>>83008512
Clearly both towns have the same level of crime if the same number of items are stolen (and we don't know about other crimes).

>>83008512
haha that's clever but yeah don't think libshits are gonna get it

>>83008512
stop acting like white hicks.
>>83008531

Poor people of any race suck.

>>83008558
but especially the brown poors (98% of them)

>>83008558
Literally the "purely socioeconomic factors" meme. NPC type post.

>>83008512
black pipo deserve food stamps and bwc not this kind of inhumane treatment

File: protest.jpg (105 KB, 720x1058)

105 KB JPG

>>83008558
>muh poverty

>>83008596
>>83008580
Stop acting like hicks, the Nigerians and Kenyans clean up shop out here. Why do we get to differentiate between variants of whites?

File: have_it_your_way_joggers.jpg (507 KB, 2203x2937)

507 KB JPG

>>83008631
I've never been in a mostly white area where fast food restaurants and gas stations had bank tier security. Why is that?

>>83008644
really makes one ponder!

>>83008644
I have. So stop acting white.

>>83008664
obvious lie, nice try brown boy

>>83008674
brown? Lol, much darker than that.

>>83008644
Some places in LA have that as well as in upstate NY, also Pittsburgh.

>>83008512
i would say the one the right is very likely to have more crime if the shoplifting rates are equal despite items being locked up

>>83008712
>Some places in LA have that as well as in upstate NY, also Pittsburgh.
wow places with tons of murderous groids? you don't say

>>83008724
ain't not groids in LA or upstate NY stop acting white.

>>83008765
>no groids in LA or NY
nigga please I KNOW you playin fr fr

>>83008512
>are towns equally free of crime?
No. Town B is a shithole filled with poor people who will take anything that isn't nailed down.

>but muh niggers
Why are they historically very poor? What situation might have caused that?

>>83008778
you obviously haven't been around. I live in OC and there are literally no black people here.

>>83008712
Betting the signs were in Spanish at these places in LA

>>83008796
ayo homie you said you was a REAL nigga and you live in the fuckin OC dawg fr? u playin rn

u a coon u a oreo what u coonin for nigga

>>83008801
I have never seen a single sign in spanish in LA,

>>83008805
I am first generation, so there is some dissonance between me and the generational Americans.

>>83008644
The NO REFILLS sign is the icing on the cake. You can just imagine how sick to death the employees were of entitled niggers demanding free refills.

>>83008818
>The NO REFILLS sign is the icing on the cake.
lmao didn't notice that.

I live in whitest whitey whiteville and every place just has the soda machine out in the open, get your own refills type of thing. Guess they can't do that with "diversity" around

File: LA.png (1.79 MB, 994x877)

1.79 MB PNG

>>83008810
>noooooo the predominately Hispanic city doesn't have anyone who speaks Spanish, especially not in the shitty areas

>>83008838
2010? imagine how much worse shit is in the last 15 years

>>83008810
>so there is some dissonance between me and the generational Americans.
lol probably. it's always funny to me when ameriblacks get onto african twitter and the insults start flying immediately

>>83008841
It definitely has gotten worse, but there's a ceiling LA is bumping up against in terms of how much more shitting up it can take. All the orange and green dots are the ghetto inner city areas. That's where you'll find the bank vault fast food places. The blue and red dots are the really nice, expensive areas by the coast or in the hills, where stores don't have to put security tags on every single item. The (((diversity))) is priced out of these locations.

>>83008512
>>83008512
>no leftist can answer this question correctly
They don't need too.
They have philosophy (dialectic materialism on their side). Means they always win argument.

>>83008898
>Means they always win argument.
grug say leftist always win argument!! grug smart, grug listen to leftist say he win argument and that convince grug!

File: demographics.jpg (120 KB, 951x667)

120 KB JPG

>>83008882
Huh? Honestly I have been in this area for seven years and I rarely see any hispanic people outside of santa ana. It's mostly Whites and Asians.

>>83008955
Santa Monica is a nice coastal city. That's why it is largely white, like I said the wealthy coastal and hill parts of LA are off limits to (((diversity))). Also Santa Ana is part of Orange County which, aside from Santa Ana, is whiter than LA. Or at least less brown than LA. Still a fuck ton of Asians in Orange County.
t. born and raised in Huntington Beach

>>83008987
Asians are pretty much white on this coast broham.

>>83008558
>Poor people of any race suck
False in my personal experience and the empirical data also doesn't support your statement.

>>83009004
well in my personal experience they do in comparison to wealthy members of any other race.

>>83008512
I'm assuming that the town b has worse crime given that the items are locked up?

File: demographics2.jpg (134 KB, 1086x751)

134 KB JPG

>>83008987
I mean yeah, it's pretty white. I mean there are some black folks, but it's the upper tier my guy.

>>83008526
And here we have a typical art hoe level intelligence. ie. average or below.

They have same theft rate, but one store is basically a bunker that is far harder to steal from. Meaning, if the theft rate is the same, even though stealing from Town B is far harder, then it means crime is overall a bigger problem in Town B by induction.

>>83008558
>Is racist
>"It's not about race"
This is bait right?

>>83009103
a little bit of column a, a little bit of column b. I just don't like lower class hicks of any race.

>>83008596
>in protest
Nice spin

File: 1691942744492169.png (637 KB, 800x800)

637 KB PNG

>people who went all over the world stealing shit complaining about theft

lol lmao

even your land is stolen

>>83009305
This is pure jeetslop.
>muh 45 gorillion
>muh British collapse
>saar plz let me immigrate to London, I sweep streets very well!

>>83008512
it just shows that the pharmacy section is for fags and the shoplifters are chads that steal steaks and alcohol

>>83009305
Uhhm soz but checkmate your nigger ancestors 600 years ago killed the Ubungu tribe and moved into their dung huts so that means you are personally responsible and can't complain about Brit Chads

>>83009319
the idea that the entire internet will soon be full of jeetslop makes me want to puke and I have thick skin

>>83008810
>I have never seen a single sign in spanish in LA
>I have never seen a single sign in spanish
>In a city called LOS ANGELES
Retarded but amusing bait! A rare combination.

>>83009829
you have never been there my guy. They don't have these signs.

>>83008558
The nice thing about retards getting brainwashed is that they will lower their guard and eventually get rekt

>>83009084
Those are entirely your own assumptions. You don't know how effective the measure shown in B is. You don't know what other security measures are present or how they're enforced in either A or B. You don't even know how big each store is, or many people enter each store every month, or how large the population of each town is.

The only hard figure given is an identical rate (number) of shoplifted items, which is also the only crime given.

>>83008512
image didn't include a "all else being equal" disclaimer which in itself a warning against wanton consumption of conservative facebook memes

>>83010163
stop acting like a hick.

>>83010350
you have severe autism but also I'm not that anon and I can accept that the question holds no real world value. shopping by definition should have the fewest barriers possible. even if all the pharmacies in town B are simply more sensitive to crime and their preventive measures are 0% effective, we are still talking about unequal criminality because it affects town B more in a negative way.

>>83010457
>shopping by definition should have the fewest barriers possible
Cool opinion, but it has nothing to do with the question.
>all the pharmacies in town B are simply more sensitive to crime
What in the fuck does that even mean?
>affects town B more in a negative way
In what way?
>you have severe autism
Sorry for actually enjoying logical puzzles.

>>83010509
>Cool opinion, but it has nothing to do with the question.
Nobody was talking about an opinion.
>What in the fuck does that even mean?
Which part are you struggling with?
>In what way?
Look at the photo, there is a difference between town A and town B
>Sorry for actually enjoying logical puzzles.
It's good that you are enjoying it! Are you good with context clues?

>>83010520
Your "context clues" are assumptions. I can just as easily assume that Town B is somewhere in Finland where they have shit like this not because they need it, but because the globohomo conglomerate wants uniform PoS setups across all their sites, while Town A is somewhere in South America where they simply cannot afford this kind of shit. See? I can push a narrative based on assumptions too.

>>83010623
Who said they need it? The question was whether they are equally free from crime or not, not about your narrative.

>>83010671
It wasn't about your narrative either (definition of shopping, a shop being "different in a negative way", etc). The point of my comment was to demonstrate that you can take assumptions and use them to push whichever narrative you like, so the only way to answer the question is disregard any and all assumptions and look at the facts, of which there is only one. Don't act like you were the one trying to stay on topic and I was the one pushing an assumption based narrative.

>>83008512
>free of crime
Neither are free of crime if they both report the same amount of shoplifting.

>>83008512
B has more crime, since an equal number of items are stolen despite the security deterrent.
Shoplifting rates would increase if the plexiglass doors were removed.

>>83011511
This wasn't about the narrative you like. The facts include the photographs, if you cannot be objective then you will answer the question incorrectly. Nobody was asking for your assumptions, just whether or not you know the correct answer.

>>83008512
The one on the left is in a democrat run state and the one on the right is in a republican run state.

And statistically that statement is more likely to be true than your disagreement about its validity.

>>83011929
That would just mean republican run states have a lot more crime, at least for pharmaceutical products and vitamins.

>>83008512
I live in NYC and almost every single big name supermarket, drug store, etc is like TOWN B, it makes me hate niggers from the bottom of my heart.
I know two facts about blacks, the first is that they will steal if given the opportunity, the second is that they will never put the shopping cart back where it belongs.

>>83011896
So you're just gonna keep trying to convince me that *I* was the one pushing "context clues" and "narratives" over objective facts, just because I illustrated that that's what you did and why it's a retarded thing to do. Okay buddy.
>The facts include the photographs, if you cannot be objective
Ah yes, the well-known objective fact that "shopping by definition should have the fewest barriers possible" and the second picture containing a literal barrier meaning Town B is objectively affected "in a negative way". For your sake, I hope you're just trying to ragebait and don't actually believe this retardation.

>>83012635
>So you're just gonna keep trying
You're making baseless assumptions. I am not trying anything. Stop changing the subject, I am not your buddy and the correct answer to the question does not depend on me.
>Ah yes
Are you being sarcastic or agreeing with me? It sounded like you didn't understand the correct answer earlier.

File: high trust low trust.png (52 KB, 1000x500)

52 KB PNG

>>83008526
The criminals in town B are certainly more daring to get through the locked cabinets, so we can conclude crime in town B is very likely higher.

>>83012681
its not even about daring, it's the amount and severity of criminal activity required to steal the same number of items. are people in this thread for real for real? in the extreme example where you have to murder someone to steal a bottle of pills, is that more or less crime than if you just find a bottle of pills laying in the street?

there isn't such a thing as a potential crime. crime only exists once its committed.

>>83012771
Planning certain crimes is a crime, you're being punished for the potential crime you would have committed had you not been caught in this case.
Does this not disprove your claim or does the fact that we've made the planning of those crimes a crime in and of itself prove you right?
Basically, you're gay, and semantics are retarded.

>>83012771
Who the fuck told you that lmao? Ok go post on Facebook about how you're gonna bomb an embassy and when you get arrested say "no no i didn't do it yet"

But first kill yourself

>>83012679
>Are you being sarcastic or agreeing with me? It sounded like you didn't understand the correct answer earlier.
Sounds like you missed the part where I referred to your """"""""""objective correct answer"""""""""" as retardation. Having said that, I don't think you're as retarded as you're pretending to be.

I gave my answer in my very first post. Shoplifting is the only crime mentioned and the rate is the same in both cases. Based on the information given, both towns are "equally free from crime", insofar as they're both equally crime-ridden, based on the only factual piece of information given. Anything else is an assumption, which can be taken in whichever direction you like, which you might even be doing subconsciously.

I think your brain is struggling to filter out the plain facts given, because as soon as you read "Town" you're immediately thinking of what an actual town might be like, complete with its inabitants and their societal problems. You're given photos from actual towns - perhaps you've actually seen that exact "Town B" setup in areas with high crime rates. So your brain instinctively fills in the blanks: "Town B must have a higher crime rate to require such a setup compared to Town A". In most cases you'd probably be right to make such a statement. The problem, is that you're letting the brain fill in the blanks via intuition, rather than definitive factual information presented. I illustrated the problem with this way of thinking (your way of thinking, not mine) by asking you to imagine Town A being in South America and Town B being in Finland - another possible scenario. Your brain might intuit that Finland likely has lower crime rates than most South American countries and reach the opposite conclusion than before.

The point is - you cannot rely on assumptions to give you a "correct" answer. The only safe assumption is that there *is* a correct answer, because that's the whole point of thought exercises, in which case it's a "yes".

>>83012771
smartest liberal

>>83012867
violent threats are a crime aren't they

>>83008526
A sailor turns the rudder of his ship to precisely counteract the force of the wind and keep it moving in a straight line. The resulting data shows that there is no correlation between the position of the rudder and direction of the ship's motion.

>>83008512
Leftists are mentally ill deranged faggots. There's no point in interacting with them other than putting a bullet in their skull.

>>83013685
I'm not a liberal In a new democrat

>>83013674
>I gave my answer in my very first post
Do you not understand why your answer is incorrect? Which part do you need help with?

>>83013728
you're trying too hard bud, you're supposed to have plausible deniability

>>83008512
it says 'TOWN A and TOWN B'
not 'STORE A and STORE B'
we can deduce the streets outside store b are pretty gnarly, unless it's a strict logic question, we would have to say 'not enough information' or something

>>83009084
The problem is with the question. Technically Town A and Town B are equally free from crime. But, only so because B has had to take more drastic measures to bring the theft rate down to the level of A which doesn't have to implement such measures. The question should be
>Which town has a greater potential for crime involving shoplifting

>>83013808
It's just a simple question. All of the towns pharmacy shelves are represented by the two photographs. For every shoplifted item in a pharmacy in town B, you have at least twice the crime rate of the equivalent in town A. All of the assumptions are baked into what the pharmacy shelves look like.

>but what if-
nobody was asking what if.

>>83013772
>Do you not understand why your answer is incorrect? Which part do you need help with?
I literally just explained my entire logic and this is all you can come up with in response? Weak, man.

>>83013845
sounds like a shitty hypothetical, then. what's the point?

>>83013834
it would be easier to steal in A, so A has the greater potential for crime

>>83013858
That is exactly what a person that moved from town B to town A would think, you nailed it

>>83013845
>For every shoplifted item in a pharmacy in town B, you have at least twice the crime rate of the equivalent in town A
Explain to me how you arrived at that conclusion.

>>83013852
the point is seemingly to chastise you for not having the "correct" biases built in

>>83013858
It would be easier, but if you left the stock in B in the same way as A then the crime-rate would increase greater than in A. The question is riddled with assumptions the reader has to make, not enough information provided for this hypothetical leaving a good bit of room for interpretation and not a concrete answer.

>>83013850
i think you are arguing with someone who isn't aware of when they're making assumptions. they probably feel you're being pedantic and playing games. i've had many similar discussions

>>83008512
"equally free from crime"
The phrasing here is essential.

We're not saying whether or not there is more shoplift crime in A or B, we were told that A and B by fiat have the same crime rate. The people that actually live in the town do not have the liberty to quickly pick up items in a convenient fashion and consume as quickly as before. They will now need to be served by a chaperone to buy their drugs. The people in town B are inconvenienced and have less liberty to make satisfying, pleasurable purchases at the slop store. Think of it this way, a pig can either live in a farm where he has to beg the farmer to open up his piggy trough, that's town B or he can live like a king swine in town A sipping as much night quil a day as he pleases. In town B pigs have less liberty, in town A they all get to drink nightquil more. Pigs in town A are more free from crime if freedom means "liberty" which is the ability to do what you desire, and whenever the urge hits you, and you do not need to seek approval by an authority. Town A is freer from crime. This is the way most people interpret freedom, and it is a fair criticism to make that many people will just look at a chart and not see the nuance that people find it an inconvenience and even interpret their lives as impeded or develop a sense of mistrust.

>>83013910
that could be true, but we were talking about the potential for crime.

>>83013852
the point is that some people, potentially more likely left leaning, are incapable of seeing or processing context; they have no way of seeing the whole picture. they get fooled by the "rate of items" trivial indicator and get so anchored to that, they completely miss everything else in the question.

>>83013850
>Weak
So you have resorted to ad hom attacks for no reason?

>>83013973
I'm not sure this is the case. Typically, when presented with data, you try to analyze it and figure out why you got what you got. Sometimes making up a context when it isn't given will introduce unhelpful biases into the equation. It's a weaker perception.

>>83013953
I could debate that but I think rephrasing the question would be better
>Which town has a greater propensity for crime?

>>83014044
if the items were locked up as a response to high shoplifting, town b
but that's an assumption. it could just be a bilaw or some shit that changes the status.

>>83013926
Yeah, something like that. It's always telling when someone refuses to explain their own logic or refute the other's. I'm liking the little "role reversal" game he's trying with me too.

>>83010350
>but what about other circumstances
What of a meteor crashed into the store?

You are given two pieces of information and asked to come to a concolusion about the given data. You sperg out because you don't like the conclusion of the data and the current rotation of Saturns moons may have an effect of theft rates. Pathetic.

File: liberals.jpg (83 KB, 673x830)

83 KB JPG

>>83012771
Correct, which is why I don't lock my doors until after a criminal has entered my house

>>83013910
The answer is very concrete. The other anon was just looking at it from another perspective.

A is more susceptible to crime but it has the same crime rates
B is less susceptible to crime yet has the same crime rates.

Therefore it can be easily concluded that town B attempts to commit more theft than A. At the same time A is still more vulnerable to attack. The only thing this would imply or conclude is that if by magic, the entire populations of the towns switched, A would see higher theft rates than before and B would likely see lower theft rates then ever before.

>>83013928
You are way more retarded than you think you are. Like I understand you think you're smart but you're actually almost guerilla levels of mentally retarded. That or you are ESL and can't understand the basic definitions of words.

free from crime is short for free from the tyranny of criminal acts. Putting a lock on goods is not criminal but theft is.

>>83014044
>>83014080
No, you're making things needlessly complicated. The sign of a midwit.

>>83014233
no, adding unnecessary biases makes things more complicated. analyzing the data doesn't.

>>83014170
>The answer is very concrete.
I disagree, the fact the answer can be open up to such interpretation is proof it isn't. Also, we're just missing key pieces of information that would allow us to give a concrete answer. We can give an answer based on loose logic and deduction but without other statistical information we're just assuming. I would consider myself politically RW, and it's important that we get the arguments right and that they can't be easily broken down by disingenuous arguments. Problem with the image in OP is that it does create a lot of angles for Left-wingers to discredit the opposing argument. Whilst it does serve as a gotcha, it can backfire completely and make our arguments look stupid when they find exceptions to the rule or when they push people to talk about race and ethnicity which is the core underlying theme of the question. We're seeing a lot of slop arguments made by MAGA that turn out to be missing key context that ultimately pushes people away from the Right.

>>83013901
There are only two options that I see.
1. The cost of shoplifting crime per item in town B is more expensive (and more significant) than the relative cost of inaccessible products on shelves and installation/maintenance of locked off shelving. Since it affects all the shelves of all the pharmacies of the entire town, there's no room for nuance trolling. The town has either defined or is experiencing crime in a way that is objectively worse for the people of the town who don't shoplift.

2. Even if we are just going peak retard with pretending that security systems are not for security or that they don't do anything functional about shoplifting, each item shoplifted from the shelves requires at least 1x (one) more unlawful action beyond just grabbing it and walking out of the store without paying. You could come up with "what if" scenarios but the crime per item is by default objectively worse if the item stolen is less accessible. Take it the other way, do things become more or less expensive (in this case for the town) if they become harder to obtain?

>>83014036
You're not saying anything of substance. Data itself can be biased. We're not even talking about data analysis, we're talking about whether or not you can generalize and not fall for anchoring bias. Some people see the "identical rate" indicator and if that's the first thing they process, they simply cannot see the whole picture. Likewise, you can also fall for anchoring bias if you look at the pictures first and just assume town B must have more crime regardless of the amount of shoplifting. both are bad.

>>83008512
I just wish poltards would stay contained on their board. Kys.

>>83014286
>mfw when leftists think that if they don't like the correct interpretation of a problem, that means problems are open to interpretation
its over. you people unironically think that if you just change the sticker price of a house, then everyone can afford a house.

>>83014233
I just think it's a shit hypothetical made by somebody that wants to feel smart by making shitty gotcha arguments.

>>83014340
Look I don't care enough about this, I'm sorry you feel the need to come to fucking /r9k/ to validate your intellect. I'm not a fucking leftist either.

>>83014350
>bro im so meta and 2deep4u but i'll still engage with it
The rise of "it depends" midwits is directly correlated with stagnation

>>83014371
I accept your apology lil bro!

>>83014384
The problem is is that on it's own you can give an answer but the moment you extrapolate that to real life then you have to look at it in a different way. You then need the extra statistics and context of the towns to give a concrete answer. You cannot apply this hypothetical to real life on its own, which is the intention here.

>>83014443
*its
>le muted

>>83014309
>Some people see the "identical rate" indicator and if that's the first thing they process, they simply cannot see the whole picture.
again, this isn't the case.

>>83014443
Batch of Cookies A
>needed to cook 30 minutes at 375 degrees to come out perfectly
Batch of Cookies B
>needed to cook 30 minutes at 425 degrees to come out perfectly
Which batch requires more energy to cook perfectly? It's the exact same question as OP's, just framed in a way that won't trigger libshits by daring to suggest their precious brownoid pets aren't little angels.

>>83014480
>again, this isn't the case.
I never said it was the case.

Might be the most autistic thread I've seen on here. Town B has to lock their shit up cuz niggers. Niggers destroy societies. No one cares about the semantics of how the question is worded.

>>83014575
then why did you say it. twice??

>>83014252
What unnecessary bias? The only ones making unnecessary biases are the seething leftists faggots who immediately thought this was about race or some other discriminatory grouping.

The data is very simple and a conclusion can easily be reached off the given data.

>>83014286
>its open to interpretation
You're just being semantic because you have no argument. I could just as easily argue that your entire post is false because its open to interpretation as you don't adequately define the definition of an argument, politics or angle.

This thread is fucking hilarious. Its such a simple question and only two conclusions can be made but leftists immediately believe that its racist or some other trick so they are doing everything in their power to deconstruct the question itself rather than reach the obvious conclusion.

The only other conclusion given the data we have is that the security glass has no effect on crime as it remained the same.

Leftists are too retarded to even be honest about their own conclusion because they are so fucking biased they immediately believe the question is about demographics.

>>83014844
Oh and btw, the conclusion that the security glass has no effect on crime is THE leftist conclusion a real leftist should make. It follows their logic that all people being equal, the only difference between the two towns is circumstances of the environment rather than the character of the people.

Leftists = environmental factors
Right wing = moral character of the people

>>83014689
I never said it, thoughever.

>>83014844
>Bwhahaha tremble leftists!
>Tremble before the might of my pointless hypothetical!!!
It's a good thing you've impressed yourself because you aren't impressing anyone else.

File: black moses.jpg (56 KB, 481x329)

56 KB JPG

>>83008512
>Could God make a Burrito so big EVEN HE couldn't eat it all?!?!?
No religionfag can answer this question correctly

Checkmate theists XD

I am very smart!!!

>>83014111
That's precisely my point and you're agreeing with it - it's silly to make assumptions because any number of possibilities could apply and lead to different outcomes. So why are you still acting like we're in disagreement?

>>83008558
nice bait, you really wanted to keep this thread on the board all day?

>>83014897
the point would be that leftists are dum lol. quick question, do you think wage inequality is an indicator of anything meaningful?

>>83015124
You don't need to make any assumptions. I think we both agree that town B has the worse crime problem.

>>83015200
If the question was:
>here's a picture of two pharmacies in two different towns
>which town is more likely to have the higher crime rate?
The most intutive and probably the most likely to be correct answer, would be B.
Except that's not the question and thus not necessarily the answer.

You're choosing to focus on the picture and your intuition/assumptions (yes, they are assumptions, as much as you don't like them being called that) as the correct answer. I chose to focus on the wording of the question and hard facts given AND believe in good faith that there IS a correct answer, because an answer like "that would never actually happen" or "no things in life are ever truly equal" is a cop out, as far as thought exercises go.

>>83015354
You don't need to make up any assumptions or "what if" scenarios. Town B is shown to be more burdened by crime. Why are you agreeing with me and then rambling about what you focus on? The question isn't asking what you are focused on.

>>83014799
I am being semantic, it's fun to be semantic sometimes. I do have an argument, it's right there in the post you replied to.
>I could just as easily argue that your entire post is false because its open to interpretation as you don't adequately define the definition of an argument, politics or angle.
You could indeed come to another conclusion based on loose logic and deduction. Without statistical fact and real world examples this whole thing is just a hypothetical. Hypotheticals can draw from assumptions to come to different conclusions.

>>83014531
Would be a better way to frame it, but as I said the moment you make the argument in real life libs/leftists will hit you with arguments that can't be disproven without further context and statistics.

>>83015416
>I do have an argument
Not what I said. What is an argument. Can you define what an argument really is.

Semantics aren't fun. Its the equivalent of being a child and continually asking why, but its not even as fun because at least in that method you learn something new and reach the bottom of your logical line of thinking.

No semantics are boring, its literally just arguing over the definition of a words and phrasing and intentionally ignoring the intent and meaning behind it.

In ye olde times kleptomaniacs had their hands sliced off, due process cucks said we must rehab nutjobs who get dopamine from stealing and well you have this crap today.

>>83015388
>Town B is shown to be more burdened by crime.
Town B is shown to have a particular, visible, anti-theft measure installed that Town A does not. That's ALL that the pictures show. You don't know how effective Town B's measure is or what other measures Town A has. Town B's smart entry gate could be hacked with a phone app/turned off at the wall/thief could wait for assistant to open the door before grabbing shit from behind. Town A could have barbwire and an alligator moat surrounding the shelves. It's pure speculation. There is no definitive answer, aside from the sole fact given.

>>83015489
>but what if there is a Town C???
There is a definitive answer because the answer is defined in the provided images. You don't need to go outside of the scope of the question. This isn't a riddle or pop culture trivia, it's just asking if you can identify a difference between the effect of a crime and frequency of a crime.

>>83015489
>Shaniqua runs hackerman9000 scripts on her phone to get to the makeup.
Gymnastics. You conceded in the most childish way possible.

>show a leftist that 2+2 = 4
>"but what if 2 is interpreted as a 3?? but what if i don't like the number 4?? it's actually not so simple!

File: MGS3.jpg (82 KB, 1280x720)

82 KB JPG

>>83014938
SHADOW MOSES?

>>83014897
Why do you think that two towns having the same crime rates, one with everything locked up requiring a staff member to unlock it, while the other leaves everything on the shelves so you can serve your self irrelevant?
There are plenty of places where you have to conduct commerce through bullet proof glass.
>>83008644

>>83015175
What about performance inequality?
I hear people say nobody needs to be a billionaire, but you could say the same of many talented people. Nobody needs to be as good as Lebron James at Basketball. Nobody needs to be as good as Babe Ruth at Baseball. Nobody needed to dominate Golf like Tiger Woods. If redistribution of wealth is moral, why not other types of redistribution. There's some people who have crappy stats who could really use the credit for some of the shots Lebron James made. If you take a Golf tournament Tiger Woods won and redistribute the credit to a young golfer that could really help the young golfers career and lower performance inequality.
There's grade redistribution as well. An A student has no need for another 95% result on an exam, while there are students who could really use a few more percentage points on their exam, so redistribute the test score distribution from the A students to the students who were on the margin of passing or failing would really help grade inequality

>>83009362
>soon
Already is, lad. If this board had flags you would leave and never look back. At least on discord I can instantly Ignore anyone who admits to being from india

>>83014163
Likewise. He's locked in with me.

File: 07909663959a2a7d4c8442429(...).jpg (30 KB, 736x740)

30 KB JPG

>>83008512
it's the same crime, just different races committing them.

>>83013845
Both stores report the same number of stolen items (let's say - near zero, within the margin of error for legitimate inventory miscounts). The owner of store B is a paranoid schizo who thinks there is crime, even though his actual losses are minimal-to-none. This does not give any meaningful information about the level of crime in either town.

>>83016584
That's part of a different meme but yeah sure. modern commies don't really consider how people diverge from each other over time, they just look at outcomes and make value judgments on how "lucky" or "privileged" someone is, given the principle that somehow all people must be born equal. In a communist world, their reframing of inequality would actually eventually be based on social credit and reputation, rather than wealth or performance.
>how dare you have that many friends!

>>83016645
It's showing all the shelves in a town suffering far more at the same level of crime. Town B might only have 1 person in it, and it's just the owner shoplifting from himself. That doesn't matter for the question. Town B is less free from crime.

>>83016584
The issue is about scale. :et's take your grade redistribution scenario:
>top student, 95%
>failing retard, 50%
>we redistribute and give the retard 70% and the top student 75%
Painful. The top student only had just under twice the score of the failing one, so bringing the failtard up to just passing put a major dent in his grade. But with actual wealth, the disparity is different. If it were:
>high income guy makes 95k
>low income guy makes 50k
Redistributing in this case would be awful, as before. Also note that even this poorfag is decently well off, you can live on 50k. But what if the story is:
>high income guy makes 950 Million per year
>low income guy still on 50k per year
Now we can double the income of the low income guy by shaving off an invisibly tiny scrap off the high income guy. In fact, we can double the income of a bunch of 50k-ers before we even have to chip one of the millions off the high earner. See the difference? In reality, 950M per year isn't even actual top performer (I think Elon is at like 90 Billion a year by now) and the lowest income earners are lucky to get 25k a year.