic meaning discrimination" as it affects by definition a bigger number of people.
Why are the masses of people so dumb to be so easily manipulated? On this matters but so many too, Has SM killed critical spirit /intelligence or just revealed the abyss?


----------



## jbocker (4 June 2020)

I don't get the recovery in the markets*. 
I don't see that any big issues being resolved. Trump and the US seem to be thrashing about while the baseline matters remain unresolved Covid19 the riots and future leadership. The economy is everything. It seems to be the only hope for a solution. There is a screaming momentum for fundamentals of US society to be addressed, and all I can see is Trump just thumping the table harder and harder. More and more people seem to be switching him off.
I certainly don't get why there isn't another howling protest on the loss of lives due to Covid-19 (focussed at the US), but it seems there are (were) far greater protests on 'opening up' and _'*I* _wont be shut down'.
Maybe the market also thrashing about and taking in its last big lungful of air. I would have expected a recovery if there were some solutions to the growing number of problems, and I am yet to mention the international stuff.

*Disclosure: I don't get a lot of stuff with the market.


----------



## rederob (4 June 2020)

Earlier in this thread I mentioned that a key element to racism was nonrandom behaviour.
I also covered the student case, so will now show how that type of behaviour manifests.
In the case of police officers doing their job, racism cannot occur if an officer's actions are consistent and lawful.
When they are not, the questions to be answered relate to motivation or errors of judgement.
In the student case covered earlier the officer's actions demonstrated a pattern of behaviour that is textbook racism, so I will go over them.
The officer had observed the student sitting on his dorm's patio for several minutes beforehand and he was not doing anything suspicious.  When the student got up he was clearly collecting rubbish.  It is impossible for that fact to be differently interpreted.  Despite this the officer chose to question the student.  The officer had no reasonable grounds for his actions and his training would have told him that he was looking at potential 4th Amendment breach if he overreached.  Put simply, at this point the officer's actions were deliberate, yet inexplicable.  Strike 1.
The initial discussion with the student informed the officer that the student was both working and living at the premises.  Without probable cause any further escalation was a 4th Amendment breach. Not satisfied with the student's response the officer asked for identification, and it was provided.  It did not have an address and the officer pressed on this matter.  The officer has no lawful rights at this point and as an experienced officer he would have known this. Strike 2.
After the student pointed to the address on the building, the student was asked for his "unit number" and was probably confused.  The building has no unit numbers - its a dormitory.  The officer refused to return the ID card to the student for inexplicable reasons.  The officer also had no grounds for keeping the student's ID, especially as it was his "entry card " to his dorm. Strike 3.
The officer looked at the reverse of the card and should have seen the contact details of the university, and made a call if he had concerns about the student's ID/address.  Why didn't he?  He's an experienced police officer and this would have been a simple, non-confrontational resolution.  Strike 4.
At this point the student offered that the officer follow him and he would "buzz" in to the building to prove his bona fides (as the officer now had his entry card and he could not open door).  The officer refused this request.  Why?  Again, the officer chose not to take a reasonable step to inform himself, despite having already overstepped his lawful remit. Strike 5.
To believe the officer is *just doing his job* at this point beggars belief.  With his background he cannot have made so many sequential mistakes.  Furthermore, Americans learn about their Constitutional rights at school and the university student will have known at Strike 2 that he had complied with what was reasonably required.
The officer then asks for the student's date of birth, apparently to verify who he is.  This is a curious and unlawful request, and it was not apparent that the officer would do anything with the information as he already had failed to act on 2 opportunities to confirm what he needed to know about the student.  Strike 6.
When the student questioned why the request was made by the officer and is not satisfied, he continues to go about collecting trash.  The officer calls for backup at this point despite their being no evidence of any offence or any threat to him.  Why?
The officer appears unhappy with his progress and now threatens the student with *obstruction *which is a jailable offence.  As there is no offence in train there cannot be obstruction, so the officer's actions are now clearly unlawful and constitute harassment.  Strike 7.
From this point onward the situation degenerates into a farce until a white man with no documentation is immediately believed and quells the confrontation.
Although the student had a potty mouth, the officer was never threatened and the student just wanted to keep doing his job until a gun was drawn on him.

It is improbable this instance was just about an officer doing his job.  From the outset their was no apparent lawful motivation for his actions.  Let's forgive that.  Once it was clear no crime had occurred or was in progress, the action should have ended.  It did not, so what motivated the officer to disbelieve the student, not make any calls to check information provided, or follow the student into his residence to resolve his concerns?
The litany of errors of law and common sense from the experienced officer suggests his actions must have been motivated by other factors.  And every one of his actions were consistent with what we associate with racist behaviours... right to the very end where a white male without any supporting evidence was immediately believed.

The independent review of this case did not examine the "motivation" of the officer, just his actions.  Racism needs to be seen in the context of what causes those actions to manifest.  So when we saw George Floyd dying in front of our eyes did we all think the arresting officer  was just doing his job, or was he motivated to what he did for other reasons?


----------



## PZ99 (4 June 2020)

Much of the above post about the officers' behaviour being textbook racism reeks of conspiracy theory and / or misinterpretation. Sorry Rob 

No one here said "the officer is *just doing his job" *in that particular case.

And "actions were consistent with what we associate with racist behaviours" is merely an opinion push around as fact which I think is unfortunate because it's this way of thinking that leads to reverse discrimination as previously mentioned.

That's what I find sad about the whole thing. Reverse discrimination forces the police or other people to tread on eggshells simply because the person they're standing next to has different colour skin - yet expect behaviour that's unoffensive to them or supporters of their creed.

For as long as that's allowed to continue - nothing will ever change.


----------



## rederob (4 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Much of the above post about the officers' behaviour being textbook racism reeks of conspiracy theory and / or misinterpretation. Sorry Rob



The difference between your posts and mine is that mine have a basis in social science, criminology and law.
Police officers doing their jobs in accordance with the law do not need to treat anyone differently due to the colour of their skin, race, religion, gender, etc., so your idea about needing to tread on eggshells, or reverse discrimination, is just made up nonsense. 
My post above makes it clear that the law was *never *in play when the Boulder police officer took the many actions he did.  He was not a rookie cop, so what compelled him to sequentially commit so many errors in law and common policing?
The officer was not irrational, and was quite deliberate in his inappropriate actions.
There is an explanation but you will never accept it.


PZ99 said:


> No one here said "the officer is *just doing his job" *in that particular case.



That's *precisely *what the officer claimed he was doing, so please check the bodycam footage to confirm you have erred.


----------



## PZ99 (4 June 2020)

rederob said:


> The difference between your posts and mine is that mine have a basis in social science, criminology and law.
> Police officers doing their jobs in accordance with the law do not need to treat anyone differently due to the colour of their skin, race, religion, gender, etc., so your idea about needing to tread on eggshells, or reverse discrimination, is just made up nonsense.



That is completely wrong - police officers behave according to the local conditions and beliefs.
Watch that footage of police reaction to Lauren Southern in Lakemba if you don't believe it.

Eggshells everywhere. Many other places wouldn't evoke that reaction.
Redfern is another one. So is Mt Druitt. All trouble spots.



rederob said:


> My post above makes it clear that the law was *never *in play when the Boulder police officer took the many actions he did.  He was not a rookie cop, so what compelled him to sequentially commit so many errors in law and common policing?
> The officer was not irrational, and was quite deliberate in his inappropriate actions.
> There is an explanation but you will never accept it.



What I don't accept is your prior claim he had racial motivations. Not enough evidence.
Your opinion is not an explanation. The officer denied it was racial. You think he's lying ?

Someone else opined the behaviour might've been based on the students age instead.
I noticed you didn't challenge that one - wonder why ? 



rederob said:


> That's *precisely *what the officer claimed he was doing, so please check the bodycam footage to confirm you have erred.



Of course the officer claimed he was doing his job. That is totally beside the point.
When you say "*To believe* the officer is just doing his job at this point" you are talking about someone believing the officer - not the officer himself. No error on my part. YOU have erred.


----------



## rederob (4 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> That is completely wrong - police officers behave according to the local conditions and beliefs.
> Watch that footage of police reaction to Lauren Southern in Lakemba if you don't believe it.
> 
> Eggshells everywhere. Many other places wouldn't evoke that reaction.
> ...



Police officers are required to uphold the law, not break it.  So if the officer or anyone else believed he was doing his job, why was every action he took *not *in keeping with the law or policing practices?  This was not a rookie cop and you keep making excuses for unlawful behaviour.

I don't have "an opinion" on the officer's actions or beliefs as they are *textbook *examples of how racism plays out.  Maybe you need to read a bit more about how this particular "*ism*" manifests in society.  It's a real thing and not anyone's conspiracy theory.


----------



## PZ99 (4 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Police officers are required to uphold the law, not break it.  So if the officer or anyone else believed he was doing his job, why was every action he took *not *in keeping with the law or policing practices?  This was not a rookie cop and you keep making excuses for unlawful behaviour.
> 
> I don't have "an opinion" on the officer's actions or beliefs as they are *textbook *examples of how racism plays out.  Maybe you need to read a bit more about how this particular "*ism*" manifests in society.  It's a real thing and not anyone's conspiracy theory.



Another error on your part. I have on multiple occasions acknowledged his unlawful behaviour.
What I don't agree with is the claim he was being racist. You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference between the two descriptions. What make that hilarious is you also claim as fact that you know what's going through that officers' mind. It reduces the credibility of your conspiracy theory to anyone over the age of a college student picking up trash outside a Colorado dorm


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2020)

I'll put this one up.

Say police stop you and ask to see in the boot of your car.

If you have nothing to hide do you say "sure", open the boot and be on your way, or complain about being picked on ?

I would say that most people would comply simply to not cause trouble, those who have a persecution complex might resist resulting in being forced to comply and maybe ending up in trouble and then complaining about it.


----------



## Value Collector (4 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> I'll put this one up.
> 
> Say police stop you and ask to see in the boot of your car.
> 
> ...




I suppose it depends how often I am being stopped and why exactly I was being targeted for this search.

It's pretty easy for a white guy like me who has actually never in my 38 years of life been stopped to have my car or person searched to say "sure you can search me", its almost a novelty at that point, But at the end of the day if it was happening to me routinely while my friends of other races were never stopped I might begin to think their is a problem.

-----------

Also, some times people have personal things they don't want searched.

I know a guy who is a surf photographer, he was accused of taking photos of kids on Bondi beach, and police made him hand over his camera to search through his photos.

It turns out there was no images of kids and he was innocent, however he had his privacy invaded just because some one saw him as a single white male taking photos and assumed he must be a pedo. If this was constantly happening you could imagine he would get pissed off.

Now what if he had nude photos of his wife on the memory card, he and his wife would have their privacy invaded even though they are totally innocent.

If he resisted the police and enforced his rights to deny the police access to his memory card they and others would assume his guilt, but in reality he is the innocent victim, because he never took photos of any ones kids, yet his wife had personal photos exposed to a stranger.


----------



## sptrawler (4 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I suppose it depends how often I am being stopped and why exactly I was being targeted for this search.
> 
> It's pretty easy for a white guy like me who has actually never in my 38 years of life been stopped to have my car or person searched to say "sure you can search me", its almost a novelty at that point, But at the end of the day if it was happening to me routinely while my friends of other races were never stopped I might begin to think their is a problem.
> 
> ...



Ride a Harley, when the police are having issues with the bikies, that can be tiresome.
Also it isn't racial.
Another example of conditioned response would be, if we started having a lot of terrorist incidents you know suicide bombers etc, you would start and treat people who look like they come from that region with caution maybe even avoid completely, well the police are only human but they deal with life threatening demographics daily.
To expect them to not over react ocassionally is not feasable, when it happens it should and will get punished, but to irradicate it will be impossible IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I know a guy who is a surf photographer, he was accused of taking photos of kids on Bondi beach, and police made him hand over his camera to search through his photos.




That's police overreach in my view. People should have a right to take photos of a public place no matter who is in those places. If you are in a public place you have voluntarily given up your privacy.

If he was sticking his camera through kid's bedroom windows it would be a different matter.


----------



## Value Collector (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Ride a Harley, when the police are having issues with the bikies, that can be tiresome.
> Also it isn't racial.
> .




Yes it isn't racial, but it is prejudice at least you can park your bike and take off you jacket and get away from that stereotype when you want, but a black guy can't change his skin.

Prejudice comes in a lot of types, eg sexism, racism, judging people with tattoos(especially facial) etc etc.

We should all be trying to catch ourselves when we find ourselves having prejudice thoughts, unfortunately at the moment and for most of recent history Black men are being killed because of these prejudices, as I said earlier saying that we don't have prejudice or ignoring them doesn't help.


----------



## sptrawler (4 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> Yes it isn't racial, but it is prejudice at least you can park your bike and take off you jacket and get away from that stereotype when you want, but a black guy can't change his skin.
> 
> Prejudice comes in a lot of types, eg sexism, racism, judging people with tattoos(especially facial) etc etc.
> 
> We should all be trying to catch ourselves when we find ourselves having prejudice thoughts, unfortunately at the moment and for most of recent history Black men are being killed because of these prejudices, as I said earlier saying that we don't have prejudice or ignoring them doesn't help.



I think if you look up the actual statistics, most black men, are killed by other black men. But with regard the police, black men are 2.5 times more likely to be shot by police, but that also depends on the search criteria for the stats.
It might be that police are 2 times more likely to be threatened by black men.
The whole subject is very emotively driven and as has been stated any stat can be manipulated, thereby not comparing apples with apples.
But it is a big issue and there are no simple solutions, middle eastern men are probably detained as suspect terrorists, 100 times more than blonde Scandinavian men, is that racist or prejudice? Or just a reflection of the demographics of the most probable suspect?


----------



## wayneL (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I think if you look up the actual statistics, most black men, are killed by other black men. But with regard the police, black men are 2.5 times more likely to be shot by police, but that also depends on the search criteria for the stats.
> It might be that police are 2 times more likely to be threatened by black men.
> The whole subject is very emotively driven and as has been stated any stat can be manipulated, thereby not comparing apples with apples.
> But it is a big issue and there are no simple solutions, middle eastern men are probably detained as suspect terrorists, 100 times more than blonde Scandinavian men, is that racist or prejudice? Or just a reflection of the demographics of the most probable suspect?



Exactly, statistics always require deeper analysis, the prima factor case almost always misleading, especially when used to make some sort of political point.

If anyone has an already done so I would advise reading Freakonomics. I have never looked at statistics the same way ever since.


----------



## macca (4 June 2020)

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics..................

half full or half empty ?

One mans terrorist  is another mans freedom fighter

All old sayings, all true, unfortunately virtually every living thing is biased against any other living thing that is different.

I might add that for many years I have been amazed at the minimum hourly wage rate in the USA, I am not surprised that there are many angry people there.


----------



## qldfrog (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I think if you look up the actual statistics, most black men, are killed by other black men. But with regard the police, black men are 2.5 times more likely to be shot by police, but that also depends on the search criteria for the stats.



This is pure BS, I gave the figures: you can find them yourselves:
considering the over representation of black mlaes in crimes, black males offenders  are LESS likely to be shot dead by police than white males offenders.
It is incredible that people just take as truth any BS that is PC without looking at numbers..
So here I am again going for the raw numbers


----------



## qldfrog (4 June 2020)

so will the do good ers and snowflakes consider these as fake news???
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/


----------



## rederob (4 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> This is pure BS, I gave the figures: you can find them yourselves:
> considering the over representation of black mlaes in crimes, black males offenders  are LESS likely to be shot dead by police than white males offenders.



I suggest you learn basic statistics. 
Factoring in the low share of blacks in th US population and their higher crime rate still leaved them over twice as likely to be shot.


----------



## sptrawler (4 June 2020)

macca said:


> Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics..................
> 
> half full or half empty ?
> 
> ...



But they still have a manufacturing sector.


----------



## macca (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> But they still have a manufacturing sector.




Funny thing is Trump was the first western pollie to call China out about the dumping of product in USA (and the world for that matter)

Artificially reducing the price by using sweat shops has been called out by the social media against manufacturers in a number of countries that have open policies and can be seen

China does the exact same thing but uses concealed sites and factories and no one says a thing on social media.

Have a look at the price of stuff here, no way the person who made that is getting a fair wage, not even USA money, let alone Oz wages


----------



## Value Collector (4 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I think if you look up the actual statistics, most black men, are killed by other black men. But with regard the police, black men are 2.5 times more likely to be shot by police, but that also depends on the search criteria for the stats.
> It might be that police are 2 times more likely to be threatened by black men.
> The whole subject is very emotively driven and as has been stated any stat can be manipulated, thereby not comparing apples with apples.
> But it is a big issue and there are no simple solutions, middle eastern men are probably detained as suspect terrorists, 100 times more than blonde Scandinavian men, is that racist or prejudice? Or just a reflection of the demographics of the most probable suspect?




did you watch “the doll test” I linked above? Black people are not immune to being prejudiced to their own race, black children as young as 5 have learned that black is bad.

Police are more likely to shoot black not because they are actually being threatened more often by blacks, but simply because the feel threatened because the darker skin you have the more likely you are to be interpreted as dangerous, aggressive and threatening.

If you have Netflix watch a show called 100 humans, one of the episodes has an experiment where they have a white guy with a gun and a black guy with a phone jump out at people at the same time, and the person is told to shoot at the person with the gun and not the innocent with the phone, however reflex makes the people more often shoot the black guy instead of the actual guy with the gun, which shows people instinctively assume the black face is the threat.


----------



## sptrawler (4 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> did you watch “the doll test” I linked above? Black people are not immune to being prejudiced to their own race, black children as young as 5 have learned that black is bad.
> 
> Police are more likely to shoot black not because they are actually being threatened more often by blacks, but simply because the feel threatened because the darker skin you have the more likely you are to be interpreted as dangerous, aggressive and threatening.
> 
> If you have Netflix watch a show called 100 humans, one of the episodes has an experiment where they have a white guy with a gun and a black guy with a phone jump out at people at the same time, and the person is told to shoot at the person with the gun and not the innocent with the phone, however reflex makes the people more often shoot the black guy instead of the actual guy with the gun, which shows people instinctively assume the black face is the threat.



If you want to check out what happens in Africa between blacks, without whites involved, it is quite amazing, is that racial?


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> If you want to check out what happens in Africa between blacks, without whites involved, it is quite amazing, is that racial?




I am not sure what that has to do with anything, I think your logic might be broke.


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

Check out a group of police pepper spray some black women Multiple times that just attempt to peacefully walk by,


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I am not sure what that has to do with anything, I think your logic might be broke.



Why do you say that?
Have you looked at racial violence in Africa, between blacks?


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Why do you say that?



Because I don’t know why you are bringing up what happens in Africa, or how it would apply to a discussion about the subconscious biases I am talking about.

it’s almost like saying it’s ok for me to kick your dog, because sometimes dogs attack each other.


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> Because I don’t know why you are bringing up what happens in Africa, or how it would apply to a discussion about the subconscious biases I am talking about.



Well it is because your premis, is on the basis of race discrimination, based on colour.
Why else would I bring up the problems in Africa, which are of the same race and colour, other than to show your bias is on compassion not on fact.


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Well it is because your premis, is on the basis of race discrimination, based on colour.
> Why else would I bring up the problems in Africa, which are of the same race and colour, other than to show your bias is on compassion not on fact.




I am not sure you have been following my point.

did you actually read my comments earlier and watch the doll test video?

I said that blacks were not immune to prejudice against their own race.

I not saying this is an issue of whites being overtly racist bigots towards blacks.

I said the problem was far more sinister than that, because the problem relates to societies underlying prejudice towards blacks, that leads them to bias that cause them to think blacks are more dangerous, aggressive and threatening than they would a white person in the exact situations.

If you watch the doll test you will see, also that 100 human show on Netflix experiment shows that even black people were instinctively shooting the innocent black guy rather than the white guy with the gun.

it’s simple, we all have inbuilt Biases based on all sorts of things eg, race, gender, tattoos etc etc it’s up to us to try and catch our selves when we find them creeping into Our brain and learn from it.


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I am not sure you have been following my point.
> 
> did you actually read my comments earlier and watch the doll test video?
> 
> ...



I did watch the video and I agree there is an inbuilt fear with regard black guys.
Did you think about what I said about what is happening in Africa as we speak, with regard black Africans killing black Africans?
Do you choose to live in an area where property is cheap, but violence is high, I doubt it.
The problem with wealthy people is, they can be smug and tell everyone how life should be, while not having to live it.
The reality is when the wealthy achieve their dream of everyone being equal, they will be living it.
I cant wait to see it.
Check out Durban in Africa.lol


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2020)

The other thing I will add with regard everyone cheering the U.S going down.
One has to realise Australia is an island far away from the U.S and the U.K, we are in the middle of SE Asia and have a fabulous welfare State with a small population.
Yet we mock and slag off continuously at the U.S and U.K.
What are we trying to achieve?
Do we want to divorce ourselves? To what end becoming an Asian economy?
I find it difficult to work out what the end game is, for all this anti Australian anti western vitriol.


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 June 2020)

macca said:


> Have a look at the price of stuff here, no way the person who made that is getting a fair wage, not even USA money, let alone Oz wages



If any business in Australia tried to get away with the treatment of workers, pay rates, safety standards and so on which is taken for granted in China then the political "Left" would never let us hear the end of it.

If you're buying their products when an alternative is available then you're supporting it. Simple as that.

On the other hand, the problem for Australia is that it's good for business and so a blind eye is turned. Chinese steel mills buying Australian iron ore. Chinese funded power stations in developing countries that will boost demand for Australian coal. And so on. Money talks.

To be fair to China though, not much has really changed apart from the "who" bit. There's always been someone exploiting humans and the natural environment throughout recorded history so the basic concept isn't in any way new. I doubt there's even one country of any significance that hasn't done it at some point. 

As for the US, well I maintain my view that Trump's the wrong man to be President in every possible way but he does have on redeeming feature and that's in regard to trade. That's his only good feature but it's a real cracker and therein lies the problem.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

_1. Earlier in this thread I mentioned that a key element to racism was nonrandom behaviour.
I also covered the student case, so will now show how that type of behaviour manifests.
In the case of police officers doing their job, racism cannot occur if an *officer's actions are consistent and lawful.*

2. *When they are not,* the questions to be answered relate to *motivation or errors of judgement.*
In the student case covered earlier the officer's actions demonstrated a pattern of behaviour that is textbook racism, so I will go over them.

3. The officer had observed the student sitting on his dorm's patio for several minutes beforehand and he was not doing anything suspicious.  When the student got up he was clearly collecting rubbish.  It is impossible for that fact to be differently interpreted.  Despite this the officer chose to question the student.  _*The officer had no reasonable grounds f*_or his actions and his training would have told him that he was looking at _*potential 4th Amendment breach*_ if he overreached.  Put simply, at this point the officer's actions were deliberate, yet inexplicable.  Strike 1.
_
1. In paragraph [1] above you indicate that there are 2 conditions that are necessary and sufficient to prove racism. They are: (a) consistency in the Officer's actions and (b) that those actions are lawful. 1(a) is fact specific. We can observe the Officer's actions and determine whether he is consistent in his actions. 1(b) is a legal test. As a starting point you would need to cite the law. Second, you would need to apply the facts/allegations/assertions against an interpretation of the law.

2. If the conditions in 1 (a) and (b) are not met, then questions can be legitimately asked re.: (i) motivation and/or (ii) errors of judgment. In this case (i) would imply some form of racism (b) simply an error which is not racially based.

3. In this paragraph you simply move to an interpretation of the facts/circumstances which as yet, has no basis in the conditions that you required as necessary and sufficient in 1(a),(b). Also in this paragraph you raise issues of potential Fourth Amendment rights being abrogated.

Therefore before moving forward, the law needs to be stated:







First and foremost the law needs to be understood. In the first sentence we have a number of legal issues: 

we would need to establish that the Officer fulfilled the definition of a '*peace officer*'. 
the words '*may stop*': requires legal interpretation;
the words _*'reasonably suspects' *_require legal interpretation.
​If these steps is not completed, we cannot apply the legal test to the facts/circumstances/etc. If we are not applying the law (as you require) this analysis is stillborn.

There is US Colorado case law that provides the law as to what is legal in detaining an individual for questioning. 

_In order to lawfully detain an individual for questioning: (1) A police officer must have a *reasonable suspicion* that the *individual has committed, or is about to commit, a crime; *(2) the purpose of the detention must be reasonable; and (3) the character of the detention must be reasonable when considered in light of the purpose. People v. Stevens, 183 Colo. 399, 517 P.2d 1336 (1973); People v. Montoya, 185 Colo. 299, 524 P.2d 76 (1974); People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Ratcliff, 778 P.2d 1371 (Colo. 1989); People v. Wilson, 784 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1989); People v. Sutherland, 886 P.2d 681 (Colo. 1994); People v. Rodriguez, 924 P.2d 1100 (Colo. App. 1996), aff'd, 945 P.2d 1351 (Colo. 1997)._

We have therefore established that a 'peace officer' can be a Police Officer. This could also be confirmed in the definitions section of the legislation.

We now know the legal standard as to who may be (stopped) detained for questioning.

We have not yet established the meaning of '*reasonable*'. Therefore:

_The *reasonableness of an officer's suspicion *is determined from the *totality of the circumstances *in which the suspicion arose. People v. Bell, 698 P.2d 269 (Colo. 1985); People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Coca, 829 P.2d 385 (Colo. 1992)._

To determine whether the Officer acted '*reasonably*' the circumstances/facts/etc. will need to be applied at this point.

My point is this: you simply have not completed the necessary steps of analysis prior to moving forward on nothing more than your own subjective interpretation.

With regard to Fourth Amendment (below) rights breaches:

_The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized._

As you have flagged potential breaches of this Amendment: where do you see the potential issues arising?

jog on
duc
_
_


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> My point is this: you simply have not completed the necessary steps of analysis prior to moving forward on nothing more than your own subjective interpretation.



Please explain where the officer formed the intent to act on reasonable grounds.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> did you watch “the doll test” I linked above? Black people are not immune to being prejudiced to their own race, black children as young as 5 have learned that black is bad.




It's all down to religion imo, "dark forces" etc..


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Please explain where the officer formed the *intent *to act on reasonable grounds.





 You will (or should have noticed) that '*intent'* forms no part of the legal test.






The point is that you specified in your introductory paragraphs what was necessary (and sufficient) to demonstrate 'racism'. 






See the law above.








What the Officer needs to demonstrate is that he had grounds to '*reasonably suspect*' that a crime is about to be committed, is being committed or has been committed. That requirement will be met through evidence. Which we will get to. First of all, we all need to be on the same page.

jog on
duc


----------



## macca (5 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> It's all down to religion imo, "dark forces" etc..




To me it seems that any difference that causes one group cluster together has the potential to create discrimination to others.

Kids form little gangs and exclude people that are different, religious adherents blow people out of the sky because they are different, people of one racial background within a larger society group together for mental comfort.

Most living things group together like with like, for safety and familiarity, herds of animals have travelled together since forever. People have lived in tribes forever, tribes distrust other tribes because of past actions.

Here in Oz the aboriginals could not go on to other tribes land without special permission, penalty was a spear in the guts.

"Discrimination"  is inbred in all of us, civilisation means we are not supposed to kill everyone else. We are not supposed to enslave others but it is happening right now in many parts of the world.

All we can do is continue to be tolerant But we need that tolerance to go both ways. 
To have a march here in OZ where people think it is OK to smash things is in fact being intolerant. 

I accept that folk may be upset that there are riots in the USA but that is Not an excuse to riot here in Oz or anywhere else.

If our Police need to act to enforce our laws then they are Not intolerant, they are protecting society as we know it. If we allow mobs to rule the streets then we all need to get a gun and that is why the USA is like it is.


----------



## basilio (5 June 2020)

macca said:


> To have a march here in OZ  *where people think it is ok to smash things  ? *is in fact being intolerant.
> I accept that folk may be upset that there are riots in the USA but that is Not an excuse to riot here in Oz or anywhere else.




Who said anything about a march where it was ok to smash things ?  Who said we should have riots in Oz ?  A protest is not a riot or smashing things up.

There are certainly people who would ban protests under the banner of Law and Order. And there is Trump *who orders police to clear peaceful demonstrators away with tear gas so he can preach in front of a Church how supportive he is of peaceful demonstrations. *
Maybe this why the US is going down.

*Tear Gas, Threats for Protesters Before Trump Visits Church*
*“I am your president of law and order and an ally of all peaceful protesters," the president declared as law enforcement officers fired tear gas and deployed flash bangs into a crowd outside the White House.*


Associated Press

Published 2 June 2020
*https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/06/02/tear-gas-threats-for-protesters-before-trump-visits-church/*


----------



## Klogg (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> I am not sure you have been following my point.
> 
> did you actually read my comments earlier and watch the doll test video?
> 
> ...




I'm not sure they're biases, than they are extrapolating statistics.

Statistically, a black man is more likely to be a criminal, all else being equal. It stands to reason that if a particular trait allows me to identify higher probability of criminality, then I should be more cautious.

It just so happens skin colour is one of those easily identifiable traits.

IF history didn't hit the african american community so badly, their over-representation on crime stats would not have caused this thinking. It's a bit of chicken and egg.


As for re-programming individuals - evolutionarily speaking, it's harmful for the individual to change their thinking. If I have a useful heuristic to identify and avoid danger which is true NOW (due to history above), then I'll use it. This does not make one racist, it makes them human. As you rightly point out, the black community also use this heuristic.

A personal anecdote: I was in Darwin a while back, walking around at night time.
I walked past two aboriginal men, sitting on the sidewalk. From a distance, I assumed they were drunk, so I crossed the road. As I got closer, it turns out I was right - AND they started hurling abuse at me.
Had I not crossed the road, would they have tried something else? Who knows. But the heuristic worked - especially because there's no downside to me.

How do you stop people from acting in self-interest?


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> You will (or should have noticed) that '*intent'* forms no part of the legal test.



The officer acted *intentionally*.  Therefore he formed an *intent*.
Prior to the officer acting he had observed the student for a few minutes.  The student was sitting on his dormitory patio.
When he got up to continue collecting trash the officer decided to contact him in person.
Please explain how the officer's intent was formed such that his actions could be reasonable.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. The officer acted *intentionally*.  Therefore he formed an *intent*.
> 
> 2. Prior to the officer acting he had observed the student for a few minutes.  The student was sitting on his dormitory patio.
> 
> ...




1. No-one is actually denying the actus reus.

The issue is: is '*intent*' an element that requires demonstration by the law so that the Officer may legally stop (detain) an individual and question him on his: (i) name, (ii) address, (iii) identification if available and (iv) an explanation of his actions.







The answer is no: it is not. That is the law. Therefore your post is not relevant to the issues.

If you remember it was your assertion that this is what was required:






2 & 3. These are evidentiary matters. We have not actually progressed that far yet. We will. First we just need to establish what the law requires. I'm sure we will get there eventually.


jog on
duc


----------



## Country Lad (5 June 2020)

Interesting how many people here must have the last word in a debate


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

Klogg said:


> Statistically, a black man is more likely to be a criminal, all else being equal. ?




When you get pulled over and searched more often you are more likely to be caught for things.

When officers are less likely to give you warnings and let you off for minor crimes you will end up with more charges.

When judges and juries are more likely to assume you are guilty you are going to end up with more convictions.

when societies prejudices make it harder for you to get ahead and find jobs etc, you are more likely to fall into poverty traps and end committing crimes.

Societies Bias show up in many ways, and its not just racial, females get let of more speeding tickets for example, "good looking people" get treated less harshly by juries etc

If you say that being black doesn't expose you to all sorts of negative bias you are a fool in my opinion.


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. No-one is actually denying the actus reus.
> 
> The issue is: is '*intent*' an element that requires demonstration by the law so that the Officer may legally stop (detain) an individual and question him on his: (i) name, (ii) address, (iii) identification if available and (iv) an explanation of his actions.
> 
> ...



Please answer the precise question I have twice asked.
Your points are not relevant because an action was taken and needs to be explained in and of itself.


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I did watch the video and I agree there is an inbuilt fear with regard black guys.




Well that they only thing you have to know to be able to understand that often they receive harsher treatment than would be justified, and that sometimes that harsher treatment results is brutality, death or even just more charges, convictions or harassment.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Please answer the precise question I have twice asked.
> 
> Your points are not relevant because an action was taken and needs to be explained in and of itself.









Already answered.






The Officer's '*intent*' is not relevant to the legal question. An Officer '*may*' detain an individual if the above section is complied with: viz. that the Officer '*reasonably suspects*' the individual fulfils the required elements.

Therefore the legal question becomes: did the Officer have grounds (evidentiary) to *reasonably suspect*?

Are we ready to move forward?

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> View attachment 104321
> 
> 
> Already answered.
> ...



If you cannot explain the basis for the officer's action then anything else you post is irrelevant.


----------



## Klogg (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> When you get pulled over and searched more often you are more likely to be caught for things.
> 
> When officers are less likely to give you warnings and let you off for minor crimes you will end up with more charges.
> 
> ...




"If you say that being black doesn't expose you to all sorts of negative bias you are a fool in my opinion"

It most definitely does, no argument there. I'm saying that :
- Statistics justify the behaviour, at the micro level. 
- It's a disadvantage to train yourself out of it, at the micro level.

To your first point: We don't know if increased searching is resulting in increased crime, or visa versa. 
How do you prove which way the causal effect actually goes? (There might be answer here and I'm just ignorant of it - would love to know either way)


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> If you cannot explain the basis for the officer's action then anything else you post is irrelevant.





That is exactly what we are going to explain. The basis for his action must be: that the Officer '*reasonably suspects*' the individual fulfils the required elements.

The explanation (evidentiary basis) must comply with the law. We are on the same page up to this point. The only discussion is regarding the correct law that needs to be complied with. 

'Intention' or in legal terms, 'mens rea' is not a required element by the section.

I think we are ready to move forward.

jog on
duc


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> when societies prejudices make it harder for you to get ahead and find jobs etc, you are more likely to fall into poverty traps and end committing crimes.




Definitely true, but I think there is also an inbuilt prejudice of blacks (African Americans and Aborigines) against whites and white society and the perfectly understandable reluctance of some black people to shrug off their own culture and adopt a "foreign" one.

There is a lot of action with regard to African Americans vs white society in the USA, but at least the USA seems to have made peace with indigenous Americans and given them their own self managed reserves and land titles.


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> That is exactly what we are going to explain.



Then please go ahead and explain the officer's motivation.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Then please go ahead and explain the officer's motivation.




I'm not going to explain his motivation. Again, irrelevant to the legal question.

What I will do is look at the evidence (which likely will require additional information) that is available and see if it complies with the legal requirements.






Your position is clear: the Officer had no reasonable grounds for his actions.

Just to clarify: the video that we are discussing appears at post #75 on pg.4. That is correct?

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> I'm not going to explain his motivation. Again, irrelevant to the legal question.



It's the nub of the entire issue, and you cannot grasp this basic fact.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> It's the nub of the entire issue, and you cannot grasp this basic fact.









Your words.

Racism cannot occur if the Officer's actions are lawful (and consistent).  At the moment we are simply looking at whether the Officer's actions are lawful. If they are, we are half-way to demonstrating that no racism exists, according to your definition.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> View attachment 104326
> 
> 
> Your words.
> ...



Where is your explanation of the officer's actions?


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> Where is your explanation of the officer's actions?




Reasonable suspicion. That is a matter of personal opinion of course, but police officers are allowed to apply it given their experience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Reasonable suspicion. That is a matter of personal opinion of course, but police officers are allowed to apply it given their experience.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion



Thanks Rumpy.
All @ducati916 needs to do is explain how that was formed.


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2020)

Value Collector said:


> Well that they only thing you have to know to be able to understand that often they receive harsher treatment than would be justified, and that sometimes that harsher treatment results is brutality, death or even just more charges, convictions or harassment.



The prejudice against people is usually born of something other than inherited genetically, would you be comfortable depositing your money in ratesetters, if it was based in Nigeria? If not, is that racist? It certainly could be perceived as racist.
But in reality I wouldn't because of a poor reputation regarding their ethics, nothing to do with their race, well following on from that a lot of the problem is perception, that is based on anecdotal and visual inputs of black people on the news featuring in violent incidents.
In the same way as many of the scams reported are based in Nigeria, it leads to a perception Nigeria isn't a good place to put your money and possibly Nigerian people are untrustworthy, that isn't racist. It is a normal reaction to real inputs.


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

So since you have not indicated that this is the wrong video, I am simply going to assume that it is the correct one.

These quotes from the video are not arranged chronologically.

The most important quote from the Officer is:

"_...we've had some stuff going on in this area_."

This is prima facie evidence that would require rebuttal. Clearly I accept that this is simply not possible. Is it a reasonable proposition? I would argue that it is: the police receive reports from the public all of the time. Is it possible that the police had received reports of criminal or non-criminal issues in that area? Of course it is. This would in the normal course of events simply be an issue of disclosure and would resolve the matter factually.

Therefore the first question that must be asked is:

_(1) A police officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed, or is about to commit, a crime;_

_The first of these requirements is determined by whether there were specific and articulable facts known to the officer, which taken together with rational inferences from these facts, created a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify the intrusion into the defendant's personal security._ _People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Wilson, 784 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1989)._

Therefore what other variables (specific) were present (and can be articulated) that could fulfil the legal requirements: these were both present and articulated by the Officer:

(a) '_...we've had stuff going on in this area_'; and
(b) signs for trespassing, private property were present; and
(c) '._..noticed that you were sitting on the patio behind the building_'.

Do these 2 additional variables (other than (a)) fulfil the legal requirements, when taken together with rational inferences, to detain the individual on '_reasonable suspicion_' of criminal activity, past, present or future?

Clearly yes. Trespassing is a (present) criminal offence. That is sufficient in of itself, to warrant a detention to determine whether it was factually a trespass or whether the individual had the legal right to be on the property. Combined with 'stuff going on in the area' and 'sitting at the back of the building', the Officer would have fulfilled the legal requirements to detain the individual.

_Investigatory stops constitute an intermediate response by the police between non-detention and arrest. These procedures are permissible only for the purpose of questioning a suspect, who might otherwise escape, regarding his identity or observed behaviour in order temporarily to maintain the status quo while seeking to procure more information regarding possible wrongdoing. People v. Severson, 39 Colo. App. 95, 561 P.2d 373 (1977)._

_The police may detain and require identification of a person if they have a reasonable suspicion, based on objective facts, that the person is involved in criminal conduct. People v. Archuleta, 616 P.2d 977 (Colo. 1980)._

The Officer was well within his rights to question the individual.

Therefore, it follows, if the detention was legal, there can be no racism (your words).

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Reasonable suspicion. That is a matter of personal opinion of course, but police officers are allowed to apply it given their experience.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion




Incorrect. That is not the information conveyed in the link at all.

Further, '_reasonable suspicion_' has case law defining exactly what is required.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> So since you have not indicated that this is the wrong video, I am simply going to assume that it is the correct one.
> 
> These quotes from the video are not arranged chronologically.
> 
> ...



You have explained absolutely nothing.  
The officer needed a reasonable basis for his actions, and nothing you have described meets that burden.
Put another way, the actions of the officer appear wholly based on presumptions as nothing the student did could be reasonably construed as suspicious.  It is equivalent to you being observed sitting on your patio at home, then being stopped when it is evident you are collecting trash in front of your home.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> Incorrect. That is not the information conveyed in the link at all.
> 
> Further, '_reasonable suspicion_' has case law defining exactly what is required.
> 
> ...




Didn't you yourself cite "reasonable suspicion" in #380 ?


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. You have explained absolutely nothing.
> 
> 2. The officer needed a reasonable basis for his actions,
> 
> ...




1. Correct. I have provided the law. I have applied the facts to the law. I have no need to 'explain'. The law is the relevant argument.

2. Correct. The case law defines what constitutes a reasonable suspicion (the legal basis). If this requirement is met, the Officer is adjudged to be lawful in his actions to this point.

_The first of these requirements is determined by whether there were specific and articulable facts known to the officer, which taken together with rational inferences from these facts, created a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify the intrusion into the defendant's personal security._ _People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Wilson, 784 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1989)._

Therefore what are the variables (specific) that were present (and can be articulated) which can fulfil the legal requirements for an evidentiary basis: the following were both present and articulated by the Officer thereby satisfying the evidentiary basis.

(a) '_...we've had stuff going on in this area_'; and
(b) signs for trespassing, private property were present; and
(c) '._..noticed that you were sitting on the patio behind the building_'.

None of the above were denied, challenged or disproven by the detainee. Prima facie, the evidence is made out.

3. Actually, if you are charging the Officer with racism, the burden of proof is on you. Innocent until proven guilty. 

4. What presumptions? The evidence (see above (a),(b) and (c)) is clear and factual. There are no presumptions. 

5. You now wish to argue a hypothetical? Really?

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (5 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Reasonable suspicion. That is a matter of personal opinion of course, but police officers are allowed to apply it given their experience.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion




Sir Rumpole,

I think I owe you an apology. I believe I misread your post. I read: 'Reasonable suspicion'...is a matter of personal opinion, which of course is an incorrect interpretation of what you actually said and meant.

My apologies.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (5 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. Correct. I have provided the law. I have applied the facts to the law. I have no need to 'explain'. The law is the relevant argument.
> 
> 2. Correct. The case law defines what constitutes a reasonable suspicion (the legal basis). If this requirement is met, the Officer is adjudged to be lawful in his actions to this point.
> 
> ...



You have failed at the first hurdle.
Please explain what made the offer's actions lawful, as nothing you have presented shows it could have been.


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The prejudice against people is usually born of something other than inherited genetically, would you be comfortable depositing your money in ratesetters, if it was based in Nigeria? If not, is that racist? It certainly could be perceived as racist.
> But in reality I wouldn't because of a poor reputation regarding their ethics, nothing to do with their race, well following on from that a lot of the problem is perception, that is based on anecdotal and visual inputs of black people on the news featuring in violent incidents.
> In the same way as many of the scams reported are based in Nigeria, it leads to a perception Nigeria isn't a good place to put your money and possibly Nigerian people are untrustworthy, that isn't racist. It is a normal reaction to real inputs.




Firstly, I never said I am immune to Bias, I believe we all have them, some more than others. Recognises our bias and trying to self correct is very important.

All I am saying is that a reason Blacks often receive harsher treatment at the hands of the cops is because of inbuilt Bias, which don't have to mean the person is openly racist or a bigot, its just a simply flaw in the way a person judges other people subconsciously.

Saying that I actually have an investment in Nigeria, I own part of the Coca-Cola bottling plant there, its the largest bottling plant in Africa I believe.

But yeah I have Bias against Africa and beliefs about it which are likely to be untrue, of course I do as I said I am not immune to these things, But atleast I can be honest and admit it, and its something I am always working on to correct.


----------



## frugal.rock (5 June 2020)

Rascism gets passed around from children's age.
I don't think I was raised rascist, but, it all got learnt in the playground.
What I heard back in the day...

Greek = Wog, wop, greasys.
Italian = Spik, wog, itites.
Asian = gooks, slants, slopes, vc etc.
Arabic = sand niggers, camel herders
African = jigaboos, niggers, gollywogs, chockos
Aboriginal = boongs, coons, jaffas
Irish = paddies
UK English= pom, twat, pratt, geezer
USA = septic tanks
India = curry munchers, bobble heads

Then there was all the jokes.

F.Rock


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. You have failed at the first hurdle.
> 
> 2. Please explain what made the offer's actions lawful, as nothing you have presented shows it could have been.




1. Which of course is simply your opinion. There is no Statutory law, Case law or Evidence to support that conclusion. 

2. What has been presented is:

(a) The Statutory requirements that Police Officers in Colorado must adhere to, if they are to act in a lawful manner:






Then there was the case law providing the correct legal interpretation of the section (above). This case law addressed the issue of 'reasonable suspicion'.






Therefore the evidence had to demonstrate reasonable suspicion as required by the case law which articulates the legal test that must be applied to the Act. The evidence is below.






The evidentiary base (a) - (c) are all present in the video. The young man in the video did not dispute, challenge or otherwise raise any doubts (reasonable or otherwise) on these points. Therefore they can be accepted as true and accurate. 

Therefore we can move forward, applying the facts (a) - (c) to the case law that provides the legal interpretation for the Act.






I even excluded (a) to see if that would or could have made a difference to the outcome. It does not. The legal outcome therefore is that the Officer was acting in a legal and lawful manner. It therefore follows that there is (cannot be) any racism involved in the detention and questioning of the young man.

I assume you have a case to put forward for the young man that will demonstrate that he was not questioned lawfully or consistently and was therefore subjected to questioning unlawfully. 

Responses like the following:









Are not really very helpful to the young man. They are simply your opinion, which while obviously incredibly valuable to yourself, actually hold no relevance or weight in deciding a legal issue.

Why is this a legal issue?






Because you made it one.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. Which of course is simply your opinion. There is no Statutory law, Case law or Evidence to support that conclusion.
> 
> 2. What has been presented is:
> 
> ...



You have never yet shown that a single act of the officer was undertaken lawfully.
Is there a reason you cannot do that?


----------



## joeno (6 June 2020)

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/20/mapped-the-7-governments-the-u-s-has-overthrown/

I'm surprised *any* big media would touch this since the US gives the cattle prod to whoever brings it up.


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> You have never yet shown that a single act of the officer was undertaken lawfully.
> Is there a reason you cannot do that?





This is your considered response to the previous post which contains:

(i) The Law;
(ii) An interpretation of the law via relevant case law;
(iii) The Evidence;
(iv) Application of the Evidence to the law;
(v) A conclusion.






To (i) you present no challenge;
To (ii) you present no challenge;
To (iii) you present no challenge;
To (iv) you present no challenge;
To (v) you present an opinion challenging the conclusion.



The only conclusion that I can entertain is that really you have no legal argument to put forward: and because you have no legal argument to put forward, you simply proffer your opinion, hoping for what I'm not really sure.

While clearly you value your opinion highly, unfortunately it is not legally relevant.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

I don't offer my opinion here, and you have posted a load of useless information to support what you claim.
The simple fact is that nothing the officer did was lawful.
So let me help you: what would have been the charge against the student if the officer thought he was correct?


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. I don't offer my opinion here, and you have posted a load of useless information to support what you claim.
> 
> 2. The simple fact is that nothing the officer did was lawful.
> 
> 3. So let me help you: what would have been the charge against the student if the officer thought he was correct?





1. Very well, here is what you have posted in response to myself:






I see nothing save your opinion. Therefore:






Your response (above) is simply (a)  more irrelevant opinion. Why is it irrelevant? It is irrelevant because it does not raise a legal argument. There are numerous references to the Officer acting illegally, but nothing save your opinion to actually substantiate your claim (except your opinion).

The issue, which you yourself stated is:






Are the Officer's actions lawful.

2. Therefore when you make this statement:






After you have been provided with everything below:






There is nothing of substance in your response: nothing save your opinion, which is worthless, when arguing legal issues.

Of course you are trying to avoid arguing the legal issues at all cost. The reason being that the law and the evidence simply do not support an allegation of racism.

3. In [3] you resort once again to the hypothetical strategy:






The issue is:






jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. Very well, here is what you have posted in response to myself:
> 
> View attachment 104376
> 
> ...



I will ask for the last time as you have *never *yet explained what actions were lawful, and have no apparent ability to state what offence was probable.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> The issue is:
> View attachment 104378



A person sitting on their porch is not a behaviour that would arouse any suspicion.  Nor would the act of a person at work collecting trash arouse any suspicion.
To consider these acts as reasonable grounds that an offence might have occurred or be in train beggars belief - and that *is *my opinion based on having been selected for jury service and required to determine if actions of an offender were proven beyond "*reasonable *doubt."
However, the next issue would be what possible offence may be contemplated by the officer.  Is there a reason you cannot determine this?


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

1. A person sitting on their porch is not a behaviour that would arouse any suspicion.  Nor would the act of a person at work collecting trash arouse any suspicion.

2(a). To consider these acts as reasonable grounds that an offence might have occurred or be in train beggars belief - 

2(b) and that *is *my opinion based on having been selected for jury service and required to determine if actions of an offender were proven beyond "*reasonable *doubt."

3. However, the next issue would be what possible offence may be contemplated by the officer.  Is there a reason you cannot determine this?

1. Your statements are without the specific context. Lacking the context, they lack specificity. The context is:









The Officer articulated those facts to the young man. The circumstances (context/facts) were such that a rational inference could be made that would create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity can be made. This fulfils the legal test.

This therefore becomes legal evidence. If it is not rebutted with distinguishing evidence, it is taken as true and becomes a fact and is applied to the law.

(a) This evidence cannot be rebutted by the young man as he has no access to the police reports. The Officer claims that there have been reports of 'stuff going on'. As there is no rebuttal evidence available, for the moment that is fact.

However let us assume for the moment that that evidence did not exist. Then we have only the two remaining variables: (b) and (c). The young man could easily have rebutted either one. He did not. Therefore we can accept these statements from the Officer as true facts.

There is a sign that states that the property is private property, no trespassing.
We have an unidentified person sitting at the back of a building (the young man).

Is it possible that this person is trespassing? Of course.
Would it raise a reasonable suspicion?

If you were a pedestrian walking past, maybe not.
If you are a Police Officer: (ignoring for the moment 'stuff happening')






Sitting at the back of a building, when there are signs prohibiting trespassing, would raise a reasonable suspicion in a Police Officer, as in this context, this is evidence of (potential, which is a suspicion reasonably held) _*present *_criminal behaviour. The Officer is lawfully allowed to detain and question the young man.

2(a). That is the law. You don't like it, take it up with the State Legislature of Colorado and Judges sitting in their courts. But for the purposes of this discussion, it-is-what-it-is.

2(b). Is this another 'White Coat' argument? Irrelevant. Is your argument: I have sat on a jury, therefore I am now a legal expert and therefore I don't actually need to demonstrate anything because I am an expert?. I watched the Lincoln Lawyer the other night.

3. There is no need to progress any further. You are unable to provide any legal argument or evidentiary basis for your assertions that the Officer was acting in a racist manner. But feel free to raise evidentiary issues if you do find them. I am open minded.

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> I will ask for the last time as you have *never *yet explained what actions were lawful, and have no apparent ability to state what offence was probable.




See above.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> See above.
> 
> jog on
> duc



You never once *explained *a lawful action from the officer. 
Furthermore, a police officer cannot lawfully determine trespass based on what occurred, but you appear consistently ignorant of this fact and chose to repeat irrelevances.
So at no time would it have been possible for the police officer to lawfully arrest the student.  That's aside from the officer making false claims to the student about *obstruction *and being dishonest with other police officers who later arrived.


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. You never once *explained *a lawful action from the officer.
> 
> 2. Furthermore, a police officer cannot lawfully determine trespass based on what occurred, but you appear consistently ignorant of this fact and chose to repeat irrelevances.
> 
> ...




1. I don't need to explain anything. Why is that? Because:

You have the LAW as stated.






Then you have the case law, explaining, defining, and providing an interpretation of the statutory law for you:






Then you have the evidence: these are the un-challenged facts.






Then you ask given the evidence: are the Officer's actions reasonable:






The conclusion can only be from applying the law to the facts that the Officer's actions were lawful. Therefore your issue:






Is answered: the Officer's actions were lawful: therefore racism cannot occur.

2. Of course he can. The individual was seen sitting behind the building. He never denied this. There were Trespassing sign(s). This was never denied or challenged. By detaining the individual and ascertaining whether that individual has the legal right to be on the property in question, the Officer can very easily determine whether a crime had been committed. To ascertain that information however, the Officer needs to ask questions and seek confirmation (see above) wherever possible.

3. Who's talking about arrest. We are talking about your issue of racism. You seem unable to stay on topic.

4. Another attempt to divert the conversation away from the issue: which is:






Are the Officer's actions lawful with regard to your allegation of racism.

Or do you want to modify your allegation to include new allegations that so far (you claim) include: false claims, dishonesty, etc. In other words you want to change boats mid-stream.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. I don't need to explain anything. Why is that? Because:
> 
> You have the LAW as stated.
> 
> ...



You are really confused about what is at issue.
No action he took was lawful.
Instead, every element of the officer's interaction was textbook racism playing out.
The independent review noted _*"he erred in believing he had reasonable suspicion that a trespass was occurring" *_so the "pedestrian stop" (as he called it in) was unsound. 
That's somewhat unsurprising except, perhaps, to a person who has no concept of what is *reasonable*.


----------



## frugal.rock (6 June 2020)

G'day Rob n Duc,
Can we please drop it?
Agree to disagree etc?
Much obliged old chaps.

I went out of my way to avoid police RBT last night, just wasn't in the mood.

(The stupid thing about the event, just before, I nearly T boned some clown driving out of the pub car park, who then disappeared up a side street.)

Turned off before the bend where they were sitting. I said to my daughter, "you watch, they will come and chase me".
Sure enough, a speeding car fly's up behind me, flashing lights get turned on.
I pulled over. Breath tested.
There was no doubt, the copper had to speed to catch up, and did so without flashing lights/ sirens.
Where I turned off, you can't directly see the police, just a bit of reflection of their lights.

Traffic laws are a big area that coppers flaunt. Who is going to stop and fine a uniformed copper in a cop car for speeding outside of their law?
The flaunting of rules by cops is the issue worldwide.
Race, sex, religion etc are the catalysts for the flaunting. We are seeing a bunch of images lately in the news calling out this behaviour.

Closer to the subject at hand...

Well, the unemployment figures released Thursday for the US had the figures pegged at 20%, figure came in around 14%.
That must have some influence on the current bounce/trend, IE, encouraging news?

F.Rick


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. You are really confused about what is at issue.
> 
> 2. No action he took was lawful.
> 
> ...




1. What is at issue is:






2. Already demonstrated a number of times. Apart from your opinion which is irrelevant, what do you have? Nothing so far.

3. Your opinion. Irrelevant.

4. Ahhh. Something new and concrete. Where is the review? Post it up.

5. The law defined what is reasonable in this context. You don't like the law as it stands? Irrelevant.

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> G'day Rob n Duc,
> Can we please drop it?
> Agree to disagree etc?
> Much obliged old chaps.
> ...




Unfortunately it is just one of those things that will need to play out. You'll just have to place us on ignore or get Joe to move us to the sin bin.


jog on
duc


----------



## frugal.rock (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> Unfortunately it is just one of those things that will need to play out. You'll just have to place us on ignore or get Joe to move us to the sin bin.
> 
> jog on
> duc



Unless an impartial jury makes a determination, the argument goes nowhere !


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2020)

Did this student case ever go to court ? What was the result ?

Sorry I don't have time to go through it all.


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> Unless an impartial jury makes a determination, the argument goes nowhere !




That is one way to look at it.
The other way is simply evaluate the arguments put forward to date.

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (6 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Did this student case ever go to court ? What was the result ?
> 
> Sorry I don't have time to go through it all.




No idea.

However, apparently there is an independent review. Just waiting for it to be posted up. That may shed further light on the matter.

jog on
duc


----------



## qldfrog (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> No idea.
> 
> However, apparently there is an independent review. Just waiting for it to be posted up. That may shed further light on the matter.
> 
> ...



The trouble i see with your determination in answering to Rederob point by point and even with facts is that this is the attitude which created the repressed henchmen found from Nazi Germany to Stalin goulag and Polpot camps.

Pray for us poor Aussies when his CCP friends will have taken control, fighting the evil US capitalism and bringing us people's power.
You will look at this from NZ, we behind barbed wires...
Let's hope the fall of the US will be a very slow process


----------



## qldfrog (6 June 2020)

In jest only..well i hope


----------



## frugal.rock (6 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> Let's hope the fall of the US will be a very slow process





qldfrog said:


> In jest only..well i hope



Thus the thread.
Sometimes, intelligent people (obviously other people, not me) need to have a discussion about things to highlight potentially impending situations to Grubberments around the world.
We see it as it is, relatively unbiased and relatively detached from the political world.
It's up to the world leaders then.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2020)

The next step will be mass resignations in the police force IMO, like I said in one of the early posts, this will all lead to no men or vey few men applying for the police force.
When you have 3% of the population being convicted and imprisoned to make up 33% of inmates, I dont think it can be put down to racial prejudice.
Just my opinion.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> That is one way to look at it.
> The other way is simply evaluate the arguments put forward to date.
> 
> jog on
> duc



The police officer resigned and the City of Boulder agreed to settle all claims made by the student.
The independent review confirmed violations of BPD Rules 5 and 8, namely that the officer took actions which he *"… reasonably should know is not in accordance with the law;”*  and, he failed to *“use reasonable judgment and refrain from conduct which reflects unfavorably on the department,”* thereby causing embarrassment to the department, compromising its reputation and impairing its credibility. 
In plain English all his actions were determined to be unlawful.
You might ask how an officer with 15 years experience could get it so wrong. The answer lies in police statistics which do not lie.


----------



## frugal.rock (6 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The next step will be mass resignations in the police force IMO, like I said in one of the early posts, this will all lead to no men or vey few men applying for the police force.
> When you have 3% of the population being convicted and imprisoned to make up 33% of inmates, I dont think it can be put down to racial prejudice.
> Just my opinion.



I believe there is a documentary highlighting the fact that the American prison system is in fact a thriving sub economy for the US, meaning, certain individuals and many companies rely on the system and the fact it's over populated for their capitalism ventures and State sanctioned slave labour...

As for copper's quitting, most likely very few could afford to quit...


----------



## rederob (6 June 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> I believe there is a documentary highlighting the fact that the American prison system is in fact a thriving sub economy for the US, meaning, certain individuals and many companies rely on the system and the fact it's over populated for their capitalism ventures and State sanctioned slave labour...
> 
> As for copper's quitting, most likely very few could afford to quit...



Off topic but in reply: if you have not binge watched *"Orange is the New Black"*, you should. 
Corporatising the prison system is, in my opinion, a poor decision from any government authority.  The above Netflix series shows how insidious that step is.
Back on topic, can we ignore the recovery?


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 June 2020)

basilio said:


> Who said anything about a march where it was ok to smash things ? Who said we should have riots in Oz ? A protest is not a riot or smashing things up.



I think the context is "if" it were to happen not a prediction that it will actually occur.

Much as those expressing concern about potential COVID-19 transmission at protests in Australia. It's a hypothetical but if it were to result in an outbreak and if that were to hypothetically result in a delay in re-opening things well then that's going to do plenty of harm to the cause. Campaigning 101 = don't do anything which gives bystanders a reason to diskile you.

That's a lot of "if" in both cases.


----------



## aus_trader (6 June 2020)

I don't have anything against peaceful protests. But I hope we don't get a spike in COVID numbers as a result, because how can social distancing be kept in a crowded protest ?


----------



## wayneL (6 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> I don't have anything against peaceful protests. But I hope we don't get a spike in COVID numbers as a result, because how can social distancing be kept in a crowded protest ?



I find the double standard.... Interesting.

I can't sit next to someone in a restaurant and the local feckin pub still isn't open, but, indulging in a copy cat protest/riot?

Well that's perfectly okay. 

On this narrow point, I'm with the protesters, but not the antifa, marxist rioters.


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> I don't have anything against peaceful protests. But I hope we don't get a spike in COVID numbers as a result, because how can social distancing be kept in a crowded protest ?




If it did lead to a COVID-19 spike then that's the sort of thing which turns fence sitters against the protesters and their message.

Protest, politics, marketing and so is not about rational logic, a point that advertisers worked out a very long time ago, such that mere association with something bad is rarely a good thing.

The underlying message I agree with, although I'd broaden it to ALL lives matter, but anyone who's lost their job, business or whatever because of the lockdown will be downright furious with anyone, regardless of their motives, who causes it to happen again. 

That being so, I'd rather they'd worked with police etc to find some means to protest and make the point without involving a mass gathering.


----------



## aus_trader (6 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> I find the double standard.... Interesting.
> 
> I can't sit next to someone in a restaurant and the local feckin pub still isn't open, but, indulging in a copy cat protest/riot?
> 
> ...



OK, there is a little self interest in it as well.

I hate to see ourselves including myself in lockdown and restrictions again. So the comment about the fear of spiking virus infections... undoing all the good we've done to bring it under control.


----------



## wayneL (6 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> OK, there is a little self interest in it as well.
> 
> I hate to see ourselves including myself in lockdown and restrictions again. So the comment about the fear of spiking virus infections... undoing all the good we've done to bring it under control.



It will be very interesting to see what happens in that regard


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> It will be very interesting to see what happens in that regard



It will highlight some pretty self righteous, self indulgent behaviour, but that is todays Australia.


----------



## aus_trader (6 June 2020)

I'll try and be a bit more optimistic about the outcome. Is the rally to be held mainly in NSW ? If so they have almost zero cases, so all will be OK after the rally I hope, with no re-infections...


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2020)

I just thought of something regarding discrimination, people discriminate against other people because of their culture and colours, the argument is that the descrimination may be because of different values and morals not colour or culture.
Well in a way this virus has brought about another discrimination, a descrimination in mode of travel, ships are going to be shunned because of the media coverage of the outbreaks onboard.
But in reality is there any greater chance of contracting the desease on a ship or a plane?
Just a thought.


----------



## aus_trader (7 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> But in reality is there any greater chance of contracting the desease on a ship or a plane?
> Just a thought.



You'd think so wouldn't ya ? I don't have any stats or anything but it's very hard to keep a social distance in a cruise ship or in economy class on a plane.


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

rederob said:


> The police officer resigned and the City of Boulder agreed to settle all claims made by the student.
> The independent review confirmed violations of BPD Rules 5 and 8, namely that the officer took actions which he *"… reasonably should know is not in accordance with the law;”*  and, he failed to *“use reasonable judgment and refrain from conduct which reflects unfavorably on the department,”* thereby causing embarrassment to the department, compromising its reputation and impairing its credibility.
> In plain English all his actions were determined to be unlawful.
> You might ask how an officer with 15 years experience could get it so wrong. The answer lies in police statistics which do not lie.





So where is the link to the 'Independent Review'. Or attach it to your post. Either/or works for me.


jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> So where is the link to the 'Independent Review'. Or attach it to your post. Either/or works for me.
> 
> 
> jog on
> duc





Found it.

Attached.

jog on
duc


----------



## qldfrog (7 June 2020)

*use reasonable judgment and refrain from conduct which reflects unfavorably on the department,”* 
Isn't it terrible?.it means this week any police arresting ANY person of colour would be sackable
Murderer and rioter included


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> *use reasonable judgment and refrain from conduct which reflects unfavorably on the department,”*
> Isn't it terrible?.it means this week any police arresting ANY person of colour would be sackable
> Murderer and rioter included





As usual (with these types of inquiries) the devil is in the detail.

The Officer's lawyer negotiated a settlement with the city. Now, if the Officer had been culpable pursuant to Regulations 5 and 8 and it was clearly proven, it is likely that no such settlement would have taken place. Rather (as per department policy) simply a disciplinary process would have been implemented. This could have resulted in his dismissal.

That he resigned with an undisclosed settlement indicates all is not as it seems. The clues are contained within the Review.

jog on
duc


----------



## qldfrog (7 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> As usual (with these types of inquiries) the devil is in the detail.
> 
> The Officer's lawyer negotiated a settlement with the city. Now, if the Officer had been culpable pursuant to Regulations 5 and 8 and it was clearly proven, it is likely that no such settlement would have taken place. Rather (as per department policy) simply a disciplinary process would have been implemented. This could have resulted in his dismissal.
> 
> ...



Good on him.
Have a great week end


----------



## rederob (7 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> That he resigned with an undisclosed settlement indicates all is not as it seems. The clues are contained within the Review.



At no point did you explain how the officer could have acted reasonably, nor in accordance with law. The BPD's Professional Standards Unit determined that he did neither.
You appear to believe you knew better but consistently could not offer reasons.  Logic is about reasoning.
A reasonable perspective is also "objective" and the PSU determined that an objective viewer would have seen in the first few minutes that the officer misjudged _*reasonable suspicion. *_ I noted your drawn-out ramblings which failed in that regard.

So let's get to the point here.  People do not normally admit they are racists, or that they discriminate on any particular grounds.  Racism is usually more subtle and can be unwittingly systemic. In this instance we saw a very experienced police officer acting unreasonably, and consistently unlawfully, without apparent explanation.  But is it not ironic that it took an elderly white male only a few moments to work out an explanation was likely *racial profiling*?

Racism is not one of those things that can be "*proven*" in the conventional sense. We link it to a pattern of behaviour that is not consistent with societal norms.  In this case we were being asked to believe that if you saw from 100 metres away a black person with a hoodie sitting down and minding their business that it was immediately suspicious.  Feel free to test your thoughts on that idea as you also wonder your reaction had you instead seen a white male wearing a suit.


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. At no point did you explain how the officer could have acted reasonably, nor in accordance with law.
> 
> 2. The BPD's Professional Standards Unit determined that he did neither.
> 
> ...




1. I could simply repost previously posted law, evidence, etc. and thereby disprove your assertion. However clearly a waste of time as you simply choose to ignore the facts placed in front of you. That's fine, people will judge for themselves the value contained in 'your opinion'.

2. Correct. However, as I intimated, all is not as it seems.

3. See [1] above.

4. As stated, not all is as it appears.

jog on
duc


----------



## rederob (7 June 2020)

ducati916 said:


> 1. I could simply repost previously posted law, evidence, etc. and thereby disprove your assertion. However clearly a waste of time as you simply choose to ignore the facts placed in front of you. That's fine, people will judge for themselves the value contained in 'your opinion'.



The BPD PSU has a grasp of law which you consistently failed to understand, and still seem to want to insist you know better.  
You are accomplished at misunderstanding the blindingly obvious.
Furthermore, I never ventured my "opinion," and what you or anyone else chooses to believe is not relevant to me.  I commented principally on what constituted reasonable and lawful actions.
To put an end to the type of behaviours that are symptomatic of racism we need to address the causes and ensure that inappropriate law enforcement practices such as those used against George Floyd are forbidden.  Let's hope the protests in America gain traction in those regards.


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

rederob said:


> 1. The BPD PSU has a grasp of law which you consistently failed to understand, and still seem to want to insist you know better.
> 
> 2. You are accomplished at misunderstanding the blindingly obvious.
> 
> ...




1. Well we shall see. 

2. Opinion. Irrelevant.

3. As I said, you will be judged by others on your content. If they find your opinion valuable, they will continue to read your opinion and give it weight.

4. Agreed. However the starting point is to recognise legitimate racism from something that is not racism.

jog on
duc


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

From the Report:

A Mr Troyer was the lead: Prosecutor 14yrs District Attorney 2yrs. Clearly well qualified. The Review looked at a substantial volume of evidence and arrived at 4 conclusions. The relevant evidence:











So far, so good.

The Officer then contacts the young man (YM). No major issues to this point. Now had the YM asked 'Am I free to leave', at that point, if the answer was yes, he could legally have walked away. If the answer was no, now he is being legally detained and subject to the law (see below): it is incumbent upon the YM to ask. Possibly he did not know. Ignorance of the law, is as they say, no defence.






The report does not consider this point. Why not? Legally it is an important point (for both parties) as it defines their legal relationship from this point moving forward.

This is a lacuna within the Report that any experienced defence Attorney would challenge immediately.

More to follow. Stay tuned for the next thrilling instalment.

jog on
duv


----------



## frugal.rock (7 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> But in reality is there any greater chance of contracting the desease on a ship or a plane?
> Just a thought.



AEI environmental systems...


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> You'd think so wouldn't ya ? I don't have any stats or anything but it's very hard to keep a social distance in a cruise ship or in economy class on a plane.



Yes , but what I'm getting at, it is just another example of conditioned response.
I think a lot of the blame is being attributed on the wrong cause, the blame is being directed based on colour discrimination, when in fact I think a lot can be attributed to high incidence of black representation in crime related incidences.
This in turn causes a conditioned response by police, if the crime rate attributed to blacks dropped, I'm sure the reaction of the public and police would change, only my opinion.
But while you have the police being attacked by a sector of society, that sector will always be dealt with differently, human nature.
Just my opinion.


----------



## Knobby22 (7 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Yes , but what I'm getting at, it is just another example of conditioned response.
> I think a lot of the blame is being attributed on the wrong cause, the blame is being directed based on colour discrimination, when in fact I think a lot can be attributed to high incidence of black representation in crime related incidences.
> This in turn causes a conditioned response by police, if the crime rate attributed to blacks dropped, I'm sure the reaction of the public and police would change, only my opinion.
> But while you have the police being attacked by a sector of society, that sector will always be dealt with differently, human nature.
> Just my opinion.



So black people are born bad and so cops are conditioned to kill them. Just my opinion.


----------



## frugal.rock (7 June 2020)

Well, some sanity prevailed yesterday in NSW with a last minute appeal approved for the BLM rally protest for Sydney.
If not approved, legislation dictates that it probably would have gotten very ugly, probably forcing the judge's hand.
As said, we can only hope that the virus was as well behaved as the protesters.
I note, the press showed some ugliness by protesters after dark, a group of youngsters at Central Station who clearly had other issues.
Their behaviour mars the efforts of all the peaceful demonstrations.
Riot police defrayed the situation.

F.Rock


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> So black people are born bad and so cops are conditioned to kill them. Just my opinion.



That is going from the sublime, to the ridiculous, but to be expected.


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> So black people are born bad and so cops are conditioned to kill them. Just my opinion.



You're related to Kathy Newman, aren't you?

The data shows they commit more crime per capita. But there may be reasons for that, uncorrelated to genetics... Perhaps there is a viscous cycle at play.

Candice Owens (a black woman) has some interesting views on that.


----------



## ducati916 (7 June 2020)

A further document to peruse (oops, too large). From this document we have this: http://aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/KYR-Colorado.pdf







So as previously stated, the YM could have simply walked away had he exercised his right to do so.

The importance of this is that, because he did not do so, his initial conversation was by consent. If the conversation is by consent, then the Officer need not demonstrate 'reasonable suspicion': he can simply ask any questions that he wishes to.

From the initial contact:

















Right up to this point, the Officer remains within his legal rights to ask for a date of birth. The contact was (legally) by consent.

Therefore the findings of the Police Inquiry and the Review of that inquiry missed this important point. As I said previously, an experienced Attorney would have identified this error immediately. I suspect that this was the foundation for the Officer's later claim against the City and why they settled paying him out. Their case was significantly flawed.

jog on
duc


----------



## aus_trader (7 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> But while you have the police being attacked by a sector of society, that sector will always be dealt with differently, human nature.



I think this is not a good assumption mate. I am not a black/aboriginal/coloured person, but we have to be careful to just assume that. There may be higher crimes based on stats, but Police needs to be trained to handle that perhaps with more defence mechanisms pepper sprays / tasers etc. At no circumstances should they have the right to use violence or as Knobby22 pointed out below, allowed to suffocate the life out of a person with a knee on top of their neck.



Knobby22 said:


> So black people are born bad and so cops are conditioned to kill them. Just my opinion.


----------



## Knobby22 (7 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> You're related to Kathy Newman, aren't you?
> 
> The data shows they commit more crime per capita. But there may be reasons for that, uncorrelated to genetics... Perhaps there is a viscous cycle at play.
> 
> Candice Owens (a black woman) has some interesting views on that.



Yes, obviously. I was just summarising SP posts. 

The next step is how do you break the cycle? You can see the right in the USA is now starting to take this a bit seriously, there are many Republicans including Senators and even the football league starting to look at it differently. 

I think the Martin Luther King death was a watershed that led to many improvements and this is another opportunity. It just requires some leadership.

I really think the USA can come out of this stronger than ever but it doesn't need some of the excuses to stop this happening.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> So black people are born bad and so cops are conditioned to kill them. Just my opinion.




Just my opinion but I'm pessimistic that there will ever be a solution to our race relations issue, the reason being that there will always be a lingering resentment by some aboriginals to the mere presence of white men in Australia and this will continue regardless of what is done for them. Indigenous people already get twice the welfare per person that others get and its still not enough.

This resentment leads to a lack of respect for white laws, people and property and will therefore lead to higher crime rates among indigenous people and therefore higher incarceration rates. This situation will be exploited by various groups for their own agendas and it's going to lead to a  day where if police arrest a black person for any crime for good reason they will be labelled racist and the "system" will be blamed rather than the perpetrator who obviously had a choice not to do the crime in the first place.


----------



## Knobby22 (7 June 2020)

Not sure why I can't quote.  SirRumpole.
We can do a lot better. I heard some aboriginal elders on ABC national say we are treating it all wrong. They want welfare cut and the money used to create industries with real jobs, not painting.

They were saying the victim mentality is being used by some of their community for   gain but it is damaging them.

We really need a rethink and that's on both sides.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Not sure why I can't quote.  SirRumpole.
> We can do a lot better. I heard some aboriginal elders on ABC national say we are treating it all wrong. They want welfare cut and the money used to create industries with real jobs, not painting.
> 
> They were saying the victim mentality is being used by some of their community for   gain but it is damaging them.
> ...




Yes, I can agree on that.


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> I think this is not a good assumption mate. I am not a black/aboriginal/coloured person, but we have to be careful to just assume that. There may be higher crimes based on stats, but Police needs to be trained to handle that perhaps with more defence mechanisms pepper sprays / tasers etc. At no circumstances should they have the right to use violence or as Knobby22 pointed out below, allowed to suffocate the life out of a person with a knee on top of their neck.



Absolutely, but there is two sides to it, only one is getting any attention.


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Not sure why I can't quote.  SirRumpole.
> We can do a lot better. I heard some aboriginal elders on ABC national say we are treating it all wrong. They want welfare cut and the money used to create industries with real jobs, not painting.
> 
> They were saying the victim mentality is being used by some of their community for   gain but it is damaging them.
> ...



There has been many attempts to encourage the aboriginal self management, the emu and orange farms at Wiluna come to mind, unfortunately very few succeed.
It doesnt mean it cant be successful, it just requires a weaning off the welfare system, but that is a difficult one not only for the aboriginals.
Anyway I wouldnt mind a dollar, for everytime these issues have been discussed and no matter how much money is thrown at it, it is never resolved.


----------



## qldfrog (7 June 2020)

There is a whole industry feeding on aborigines wekfare from black owners of liquor stores to white lawyer milking native title.
This is what you get when you institutionalize racism, in this case supposedly positively by giving more to individuals based on their genes/skin darkness
A culture of dependency losers and corruption with no hope for kids there


----------



## Klogg (7 June 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> Not sure why I can't quote.  SirRumpole.
> We can do a lot better. I heard some aboriginal elders on ABC national say we are treating it all wrong. They want welfare cut and the money used to create industries with real jobs, not painting.
> 
> They were saying the victim mentality is being used by some of their community for   gain but it is damaging them.
> ...




They're very smart elders. That I can get behind.

What happened to their ancestors was absolutely horrible. But playing the victim card makes it worse - as these wise people suggest.


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> There is a whole industry feeding on aborigines wekfare from black owners of liquor stores to white lawyer milking native title.
> This is what you get when you institutionalize racism, in this case supposedly positively by giving more to individuals based on their genes/skin darkness
> A culture of dependency losers and corruption with no hope for kids there



Correct. It is the soft racism of low expectations and as you say, snouts in troughs.


----------



## macca (7 June 2020)

What a group of excellent posts about "racism" in OZ.

Many elders are now speaking out about entrenched victim hood and divisions that result from it, my Elder friend has been speaking about this for 30 years.

He was kicked off the local land council twenty years ago for being a stirrer, his crime was to say that he did not want his kids and grandkids sitting around under a tree living on the dole.

He wanted to establish a training program for teenagers to have modern skills to get proper employment in todays world

About 8 years ago they decided he was right after all and invited him back as a senior elder.

Before 1967 all the Aboriginal adults I knew had a job working right along side white people. Of three crews one had a black foreman, he was the boss and if you did not like taking orders from a black fella then you got sacked.

Then along come "sit down money" and not surprisingly most took it and sat down. This has been the way of many for the past 50 years, two complete generations with no need to work.

Social workers talk of problems created in white society by second generation unemployed, add to that the "victimhood" things and we now have a toxic mix.

This is what the Aboriginal reformist elders have to break to encourage the next generation to become part of todays world, not sit back and complain. 

It is a massive task, money won't fix it, that has been tried, billions have been spent and it is in fact worse now than before IMO

I think all we can do is encourage reformist Elders to continue their battle


----------



## aus_trader (9 June 2020)

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/worl...intervene-in-case/ar-BB15cvRn?ocid=spartanntp

A snippet of the above article:


----------



## joeno (17 June 2020)

Given WWIII is brewing we should prob step back, cool down and mind each other's business and stfu for a year.

China has a dictator in charge keen on ruling for life.
India has a hindu fundamentalist in charge keen on expelling all Muslims.
North Korea has a Marvel supervillain who likes nuclear rockets.
Russia has Stalin 2.0 in charge.
The US has "all the above". Except the people are in charge. ahahahaha


----------



## aus_trader (17 June 2020)

I don't think there is any real rivalry between nations like previous WW's. More like trade wars and showing off, political bluff mostly.

I agree US may see some form of transformation though... some sort of revolution perhaps.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> I don't think there is any real rivalry between nations like previous WW's. More like trade wars and showing off, political bluff mostly.
> 
> I agree US may see some form of transformation though... some sort of revolution perhaps.





I don't see another WW either, yet a significant decline in US *economic* power is almost a certainty.


----------



## aus_trader (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> I don't see another WW either, yet a significant decline in US *economic* power is almost a certainty.



Yes, that's what's more likely.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> I don't see another WW either, yet a significant decline in US *economic* power is almost a certainty.




I can't see any country winning out of the epidemic, the world is so inter related these days that when the consumers (the West) go down, so do the producers (the East).


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> I can't see any country winning out of the epidemic, the world is so inter related these days that when the consumers (the West) go down, so do the producers (the East).




Well we are all jostling for a better position now, country wise; irrespective of West or East positioning or alliance. A major shock to the global order has occurred with this pandemic, however I think it will reinforce and accelerate the pre-virus global economic trajectory rather than divert or slow it.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> *Well we are all jostling for a better position now, country wise*; irrespective of West or East positioning or alliance. A major shock to the global order has occurred with this pandemic, however I think it will reinforce the pre-virus economic trajectory rather than slow or divert it.




I saw our lilly livered trade minister trying to pretend that we have a strong manufacturing sector.

If he truly believes that he should be out on his ear.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> I saw our lilly livered trade minister trying to pretend that we have a strong manufacturing sector.
> 
> If he truly believes that he should be out on his ear.




Our trade minister will announce what he is given, and probably doesn't know any better. Joshy knows the situation that we are in!


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

I'm just baffled at people cheering on the demise of the U.S, maybe some should ponder a World owned by Chinese manufacturing multinationals, I don't know who will ensure we stay as we are if China buys all the mining?
The U.S will probably island itself as pre WW1, Europe and the U.K will also look after themselves, which leaves us and our easily accessible minerals who we are dependent on China buying.
So extrapolating out, China squeezes us until we have to sell the companies, then we have to increase taxes to support our welfare.
How long will that last?
ATM the U.S is attempting to stop China dumping cheap manufactured goods, which is destroying first World manufacturing, if it fails they will just look after their own manufacturing base and China will continue with State funded companies.
So what is everyone cheering about?
Trump is the only World leader since 1970, to address this problem, and the media and muppet show are trying to stop him, well if they succeed they will look back in 20 years and say OMG.
Just my opinion.


----------



## macca (17 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I'm just baffled at people cheering on the demise of the U.S, maybe some should ponder a World owned by Chinese manufacturing multinationals, I don't know who will ensure we stay as we are if China buys all the mining?
> The U.S will probably island itself as pre WW1, Europe and the U.K will also look after themselves, which leaves us and our easily accessible minerals who we are dependent on China buying.
> So extrapolating out, China squeezes us until we have to sell the companies, then we have to increase taxes to support our welfare.
> How long will that last?
> ...




The western world desperately needs a strong USA, non western countries are cheering the turmoil on and undoubtedly feed the flames (discreetly)

I noticed that the woman charged with damage to the statues in Sydney appeared to be of Asian descent, probably just a coincidence......................


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

macca said:


> The western world desperately needs a strong USA, non western countries are cheering the turmoil on and undoubtedly feed the flames (discreetly)




Who pays the media? the advertising companies, who pays the advertising companies?
Who wants to keep using cheap labour in third world countries?
Whose multi billion dollar salaries are dependent on manufacturing in cheap labour, low taxing countries?
It really isn't that hard to join the dots. What amazes me is how many people just eat up the chook feed they are fed.


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

China is the fastest ageing nation in the world/has had the biggest baby bust in history. It's also the most overcredited nation in history.

The average Chinese man is already older than the average american, and 50 years from now, there will be 500 million fewer chinese people in the world.










Contrast this with united states:


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> China is the fastest ageing nation in the world/has had the biggest baby bust in history. It's also the most overcredited nation in history.
> 
> The average Chinese man is already older than the average american, and 50 years from now, there will be 500 million fewer chinese people in the world.




Hang on, do we have our bet or not?

I am a gentleman and will honour it, if that is what you're concerned about.


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

I'd bet you any amount you wanted


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> I'd bet you any amount you wanted




Well; the bet is on, based on the statement below:

On the 17th of June 2030 the USA will not be the largest economy in the world based on nominal GDP and the IMF, World Bank and UN will be unanimous in their decision and declaration of GDP nominal metrics.

If the statement above is correct, you will post me a 1kg Perth Mint silver cast bar to my nominated address; if the statement is incorrect, I will post you a 1kg Perth Mint silver cast bar to your nominated address.

Agreed?


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

Yep - I posted in the other thread, but let's go nominal gdp and majority 2/3 verdict.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> China is the fastest ageing nation in the world/has had the biggest baby bust in history. It's also the most overcredited nation in history.
> 
> The average Chinese man is already older than the average american, and 50 years from now, there will be 500 million fewer chinese people in the world.



China had a one child policy from 1980 untill the end of 2015, then the two child policy was introduced.
I'm sure they are well in control of their birthrate, as they are in control of most things. 
The one child policy, might be the bust you are talking about?
I'm not sure your charts will give an accurate prediction, with such a small timescale, since the government has allowed couples to have two children.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> Yep - I posted in the other thread, but let's go nominal gdp and majority 2/3 verdict.




I am happy with all 3; so I need all three to win; if not I lose. And yes nominal GDP.


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

trawler - That still results in a negative population pyramid due to simple mortality. It also takes 25 years to make a 25 year old (the beginning of your consumer economy).

China is simply done for at least an entire generation.


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> I am happy with all 3; so I need all three to win; if not I lose. And yes nominal GDP.



Ok, deal. 

How many bars do you already have?


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> Ok, deal.
> 
> How many bars do you already have?




MORE THAN ENOUGH TO COVER THIS BET

Perhaps you should buy a bar now, in case it costs you a few thousand, haha.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> MORE THAN ENOUGH TO COVER THIS BET
> 
> Perhaps you should by a bar now, in case it costs you a few thousands, haha.



The present Mrs Gumnut has cabinets full of silver if you would like to melt it down and take it away. 

gg


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The present Mrs Gumnut has cabinets full of silver if you would like to melt it down and take it away.
> 
> gg




I only invest in 99%, but the bullion dealers will buy it if you want to let it go.


----------



## satanoperca (17 June 2020)

Maybe I'm just curious, maybe I am skeptical, but 2 new posters, one register <7 days and one registered less than <30 days, both posting in nearly the exact same 2-3 threads at/on average 10 posts a day. Both playing with each other.

Seems even ASF can be taken over, shame, more good contributors will disappear.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Maybe I'm just curious, maybe I am skeptical, but 2 new posters, one register <7 days and one registered less than <30 days, both posting in nearly the exact same 2-3 threads at/on average 10 posts a day. Both playing with each other.
> 
> Seems even ASF can be taken over, shame, more good contributors will disappear.




That's not a very nice thing to say. I was thinking of an ASF revival!


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> trawler - That still results in a negative population pyramid due to simple mortality. It also takes 25 years to make a 25 year old (the beginning of your consumer economy).
> 
> China is simply done for at least an entire generation.



Yes, but first world countries have a falling birthrate with no limit on children, so one would think China will be o.k. they are starting with a population of 1.3 billion.
The older generation may be coming from a very poor and under educated background, so in reality there will be a change in the demographics, which China may not find a bad thing.
5 years ago, China stated they were going to urbanise 100million people in the next few years, so domestic consumerism and probably productivity will increase.
https://m.economictimes.com/news/in...in-urbanisation-plan/articleshow/50296652.cms

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/...sa-el-alto-growth-mexico-city-bangalore-lagos


----------



## frugal.rock (17 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> What amazes me is how many people just eat up the chook feed they are fed.



That comment is a bit low and scratchy... I prefer the mushroom analogy... kept in the dark and fed shoite. 


satanoperca said:


> Seems even ASF can be taken over, shame, more good contributors will disappear.



HFP (high frequency posting) agendas, agendas.

My job here is done.
5 eyes should have got the picture by now, however....Made in New Zealand? from chinese products to bypass our labelling rules.
Thanks Jacinda horse teeth Ardurn, don't know if we can trust un zud either... a change to 4 eyes perhaps?


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Maybe I'm just curious, maybe I am skeptical, but 2 new posters, one register <7 days and one registered less than <30 days, both posting in nearly the exact same 2-3 threads at/on average 10 posts a day. Both playing with each other.
> 
> Seems even ASF can be taken over, shame, more good contributors will disappear.




Do you play Chess? I will play the best of 3 games online, in blitz 5 min!

No cheating.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> That comment is a bit low and scratchy... I prefer the mushroom analogy... kept in the dark and fed shoite.
> 
> HFP (high frequency posting) agendas, agendas.
> 
> ...




If this is the way you want to treat new contributors, then you need to get your head checked.

Look at the depth of my posts.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> If this is the way you want to treat new contributors, then you need to get your head checked.
> 
> Look at the depth of my posts.



I agree with you, new posters are welcomed and you both have given positive input, so don't be too upset. I certainly have appreciated the posts.
It takes a while for everyone to settle into a forum, be that the pace or congeniality, we do try to be civil and respectful on ASF, no one has all the answers so everyone is worth listening to.


----------



## frugal.rock (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> If this is the way you want to treat new contributors, then you need to get your head checked.
> 
> Look at the depth of my posts.



Aww crap. I've done it again. Upsetting people without trying...
I think I have this autistic spectrum thing where I don't consider other people's emotions and do 
things with numbers in my head...
But now that you have told me straight out, I owe you a beer. 
Now, where can I get my head checked?


----------



## over9k (17 June 2020)

I really only follow one other forum and it's full of dickheads, hence coming here. If you guys know of a more active forum, I'm all ears...


----------



## joeno (17 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I'm just baffled at people cheering on the demise of the U.S, maybe some should ponder a World owned by Chinese manufacturing multinationals, I don't know who will ensure we stay as we are if China buys all the mining?
> The U.S will probably island itself as pre WW1, Europe and the U.K will also look after themselves, which leaves us and our easily accessible minerals who we are dependent on China buying.
> So extrapolating out, China squeezes us until we have to sell the companies, then we have to increase taxes to support our welfare.
> How long will that last?
> ...




"This thread is about America, so let me talk about China. China is bad. China sells us cheap ****. We shouldn't trade with China. Ok China stopped trading with us... how dare they try to destroy us through economic warfare? Btw if you criticize my comment you're a CCP communist spy."


----------



## frugal.rock (17 June 2020)

over9k said:


> I really only follow one other forum and it's full of dickheads, hence coming here. If you guys know of a more active forum, I'm all ears...



Relax lads/gals or other.
Devil fish  has given you the evil eye, and your falling for it...


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

joeno said:


> "This thread is about America, so let me talk about China. China is bad. China sells us cheap ****. We shouldn't trade with China. Ok China stopped trading with us... how dare they try to destroy us through economic warfare? Btw if you criticize my comment you're a CCP communist spy."



I don't think China or the U.S is bad as such, China wants to build a first world economy and lifestyle for 1.3 billion people and it has done a great job of that over a short period of time.
On the other hand, the U.S wanted to maximise profits, so offshored a lot of manufacturing to China and other low cost countries.
In theory it should be a win/win situation, however now we have the U.S being in a position where it imports far more, than it exports.
So its trade imbalance drags on the U.S economy and also make it dependent on China for essential infrastructure equipment.
As for Australia we are just about a basket case, we are lower than Thailand on the industrialisation index, yet enjoy a better standard of living and a better welfare system.
This is currently being funded mainly by mining and gas exports, but those are finite, the question is what will fund our lifestyle and welfare when the easily extracted minerals are gone?


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

frugal.rock said:


> Aww crap. I've done it again. Upsetting people without trying...
> I think I have this autistic spectrum thing where I don't consider other people's emotions and do
> things with numbers in my head...
> But now that you have told me straight out, I owe you a beer.
> Now, where can I get my head checked?




Mate; I don't care if you have some strange disease. I don't get upset, if you do, that is your problem.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> Mate; I don't care if you have some strange disease. I don't get upset, if you do, that is your problem.



It sounded like he was apologising, said he owes you a beer.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> Mate; I don't care if you have some strange disease. I don't get upset, if you do, that is your problem.



If you're buying beers, you can get me a lashes.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> It sounded like he was apologising, said he owes you a beer.




I am just here for a chat and discussion about finance, politics and world events.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> If you're buying beers, you can get me a lashes.




I will have a lashes also. The best beer produced, in my opinion.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> I am just here for a chat and discussion about finance, politics and world events.



Sounds good to me, I'm here for the same reason.


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (18 June 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds good to me, I'm here for the same reason.



But, but, but I am scared of the ABC: THEY WILL DESTROY ME


----------



## aus_trader (18 June 2020)

We need the humorous posters like @frugal.rock  and @barney. Take their comments with a pinch of laughter, it'll be good for the soul.

I am also usually too serious talking only about stocks or economy. But I know about these guys, since I've been around this forum for a while and they make visiting here so much fun


----------



## qldfrog (18 June 2020)

@Chronos-Plutus @over9k 
Interesting bet.
If this helps , spent 2y in China 
The change of generation :standards education is massive US is beaten flat 
One thing about China is trust: do not trust their figures
Your nice age pyramid is in reality 1.5 billion..or near ,the 200m extra are undeclared kids: brothers and sisters of one child policies.young...
That will already twist your figures
Moreover China does not care about global warming BLM or metoo
All energy is focussed on growth.:
work hard harder 24/7
In my last trip to NY, i had the feeling i was in a retirement village compared to Shenzhen Shanghai or Beijing.
I do not idealise China believe me: i worked and lived there but in 10y yes China will be bigger and take over the US..buy silver now before a melt up...
The only reason it may not is controlling the yuan so that dollar is inflated higher artificially for your gdp figures.
Chine imho will take number one position by 2030 but  i think it will just stay there for 1 generation as with CCP it is unsustainable.
In the meantime, it will crush the West which is what the West wants anyway.


----------



## frugal.rock (18 June 2020)

I am only offering 1 beer...
To which @Chronos-Plutus do I arrange for ?


----------



## wayneL (18 June 2020)

Chronos-Plutus said:


> I will have a lashes also. The best beer produced, in my opinion.



Now this is why aliens won't visit us. Lashes is okay on a Wednesday night if Guinness isn't available, but they won't come down until Irish brewed Guinness is available in every pub on the planet...

... And Kilkennys for girls and weaklings


----------



## over9k (18 June 2020)

Anything other than a blonde or boag's st george is like trying to drink a loaf of bread. 

Still, a kg of silver is only about 500 bucks so it's not exactly a huge bet we have on.


----------



## barney (18 June 2020)

aus_trader said:


> We need the humorous posters like @frugal.rock  and @barney. Take their comments with a pinch of laughter, it'll be good for the soul.




Thanks Aus.  I actually really appreciate that comment (that's my chuffed look)

I know @frugal.rock has a slightly silly SOH so if anyone is taking him too seriously, please re-think

Personally, I've been off the air a bit lately for various reasons, but its great to see so many posters (new and old) participating. ASF certainly has a great blend of excellent posters. Discounting the odd kerfuffle, @Joe Blow should be proud of the community he has assembled


----------



## frugal.rock (18 June 2020)

Have missed you @barney, was nearly about to send out the troops. 

Was dismayed to hear on the ABC news that the US cop that shot the fellow human in the back, then spat on him and *jumped up and down on his corpse.*
Judge, jury and executioner.

One could hear a watcher in a nearby car complaining, "c'mon man, we got kids in here".
That's very distressing to me, as it implies that the parent/s were used to that kind of behaviour from cops.

F.Rock


----------



## aus_trader (19 June 2020)

barney said:


> Thanks Aus.  I actually really appreciate that comment (that's my chuffed look)
> 
> I know @frugal.rock has a slightly silly SOH so if anyone is taking him too seriously, please re-think
> 
> Personally, I've been off the air a bit lately for various reasons, but its great to see so many posters (new and old) participating. ASF certainly has a great blend of excellent posters. Discounting the odd kerfuffle, @Joe Blow should be proud of the community he has assembled



_Long time no see_ my man, great to see you keeping in touch.

Aren't we all busy, I am as busy as ever coming out of the lockdown as well. But somehow find a bit of time (let's see... holy crap it's 3am) for this wealth of knowledge and the odd bit of humor on ASF.


----------



## aus_trader (19 June 2020)

qldfrog said:


> @Chronos-Plutus @over9k
> Interesting bet.
> If this helps , spent 2y in China
> The change of generation :standards education is massive US is beaten flat
> ...




Very informative info from your travels qldfrog.


----------

