Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"Murder by State"

16 Comments -

1 – 16 of 16
Blogger LemmusLemmus said...

The problem with this kind of analysis is that %black, poverty, inequality and measures of familial instability are all highly correlated in American samples and thus can not be meaníngfully analysed separately. If your reader checks the collinearity diagnostics, I predict s/he will find a two-digit VIF, which basically means that the results are uninterpretable.

11/28/07, 6:48 AM

Anonymous Mr. F. Le Mur said...

In other words, blacks tended to be at their worst in the Progressive old Northwest, where whites are nicest.

Griffe du Lion has an article the various state ratios of blacks-in-prison to whites-in-prison:

State-by-state, the figures varied widely from 3.1 to 29.3. But contrary to expectation, the highest disparity ratios turned up mostly in politically progressive states, while the smallest ratios were mostly found in conservative states.

11/28/07, 7:14 AM

Anonymous Mthson said...

"the white / non-white percentage in any state is not a good predictor of homicide It turns out that a major reason for this poor result is Hawaii."

Calculating the white AND asian percentage would not only probably make these calculations somewhat more accurate, it would also help people avoid seeing the outcomes as an inaccurate dichotomy of whites on the one hand and all other ethnic groups on the other. (One less unnecessary stumbling block for many people.)

11/28/07, 7:22 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...


6. Poverty - This was the only unexpected result. The worksheet "Regression B H Poverty" shows the results of adding poverty. The coefficient is postive and marginally significant (a P-value of 0.056). Note that this was the only regression that produced an adjusted R2 better than demographics alone. It wasn't much better, but it was better.


I would be interested in how much of the murder rate poverty alone explains.

There are several models that one can think of. For example, being poor might lead one into criminality, and might be the only factor.

However, another model is that there are several factors explaining poverty, including low IQ, aggressiveness, impulsiveness and so forth (all controlled by some underlying factors--genes), and that having low IQ in one population does not predict high criminality ... possibly because some populations have driven out most of the genes that lead to criminality and violence.

11/28/07, 9:10 AM

Anonymous RKU said...

Well, it seems to me that anyone who claims to be hugely surprised by this "discovery"---including the strong refutation of Jared Taylor's obvious nonsense---is either a fool, a liar, or a resident of Mars. I'm not sure into exactly which category Mr. Taylor himself falls.

But I do admit a little surprise at the very low murder rates for heavily-Asian Hawaii. After all, "everyone knows" that Asians are particularly prone to criminality and deadly violence, as demonstrated by all the endless Kung-Fu movies. And movies surely would never present a distorted image of reality...

11/28/07, 9:34 AM

Blogger Audacious Epigone said...

I did a similar analysis last summer. My results were virtually identical to those of your friend (r-squared value of .689 for black+Hispanic to his .687), even though I looked at total violent crime and he specifically at homicide. I'd argued that race mattered more than any other of the usual explanations, including poverty.

An insightful commenter, Antero Kalva, pointed out that at the county level, the percentage of single-mother households is a stronger predictor of violent crime than racial composition is. He sent me the data set, and I randomly dug into county states to check for accuracy. It was legitimate, and sure enough, what he said was correct.

We then had a nice back-and-forth on why the top two explanations would be flipped when states on the whole or individual counties were the focus.

11/28/07, 10:13 AM

Blogger Ron Guhname said...

In simple state-level analyses I've conducted, "percent black" alone has explained roughly half of the variation in homicide. I haven't seen any other predictor come close. Mainstream researchers usually include this predictor in their models, but they argue that it is a measure of anything other than race: social disorganization, single parent families, concentrated poverty, gangs, drug dealing, racism, etc. They don't even have the guts to call it culture of violence since that seems too internal.

11/28/07, 10:56 AM

Anonymous appeal to reason said...

Meanwhile, blacks had relatively low imprisonment rates in the old South, suggesting that conservative policies tend to be good for the moral health of African-Americans.

Not necessarily. It could be due to the fact that northern blacks are much more likely to live in big cities than their southern counterparts.

11/28/07, 11:49 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Meanwhile, blacks had relatively low imprisonment rates in the old South, suggesting that conservative policies tend to be good for the moral health of African-Americans."

Maybe criminal blacks in the old South were more often lynched before they made it to trial.

Eternally Anonymous

11/28/07, 1:42 PM

Anonymous tggp said...

What is "EV"? I did some googling didn't find any page he was likely referring to.

11/28/07, 2:01 PM

Anonymous David Davenport said...

It could be due to the fact that northern blacks are much more likely to live in big cities than their southern counterparts.


The [Southern] Agrarian point of view is that big cities are evil, no matter where located.

11/28/07, 3:04 PM

Anonymous Evil Neocon said...

RKU -- Hawaii has long been known (since before annexation when it was a Kingdom) as a fairly explosive place with lots of racial group conflict.

Native Hawaiians vs. Filipinos vs. Chinese vs. Japanese vs. Military -- there was enough fighting in Hawaii to spur it's very own martial art, Kajukembo. There's even "beat on Haole Day" where white kids don't attend school or leave the house because it's open season on them.

Originally of course Hawaii was an independent though poorly run native kingdom, with many grants to missionaries and pineapple plantation owners who came from New England. And imported replacement labor from other places in the Pacific. A recipe for mutual resentment and a stew of racial politics. Fortunately the isolation (and low replacement levels of labor) led to vast intermarriage.

11/28/07, 3:50 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, it seems to me that anyone who claims to be hugely surprised by this "discovery"---including the strong refutation of Jared Taylor's obvious nonsense---is either a fool, a liar, or a resident of Mars. I'm not sure into exactly which category Mr. Taylor himself falls.

Absolutely right, RKU.

It's too bad that the idiots pushing mass immigration haven't come to terms with this. Hispanics increase crime predictably and universally, and unlike blacks we theoretically have at least some control over their numbers.

But the people pushing mass immigration of Hispanics are just incapable of coming to terms with this data. Sigh.

11/28/07, 6:43 PM

Anonymous Jared Taylor said...

Mr. Sailer got his reference to research my organization sponsored right on the second try: The percentage of blacks and Hispanics in a state's population is a better predictor of violent crime rates than are rates of poverty, unemployment, or failure to complete high school. In fact the percentage of blacks and Hispanics is a better predictor of violent than all three other factors combined.

My suspicion is that a more fine-grained analysis by census tract would yield similar results.

These findings, along with a great many more, are to be found in the New Century Foundation report, "The Color of Crime," which can be found at the following URL.


http://www.amren.com/newstore/cart.php?page=color_of_crime

Despite remarks by a previous commenter, nothing in the report can be dismissed as "obvious nonsense."

Jared Taylor

11/28/07, 7:44 PM

Anonymous none of the above said...

Two dumb questions: (I haven't studied this at all, so they may be really obvious.)

a. How do age demographics affect the totals? I've always heard that most crimes are committed by folks under 25, probably because mugging people is a hard job when you're 50, maybe because career criminals are mostly dead or in prison by then.

b. We've seen a huge influx of NAMs in the last few years (the story on the radio the other day said the biggest influx of immigrants in US history, and almost all poor nonwhites from Latin America. But the crime rate hasn't gone up much in that time, right? Why not? (Selective migration is the obvious guess, but I'm not sure what that means for their kids. Salvadoran kids sure seem to get into a lot of trouble around here.)

11/30/07, 6:58 PM

Anonymous Tracy Esau said...

very informative and thought provoking blog

5/20/08, 11:56 PM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL