peter Zeihan 2020

[strunkenwhite]

No, your argument was on the composition of the drug deaths. Total drug deaths has exceeded alcoholism deaths in Post-Soviet Russia.

You quoted, without comment, a tweet that said "opioid deaths" while showing a graph about "age adjusted drug deaths". I objected to this, and I remain unsure of what "age adjusted" means in this context.

Nevertheless, I am prepared to agree based on other data that the total per capita number of drug overdose deaths in the US has topped the peak per capita number of alcohol-induced deaths in Russia.

 

[History Learner]

You quoted, without comment, a tweet that said "opioid deaths" while showing a graph about "age adjusted drug deaths". I objected to this, and I remain unsure of what "age adjusted" means in this context.

Indeed, so I’m not really sure what your argument is over; you quibbled over the level of what amount of the total drug deaths is opioids but have yet to dispute the central point of the tweet I posted. Drug deaths now equal alcoholism deaths.

 

[strunkenwhite]

Indeed, so I’m not really sure what your argument is over; you quibbled over the level of what amount of the total drug deaths is opioids but have yet to dispute the central point of the tweet I posted. Drug deaths now equal alcoholism deaths.

Was that his point? So in your mind when he said "opioid" he just meant to say "drug"?

I'm not at all convinced that was what his point was supposed to be, but if it's your point, then fine. But please expect your readers to do less mind-reading in the future.

 

[History Learner]

Was that his point? So in your mind when he said "opioid" he just meant to say "drug"?

That drug deaths in the United States are now equal to alcoholism deaths during the collapse of the USSR. Whatever the composition of the drugs is is irrelevant to that central fact; we don't quibble on whether a murder is done by a hammer or gun when counting it in the statistics.

I'm not at all convinced that was what his point was supposed to be, but if it's your point, then fine. But please expect your readers to do less mind-reading in the future.

Forgive me for assuming my readers are not being intentionally obtuse.

 

[strunkenwhite]

That drug deaths in the United States are now equal to alcoholism deaths during the collapse of the USSR. Whatever the composition of the drugs is is irrelevant to that central fact; we don't quibble on whether a murder is done by a hammer or gun when counting it in the statistics.

And that's fine IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL DRUG DEATHS.

To take your analogy, this guy posted a graph of the overall murder rate and said "look how many people are being killed by guns!"

And that's why you don't post without comment unless you're really, really sure the message you're transmitting needs no comment.

History Learner lecturing people on being obtuse. What a fucking world we live in.

 

[History Learner]

And that's fine IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL DRUG DEATHS.

Wouldn’t it be crazy if the chart in question said exactly that? Oh wait…

To take your analogy, this guy posted a graph of the overall murder rate and said "look how many people are being killed by guns!"

And that's why you don't post without comment unless you're really, really sure the message you're transmitting needs no comment.

As I said, I assumed the reader would not be obtuse. It was my mistake for placing that much faith in you.

History Learner lecturing people on being obtuse. What a fucking world we live in.

I’m happy to be of service to those that need it.

 

[Poe]

Wouldn’t it be crazy if the chart in question said exactly that? Oh wait…

It would be crazy, but it doesn't it says opioid deaths

 

[History Learner]

It would be crazy, but it doesn't it says opioid deaths

That's entirely the point:

That drug deaths in the United States are now equal to alcoholism deaths during the collapse of the USSR. Whatever the composition of the drugs is is irrelevant to that central fact; we don't quibble on whether a murder is done by a hammer or gun when counting it in the statistics.

And that's fine IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL DRUG DEATHS.

His argument seemed to revolve around whether it's mostly opioids, which misses the central point is on total drug deaths. As I said, we don't quibble on murder statistics regardless of whether they're caused by a knife or a gun, etc; the murder still happened is the point.

 

[Poe]

That's entirely the point:




His argument seemed to revolve around whether it's mostly opioids, which misses the central point is on total drug deaths. As I said, we don't quibble on murder statistics regardless of whether they're caused by a knife or a gun, etc; the murder still happened is the point.

Because from a quick google it doesn't look like this is true of opioid deaths (54/100000 for russian men from alcohol, 34/100000 for opioid deaths in the US.) If it's true of all drugs okay, but that includes e.g. alcohol so you're comparing a totality against a subset and only doing so once your chart was called out as bs.

 

[History Learner]

Because from a quick google it doesn't look like this is true of opioid deaths. If it's true of all drugs okay, but that includes e.g. alcohol so you're comparing a totality against a subset and only doing so once your chart was called out as bs.

Because the point was always total drug deaths, and does not include alcohol deaths. Nor did I change my argument; I literally did not even include a comment with the original post because I thought it spoke for itself.

 

[Poe]

Because the point was always total drug deaths, and does not include alcohol deaths. Nor did I change my argument; I literally did not even include a comment with the original post because I thought it spoke for itself.

But you posted a (wrong) chart about opioid deaths only? So you've clearly changed just based on the image you provided.

 

[strunkenwhite]

But you posted a (wrong) chart about opioid deaths only? So you've clearly changed just based on the image you provided.

No, he posted a chart allegedly about all drug deaths, which was mistakenly cited as a chart about opioid deaths, without comment, and blames me for assuming that we were supposed to care about the opioid deaths.

 

[History Learner]

No, he posted a chart allegedly about all drug deaths, which was mistakenly cited as a chart about opioid deaths, without comment, and blames me for assuming that we were supposed to care about the opioid deaths.

If someone is murdered by a gun or a knife, does that change the fact they were murdered? I'm also unsure how it can be allegedly when you admitted the chart directly says total drug deaths.

 

[strunkenwhite]

If someone is murdered by a gun or a knife, does that change the fact they were murdered? I'm also unsure how it can be allegedly when you admitted the chart directly says total drug deaths.

For the ten thousandth time, what the fuck does "age adjusted" mean? For example, if they are counting only adult deaths against the adult population while the russian data is counting all (alcoholic) deaths against the whole population then that would be a pretty classic case of lying with statistics.

And to answer your question, if we're talking about gun deaths then I don't care about knife deaths. So it matters what the actual topic is, which is the entire problem with your tweet repost without comment.

 

[History Learner]

For the ten thousandth time, what the fuck does "age adjusted" mean? For example, if they are counting only adult deaths against the adult population while the russian data is counting all (alcoholic) deaths against the whole population then that would be a pretty classic case of lying with statistics.

Here's the CDC literally explaining what is.

And to answer your question, if we're talking about gun deaths then I don't care about knife deaths. So it matters what the actual topic is, which is the entire problem with your tweet repost without comment.

In which case, why did you not ask me instead of assuming the argument? I mean, as you literally concede, the chart itself says total drug deaths. You're mad, but the fault here lies entirely with you.

 

[strunkenwhite]

In which case, why did you not ask me instead of assuming the argument? I mean, as you literally concede, the chart itself says total drug deaths. You're mad, but the fault here lies entirely with you.

You posted a tweet of a guy making an argument, and you want me to know you're using his chart to wordlessly "make" a completely different argument?

 

[History Learner]

You posted a tweet of a guy making an argument, and you want me to know you're using his chart to wordlessly "make" a completely different argument?

Once again, when you directly concede the chart says total drug deaths, how am I making a different argument? From this, we can infer:

1. You didn't bother to actually read the chart before commenting
2. You picked a strawman argument for me instead of just asking

 

[strunkenwhite]

Once again, when you directly concede the chart says total drug deaths, how am I making a different argument? From this, we can infer:

1. You didn't bother to actually read the chart before commenting
2. You picked a strawman argument for me instead of just asking

If I didn't read the chart how did I know his tweet was mistaking drug deaths for opioid deaths

lol

 

[History Learner]

If I didn't read the chart how did I know his tweet was mistaking drug deaths for opioid deaths

lol

Which is why I included #2; you could've just asked what I meant instead of making a strawman argument.

 

[strunkenwhite]

Which is why I included #2; you could've just asked what I meant instead of making a strawman argument.

No, I mean what is your logic that makes #1 even a possibility given the available evidence?