Six of the top ten cities with the largest homeless population are in California -- go figure.

10. Denver, Colorado
9. San Francisco, California
8. San Diego, California
7. Phoenix, Arizona
6. Sacramento, California
5. Oakland, California
4. San Jose, California
3. Seattle, Washington
2. New York, New York
1. Los Angeles, California

Also, the  US Conference of Mayors have identified the number one reason for homeless is lack of affordable housing, don't look for real solutions anytime soon.

You can't fix the problem if you think cheap housing will fix mental illness, substance addiction, and economic opportunity. 

Something tells me the only reason Biden's inflation isn't seeing an even bigger uptick in homelessness is all the money he has given out under the umbrella of COVID emergency spending.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/slideshows/cities-with-the-largest-homeless-populations-in-the-u-s

 

Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk

Honolulu is a Democrat run city, but generally speaking we are about 6 to 9 months behind on all the trends.

Here's a look into our future

That may appear to be racist , but I'm just
running the numbers.
[/quote]

There, I fixed it for you.

That may appear to be racist , but I'm just
running the numbers.


There, I fixed it for you.

There's a huge difference between racism and using actual demographic data to demonstrate comparative correlations.

When the numbers show a correlation between blacks committing crimes versus crimes from other ethnicities, blacks are representing their race at far greater rates.

Law enforcement reported information about 7,173,072 known offenders,
meaning some aspect of the suspect—such as age, gender, or race—was
known.

Of these offenders, 38.2% were between 21 and 35 years of age.

By gender, most offenders (62.1%) were male; 24.2% were female; and the
gender for 13.7% of known offenders was unknown.

By race, more than half (50.8%) of known offenders were white; 29.6% were
Black or African American; and 2.2% were of other races.

The race was unknown for 17.4% of reported known offenders.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-2020-incident-based-data

Since those were 2020 figures, let's look at some key demographics of the country in 2020:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/POP010220

Total population of US (2020) ~ 331.45M
Whites - 250.56M  (250.56 / 331.45 = 75.59%)
Blacks -   44.78M  (44.78 / 331.45 = 13.51%)

Comparison:   

75.59% of the population accounts for 50.8% of crime
13.50% of the population accounts for 29.6% of crime

Crimes committed by whites are at a 0.672 rate.
Crimes committed by blacks are at a 2.19 rate.

If whites were committing crimes at the same rate as blacks, the percentage of white-related crimes would be 165.54%!!

** The population percentages by race vary report to report depending on inclusion or exclusion of mixed race, white hispanics, etc.  Lowest percentage of whites I found was 61.6%, which would increase the crime rate for that group to 0.825 -- still less than half that of the other group.

Numbers are racist, too, I guess.

There's a huge difference between racism and using actual demographic data to demonstrate comparative correlations.

When the numbers show a correlation between blacks committing crimes versus crimes from other ethnicities, blacks are representing their race at far greater rates.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-2020-incident-based-data

Since those were 2020 figures, let's look at some key demographics of the country in 2020:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/POP010220

Total population of US (2020) ~ 331.45M
Whites - 250.56M  (250.56 / 331.45 = 75.59%)
Blacks -   44.78M  (44.78 / 331.45 = 13.51%)

Comparison:   

75.59% of the population accounts for 50.8% of crime
13.50% of the population accounts for 29.6% of crime

Crimes committed by whites are at a 0.672 rate.
Crimes committed by blacks are at a 2.19 rate.

If whites were committing crimes at the same rate as blacks, the percentage of white-related crimes would be 165.54%!!

** The population percentages by race vary report to report depending on inclusion or exclusion of mixed race, white hispanics, etc.  Lowest percentage of whites I found was 61.6%, which would increase the crime rate for that group to 0.825 -- still less than half that of the other group.

Numbers are racist, too, I guess.

Correlation≠causation.  Saying there’s less crime BECAUSE there are less black people is, in fact, racist.

Correlation≠causation.  Saying there’s less crime BECAUSE there are less black people is, in fact, racist.

You can be subjective( emotional) or objective(logical)
I choose objective., what you do is up to you.
 

You can be subjective( emotional) or objective(logical)
I choose objective., what you do is up to you.
 

You can post facts, or post racist inferences that aren’t supported by evidence (e.g. less crime BECAUSE of fewer black people). 

I choose to identify blatantly racist statements when I see them. What you do is up to you.

Correlation≠causation.  Saying there’s less crime BECAUSE there are less black people is, in fact, racist.

Show me where anyone (me especially) said this comparison proved causation?

Demographics exist.  You can't ignore them.

Does race ITSELF cause criminal behavior?  Or does family (or lack of), culture, environment (friends, schools, ...), society/narratives ("Whitey's keeping you down"), self image, victimhood (slavery, racism, ...) determine causation?

Can't exclude race if the rest of those things are based on racial group identity.

Blacks are the permanent underclass. Liberals never allow them to succeed because they need victims in order to justify corrupt and radical policies. When anyone asks a question about why blue states are so regressive they point to conservatives as the bad guys.

Lots of blacks are waking up to this, but many of them were brought up in subhuman conditions which causes rampant degeneracy. Now the Soros prosecutors refuse to charge them and corporate media tells them they are victims therefore it's okay to destroy their cities.

The same scenario is playing out here although not as dramatic, but it's easy to spot the difference between today's Waikiki/China Town and what it used to be like 10 years ago. Every city under communist control is on the same trajectory.

CA has a homeless problem worst than here. Mrs. CMO travels for work to San Fran, San Jose, San Diego, LA and it's all much worst than HI.  And their crackheads are either zombies or more aggressive than the ones here.  Guess by the time the drugs get here, they're super watered down.

I think much of the issue can be stopped if the flow of drugs were stopped.  The "US empire" can invade Iraq for much less, but won't invade Mexico just to get the cartel leaders and go to war with them.  Government corruption keeps the drug production going.

I don't think we have as many bleeding heart morons here. We moved left a bit in recent years but not like California

You can post facts, or post racist inferences that aren’t supported by evidence (e.g. less crime BECAUSE of fewer black people). 

I choose to identify blatantly racist statements when I see them. What you do is up to you.

How about real life?
I lived in a very predominately illegals spanish neighborhood
in Paramount CA.
Just across the river from Compton California. a predominately AA city.
I could ride my bike at anytime of day or night, I worked in a local
liquor store and made deliveries all over Paramount.
Probably the ony reason they didn't mess with the white boy,
I sold them their booze.

I tried to get a job in a Cabinet shop in Compton.
Manager said he couldn't hire me, although I was very qualified,
as he admitted,  because he was worried about my safety.
I have zero tolerance for liberal BS, especially on race issues.
 

Communism is an infection that must sew chaos in order to take over. The decay of our society is deliberate The point is to make you beg for their totalitarian regime just to restore some order.

It's difficult for us to realize what's going on because that sort of thinking is so foreign to decent people.

I still believe that in America even if you are under privileged, you can succeed..

Ainokea what color you are.

You don't succeed because you lack drive, or are just plain lazy.  Or entitled.  Or whatever rubbish was fed to you by your sub par parents.

Think for yourself.  Want to succeed over anything else?  You will if you suck it up.  You won't if you hold a pity party.

I had sub par parents.  Sorry to say.  If I listened to them I would be a loser today.

I still believe that in America even if you are under privileged, you can succeed..

Ainokea what color you are.

You don't succeed because you lack drive, or are just plain lazy.  Or entitled.  Or whatever rubbish was fed to you by your sub par parents.

Think for yourself.  Want to succeed over anything else?  You will if you suck it up.  You won't if you hold a pity party.

I had sub par parents.  Sorry to say.  If I listened to them I would be a loser today.

Agreed.
if you get up off your a$$ and work at it
and you don't use your sex, race, or various perversions as an execuse
you'll do just fine.
I'm an old man,  if I had it to do all over again,
I'd  be a plumber.
It made me sick dealing with all the liberals in "hi tech"
 

I still believe that in America even if you are under privileged, you can succeed..

Ainokea what color you are.

You don't succeed because you lack drive, or are just plain lazy.  Or entitled.  Or whatever rubbish was fed to you by your sub par parents.

Think for yourself.  Want to succeed over anything else?  You will if you suck it up.  You won't if you hold a pity party.

I had sub par parents.  Sorry to say.  If I listened to them I would be a loser today.

What you think about others is irrelevant.  What matters is what others think about themselves and the people they've been taught are the reason they can't succeed regardless of how hard they try.

Democrats reward the most pitiful victims -- it's a contest.

The United States is a third world country now with widespread economic disaster areas punctuated with a few wealthy cities. When Democrats and Republicans shipped our manufacturing overseas they destroyed the future of a large chunk of the population just so the managerial class could profit from cheap foreign labor. That’s why they hated Trump so much, because he started to bring the jobs back and ruin things for the people who profit off our national cannibalization.

Show me where anyone (me especially) said this comparison proved causation?

Demographics exist.  You can't ignore them.

Does race ITSELF cause criminal behavior?  Or does family (or lack of), culture, environment (friends, schools, ...), society/narratives ("Whitey's keeping you down"), self image, victimhood (slavery, racism, ...) determine causation?

Can't exclude race if the rest of those things are based on racial group identity.

The OP used words to the effect of “there’s less crime because there are fewer black people.”  (I can’t actually quote it, because the original post has mysteriously gone missing…). That implies causation.

I pointed out that the OP’s statement was racist.

You posted statistics (historical data), I assume in defense of the OP, about how black people are involved in crime at rates higher than their proportion of the population.  That’s correlation.

By defending the OP’s claim of causation by posting evidence of correlation, it sure looks to me like you were indicating that correlation=causation.

The OP used words to the effect of “there’s less crime because there are fewer black people.”  (I can’t actually quote it, because the original post has mysteriously gone missing…). That implies causation.

I pointed out that the OP’s statement was racist.

You posted statistics (historical data), I assume in defense of the OP, about how black people are involved in crime at rates higher than their proportion of the population.  That’s correlation.

By defending the OP’s claim of causation by posting evidence of correlation, it sure looks to me like you were indicating that correlation=causation.

You would be wrong in your assumptions.

#1 - I wasn't defending his statement.  I was arguing against yours.  You said, "You can post facts, ...", so i decided to do just that.  The facts support a conclusion that statistics support the claim that you're more likely to experience a higher rate of crime in certain size black populations than you would if the same size population was other races.  That's what the numbers show.

#2 - I never said correlation=causation, nor did I "indicate" that.  I'm the one who constantly posts the exact opposite when people post misleading gun stats.

Don't argue over what you think someone implied or indicted.  Try asking for clarification before passing judgement.  Otherwise, arguing about who said what and what someone implied or indicated becomes counterproductive.  Better to discuss what someone actually meant -- not what your interpretation may be.

Misconstrued electronic communications lead to more arguments and verbal fights than marriage.  Don't automatically assume that what you read is what the other person meant if the statement is contentious or controversial.

You would be wrong in your assumptions.

#1 - I wasn't defending his statement.  I was arguing against yours.  You said, "You can post facts, ...", so i decided to do just that.  The facts support a conclusion that statistics support the claim that you're more likely to experience a higher rate of crime in certain size black populations than you would if the same size population was other races.  That's what the numbers show.

#2 - I never said correlation=causation, nor did I "indicate" that.  I'm the one who constantly posts the exact opposite when people post misleading gun stats.

Don't argue over what you think someone implied or indicted.  Try asking for clarification before passing judgement.  Otherwise, arguing about who said what and what someone implied or indicated becomes counterproductive.  Better to discuss what someone actually meant -- not what your interpretation may be.

Misconstrued electronic communications lead to more arguments and verbal fights than marriage.  Don't automatically assume that what you read is what the other person meant if the statement is contentious or controversial.

Wait… What post of mine were you arguing against?  The one where I said that if you say “fewer black people means less crime” was racist? Or the one where I said “You can post facts…”? 

Just to refresh your memory, here’s the order in which things happened:

1) OP makes openly racist statement, implying that race causes crime.
2) I point out that the OP’s statement was openly racist.
3) You post statistics that show correlation, but with no support for causation.
4) I point out that correlation≠causation
5) OP replies with post about being “objective.”
6) I reply including the “you can post facts” statement.
7) You say that your post in “3)” was arguing against my post in “6)”, which hadn’t happened yet…?

You’re welcome to believe that the original post wasn’t expressing a racist point of view; I was just pointing out the logical inconsistency there.