Whera are jews in ths? They are not White.
This is stats from the US zog. They are in the "Non-hispanic White" column.
Wonder what % of "Non-hispanic Whites) is actually jew or spic or even nigger. It's at least half.
Arabs and Indians are usually white too
"But there are so more whites than blacks thats why it looks so bad for african amricans because you harp on a smaller group"
-Person with no child left behind and common core education
If you cut out the jews strike another 2/3 if you cut out all perverted libshites its another 75% off.
if you cut out all perverted libshites its another 75% off.
You can't really do that. It's retarded to think that's a reasonable cut off. Cutting jews, yes they aren't White. But muh perverted libshites (trash label, leave cuckbook behind) are still White when nonWhites are removed.
This graphic actually supports my anecdotal experience based opinion. I always thought maybe it was my race bias and prejudices but apparently not.
True.
Was just an after thought anyway.
Tell me you don't know what 'Per Capita' means without telling me... And I don't mean the figurative person in your post, I specifically mean you.
I know what per capita is.
But too many people somehow don't....thats the joke.
Where's the rest of the chart?
They would be higher than representation.
They're conflating hispanic and latino. Hispanics are just descendants of Spaniards, i.e. white. Latinos refer to those from the spanish speaking world, like mestizos for example. The right column should say mestizo. Not hispanic.
hispanics are White
No. Fuck off. You will never be White.
Hispanic literally means descendant of Spaniards. Spain is in Europe. You know, the place where white people are from.
Cool. And native Americans means native of America yet there are no native humans from any of the Americas. hispanics are not White. SOME Spaniards are White but not many after jew-led sandjew invasions of history, same is true for Italy.
The funny business with the charts though. Why does it have to begin with 60%?
Nothing funny here. Because the White rate is 78% of of the total populations mean, adding the lower portion of the 3 bars adds no information and makes the comparison look less impressive.
For the same reason that the stock chart for Tesla starts at 180. No reason to start at 0 and waste a bunch of space showing irrelevant information
"Non-Hispanic white." LOL.
Really like these nonsense charts with unusable variables. The only thing we are seeing is just some bars where they are different sizes but the y axis is nonsense. It looks like "representation relative to population" is actually the percentage underneath each categories on the x-axis.
But what I did learn is that Hispanics molest the shit out of each other. That's legit crazy and something new. I thought the blacks did it the worst because of the shit black people tell me that goes down in their families. Everyone is molesting everyone in black homes.
The numbers under the x-axis labels show the same thing (inverse) as the values on the y-axis. If whites are 70% of the population and commit 70% of the offenses, then their y-value would be 100 and it would say (0%) below the x-label for equal representation relative to population. (-22%) for whites is the same as 78%, which is what it shows on the y-axis.
I’m not sure how that’s nonsense or how that means the chart is mislabeled
Everyone is molesting everyone in black homes
Not that women never do it, but for sure if more black homes had adult men present their numbers would be way higher
I’m not sure how that’s nonsense
Because we have per capita stats that would have worked just fine for all of this and not ended up looking like nonsense. If one of my employees brought me this nonsense at work, I'd ask them if they are in the right profession (I do stats and research).
The person who made this is a moron. When they teach you stats, proper labeling on your charts is the basics. The absolute basics. Messing up the labels like was done and not having the labels defined properly clearly demonstrates how much of an absolute moron the author of this chart really is.
The author was trying to go for an under and over representation stat. But failed miserably (you can do a per capita stat and IN THE READING, state which group is over/under represented). Also, you're defending this too hard. You must be the retard who made this. Damn, you're retarded if you made this.
Lmao what?
You didn’t understand what the y-axis label meant.
That doesn’t make the person who made the chart retarded, it makes you retarded. Pretty much everyone here understood this graph except you, you should not be in charge of people whose job it is to present information if you think this simple chart is nonsense.
It literally shows per capita data using 100% as the baseline for expectation per race but you somehow think it’s something separate from per capita rates
![[sourced] Child Molestation by Race - Per Capita [472x413 - 77KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/u5IYmp.png){kind=link}
(post is archived)