beedeebeedee

9 ms·

91.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
Wealth disparity drives crime
92.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
I've been beaten, pistol-whipped by a group and had to go to the hospital, had a kid try to knock me out from behind (remember the knock out craze fifteen years ago?), seen people beaten and shot, and had the cops draw their guns on me
93.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
They have a disproportionate amount of influence on public policy. That leads to diverse systemic problems in society, so yes, this impacts low income workers and the overall cost of living in a city, state and country.
94.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
Both can be true. Dogmatic legislators get voted into office along party lines, but they are not representative of the actual beliefs of most Texans (they appeal to what a lot of Texans think they should believe, but don't actually whe
95.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
You and the commenter I was responding to are correct that the conditions were disorienting, and he should not have been flying without an instrument rating, but I bristled at the cheap shot.
96.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
That's a little too dismissive. Flying in those conditions is deeply disorienting, and you have to have instrument training (and discipline) to safely accomplish it. My dad (also air force pilot, F-104, and later, bush pilot) was flyin
97.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
Almost all flight during this stage of development was reckless. It took a long time for us to collectively learn the lessons as pilots, mechanics, engineers, logistics, etc, to make it safe. A great source of reckless piloting stories are
98.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
Hi, you are a long way off from your initial comment that there were no workers revolts in the US in the 19th century. That claim is easily disproven unless you then claim strikes are not workers revolts (which makes discussion with you unp
99.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
That is not accurate again. Not only did North America have much more available and abundant natural resources than Central America and South America, the immigration to North America was much higher, so there was a more able labor force to
100.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
> Unionizing and voting for Saturdays off and the politics of the underdog hardly counts as "warfare". Yes, the workers' demands were reasonable, but they were met with warfare by the upper class who did not want to accept
101.
by beedeebeedee 1y ago
That is not accurate. There were many strikes in the industrial part of the US during the 1800's. That's how working conditions were improved in the mills. The free market would have crushed the working people had they not banded
102.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
The previous submission was flagged, despite this article being of great importance for this community. The actions that it reports are being taken by government and corporate interests will affect all industries, markets and citizens.
103.
Doge wants businesses to run government services 'as much as possible'(washingtonpost.com)
33 points by beedeebeedee 2y ago|7 comments
104.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
We are led by the worst amongst us
105.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
> For a long time now, many people who's religious values are deeply important to them have felt disrespected and looked down upon by "the left" (yes, I'm obviously painting with a broad brush here). In subtle and not
106.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Nor if you have a class of low paid (and before that unpaid) people who carried luggage for travelers. There was a lot of social change in the US after the 1960's, and travel only became democratized recently.
107.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
American bureaucracy is not broken (but is in the process of being destroyed). Claiming that it is broken is easy rhetoric for charlatans and backed up by a few cherry picked examples.
108.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
> This is a distraction from the criminality involved in many of these organizations essentially embezzling our money. This should be the top story Please stop stating that outrageous statement- it will not make it true. Post facts. Just
109.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Yeah, I was confused about that when I tried to replicate the study for all of the counting groups ('Mail', 'Early Voting', 'Election Day'). I'd like to know more about the data to understand how to compar
110.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
> 6:11 I don't find this particularly strange. I think they'd make a much stronger argument if they showed the drop-off vote for 2020. I found it strange that they only picked 2012 and 2016 It would have been nice to have 2020
111.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Hi derangedHorse, thanks for your insight. The anomaly is that there appears to be a heavy shift in votes only in (1) early voting, and not in (2) mail-in ballots or (3) Election Day voting. Additionally, the anomaly only appears for all ta
112.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Another commenter posted a colab notebook and created a histogram that shows the "Russian tail". Please at least copy and paste it, and show where they have gone wrong with their statistical analysis, instead of making uncited and
113.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Another commenter has posted a colab notebook. You've been dismissive in every post, but based on your own value judgments and not based on statistical analysis. At least copy and paste their colab notebook (and read the original analy
114.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
"He knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote-counting computers," Trump told the crowd. "And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide." https://www.newsweek.com&#x
115.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Thank you! I've run the notebook and reproduced the histograms of the early votes. I'm grateful for you sharing your work. For the other commenters who have dismissed the analysis without providing details, I would recommend that
116.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
You are missing most of their analysis. The surprising anomaly (the so called "Russian Tail") appears in early votes but not the Election Day votes or mail-in ballots. There analysis is worth reading again to catch what you missed
117.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Trying to repress discussion is the opposite of soberly analyzing divisive topics, so you are attempting to prove your point. There are many people who disagree with you (including me) and would encourage you to dig in and practice curiosit
118.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
Can you share your analysis of the data? Other commenters have included details. I think we all would be interested in more than vague value judgments that you took a look, didn't like it and therefore tried to flag to repress discussi
119.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
All of your criticisms are unrelated to understanding the analysis (or software). Let's read it, work through it and discuss it, rather than dismissing it for all the wrong reasons. Flagging this submission is anti-curious. Instead of
120.
by beedeebeedee 2y ago
The position of the Democratic party shouldn't change the analysis. If there is evidence it should be analyzed on its own merits.

More ›