3 ms·

Can you cite those numbers? I checked one and even being generous you inflated it by quite a bit. https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citize

Can you cite those numbers? I checked one and even being generous you inflated it by quite a bit. https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citiz... Thst indicates that if every single non U.S. citizen in federal custody were there illegally (unlikely) they’d represent 20% and not 25%. Further clarification from the Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/blog/another-confusing-federal-report-immigrant-incarceration https://www.cato.org/blog/another-confusing-federal-report-i... The evidence that legal and illegal immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated, convicted, or even arrested for crimes is so overwhelming that even immigration restrictionists like Mark Krikorian at the Center for Immigration Studies admit that, “A lot of data does suggest immigrants are less likely to be involved in crime.” The Cato Institute being famously not left wing I’d add, founded by the Koch’s.

escape_goat 8y ago
He is probably using reports from the Centre For Immigration Studies. I believe they can be trusted to use real data, but can't really be trusted to represent it in proper context. I'm not sure if they cherry-pick cynically or just out of confirmation bias. 1. 26% of Federal Prisoners are Aliens [https://cis.org/Huennekens/DOJ-26-Federal-Prisoners-Are-Aliens https://cis.org/Huennekens/DOJ-26-Federal-Prisoners-Are-Alie...] 2. Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households [https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native...]
- dfilppi 8y ago
  Confirmation bias works both ways.
  - escape_goat 8y ago
    Shrugging and saying "confirmation bias works both ways" is neither factual nor a valid rebuttal. Confirmation bias is a value-neutral phenomenon. It is neither innate, unavoidable, nor inherent to sociopolitical analysis. It does not "work both ways." It works only one way. There are numerous sources of policy opinion all across the political spectrum that exhibit confirmation bias. There are also those who attempt to limit their own bias and do scholarly policy work in good faith. When a person or publishing entity exhibits a tendency to systematical devalue evidence that contradicts their assumptions, that is confirmation bias.

escape_goat 8y ago

He is probably using reports from the Centre For Immigration Studies. I believe they can be trusted to use real data, but can't really be trusted to represent it in proper context. I'm not sure if they cherry-pick cynically or just out of confirmation bias. 1. 26% of Federal Prisoners are Aliens [https://cis.org/Huennekens/DOJ-26-Federal-Prisoners-Are-Aliens https://cis.org/Huennekens/DOJ-26-Federal-Prisoners-Are-Alie...] 2. Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households [https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native...]

dfilppi 8y ago
Confirmation bias works both ways.
- escape_goat 8y ago
  Shrugging and saying "confirmation bias works both ways" is neither factual nor a valid rebuttal. Confirmation bias is a value-neutral phenomenon. It is neither innate, unavoidable, nor inherent to sociopolitical analysis. It does not "work both ways." It works only one way. There are numerous sources of policy opinion all across the political spectrum that exhibit confirmation bias. There are also those who attempt to limit their own bias and do scholarly policy work in good faith. When a person or publishing entity exhibits a tendency to systematical devalue evidence that contradicts their assumptions, that is confirmation bias.