i REALLY REALLY REALLY HATE people who can't say "i don't know" and instead pull a random answer from right out of the deepest part of their large intestine.
@thievesarmy and it's called racism and it has to be some level of cognitive dissonance. Their entire world view of a group of people is shattered within seconds or less. How would I feel? This isn't sympathy for the devil. It's more like disgust.
Same. Hate it when people are super confident in what they are saying when it is obvious that there is a high chance they are wrong and don't know what they are talking about.
@@Jonathynn "Well according to various openpsych journal academics who exclusively publish on that site their articles on race because they know their articles won't pass peer review." We can do this all day.
In other words "I'm not smart nor knowledgeable enough to assess a study on it's own merit, which is why I have to pathetically resort to heuristics like who funded the study"
@fjf sjdnx A News article isn't scientific evidence. If CNN funded an actual scientific study, then I would obviously be sceptical but I would read the study to see if I can spot flaws in its methodology or their interpretation. If I can't find any then I can't just dismiss the study. "But it's funded by CNN!" is not an argument.
A summary of this argument: Learn the difference between economic and fiscal impacts from immigration. Also, before you claim immigrants use more education funding disproportionately to natives, learn how schools are funded.
Momentai that is what he asked. Which taxes fund schools was never, ever implied. What was implied in "which ones?" was that ones meant "which people" as stated in the prior answer; not which taxes fund the schools. Horrid word choice on Destiny's part.
Momentai “He never conflated fiscal impact with economic impact” Literally, from the begging of the stream he began to conflate the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration which is why Destiny had to ask him to verify if he knew the difference between the two. At 1:13 he states “there’s an analysis on that website of the fiscal impact of different ethnic groups in the United States.” Destiny asks him “what about it” to which he replied, “Hispanics have a negative fiscal impact…in spite of this you say(referring to Destiny) that hispanics do not have a negative fiscal impact”, which is something Destiny hasn’t claimed but has stated immigrants have a positive economic impact which is verified by virtually all economist. The Redditor CLEARLY conflates the two. “he already told Destiny he knew how schools were funded but that he didn't understand the question Destiny was asking because of the phrasing.” Ummmm NO. Destiny phrased the question appropriately. Asking ANYONE who knows how schools are funded or has bought property would have immediately solicited the correct response instead of “uhhhh…the people who pay them.” which is needlessly vague for a pretty exact answer. For example, it would be like me asking you if you knew how gravity worked and your response was “uhhhh…..the earth.” There is no vagueness to education funding. www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/08/property-taxes-and-unequal-schools/497333/ Any prior research into how education is funded would have informed him, which allows me to conclude he clearly didn't research the main premise of his own argument.
That was in relation to per pupil spending by ethnicity. Destiny seems to have this idea that non-white students, on a average, receive less funding because they live in less wealthy neighborhoods and school funding is largely paid via property taxes. However his inference contains an error he assumes Seans initial argument contains as it ignores some underlying complexities. Analysis of per pupil spending by institutions as diverse as the Tax Policy Center (Murray & Rueben, 2008), Heritage Fundation (Richwine, 2011) and the Center for American Progress (Epstein & Miller, 2011) show no systematically lower spending for non-white students. This holds true for Asians, Hispanics and Blacks. The interpretations of the Center of American Progress of this data, of course, is somewhat bizarre in that it moans about the fact that the spending for African-Americans in some states is somewhat lower while ignoring the fact that in other states the per pupil spending for African-Americans is higher than that for White students. Overall it's a wash. Good schools vs. bad schools is not a funding issue. It's a student issue.
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 First of all, I'm gonna start this off with a statement that Im not at all interested in this topic, so this research is going to be painful. What that means, is that if I find somethig glaringly incorrect in your arguments, I'm gonna hate you for wasting my time looking into the minutia of this topic, that I have no interest in, while it seemed you did no research yourself. Not that that would have any impact on your life if that happens, but id like it to be known up front that if this happens, there is at least one person in the world who thinks youre a dumb, terrible human and ill just hope that gives you even an iota of the annoyance you gave me. That being said, if you're correct, ill validate your argument here and hope that anyone else who sees this will see a super lib guy concede a pretty important example that people point to when they discuss systemic discrimination.
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 First the 2008, and I'm gonna say, youre not starting off strong. The first part of the findings hammers on a trend between an elderly population and declining support for public education, and they ask if as a society has more percent elderly, does per pupil spending decline. They then say that another study found that just looking at elderly percents isn't enough, but rather if a population has a large percent elderly, that per pupil spending on groups that are of a different race than the elderly decline and that this is reflected in a lot of studies. "Public support for education is a particular concern. Seniors realize fewer direct benefits from education spending than do other age groups. Consequently, as the population ages and political power shifts toward the elderly, we might expect spending on education to fall. Previous research has consistently demonstrated that the elderly are less likely to support increases in school spending when the children in their community are of a difference race and, as the racial makeup of the school-age and elderly populations diverges, we would expect neighborhoods to reflect this divergence. Reduced support for education could then lead to sharp decreases in per-pupil spending as the school-age population continues to grow." Page 341-343 That being said, there is absolutely no breakdown on per pupil spending by racial group, and that fact makes me start to suspect that you're arguing in bad faith and claiming fake support, but I'll suspend judgement for right now
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 Richwine shows some promise and makes me want to retract my suspicions on bad faith, for now. The article itself is typical conservative trash, and you should really resource to the actual links that the article instead of some dudes fevered writings. They link to another 2008 article by rueben amd murray (a different than the original that I found on the tax credit centers website). If I were to be a pedant, I would say that you should really change your source from TCC to Urban Institute. Besides this, the other thing that Id like to point out, which bears a little more weight is that the second source links to what appears to be the first source, so maybe just use the one? The new 2008 source sources their info from census of bureau stats from 2002, which from looking up online most people don't really have issue with. This shows that per pupil spending on nonwhites is typically 5% more than whites. I tried looking for more recent numbers but I couldnt find a similar per pupil spending broken down by race. Perhaps they stopped doing it since 2002? It does give per pupil spending by school district, and that can be combined with demographic info to estimate per pupil spending, but I dont have the ability to make that right now. Possibly I'll do it tomorrow if I get bored at work, but most likely I won't because, like destiny argued in this very video, I cant just compare two numbers that aren't given in the same context and extrapolate a comparison without some competency in the social science field, which I don't have as an engineer. I can do stats and maths, but thats about it.
@@thejosh0000001 The 2008 Rueben & Murray paper is available on the TPC website. www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/racial-disparities-education-finance-going-beyond-equal-revenues/full The idea that non-white students receive less funding is usually based on citing data that shows that whiter districts tend to have higher educational spending per pupil but this ignores the fact that within districts funding tends to be skewed towards poorer and less-white schools. This is shown in Ejdemyr & Schores (2017). Destiny, and many others, now makes the leap from the former trend to the conclusion that there is a systematic educational funding bias against non-white pupils when every analysis by economist that I know of that attempts to resolve this question shows there is no systematic bias in this direction. Rueben & Murray (2008): >In 1972, the ratio of nonwhite to white spending was .98; this trend had reversed by 1982, as spending per pupil for nonwhite students was slightly higher than for white students in most states and in the United States as a whole and has been for the past 20 years Richwine (2011): >Nationwide, raw per-pupil spending is similar across racial and ethnic groups. The small differences that do exist favor non-white students. After breaking down the data by region, the non-white funding advantage becomes more pronounced. In the Northeast, for example, blacks receive over $2,000 more than whites in per-pupil funding per year. The region with the smallest differences is the South, where spending on black and Hispanic students is only slightly higher than on whites. >Adjusted for cost of living, the differences narrow. Asian and Hispanic students receive slightly less money than whites overall, while blacks receive slightly more. Regional differences persist after the adjustment, especially in the Northeast. I'm not an economist so i go with what field relevant experts say in the literature that addresses the specific issue at hand which is something Destiny told me is the reasonable thing to do because of the complexities that can easily be overlooked by non-experts - although he doesn't seem to take his own advice when it's ideologically inconvenient. if you happen to have some literature that attempts to estimate per pupil spending by race and comes to a different conclusion: Please share. I haven't seen one.
Hypothetical situation: If 4 laborers spend $1k in gov services a piece, earn $500 a piece, but they made me so much more income that I had to pay $6k more in taxes because I had a good strategy to market the value of their labor, then we have a net gain, to both fiscal and economic, even if the laborer themselves is spending twice their take home pay (under the table) in social services.
This was 10 years ago but San Diego right across from Tijuana had 50 hospitals go under and another 100 in the red from Tijuana citizens going across the border and having a child delivered for free in our hospitals. Then go back home across the border. This is not hypothetical, this is reality. Many billions are lost by the American tax payer with no ROI. This isn't racism, this is a drain on our system but politicians don't say, "You want us to cut back on Welfare"? They say "You want us to cut back on SS" Something many of us paid in all of our lives to.
@@robertjackson7590 Well you are just literally wrong on your calculations. They absolutely bring more to the table economically than they use up on welfare. Your one example is just a drop in the bucket, but still should be addressed. You still made the wrong calculations about the net benefit to the economy.
@@RanEncounter I can learn something from everyone here, please point to a link or something more than an opinion. I live in Texas, where do you live? Here's something to think about, an illegal alien comes across bringing his family. He doesn't show to be married so his wife and children get gov help. He works as a brick layer and 10 years later with naturally many more illegals doing the same business model. You have a 33% drop in the price for laying brick. If you're an American of any color you will compete with that or make nothing. When this man hits an age his body is too worn to work he goes on welfare. Who in this picture benefited from this? There are suggested 200 Million people that want to migrate to the US, who and how many do you think we can support and who gets to pick them?
@@robertjackson7590 "I can learn something from everyone here, please point to a link or something more than an opinion." After you have done that sure. You literally made claims that every economist refutes. Can you actually show your sources? "Here's something to think about, an illegal alien comes across bringing his family. He doesn't show to be married so his wife and children get gov help. He works as a brick layer and 10 years later with naturally many more illegals doing the same business model. You have a 33% drop in the price for laying brick." And the citizens benefit from the 33% drop in the price of laying brick. Are you against the standard of living in the America rising? You have got to be kidding me. "If you're an American of any color you will compete with that or make nothing." Start a brick laying company with these guys and make more money. They cannot do that as they are not citizens with proper papers. You seem so one dimensional with your thinking. "When this man hits an age his body is too worn to work he goes on welfare. Who in this picture benefited from this?" The average citizen that gets cheaper brink laying prices so living standards increase, the person that started the company made a huge bank, government got a lot of more taxes collected as more people living and spending money bring more tax income, I really could go on. The illegal immigrant cannot get a good pension because they don't have social security number while they payed nearly as much taxes as you do and did it with shit pay. They are the ones getting fucked here and America is reaping the benefits. Sure there are loses in labor wages and other areas but this is why the huge economic benefits should be distributed from the winners so that the economic losers would be compensated. This is not hard to understand. "There are suggested 200 Million people that want to migrate to the US, who and how many do you think we can support and who gets to pick them?" All of them and you would be better for it, if you had an economic distribution system the way that I mentioned. Here you can read from the leading economist on immigration and its impacts in more detail: www.jstor.org/stable/2728791
damn it I love destiny, he always obliterate everyone he speaks to and has them stumbling all over the place. why cant these people just say"hey you have a valid point let me look into that some more" they just dig the hole deeper and deeper
Modern American debate is a rhetorical competition. It is taught that way in school, is framed that way in politics, and has been intensified by the internet. When the goal of debate is not about getting to the truth then concession just seems like losing. This is why real debates are called "discussions" or "conversations" now and why platforming idiots is often counterproductive.
He's getting better are breaking down disingenuous arguments and showing that the foundation of the other person's argument is based on motivated reasoning and not on facts.
deedles ...what he hasn't accepted is the insight that, neurologically and psychologically speaking, all reasoning is motivated. It's just a question of degree and transparency. (This isn't meant to detract from the value of his ability to be the big fish in a small pond full of ignorant, racist fish.)
@@mikebaker2436 So true, and yet people are here because they want to see Destiny destroy someone. I hope there are more that are here to see him change someone's mind. Or change his own!
One day Destiny comes to his YT comments, see's your comment and reads you account.. "gaming", hmm. Checks your channel and notices this game you're doing videos about. He then tries it, get's hooked, researches the fuck out of it, and then we have Destiny coming in to debate PoE's redditors. Can't wait.
Hahaha would be awesome, but the more likely scenario is: gaming? Who the fuck puts GAMING in his name. What a fucking idiot. *queues another League game. Pepehands
What does "WOOSH" mean? He answered the question correctly and coherently after Destiny asked it. WTF is wrong with you that you think asking a simple question that was answered is some kind of "own"?
african immigrants are literally some of the most educated and well off immigrants we receive lmaooooo. i love the dishonesty "they cant integrate to our culture"
Couldn't the economic impact by household number also include the fiscal impact number? If the fiscal impact is -$4k, who is to say the economic impact isn't $6k so it balances out to $2k benefit? Am I missing something?
As someone who works in accounting, I'm dumbfounded trying to figure out what he's trying to say when attempting to relate the field to economics, which I've also studied a little bit some years ago. There's not much meaningful crossover, if any, between the two. Wtf is the "accounting lens"?
Well him and Ryan did a correlation between primaries turn out and national election results and used that to out perform professional pollster because they assumed there was no correlation.
Yes, and you can easily find this report with the simple Google search that Destiny is a big fan of. TL;DR spoiler: The truth is complicated and real life outside of internet debate is never as clear cut as laypeople want it to be. Exhaustive economic research doesn't cleanly support EITHER of their positions because economics is complicated and these guys are both underinformed ideologues when it comes to this topic. (Edit: ....but Destiny, though he is not fully compitent in economics, is at least not an ignorant and xenophobic racist.)
6 minutes in, the guy's argument has no data to support it and he just starts babbling. Be interesting to see how this can go on for another 40 odd minutes.
Wait, what the fuck, wouldn't the fiscal cost (so public spending) be taken into account in term of inflation, debt, and malinvestments ? You're subtracting two times the same thing, and chances are, what you're subtracting is being calculated differently in both instances.
On the issue they had with "black" schools not having calculus. I think that the schools in the lower income areas might focus more on automotive and shop type courses. And the higher income areas would focus more on physics and calculus. Cause I know I'm my area there where certain high schools kinda focused on certain things. Are kids forced to go to the highschool that's closest to them in America.?
economic impact literally includes fiscal impact, the fiscal drain cannot possibly be overpowering the -rest of the- economic impact if the economic impact is overall positive, how can people read data so thoughtlessly, i think i literally learned that on first semester, back when my major was not even econ.
its also very dumb to just subtract fiscal spending from gdp contribution, it’s literally pretending fiscal spending is equivalent to directly destroying not just money but literal value from the economy, fiscal spending has its own net gdp contribution. it’s crazy how neolibs are so obsessed with the economy yet won’t take the 3 minutes it takes to search in the most basic econ book how measurements and indicators interact at all.
Something I missed, were they talking about legal immigration, illegal immigration or both confounded together? Because what I believe is that destiny took the part with legal migrants where those are bounds by certain law to prove that they are always working and may never receive welfare and so on and the other guy was primarily talking about illegal immigrants using taxes loophole to get social security number to make their taxes(because the law forces everyone, legal or illegal to send their tax form and if an individual doesn't have a social security number, the IRS will send an unofficial 9 digit number to fill their form), receiving tax return and collecting welfare afterwards.
12:50 So this question proved the guy had no idea what he was talking about, but Destiny it should be noted that while yes transfer payments do not count in GDP, welfare payments may still have an impact on GDP because after you receive your welfare check you tend to spend it on consumption which is counted in GDP. Hence welfare spending is said to increase GDP because it increases the consumption of those receiving welfare even though it is not directly counted in the GDP.
First the premise of comparision on a basis proposing the assumption that race is natural instead of social is deeply flawed, secondly gathering material to support a previously incorrectly deduced opinion is deeply flawed on top of that. Interestiningly, taking social perception into account this quite inverts causality, a deduction which is reinforced by the second fallacy. To elaborate this by an example we could compare wearing a hat or a cloak, thus deducing, should the data support it, that wearing a hat is not economically feasible by correlation. Its, of course, totally arbitrary and won't tell us anything about causation. I wouldn't waste my time with validating proper correlation of such premises. This is already a step too far.
At the 31 minute mark: oh, this Redditor means all immigrant households, not illegal immigrant households. My household is an immigrant household, and we pay ass loads of taxes. I realize that using a technical term like ass loads makes me seem a bit elite, but I assure you I am barely middle class.
i could be completely wrong but the guy destiny debated and i don't want to put words in his mouth but to ME and my interpretation of his view and his beating around the bush for this, His main position is that hispanics who immigrate are not as educated and are poor they also take out more out of the system then they put in. so he basically wanted to say hispanics are bad for America? and we shouldn't let them in because they are not as good for America as European who immigrate?
it feels so weird to hear the word hispanic so much, grouping up nations that have their own identities and, in some cases, hate each other with a passion. and no, they don't necesarily have more in common between each other. I promise you, chile and mexico have nothing in common other than speaking spanish (and even then, they will have trouble fully understanding each other, since nobody speaks "neutral" spanish). culture? weather? geography? race? nope.... and yet, both "hispanic"??? this grouping up of whole continents (which happens with asia and europe too) reduces everything to a level of sameness or simplicity that in reality doesn't exist.
I'm not an economist so I Googled "Economic vs. Fiscal Impacts" which I think they should have done in the beginning. (I'm 'just' an engineer who knows not to just add up unrelated numbers like kilograms Newtons and meters, inches... ) "Beyond these economic impacts, there are also fiscal impacts, or the additional revenues and costs incurred by public entities, representing how the specific economic activity will affect the bottom line of local and state governments." impactdatasource.com/economic-vs-fiscal-impacts-whats-important-economic-developers/ From this and the wording 'additional' I would suspect that 1/ you can add these numbers somehow to get another number (whatever that is, and its significance is another question), 2/ the economical impact is only a subset of the impact and does not contain all relevant information and therefor is not a good number to base your arguments on when comparing overall impact (of immigration, AI automation or anything really). "For example, economic impact might tell you how many jobs are created, but fiscal impacts consider how much those jobs will result in taxable spending, new residential property taxes, and also weighs out additional government costs such as the added expense of fire trucks having to dispatch more frequently to accommodate the larger population. With all the factors considered, fiscal impacts are typically more difficult to estimate and can be difficult to summarize in a headline." "From time to time, clients will ask us to prepare a study that estimates just the economic impact or just the fiscal impact of their project. Depending on the purpose, one of these impacts in isolation can be helpful but more often than not, we suggest estimating both economic and fiscal impacts together in the same study, as they provide a complete picture to the project or activity." I agree with Destiny that the Redditor needs to know more before adds these numbers and makes a claim, but in this case the Redditor might actually be right, and Destiny probably misrepresents the facts, operates in half truths. (I don't think Destiny is intentionally misleading - he might be - but I think he is ill informed.) You need additional knowledge, wisdom to interpret these numbers in responsible way. That is why statistics is so dangerous in the wrong hands. "I can prove anything by statistics except the truth"
There is the money/value that an immigrant generates for the person/company/factory/... he works for, and there is money that he gets paid. The former is attributed to the "native" that owns the business. The guy debating destiny here only considers the number the immigrant gets paid when subtracting, which underestimated the net positive the immigrant generates in the whole economy.
"economist A has a PhD so I believe what he says" vs "I don't believe you because you don't have a PhD" does anyone see the hilarity here? When did we start teaching parrots how to use computers?
Destiny, I do agree with you on some things but on immigration my only contention is I would rather we have legal immigration so that we at least have a handle on it. If we decide to allow more people in thats fine with me, bring em in we are a huge land mass thats barely being used and could grow. We could ease the restrictions and allow more people in easily. Now when I say this, I get accused of being racist. People say I must not like mexicans, etc. What is the argument against having legal immigration be forced?
Plenty of people on Fox News or Deadbart say the same thing. You are not special. Also, then you would change the "legal" definition of immigration to snow white European. Tool
@@CEWIII9873 Calm down. Go spread your hate somewhere else. I have one brother and sister that are mexican and one sister that is indian. I'm married to an immigrant. I'm all for immigration. Bring em all. Open it wide. Just have sign ins.
Isn't it self evident that as the work force (immigrants) accepts lower wages then the cost of products and services go down? That would not be apparent if you were only looking at a fiscal comparison.
the economy got destroyed in this debate
i REALLY REALLY REALLY HATE people who can't say "i don't know" and instead pull a random answer from right out of the deepest part of their large intestine.
@thievesarmy and it's called racism and it has to be some level of cognitive dissonance. Their entire world view of a group of people is shattered within seconds or less. How would I feel? This isn't sympathy for the devil. It's more like disgust.
Same. Hate it when people are super confident in what they are saying when it is obvious that there is a high chance they are wrong and don't know what they are talking about.
"Well according to The Heritage Foundation".
Goodbye.
"Well according to Paul Krugman."
Goodbye.
Also, put the "." before the end quotation mark before you open your mouth please.
@@Jonathynn "Well according to various openpsych journal academics who exclusively publish on that site their articles on race because they know their articles won't pass peer review."
We can do this all day.
In other words "I'm not smart nor knowledgeable enough to assess a study on it's own merit, which is why I have to pathetically resort to heuristics like who funded the study"
@fjf sjdnx if they're a joke it should be a walk in the park for you to point to methodological flaws, yet here you are talking about funding.
@fjf sjdnx A News article isn't scientific evidence. If CNN funded an actual scientific study, then I would obviously be sceptical but I would read the study to see if I can spot flaws in its methodology or their interpretation. If I can't find any then I can't just dismiss the study. "But it's funded by CNN!" is not an argument.
A summary of this argument: Learn the difference between economic and fiscal impacts from immigration. Also, before you claim immigrants use more education funding disproportionately to natives, learn how schools are funded.
Momentai that is what he asked. Which taxes fund schools was never, ever implied. What was implied in "which ones?" was that ones meant "which people" as stated in the prior answer; not which taxes fund the schools.
Horrid word choice on Destiny's part.
Momentai “He never conflated fiscal impact with economic impact”
Literally, from the begging of the stream he began to conflate the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration which is why Destiny had to ask him to verify if he knew the difference between the two. At 1:13 he states “there’s an analysis on that website of the fiscal impact of different ethnic groups in the United States.” Destiny asks him “what about it” to which he replied, “Hispanics have a negative fiscal impact…in spite of this you say(referring to Destiny) that hispanics do not have a negative fiscal impact”, which is something Destiny hasn’t claimed but has stated immigrants have a positive economic impact which is verified by virtually all economist. The Redditor CLEARLY conflates the two.
“he already told Destiny he knew how schools were funded but that he didn't understand the question Destiny was asking because of the phrasing.”
Ummmm NO. Destiny phrased the question appropriately. Asking ANYONE who knows how schools are funded or has bought property would have immediately solicited the correct response instead of “uhhhh…the people who pay them.” which is needlessly vague for a pretty exact answer. For example, it would be like me asking you if you knew how gravity worked and your response was “uhhhh…..the earth.” There is no vagueness to education funding. www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/08/property-taxes-and-unequal-schools/497333/
Any prior research into how education is funded would have informed him, which allows me to conclude he clearly didn't research the main premise of his own argument.
Momentai shut yo hating ass up my guy.
Momentai who cares, thinking too hard about shit that doesn't matter, didnt know this was a debate contest. Shut yo hatin ass up
Wasn't his whole argument taking some fiscal impact and subtract that from some economic impact? That is conflating.
Dude, just combine them. The logic is clear.
Is this satire lmao
Video ends at 4:30
Doing an assignment for macroeconomics and this helped significantly, thanks for the free talking points
I want to see destiny debate steven crowder
i feel like it would be a waste of time
then again most debates are
Josiah Thompson Steven “Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme” Crowder
He'd cower.
Crowder is a massive pussy, he won’t try and debate anyone who will call him autistic
I love when he brings up the school thing when destiny literally bought a house in a better neighbourhood so Nathan could go to a better school.
That was in relation to per pupil spending by ethnicity. Destiny seems to have this idea that non-white students, on a average, receive less funding because they live in less wealthy neighborhoods and school funding is largely paid via property taxes. However his inference contains an error he assumes Seans initial argument contains as it ignores some underlying complexities.
Analysis of per pupil spending by institutions as diverse as the Tax Policy Center (Murray & Rueben, 2008), Heritage Fundation (Richwine, 2011) and the Center for American Progress (Epstein & Miller, 2011) show no systematically lower spending for non-white students. This holds true for Asians, Hispanics and Blacks. The interpretations of the Center of American Progress of this data, of course, is somewhat bizarre in that it moans about the fact that the spending for African-Americans in some states is somewhat lower while ignoring the fact that in other states the per pupil spending for African-Americans is higher than that for White students. Overall it's a wash.
Good schools vs. bad schools is not a funding issue. It's a student issue.
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 First of all, I'm gonna start this off with a statement that Im not at all interested in this topic, so this research is going to be painful. What that means, is that if I find somethig glaringly incorrect in your arguments, I'm gonna hate you for wasting my time looking into the minutia of this topic, that I have no interest in, while it seemed you did no research yourself. Not that that would have any impact on your life if that happens, but id like it to be known up front that if this happens, there is at least one person in the world who thinks youre a dumb, terrible human and ill just hope that gives you even an iota of the annoyance you gave me.
That being said, if you're correct, ill validate your argument here and hope that anyone else who sees this will see a super lib guy concede a pretty important example that people point to when they discuss systemic discrimination.
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 First the 2008, and I'm gonna say, youre not starting off strong.
The first part of the findings hammers on a trend between an elderly population and declining support for public education, and they ask if as a society has more percent elderly, does per pupil spending decline.
They then say that another study found that just looking at elderly percents isn't enough, but rather if a population has a large percent elderly, that per pupil spending on groups that are of a different race than the elderly decline and that this is reflected in a lot of studies.
"Public support for education is a particular concern. Seniors realize fewer direct benefits from education spending than do other age groups. Consequently, as the population ages and political power shifts toward the elderly, we might expect spending on education to fall. Previous research has consistently demonstrated that the elderly are less likely to support increases in school spending when the children in their community are of a difference race and, as the racial makeup of the school-age and elderly populations diverges, we would expect neighborhoods to reflect this divergence. Reduced support for education could then lead to sharp decreases in per-pupil spending as the school-age population continues to grow."
Page 341-343
That being said, there is absolutely no breakdown on per pupil spending by racial group, and that fact makes me start to suspect that you're arguing in bad faith and claiming fake support, but I'll suspend judgement for right now
@@izwhechtsuppe3565 Richwine shows some promise and makes me want to retract my suspicions on bad faith, for now. The article itself is typical conservative trash, and you should really resource to the actual links that the article instead of some dudes fevered writings.
They link to another 2008 article by rueben amd murray (a different than the original that I found on the tax credit centers website). If I were to be a pedant, I would say that you should really change your source from TCC to Urban Institute.
Besides this, the other thing that Id like to point out, which bears a little more weight is that the second source links to what appears to be the first source, so maybe just use the one?
The new 2008 source sources their info from census of bureau stats from 2002, which from looking up online most people don't really have issue with. This shows that per pupil spending on nonwhites is typically 5% more than whites. I tried looking for more recent numbers but I couldnt find a similar per pupil spending broken down by race. Perhaps they stopped doing it since 2002? It does give per pupil spending by school district, and that can be combined with demographic info to estimate per pupil spending, but I dont have the ability to make that right now.
Possibly I'll do it tomorrow if I get bored at work, but most likely I won't because, like destiny argued in this very video, I cant just compare two numbers that aren't given in the same context and extrapolate a comparison without some competency in the social science field, which I don't have as an engineer. I can do stats and maths, but thats about it.
@@thejosh0000001 The 2008 Rueben & Murray paper is available on the TPC website.
www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/racial-disparities-education-finance-going-beyond-equal-revenues/full
The idea that non-white students receive less funding is usually based on citing data that shows that whiter districts tend to have higher educational spending per pupil but this ignores the fact that within districts funding tends to be skewed towards poorer and less-white schools. This is shown in Ejdemyr & Schores (2017).
Destiny, and many others, now makes the leap from the former trend to the conclusion that there is a systematic educational funding bias against non-white pupils when every analysis by economist that I know of that attempts to resolve this question shows there is no systematic bias in this direction.
Rueben & Murray (2008):
>In 1972, the ratio of nonwhite to white spending was .98; this trend had reversed by 1982, as spending per pupil for nonwhite students was slightly higher than for white students in most states and in the United States as a whole and has been for the past 20 years
Richwine (2011):
>Nationwide, raw per-pupil spending is similar across racial and ethnic groups. The small differences that do exist favor non-white students. After breaking down the data by region, the non-white funding advantage becomes more pronounced. In the Northeast, for example, blacks receive over $2,000 more than whites in per-pupil funding per year. The region with the smallest differences is the South, where spending on black and Hispanic students is only slightly higher than on whites.
>Adjusted for cost of living, the differences narrow. Asian and Hispanic students receive slightly less money than whites overall, while blacks receive slightly more. Regional differences persist after the adjustment, especially in the Northeast.
I'm not an economist so i go with what field relevant experts say in the literature that addresses the specific issue at hand which is something Destiny told me is the reasonable thing to do because of the complexities that can easily be overlooked by non-experts - although he doesn't seem to take his own advice when it's ideologically inconvenient.
if you happen to have some literature that attempts to estimate per pupil spending by race and comes to a different conclusion: Please share. I haven't seen one.
Workers also contribute to generating wealth that does not necessarily go to them, especially the poor ones generate wealth for the wealthy.
You made a video saying you're done with debates. That video got DESTROYED in this debate
Hypothetical situation: If 4 laborers spend $1k in gov services a piece, earn $500 a piece, but they made me so much more income that I had to pay $6k more in taxes because I had a good strategy to market the value of their labor, then we have a net gain, to both fiscal and economic, even if the laborer themselves is spending twice their take home pay (under the table) in social services.
What you mean by earning $500 a piece? You mean making $500 from their job
This was 10 years ago but San Diego right across from Tijuana had 50 hospitals go under and another 100 in the red from Tijuana citizens going across the border and having a child delivered for free in our hospitals. Then go back home across the border. This is not hypothetical, this is reality. Many billions are lost by the American tax payer with no ROI. This isn't racism, this is a drain on our system but politicians don't say, "You want us to cut back on Welfare"? They say "You want us to cut back on SS" Something many of us paid in all of our lives to.
@@robertjackson7590 Well you are just literally wrong on your calculations. They absolutely bring more to the table economically than they use up on welfare. Your one example is just a drop in the bucket, but still should be addressed. You still made the wrong calculations about the net benefit to the economy.
@@RanEncounter I can learn something from everyone here, please point to a link or something more than an opinion.
I live in Texas, where do you live?
Here's something to think about, an illegal alien comes across bringing his family. He doesn't show to be married so his wife and children get gov help. He works as a brick layer and 10 years later with naturally many more illegals doing the same business model. You have a 33% drop in the price for laying brick. If you're an American of any color you will compete with that or make nothing.
When this man hits an age his body is too worn to work he goes on welfare. Who in this picture benefited from this?
There are suggested 200 Million people that want to migrate to the US, who and how many do you think we can support and who gets to pick them?
@@robertjackson7590 "I can learn something from everyone here, please point to a link or something more than an opinion."
After you have done that sure. You literally made claims that every economist refutes. Can you actually show your sources?
"Here's something to think about, an illegal alien comes across bringing his family. He doesn't show to be married so his wife and children get gov help. He works as a brick layer and 10 years later with naturally many more illegals doing the same business model. You have a 33% drop in the price for laying brick."
And the citizens benefit from the 33% drop in the price of laying brick. Are you against the standard of living in the America rising? You have got to be kidding me.
"If you're an American of any color you will compete with that or make nothing."
Start a brick laying company with these guys and make more money. They cannot do that as they are not citizens with proper papers. You seem so one dimensional with your thinking.
"When this man hits an age his body is too worn to work he goes on welfare. Who in this picture benefited from this?"
The average citizen that gets cheaper brink laying prices so living standards increase, the person that started the company made a huge bank, government got a lot of more taxes collected as more people living and spending money bring more tax income, I really could go on.
The illegal immigrant cannot get a good pension because they don't have social security number while they payed nearly as much taxes as you do and did it with shit pay. They are the ones getting fucked here and America is reaping the benefits.
Sure there are loses in labor wages and other areas but this is why the huge economic benefits should be distributed from the winners so that the economic losers would be compensated. This is not hard to understand.
"There are suggested 200 Million people that want to migrate to the US, who and how many do you think we can support and who gets to pick them?"
All of them and you would be better for it, if you had an economic distribution system the way that I mentioned.
Here you can read from the leading economist on immigration and its impacts in more detail:
www.jstor.org/stable/2728791
damn it I love destiny, he always obliterate everyone he speaks to and has them stumbling all over the place. why cant these people just say"hey you have a valid point let me look into that some more" they just dig the hole deeper and deeper
"But I don't like brown people and you're taking away one of my reasons to do so. I don't wanna stop!"
Modern American debate is a rhetorical competition. It is taught that way in school, is framed that way in politics, and has been intensified by the internet. When the goal of debate is not about getting to the truth then concession just seems like losing. This is why real debates are called "discussions" or "conversations" now and why platforming idiots is often counterproductive.
He's getting better are breaking down disingenuous arguments and showing that the foundation of the other person's argument is based on motivated reasoning and not on facts.
deedles ...what he hasn't accepted is the insight that, neurologically and psychologically speaking, all reasoning is motivated. It's just a question of degree and transparency. (This isn't meant to detract from the value of his ability to be the big fish in a small pond full of ignorant, racist fish.)
@@mikebaker2436 So true, and yet people are here because they want to see Destiny destroy someone. I hope there are more that are here to see him change someone's mind. Or change his own!
Just do the math yourself LOOOL 4Head
love
the streams keep it up daddy
hi empi
One day Destiny comes to his YT comments, see's your comment and reads you account.. "gaming", hmm. Checks your channel and notices this game you're doing videos about. He then tries it, get's hooked, researches the fuck out of it, and then we have Destiny coming in to debate PoE's redditors.
Can't wait.
Hahaha would be awesome, but the more likely scenario is:
gaming? Who the fuck puts GAMING in his name. What a fucking idiot.
*queues another League game.
Pepehands
When are those podcasts being made? The ones you mentioned 2 months ago.
shhhhhhhhh
Whos Nilo you must be new here. Never take what he says as set in stone. Ever.
He says that he's too lazy to set the podcasts up.
“Do you understand the difference between fiscal and economic impact?”
WOOSH
What does "WOOSH" mean? He answered the question correctly and coherently after Destiny asked it.
WTF is wrong with you that you think asking a simple question that was answered is some kind of "own"?
African Americans are on average 30 percent white and are closer to whites than east Asians so wtf is this guy talking about.
lol my favorite parts of these debates are when he ends the call and just starts laughing at the stupidity of what he just had to deal with
Destiny was fiscally negative in that debate
Wow economists got destroyed in this debate
More of the debating brainlets memes, huh?
Destiny's hispanic heritage got DESTROYED in this debate
@Nikolai Karkaroff yoooo this you?
@Nikolai Karkaroff from discord?
@Nikolai Karkaroff yea I'm in your discord
Destiny can’t stay away.
That is a big yikes from me
Destiny really waited to kill the wall of flesh in this debate.
This argument is basically the same as:
"What's the deal with homeless people? Just get a house LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL 4House"
Debatestiny is back!
I do miss debates like this. Even when the party on the other side is a potato its still fun to watch them being exposed.
african immigrants are literally some of the most educated and well off immigrants we receive lmaooooo. i love the dishonesty "they cant integrate to our culture"
Simple people like simple solutions
This sounds like Ryan faulks (alternative hypothesis) friend Sean last.
Oh shit it is him.
Couldn't the economic impact by household number also include the fiscal impact number? If the fiscal impact is -$4k, who is to say the economic impact isn't $6k so it balances out to $2k benefit? Am I missing something?
His first mistake was using Alternative Hypothesis as a source.
He's one of the creators of the alternative hypothesis
and now he lost a formal debate to him lol
Appreciate this kind of content buddy.
Slowly, but surely we're getting the old Destiny back, boys!
The debate was over from 2:34.
Debate Stefan molyneux or Steven crowder.
Now that would be a REAL debate.
You got skills show them off!
Not even gonna lie, the music playing in the first few minutes is the reason why I liked this lmao
As someone who works in accounting, I'm dumbfounded trying to figure out what he's trying to say when attempting to relate the field to economics, which I've also studied a little bit some years ago. There's not much meaningful crossover, if any, between the two. Wtf is the "accounting lens"?
WACKY STEVE AT IT AGAIN
vikram He is THE REAL racist. Bonus meme: there are no black people named Steve.
That twist at the end of the second act tho!
Destiny listened to a NieR soundtrack cover in this debate. (and holy shit its good)
Guy found something That people with a PhD in economics haven’t found, seems legit.
Well him and Ryan did a correlation between primaries turn out and national election results and used that to out perform professional pollster because they assumed there was no correlation.
Holy shit I'm pretty ignorant and I have a small vocabulary. But come on dude destiny explained it well enough that even I could grasp it.
Even if this dudes numbers were right why wouldn’t you also do this math for native people
can anyone tell me waht size world destiny was playing on, on terraria?
Most income now goes to the top 1% who do not spend and pay less taxes. This is why a massive debt exists.
Watching this live was funny as fuck. When Destiny went hard on this guy half way through it was funny asf.
National academy of sciences madea 500 page report on the fiscal and economic impact of immigration. Read it. Your welcome
Yes, and you can easily find this report with the simple Google search that Destiny is a big fan of.
TL;DR spoiler: The truth is complicated and real life outside of internet debate is never as clear cut as laypeople want it to be. Exhaustive economic research doesn't cleanly support EITHER of their positions because economics is complicated and these guys are both underinformed ideologues when it comes to this topic.
(Edit: ....but Destiny, though he is not fully compitent in economics, is at least not an ignorant and xenophobic racist.)
Destiny got annoyed in this debate
6 minutes in, the guy's argument has no data to support it and he just starts babbling. Be interesting to see how this can go on for another 40 odd minutes.
Wait, what the fuck, wouldn't the fiscal cost (so public spending) be taken into account in term of inflation, debt, and malinvestments ? You're subtracting two times the same thing, and chances are, what you're subtracting is being calculated differently in both instances.
Same sperch mannerisms as Sam Harris. Weird
Probably because they have similarly high IQs.
You have to at least give it to the guy for shrugging off the berating he got near the middle.
Does the immigration surplus account for the higher cost of rent?
Economists got refuted by a layman in this Destiny
On the issue they had with "black" schools not having calculus.
I think that the schools in the lower income areas might focus more on automotive and shop type courses. And the higher income areas would focus more on physics and calculus.
Cause I know I'm my area there where certain high schools kinda focused on certain things.
Are kids forced to go to the highschool that's closest to them in America.?
Would this guy also argue that 6 meters of land is more than 5 liters of water?
economic impact literally includes fiscal impact, the fiscal drain cannot possibly be overpowering the -rest of the- economic impact if the economic impact is overall positive, how can people read data so thoughtlessly, i think i literally learned that on first semester, back when my major was not even econ.
its also very dumb to just subtract fiscal spending from gdp contribution, it’s literally pretending fiscal spending is equivalent to directly destroying not just money but literal value from the economy, fiscal spending has its own net gdp contribution. it’s crazy how neolibs are so obsessed with the economy yet won’t take the 3 minutes it takes to search in the most basic econ book how measurements and indicators interact at all.
Something I missed, were they talking about legal immigration, illegal immigration or both confounded together? Because what I believe is that destiny took the part with legal migrants where those are bounds by certain law to prove that they are always working and may never receive welfare and so on and the other guy was primarily talking about illegal immigrants using taxes loophole to get social security number to make their taxes(because the law forces everyone, legal or illegal to send their tax form and if an individual doesn't have a social security number, the IRS will send an unofficial 9 digit number to fill their form), receiving tax return and collecting welfare afterwards.
Must be that Soul Math I been hearing about.
This is a savage murder
12:50 So this question proved the guy had no idea what he was talking about, but Destiny it should be noted that while yes transfer payments do not count in GDP, welfare payments may still have an impact on GDP because after you receive your welfare check you tend to spend it on consumption which is counted in GDP. Hence welfare spending is said to increase GDP because it increases the consumption of those receiving welfare even though it is not directly counted in the GDP.
How can a man be so oblivious to standard methodology?
First the premise of comparision on a basis proposing the assumption that race is natural instead of social is deeply flawed, secondly gathering material to support a previously incorrectly deduced opinion is deeply flawed on top of that. Interestiningly, taking social perception into account this quite inverts causality, a deduction which is reinforced by the second fallacy.
To elaborate this by an example we could compare wearing a hat or a cloak, thus deducing, should the data support it, that wearing a hat is not economically feasible by correlation. Its, of course, totally arbitrary and won't tell us anything about causation. I wouldn't waste my time with validating proper correlation of such premises. This is already a step too far.
Jesus Lord Almighty, Destiny fucking shredded this guy
Fuck lol Steve was just polishing his fangs for 20 minutes
OH FUCK.
This is Sean Last! Destiny debated Sean Last. He's one of the big players in the race realism ballpit.
That twist, poor people, omg
one of these days, destiny is going to look back at this shit and wonder why he ever thought any of this mattered.
Finally playing a good game
At the 31 minute mark: oh, this Redditor means all immigrant households, not illegal immigrant households. My household is an immigrant household, and we pay ass loads of taxes. I realize that using a technical term like ass loads makes me seem a bit elite, but I assure you I am barely middle class.
What are these numbers he's talking about? Vorhaas? Voerhas?
whats the song at 4:00?
Its the piano version of a song from the Nier Automata soundtrack. I think it's Voice of No Return
This is Sean Last he probably wrote the article lol this video is such a gem.
Sean "I am no longer a white nationalist despite not changing any of my opinions" Last
Immigration is literally one of the most settled concepts in the field of economics.
positive or negative?
The music is really bizarre
i could be completely wrong but the guy destiny debated and i don't want to put words in his mouth but to ME and my interpretation of his view and his beating around the bush for this, His main position is that hispanics who immigrate are not as educated and are poor they also take out more out of the system then they put in. so he basically wanted to say hispanics are bad for America? and we shouldn't let them in because they are not as good for America as European who immigrate?
Wait... all his research about economics comes from Reddit??!?!?!
so painful.
5 ads on a video, Jesus
freedin all ad revenue goes to feeding Kylo Ren. (Nathan)
Hilariously bad example given at 50:45 by Destiny but maybe he was just distracted by League.
All lower middle class and poor person in the USA have a net negative fiscal impact.
it feels so weird to hear the word hispanic so much, grouping up nations that have their own identities and, in some cases, hate each other with a passion. and no, they don't necesarily have more in common between each other. I promise you, chile and mexico have nothing in common other than speaking spanish (and even then, they will have trouble fully understanding each other, since nobody speaks "neutral" spanish). culture? weather? geography? race? nope.... and yet, both "hispanic"??? this grouping up of whole continents (which happens with asia and europe too) reduces everything to a level of sameness or simplicity that in reality doesn't exist.
Nier Automata ost Pog
What's the ost around 5:17?
武道館 nier automata piano collections - vague hope
I'm not an economist so I Googled "Economic vs. Fiscal Impacts" which I think they should have done in the beginning. (I'm 'just' an engineer who knows not to just add up unrelated numbers like kilograms Newtons and meters, inches... )
"Beyond these economic impacts, there are also fiscal impacts, or the additional revenues and costs incurred by public entities, representing how the specific economic activity will affect the bottom line of local and state governments."
impactdatasource.com/economic-vs-fiscal-impacts-whats-important-economic-developers/
From this and the wording 'additional' I would suspect that 1/ you can add these numbers somehow to get another number (whatever that is, and its significance is another question), 2/ the economical impact is only a subset of the impact and does not contain all relevant information and therefor is not a good number to base your arguments on when comparing overall impact (of immigration, AI automation or anything really).
"For example, economic impact might tell you how many jobs are created, but fiscal impacts consider how much those jobs will result in taxable spending, new residential property taxes, and also weighs out additional government costs such as the added expense of fire trucks having to dispatch more frequently to accommodate the larger population. With all the factors considered, fiscal impacts are typically more difficult to estimate and can be difficult to summarize in a headline."
"From time to time, clients will ask us to prepare a study that estimates just the economic impact or just the fiscal impact of their project. Depending on the purpose, one of these impacts in isolation can be helpful but more often than not, we suggest estimating both economic and fiscal impacts together in the same study, as they provide a complete picture to the project or activity."
I agree with Destiny that the Redditor needs to know more before adds these numbers and makes a claim, but in this case the Redditor might actually be right, and Destiny probably misrepresents the facts, operates in half truths. (I don't think Destiny is intentionally misleading - he might be - but I think he is ill informed.)
You need additional knowledge, wisdom to interpret these numbers in responsible way. That is why statistics is so dangerous in the wrong hands.
"I can prove anything by statistics except the truth"
There is the money/value that an immigrant generates for the person/company/factory/... he works for, and there is money that he gets paid. The former is attributed to the "native" that owns the business. The guy debating destiny here only considers the number the immigrant gets paid when subtracting, which underestimated the net positive the immigrant generates in the whole economy.
Destiny sounds too mad. Sean is chill.
sean is always chill he’s a beast
stop using discord its completely ass in voice quality
NO ECONOMIST HAS EVER DONE THAT IN THE HISTORY OF ECONOMY. What a mad man!
More like Mexican and Central American immigration debate
"economist A has a PhD so I believe what he says" vs "I don't believe you because you don't have a PhD" does anyone see the hilarity here? When did we start teaching parrots how to use computers?
I guess that's two parrots.
This dude's voice sounds really familiar...
Soviet Hereditarian based profile picture
Soviet Hereditarian i’m already in it lmfao
Destiny, I do agree with you on some things but on immigration my only contention is I would rather we have legal immigration so that we at least have a handle on it. If we decide to allow more people in thats fine with me, bring em in we are a huge land mass thats barely being used and could grow. We could ease the restrictions and allow more people in easily. Now when I say this, I get accused of being racist. People say I must not like mexicans, etc. What is the argument against having legal immigration be forced?
Plenty of people on Fox News or Deadbart say the same thing.
You are not special.
Also, then you would change the "legal" definition of immigration to snow white European.
Tool
@@CEWIII9873 Calm down. Go spread your hate somewhere else. I have one brother and sister that are mexican and one sister that is indian. I'm married to an immigrant. I'm all for immigration. Bring em all. Open it wide. Just have sign ins.
@@onbored9627 That's nice.
Do you also have a black friend?
@@CEWIII9873 Are you 12?
@@onbored9627 Ask your mom
Isn't it self evident that as the work force (immigrants) accepts lower wages then the cost of products and services go down? That would not be apparent if you were only looking at a fiscal comparison.
Destiny is the Don Quixote of the internet romantically and valiantly battling the windmills of weaponized autism.
Thwoback to Candice Owens ckickening out of debating him at politicon
Is it just me or does this guy sound like Stephan moleneux ?
47:12 i agree with lily Dafeels
Godstiny