Romney

[Coito ergo sum]

Have you ever been to the US?

Three times to date.
However, I cannot judge the US from those visits, since I was 'cushioned' as most visitors are, by the services provided to visitors - like hotels, tour groups etc. I doubt that Americans can appreciate the nature of America from their everyday lives, either. They will just know what their immediate neighbourhood is like. My personal knowledge of America is mainly from reading, which would, of course, also be the best way for Americans to get a good overall view also.

Crime in NZ versus America.
You are correct that crime rates here are high. The reason is different. Our population is 15% indigenous polynesian - the Maori people. While the vast majority of Maori are pretty cool people - friendly, welcoming, and law abiding, most sadly there is a sizable minority who have a very, very big chip on their shoulders, and believe they have a 'right' to become predators on their fellows. The end result is that the majority of our prison population is Maori, the majority of criminal gangs are Maori, and the places where there are lots of Maori are also places where the crime rate is off the scale.

Similarly, in the US, our inner city gangs and large cities in general do most of the murdering, most of which is drug related. Our crime rate, as noted above for violent crimes in general is much lower than New Zealand's overall.

You'll need to clarify what you mean "the reason is different." Just blaming a disaffected minority in your midst? That's like if I said most of the violent crimes were committed by black people.

Despite this, our homicide rate per capita is a third of the USA, due to the fact that the government has wisely made firearms capable of concealment on your person totally illegal. Since a firearm assault, even without causing death, is vastly more serious than one involving just fists, violent crimes in the USA are 'more violent' than those in NZ. Our police are rated in the top three least corrupt in the world, and are most effective.

So, you think it makes New Zealand a better place because you have a lower homicide rate, but a vastly higher rate of all other violent crimes.

In spite of the comments on crime rates, NZ has a prison population consisting of 1 person per 500 overall, compared to 1 per 150 in the US. This is probably because we have a policy of alternative means of dealing with convicted criminals, ranging from home detention, to community service, to fines, supervision etc.

given your nearly double violent crime rate, it doesn't appear to be working very well.

On terrorism in NZ.
Ironically, the major terrorist act performed here was by a 'friendly' government. French agents blew up the ship - the Rainbow Warrior - while tied to a berth in Auckland, and killed one person. Apart from that, we have had local crimes that are politically motivated that might be defined as terrorism. Fortunately, very few.

It's partly because New Zealand is tucked under Australia, out of the way, is very tiny, and has very little involvement or influence globally. Nobody gives NZ much thought, and it's far away from most places other than Australia.

Nevertheless, the government is very concerned about possible foreign terrorism, and takes measures as appropriate. A few years ago, the Commonwealth Heads of Government met in Auckland, and anti-terrorism measures were strong. Just not sufficient to interfere with normal citizen's freedoms.

Same here. What "freedoms" do you think are interfered with here in the US, that are NOT also interfered with by the NZ terrorism measures? You don't get searched at the airport? The government there can't bug a phone?

On health.
Again, from my reading I discovered that the American health system costs more than double, on a case by case basis, than the NZ one.

This is a topic for another thread, and I don't want to derail. Generally, these numbers include more kinds of costs for the private system than are included as costs to the public system. In other words, generally, it's not an apples to apples comparison.

For example : if a minor operation costs $10,000 here, it will cost $ 20,000 plus in the US. Nothing really strange about that. You can get even cheaper health care in India, of a surprisingly high standard.

I doubt that statistic and I would need your source and to know the methodology, although, the US has much sought after health care, and various things cost more in different countries so it's not surprising that some things might cost more here. Clothing in Brazil, for example, is much more expensive than it is in the US. Go figure.

Last point - on crime rates decreasing.
That is a phenomenon seen throughout the developed world. While various police forces will claim credit, the most likely reason is a demographic change. The percentage of young people is dropping and the percentage of older people is rising. Simply, older people commit fewer crimes.

Quite possibly.

[Coito ergo sum]

So you're going to dump all your crime stats off on the Maori? Nice! There's a racist here named Tyrannical who likes to dump all our crime stats off on African Americans. You two should hang out.

Who is a judgmental gasbag now?

My comments are based on hard data. Easy to find if you look up crimes stats. Is a concept racist if it is demonstrably shown to be correct using hard data?

In the US, when the stats point to African Americans in that respect, it's generally said to be because of anti-black racism. Is it possible that there is anti-Maori racism in NZ, which sets the socio-economics in such a way that the disaffected group commits more crimes because of inequality, racism and such. And, perhaps they are profiled, meaning they are not necessarily committed that many more crimes, but rather they are being arrested at higher rates than whites?

[Coito ergo sum]

Lol. You can't just conveniently exclude your nation's highest crime group from the data to make your national crime stats look better. You don't think other countries have groups like that?

If we exclude African Americans and Hispanics, the U.S. stats clean up nicely as well. But that's cheating. And/or scapegoating.

I am not trying to do that . My intention was a simple explanation.

Removing Hispanic and African Americans from US stats would indeed help your crime stats. However, I doubt it would make that big a difference to your homicide stats which are so much higher than any other OECD country that even halving them would still leave the US in the worst position.

To the homicide stats? Oh, hell yeah it would make a tremendous difference.

[Ian]

I highly recommend reading chapter 3 of Stephen Pinker's "The Better Angels of our Nature".

[Tyrannical]

So you're going to dump all your crime stats off on the Maori? Nice! There's a racist here named Tyrannical who likes to dump all our crime stats off on African Americans. You two should hang out.

Who is a judgmental gasbag now?

My comments are based on hard data. Easy to find if you look up crimes stats. Is a concept racist if it is demonstrably shown to be correct using hard data?

In the US, when the stats point to African Americans in that respect, it's generally said to be because of anti-black racism. Is it possible that there is anti-Maori racism in NZ, which sets the socio-economics in such a way that the disaffected group commits more crimes because of inequality, racism and such. And, perhaps they are profiled, meaning they are not necessarily committed that many more crimes, but rather they are being arrested at higher rates than whites?

Blacks are not being arrested more than Whites, at least for crimes having a victim as Blacks are reported as the perpetrator similarly to their arrest and conviction rates.
High criminality is an intrinsic behavioral issue with Blacks where ever they are found.

[Thumpalumpacus]

On a per capita basis, this isn't correct.

Depends who you are comparing yourself with. My own words were "compared to other OECD countries." If you want to compare America with Russia, Afghanistan, or Colombia, you are correct.

However, if you are comparing apples with apples, a so-called advanced western nation with other advanced western nations, then you are not correct. Even cutting the US homicide rate in half will still leave it with a massively greater rate than any other OECD country.

Not so. Look at those numbers again. Cutting it in half would result in a per capita murder rate of 2.4, comparable to Finland or (gasp!) New Zealand.

As far as who we compare ourselves to, I'm not really picky. We're all human beings, and that means that given the right set of circumstances, any culture or civilization on earth could find itself in a murderous set of circumstances.

I wonder what the statistics say about violent crime in general?

[Tyrannical]

In California, the rate that Whites commit murder is 2.42 per 100K.

And racism as an excuse for the increased crime?
Think about it, most Black crime is against other Blacks. That means evil racist Whitey is tricking them into killing each other? Does that really make sense?

[Svartalf]

We will not balance the budget. He is so committed to cutting tax that it takes priority over all else.

You're not balancing the budget... nobody has the balls to up the receipts to a degree necessary to pay off the debt and keep the State running while reforms are implemented to run a balanced budget once the debt is paid off.

[Coito ergo sum]

We will not balance the budget. He is so committed to cutting tax that it takes priority over all else.

You're not balancing the budget... nobody has the balls to up the receipts to a degree necessary to pay off the debt and keep the State running while reforms are implemented to run a balanced budget once the debt is paid off.

Why don't we just balance the annual budget, and work on the debt once we stop increasing it?

Upping tax rates can be a good way to reduce receipts. The best way to increase revenue is to find a way to cause an increase in the tax base, and to increase the size of the economy. That way there is more to tax.

[Seabass]

In California, the rate that Whites commit murder is 2.42 per 100K.

And racism as an excuse for the increased crime?
Think about it, most Black crime is against other Blacks. That means evil racist Whitey is tricking them into killing each other? Does that really make sense?

No, it means centuries of slavery and segregation can leave a culture broken, humiliated, and demoralized.

[Tero]

Budget=annual
National debt=big lump

What is confusing?

[Svartalf]

We will not balance the budget. He is so committed to cutting tax that it takes priority over all else.

You're not balancing the budget... nobody has the balls to up the receipts to a degree necessary to pay off the debt and keep the State running while reforms are implemented to run a balanced budget once the debt is paid off.

Why don't we just balance the annual budget, and work on the debt once we stop increasing it?

Upping tax rates can be a good way to reduce receipts. The best way to increase revenue is to find a way to cause an increase in the tax base, and to increase the size of the economy. That way there is more to tax.

I said upping recepts. Not upping tax rates... and upping tax rates CAN up receipts, you just choose what taxes, and possibly what brackets.

Oh, yeah, that would require competent people in a position to decide on policy...:

[Thumpalumpacus]

Is it true that Romney gets his economic reports from the guy running the register at Starbucks?

[Blind groper]

Not so. Look at those numbers again. Cutting it in half would result in a per capita murder rate of 2.4, comparable to Finland or (gasp!) New Zealand.

As far as who we compare ourselves to, I'm not really picky. We're all human beings, and that means that given the right set of circumstances, any culture or civilization on earth could find itself in a murderous set of circumstances.

New Zealand's homicide rate is roughly 1.4 per 100,000 per year. Not really comparable to 2.4 if the US homicide rate halved.

The reason why America is so murderous is obviously related to its ethnic make-up. Unlike Tyrranical, i do not believe any 'racial' group is innately murderous. However, forcing major culture change onto a people will result in all kinds of stresses, and a high crime rate is one outcome. African Americans have gone through several periods of massive cultural and emotional turmoil. Being made slaves, and then being dumped into an alien culture. It is not surprising that a lot of their young males will kick over the traces.

However, understanding the reason for high crime, and having some empathy, does not alter the fact that the high crime levels exist. We can be sympathetic, but must not be blind.

The Maori in NZ are similar. For a stone age tribal and xenophobic society 200 years ago, they are required to adapt to 21st century western culture. Most have done so admirably, but a sadly large minority still retain the less desirable attributes of their ancestors, including hostility, xenophobia, tribal loyalty, and willingness to engage in violence.

The other big reason for high homicide in America is the availability of firearms, and especially those that can be carried concealed on your person. Other OECD countries restrict his, meaning a lower murder rate. Hand held guns are responsible for more than half of America's homicides. In Britain, by comparison, all firearms together account for only 8% of homicides. Hence a much lower murder rate in Britain.

[Thumpalumpacus]

New Zealand's homicide rate is roughly 1.4 per 100,000 per year. Not really comparable to 2.4 if the US homicide rate halved.

My apologies, I confused you with Bangladesh.

Seriously, the point remains, that skimming New Zealand's minority issues out of the pool, while leaving in America's, is an apparent double standard that you have yet to justify adequately. I'm not arguing that America doesn't have a higher murder rate, but the fact that you would draw such an arbitrary distinction doesn't strike me as very objective.

The reason why America is so murderous is obviously related to its ethnic make-up. Unlike Tyrranical, i do not believe any 'racial' group is innately murderous. However, forcing major culture change onto a people will result in all kinds of stresses, and a high crime rate is one outcome. African Americans have gone through several periods of massive cultural and emotional turmoil. Being made slaves, and then being dumped into an alien culture. It is not surprising that a lot of their young males will kick over the traces.

You realize most black Americans are native-born, right? You realize that they have not been "dumped into an alien culture"? Blacks in general have had a historically shitty time in America, but I'm of the opinion that the root of the problem is much more economic than cultural, myself.

However, understanding the reason for high crime, and having some empathy, does not alter the fact that the high crime levels exist. We can be sympathetic, but must not be blind.

Understood. Seeking to explain is not seeking to excuse. However, I don't think your analysis on the phenomenon of American murder rates is very accurate. While blacks are disproportionately represented as both convicts and victims, it strikes me that there's a real possibility that ascribing that directly to their culture is very possibly a post hoc error.

The Maori in NZ are similar. For a stone age tribal and xenophobic society 200 years ago, they are required to adapt to 21st century western culture. Most have done so admirably, but a sadly large minority still retain the less desirable attributes of their ancestors, including hostility, xenophobia, tribal loyalty, and willingness to engage in violence.

I think the analog here in America would be our native tribes, which also have disproportionately high crime indices, typically.

The other big reason for high homicide in America is the availability of firearms, and especially those that can be carried concealed on your person. Other OECD countries restrict his, meaning a lower murder rate. Hand held guns are responsible for more than half of America's homicides. In Britain, by comparison, all firearms together account for only 8% of homicides. Hence a much lower murder rate in Britain.

You never did answer my question about the rates of violent crime in general (as opposed to only murder). Is there a reason for this omission?