TRUMP - and the politics of being wrong

The first study appears to make the assertion that illegal immigrants have not caused an increase in crime, because crime has been declining since the past 30 years. I would say that it is rather difficult to make that assertion considering that there are a number of factors that have led to the decrease of crime over the past 30 years, not the least of which is America's mass incarceratiosn (a number of whom are the incarcerated illegals kept in federal prisons).

The second study actually makes the hilarious and absurd suggestion that illegal immigration may actually lead to "decreases in public health concerns". I personally have no time for studies attempting to make correlations without any sensible factual basis. You should atleast offer some sort of a tangible explanation as to why you may think that illegal immigration decreases public health concerns. A mere "correlation" doesn't quite cut it, as a host of factors have played part into the betterment of public health and decrease of crime in the past 30 years, the increase of illegal immigration having played a rather minimal part according to any sensible observer.

The third study seems to rely heavily on the data provided by the state of Texas, about the criminality of illegal aliens. However, the study does not cite that the Texas law departments themselves acknowledge that their statistics are likely under-representing the entirety of illegal crime in the state, taking into account only the crimes of the illegals at the time of which they were identified through PEP, which requires the illegal to have had a prior encounter with Department of Homeland Security, in order to have had their finger-prints taken.

"These figures only count individuals who previously had an encounter with DHS that resulted in their fingerprints being entered into the DHS IDENT database. Foreign nationals who enter the country illegally and avoid detection by DHS, but are later arrested by local or state law enforcement for a state offense will not have a DHS response in regard to their lawful status and do not appear in these counts."

The report states:

"It is also important to note that these figures represent the minimum number of crimes associated with criminal illegal aliens"

There does not appear to be a reference made to this rather significant fact, in the article that you posted.

I understand that no study that tells you something you don't want to hear will be convincing to you, but the point is that pretty much everyone who has tried to answer the question has reached the conclusion that you dismiss our of hand. That at least suggests that your confidence is not justified.
 
Anyway. Now CATO is a reliable source for your tribe

Oh well, I put the bet out there on actual stats. You are now getting into silly banter and GIFs

CATO(open borders) study= evidence

Actual incarceration rates= Fake news

You don't seem to be able to comprehend that not everyone is as tribalistic as you are.
 
You don't seem to be able to comprehend that not everyone is as tribalistic as you are.

I’m not the one who cherry picks studies from outfits for tribalistic reasons. Would you also trust CATO on universal HC

It’s a shit study anyway that actually does not say illegal immigrants are more law abiding. Which is what was originally stated

Incarceration stats do not jive with your narrative so you post a study that proves nothing about what was originally said. And you use a source that you would deem BIASED on most issues
 
Lol, then you weren't paying attention, or weren't in the presence of an even slightly competent person.

The statistics are disproportionate because they include immigration offenses: without accommodating for that variable, 100% of undocumented immigrants have committed crime, and every person picked up for illegal presence or stopped at the border becomes a criminal categorically. And because of the very narrow scope of federal crime (the vast majority of criminal offenses are handled at the state level), the prevalence of undocumented immigrants is even more pronounced since immigration offenses are far, far away the most frequent federal crime.

Controlling for immigration offenses, there is absolutely no evidence that undocumented immigrants commit more crime. You just won't find it. Meanwhile, there is evidence (however perpetually incomplete its methodology given the subject matter) and highly suggestive demographic data that shows undocumented immigrants are actually less likely to commit crime than native citizens of the same economic status.

According to the data by BOP, 6,8% of the federal prison population are incarcerated for immigration related offenses, amounting to around 11,000 prisoners. That still doesn't quite account for the 22,614 of known illegals in federal prisons, the suspected number of which is 39,455 (with 14,900 still currently under investigation by ICE).

Even at the barest minimum, we would be talking about a rough 7% of illegals residing in federal prison for non-immigration related crimes, out of the overall population, which would still be an over-representation, considering that around 3-4% of the American population are estimated to reside in the country illegally. Of course, depending on the results of ICE's on-going investigations, that number is probably bound to be higher, resulting in an even more skewed over-representation.

Anyway, it appears that the studies into this are still on-going and it's probably best to not hedge too many bets with incomplete data. Chalk that down to America's retarded prison system. Over here, we've possessed comprehensive data on that subject for decades. And the numbers have amounted to the conclusion that it's probably best to have a respectable vetting system when it comes to immigrants. Crazy idea, I know.
 
Last edited:
I’m not the one who cherry picks studies from outfits for tribalistic reasons. Would you also trust CATO on universal HC

It’s a shit study anyway that actually does not say illegal immigrants are more law abiding. Which is what was originally stated

I also didn't want to get overly semantic, but you have repeatedly used the term "debunked" without seeming to understand what it means. For something to be "debunked" would mean that its conclusion has been proven incorrect, not that its methodology is deemed imperfect. You have, at least in part, conceded that there is no data to suggest that undocumented immigrants commit more crime ceteris paribus.

Incarceration stats do not jive with your narrative so you post a study that proves nothing about what was originally said. And you use a source that you would deem BIASED on most issues

Yes, they do: or at least, they definitively don't contradict the narrative. We've been over this before on how using incarceration statistics that don't control for immigration offenses is wholly unreliable. In fact, I believe that our last time around I provided local jail stats that, when controlling for detention for immigration purposes and inquiry, showed a lower incidence of detention. But I could be mistaken and not remembering that correctly.

Also, presuming you are talking about CATO, it can generally be presumed to be skewed (I wouldn't say "biased," but if that floats your boat) toward economic rightism, free markets, low taxes, etc. At no point has there ever been a popular presumption that it is biased in favor of undocumented immigration lol.
 
I understand that no study that tells you something you don't want to hear will be convincing to you, but the point is that pretty much everyone who has tried to answer the question has reached the conclusion that you dismiss our of hand. That at least suggests that your confidence is not justified.

So you're not even going to bother addressing the points that I have made. Stop wasting my time then, by linking to inadequate studies.
 
So you're not even going to bother addressing the points that I have made. Stop wasting my time then, by linking to inadequate studies.

Oh, the studies I linked to were fine. It's just that you have a strong emotional aversion to the conclusions and thus are going to look for reasons to reject them and then assume that the opposite conclusion is true with no evidence at all if you find those reasons. I think anyone who studies the issue objectively is going to conclude that we don't have full visibility but that the weight of the evidence at this time suggests that unauthorized immigrants commit fewer crimes (not related to their immigration) than the native born. While you previously suggested that that was an obviously false conclusion despite having conducted no studies on the matter.
 
According to the data by BOP, 6,8% of the federal prison population are incarcerated for immigration related offenses, amounting to around 11,000 prisoners. That still doesn't quite account for the 22,614 of known illegals in federal prisons, the suspected number of which is 39,455 (with 14,900 still currently under investigation by ICE).

Even at the barest minimum, we would be talking about a rough 7% of illegals residing in federal prison for non-immigration related crimes, which would still be an over-representation, considering that around 3-4% of the American population are estimated to reside in the country illegally. Of course, depending on the results of ICE's on-going investigations, that number is probably bound to be higher, resulting in an even more skewed over-representation.

Anyway, it appears that the studies into this are still on-going and it's probably best to not hedge too many bets with incomplete data. Chalk that down to America's retarded prison system. Over here, we've possessed comprehensive data on that subject for decades. And the numbers have amounted to the conclusion that it's probably best to have a respectable vetting system when it comes to immigrants. Crazy idea, I know.

I realize that our "retarded prison system" is complex, so I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt that this post was made in good faith.

You're working with two entirely different classes/data sets. The first BOP set ("inmate statistics") represents persons convicted and in federal prison post-conviction. The DHS reports include all those in federal detention, including those in customs detention, awaiting administrative proceedings, and local detention in concert with the federal government (those that are in local detention in jurisdictions that are not fully cooperative with DHS are not included). That's why, if you look at the DHS link, it specifically refers to BOP inmates as its first of three component classes. Your statement of 22.6k known illegals in federal prison is inaccurate as being equated to the first group: in actuality, although it is the BOP reporting, they are not inmates and are a separate group.

Your 7% figure, unless I'm misunderstanding your phrasing, is ludicrously wrong. But you phrased it awkwardly and I could take it at least two ways. The first would be lol-worthy (that 7% of undocumented immigrants are in federal detention for non-immigration offenses), and the second would be incoherent (that 7% of federally detained undocumented immigrants are detained for non-immigration offenses, and that that should be compared against their portion of the population).
 
Oh, the studies I linked to were fine. It's just that you have a strong emotional aversion to the conclusions and thus are going to look for reasons to reject them and then assume that the opposite conclusion is true with no evidence at all if you find those reasons. I think anyone who studies the issue objectively is going to conclude that we don't have full visibility but that the weight of the evidence at this time suggests that unauthorized immigrants commit fewer crimes (not related to their immigration) than the native born. While you previously suggested that that was an obviously false conclusion despite having conducted no studies on the matter.

You always manage to write a lot without actually saying anything.

I believe my counter-points were perfectly valid, most especially the point about Texas Department of Public Safety itself having acknowledged that these statistics are only to serve as indicators of the "bare minimum" of illegal crime, not its overall scope. It is quite intellectually dishonest, then, by CATO institute, to use these statistics to make the claim that illegals commit fewer crimes than natives, when the data has been acknowledged to be incomplete within the report itself, without even making a reference to the possible incompleteness of the data.
 
You always manage to write a lot without actually saying anything.

I think it's the opposite, really. I get to the point, and that's what upsets you. You want to go on about the studies, while I think we both know, knew before I posted the link, that you're just looking for a reason to dismiss all the evidence on the issue because you have an emotional aversion to the conclusion that people who study it generally draw.
 
I think it's the opposite, really. I get to the point, and that's what upsets you. You want to go on about the studies, while I think we both know, knew before I posted the link, that you're just looking for a reason to dismiss all the evidence on the issue because you have an emotional aversion to the conclusion that people who study it generally draw.

Umm, not really. I looked at them and I gave my honest perspective of what I believe to be the short-comings of these studies.

You, on the other hand, are completely ignoring any of the points I've made, and not even trying to make an argument in your stead, outside of making references to what you subjectively believe to be my emotional responses.

Do you honestly think that I'm more emotionally invested in American politics than you? American politics, to me, is merely a matter of learning how to argue points in English. To you, it's what you see around you every day. So let's not even bother with the argument about one's supposed "emotions". You are "in it" much more than I am.
 
I realize that our "retarded prison system" is complex, so I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt that this post was made in good faith.

You're working with two entirely different classes/data sets. The first BOP set ("inmate statistics") represents persons convicted and in federal prison post-conviction. The DHS reports include all those in federal detention, including those in customs detention, awaiting administrative proceedings, and local detention in concert with the federal government (those that are in local detention in jurisdictions that are not fully cooperative with DHS are not included). That's why, if you look at the DHS link, it specifically refers to BOP inmates as its first of three component classes. Your statement of 22.6k known illegals in federal prison is inaccurate as being equated to the first group: in actuality, although it is the BOP reporting, they are not inmates and are a separate group.

Your 7% figure, unless I'm misunderstanding your phrasing, is ludicrously wrong. But you phrased it awkwardly and I could take it at least two ways. The first would be lol-worthy (that 7% of undocumented immigrants are in federal detention for non-immigration offenses), and the second would be incoherent (that 7% of federally detained undocumented immigrants are detained for non-immigration offenses, and that that should be compared against their portion of the population).

Your system is most certainly confusing but I do not think that I'm off the mark here.

The BOP statistics themselves list the number of "foreign nationals" residing in federal custody, at a number amounting to over 35,000. However, I ended up using the statistics offered by DHS because the number here does not indicate how many of these foreign nationals were in the country legally, or how many have acquired legal citizenship.

Numerous newspapers, including NYTimes and Huffington Post (which certainly don't share any conservative right-wing agenda), have made references to the same DHS reports in order to make the claim that over 20% of federal prisoners are foreigners, and over 90% of them are illegals, so it appears that it is valid number.

What I'm saying is that, taking into account that even if we discount up to 50% of illegal aliens (meaning all of the 11,000+ people incarcerated for immigration-related crimes) that reside in federal prison due to immigration-related offenses, we would still be dealing with a group of illegals consisting, at a minimum of 7% of the overall inmates. And I mean the bare, absolute minimum that we can possibly come up with. So even if we use "immigration-controlled" data, we are still dealing with a disproportionate representation, of atleast 7%, by illegals (an estimated 3-4% of America's total population), compared to the overall population.

No matter how the federal prison statistics are to be studied, with or without immigration control, the disproportionate representation by illegals amongst federal prison population remains.
 
Last edited:
Do you honestly think that I'm more emotionally invested in American politics than you? American politics, to me, is merely a matter of learning how to argue points in English. To you, it's what you see around you every day. So let's not even bother with the argument about one's supposed "emotions". You are "in it" much more than I am.

What we're discussing isn't actually an issue in American politics, while the supposed evils of immigration appears to be a major issue for the non-American right.

BTW, you're making a huge error in your most recent response to Trotsky that relates to your lack of knowledge of the American CJ system. I'm sure he'll point it out, though.
 
Yeah, I think it's a safe bet they all have fatal flaws that the researchers and reviewers did not find, but untrained supergenius SBJJ will at a glance.
tenor.gif
 
I also didn't want to get overly semantic, but you have repeatedly used the term "debunked" without seeming to understand what it means. For something to be "debunked" would mean that its conclusion has been proven incorrect, not that its methodology is deemed imperfect. You have, at least in part, conceded that there is no data to suggest that undocumented immigrants commit more crime ceteris paribus.



Yes, they do: or at least, they definitively don't contradict the narrative. We've been over this before on how using incarceration statistics that don't control for immigration offenses is wholly unreliable. In fact, I believe that our last time around I provided local jail stats that, when controlling for detention for immigration purposes and inquiry, showed a lower incidence of detention. But I could be mistaken and not remembering that correctly.

Also, presuming you are talking about CATO, it can generally be presumed to be skewed (I wouldn't say "biased," but if that floats your boat) toward economic rightism, free markets, low taxes, etc. At no point has there ever been a popular presumption that it is biased in favor of undocumented immigration lol.

#1. The CATO study is debunked in the sense that it’s not even a study. It’s an opinion that since crime has dropped as immigrants increased that concludes illegal immigrants are not more inclined to commit crimes. It’s beyond silly

#2. Just as in the original thread where you threw out the completely untrue unsubstantiated “Illegals are more law abiding than citizens “. NO stats at all back you up. GreatA is breaking it down for you just like it was broken down for you in the original thread

Stating the stats back u up when it’s clear as day they do not is EXACTLY what you were whining about when u created this thread
 
#1. The CATO study is debunked in the sense that it’s not even a study. It’s an opinion that since crime has dropped as immigrants increased that concludes illegal immigrants are not more inclined to commit crimes. It’s beyond silly

That's not what the study was. You're not even coherently critiquing it now: you're just painting it as a broad overview of correlation (=/= causation).

And you still don't seem to understand what "debunk" entails.

#2. Just as in the original thread where you threw out the completely untrue unsubstantiated “Illegals are more law abiding than citizens “. NO stats at all back you up. GreatA is breaking it down for you just like it was broken down for you in the original thread

He isn't, as I have been in the process of pointing out, and you didn't.

Stating the stats back u up when it’s clear as day they do not is EXACTLY what you were whining about when u created this thread

So we're just embracing the ouroboros now.
 
I think it's the opposite, really. I get to the point, and that's what upsets you. You want to go on about the studies, while I think we both know, knew before I posted the link, that you're just looking for a reason to dismiss all the evidence on the issue because you have an emotional aversion to the conclusion that people who study it generally draw.

Curious. What evidence is it that you grab from the CATO study. What is it that “study” has within it you believe is evidence that supports your position
 
What we're discussing isn't actually an issue in American politics, while the supposed evils of immigration appears to be a major issue for the non-American right.

BTW, you're making a huge error in your most recent response to Trotsky that relates to your lack of knowledge of the American CJ system. I'm sure he'll point it out, though.

I know that I'm surely making errors, but that's mainly because your prison system, to be honest, is shit. However, I cannot be making a large enough error to invalidate my original claim.

Even by discounting all immigration-related offenses, you will still not come up with a number of illegals in federal prison, that is proportionate to the number that they represent in the overall population of the country.

So far, I'm the only person even trying to put any honest effort into evaluating the true number of illegals residing in federal prison, for non-immigrant related offenses. I'm merely trying to do something that @Trotsky criticized for not having been done. As a person who wants to get to the bottom of the truth, I'm now trying to deliver on that front.

If someone can come up with a number that debunks the idea that illegals are being disproportionately represented in federal prison, if not for immigration-related crimes, then I will applaud them for their efforts. But I personally don't really expect anything, other than more people trying to talk around the numbers.
 
That's not what the study was. You're not even coherently critiquing it now: you're just painting it as a broad overview of correlation (=/= causation).

And you still don't seem to understand what "debunk" entails.



He isn't, as I have been in the process of pointing out, and you didn't.



So we're just embracing the ouroboros now.

I’ll just hit one of these. Since you are just saying the same thing over and over at this point with no back up

What evidence is in the CATO study that backs up your argument
 
I know that I'm surely making errors, but that's mainly because your prison system, to be honest, is shit. However, I cannot be making a large enough error to invalidate my original claim.

Even by discounting all immigration-related offenses, you will still not come up with a number of illegals in federal prison, that is proportionate to the number that they represent in the overall population of the country.

So far, I'm the only person even trying to put any honest effort into evaluating the true number of illegals residing in federal prison, for non-immigrant related offenses. I'm merely trying to do something that @Trotsky criticized for having not been done. As a person who wants to get to the bottom of the truth, I'm now trying to deliver on that front.

If someone can come up with a number that debunks the idea that illegals are being disproportionately represented in federal prison, if not for immigration-related crimes, then I will applaud them for their efforts. But I personally don't really expect anything, other than more people trying to talk around the numbers.

I do applaud your effort. I’m sure there is some PMing going on between 2 posters as we speak trying to come up with some sort of attack

It all doesn’t matter because 100% of Illegal immigrants have committed a crime to begin with so Trotsky’s actual original comment was incorrect on face value

Funny the dudes crying about not being able to admit a mistake have turned this thread into exactly what they were bitching about
 
Back
Top