That Marcus Rashford, what a leader, a man amongst men

[WES]

he thinks we should end child hunger.

Now that, my friends, is that sort of insight we need more of. Thank god he’s around to make the world right. :hehe:

[Sir C]

he thinks we should end child hunger.

Now that, my friends, is that sort of insight we need more of. Thank god he’s around to make the world right. :hehe:

Actually I’d say the point is he thinks the government should end child hunger. Personally I’d be tempted to place the onus on parents to do the job, but ho hum...

[WES]

Actually I’d say the point is he thinks the government should end child hunger. Personally I’d be tempted to place the onus on parents to do the job, but ho hum...

I couldn’t be bothered clicking the link to find out more details, the headline alone made me nauseous.

Still, his concern for hungry children resulted in a MBE without him having to dip into his 200k a week salary.

Shrood IMO.

[barrybueno]

he thinks we should end child hunger.

Now that, my friends, is that sort of insight we need more of. Thank god he’s around to make the world right. :hehe:

Sir Marcus of Rashford MBE if you don't mind!

[AFC East]

Actually I’d say the point is he thinks the government should end child hunger. Personally I’d be tempted to place the onus on parents to do the job, but ho hum...

Of course it is, but no doubt you are a fine Dad or Mum and your children have enjoyed that advantage. Some utter cvnts become parents and it would be nice if the kids disadvantage didn't extend to hunger.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Of course it is, but no doubt you are a fine Dad or Mum and your children have enjoyed that advantage. Some utter cvnts become parents and it would be nice if the kids disadvantage didn't extend to hunger.

Spot on again.

The sins of the father shouldn't be visited upon the son. My Indian mates don't blame me for what the GB Empire did back in the day.

It's fine to hate chav oiks. It's not ok to wish their innocent young kids starve. That's the difference between a one nation Tory and a fascist.

[Arsenal Alcoholic Review]

Marcus Rashford's next economic wisdom "why don't we just print trillions of more money and give it to the poor init".

[redgunamo]

:hehe: looooooooool.



Of course it is, but no doubt you are a fine Dad or Mum and your children have enjoyed that advantage. Some utter cvnts become parents and it would be nice if the kids disadvantage didn't extend to hunger.

[redgunamo]

Of course they should! That's the whole point; that's how it works.

Letting parents off the hook, responsibility-wise, is the cause of all the trouble.


The sins of the father shouldn't be visited upon the son.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Of course they should! That's the whole point; that's how it works.

Letting parents off the hook, responsibility-wise, is the cause of all the trouble.

It may be how it works, but it shouldn't be.

Crime fell in the '90s in NYC. Why? Cos Roe vs Wade meant there weren't millions of unloved scrotes running round mugging each other.

Imagine Rashford loses and loads of Manc chavs have oik kids they can't feed.

The hunger pains drive young Johnny Manc mad, and after years of starving and hatred of his betters in London who didn't agree with Rashford, he bunks the train down, stabs your glw and munches one of her body parts. And then, now with a full belly, rapes poor old Goonersaurus out of spite.

All because we wouldn't let the govt buy him a spam sarnie each day.

It's all that Abrahamic eye-for-an-eye shît, Red. You are now to blame for the sins of the father going being visited not just on the son, but on your beloved and Goonersaurus to boot.

I hope you feel suitably chastised.

[Sir C]

Spot on again.

The sins of the father shouldn't be visited upon the son. My Indian mates don't blame me for what the GB Empire did back in the day.

It's fine to hate chav oiks. It's not ok to wish their innocent young kids starve. That's the difference between a one nation Tory and a fascist.

You know how much healthier a society we would be if people stopped bandying words like 'fascist' around willy-****ing-nilly.

[WES]

It may be how it works, but it shouldn't be.

Crime fell in the '90s in NYC. Why? Cos Roe vs Wade meant there weren't millions of unloved scrotes running round mugging each other.

Imagine Rashford loses and loads of Manc chavs have oik kids they can't feed.

The hunger pains drive young Johnny Manc mad, and after years of starving and hatred of his betters in London who didn't agree with Rashford, he bunks the train down, stabs your glw and munches one of her body parts. And then, now with a full belly, rapes poor old Goonersaurus out of spite.

All because we wouldn't let the govt buy him a spam sarnie each day.

It's all that Abrahamic eye-for-an-eye shît, Red. You are now to blame for the sins of the father going being visited not just on the son, but on your beloved and Goonersaurus to boot.

I hope you feel suitably chastised.

Crime went down in NYC in the 90s because of Roe v Wade, GG? Now that is a seriously bizarre conclusion.

Crime went down because a booming economy meant the city had money and Rudy flooded the streets with cops.

You’ll be telling us Ramsey was a steal at 400k a week next :-)

[barrybueno]

It may be how it works, but it shouldn't be.

Crime fell in the '90s in NYC. Why? Cos Roe vs Wade meant there weren't millions of unloved scrotes running round mugging each other.

Imagine Rashford loses and loads of Manc chavs have oik kids they can't feed.

The hunger pains drive young Johnny Manc mad, and after years of starving and hatred of his betters in London who didn't agree with Rashford, he bunks the train down, stabs your glw and munches one of her body parts. And then, now with a full belly, rapes poor old Goonersaurus out of spite.

All because we wouldn't let the govt buy him a spam sarnie each day.

It's all that Abrahamic eye-for-an-eye shît, Red. You are now to blame for the sins of the father going being visited not just on the son, but on your beloved and Goonersaurus to boot.

I hope you feel suitably chastised.

I don't know why you feel the need to drag the Chelsea owner in to this :chav:

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Crime went down in NYC in the 90s because of Roe v Wade, GG? Now that is a seriously bizarre conclusion.

Crime went down because a booming economy meant the city had money and Rudy flooded the streets with cops.

You’ll be telling us Ramsey was a steal at 400k a week next :-)


New economic research resurfaces debate about the link between legalized abortion and crime reduction

May 24, 2019

Crime rates in the U.S. have fallen by about half since the early 1990s. A new working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research finds that legalized abortion following the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 accounts for 45% of the decline in crime rates over the past three decades.

The paper’s authors, Stanford University economist John Donohue and University of Chicago economist Steve Levitt, take new data and run nearly the same model they used in their influential — and controversial — 2001 analysis published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, where they first suggested an association between abortion and crime.

In the 2001 paper, they found that legalized abortion appeared to account for up to half of the drop in rates of violent crime and property crime to that point. They also predicted crime would fall an additional 20% over the next two decades. Levitt featured the research in the 2005 bestseller Freakonomics. The new paper also looks at violent crime and property crime.....

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/abortion-crime-research-donohue-levitt/

Accepted academic consensus now, I'm afraid. Has been accepted since their first paper in 2001 and this latest research on the post-2001 period backs it up.

If you hadn't spent a decade sticking pins into your Rambo voodoo doll, you might have had some more time for a little light research.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

I don't know why you feel the need to drag the Chelsea owner in to this :chav:

Cos he gave us Gallas, Cech, Luiz and Willian.

[WES]

New economic research resurfaces debate about the link between legalized abortion and crime reduction

May 24, 2019

Crime rates in the U.S. have fallen by about half since the early 1990s. A new working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research finds that legalized abortion following the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 accounts for 45% of the decline in crime rates over the past three decades.

The paper’s authors, Stanford University economist John Donohue and University of Chicago economist Steve Levitt, take new data and run nearly the same model they used in their influential — and controversial — 2001 analysis published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, where they first suggested an association between abortion and crime.

In the 2001 paper, they found that legalized abortion appeared to account for up to half of the drop in rates of violent crime and property crime to that point. They also predicted crime would fall an additional 20% over the next two decades. Levitt featured the research in the 2005 bestseller Freakonomics. The new paper also looks at violent crime and property crime.....

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/abortion-crime-research-donohue-levitt/

Accepted academic consensus now, I'm afraid. Has been accepted since their first paper in 2001 and this latest research on the post-2001 period backs it up.

If you hadn't spent a decade sticking pins into your Rambo voodoo doll, you might have had some more time for a little light research.

It may be accepted by some, GG, but it is hardly a consensus.

So error number one is that you said crime in NYC. Roe v Wade established a constitutional right to an abortion but that had no impact in NYC because NY state already had the most liberal abortion laws in America before Roe v Wade. And after Roe v Wade, NYC had the worst crime rates in its history for the remainder of the 70s and the 80s, it wasn’t until the economic boom of the late 80s that the city’s finances turned around, and it wasn’t until Rudy spent the money and established zero tolerance that crime really came down.

I worked in NYC in the 90s and lived there for 3 1/2 years in the early 00s, GG. It was incredibly safe simply because Manhattan was flooded with cops. You couldn’t walk a block in any direction without seeing one.

An increase in abortion rates, if that actually happened in NY, had a trivial impact compared to the investment in NYPD.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

It may be accepted by some, GG, but it is hardly a consensus.

So error number one is that you said crime in NYC. Roe v Wade established a constitutional right to an abortion but that had no impact in NYC because NY state already had the most liberal abortion laws in America before Roe v Wade. And after Roe v Wade, NYC had the worst crime rates in its history for the remainder of the 70s and the 80s, it wasn’t until the economic boom of the late 80s that the city’s finances turned around, and it wasn’t until Rudy spent the money and established zero tolerance that crime really came down.

I worked in NYC in the 90s and lived there for 3 1/2 years in the early 00s, GG. It was incredibly safe simply because Manhattan was flooded with cops. You couldn’t walk a block in any direction without seeing one.

An increase in abortion rates, if that actually happened in NY, had a trivial impact compared to the investment in NYPD.

RvW was '73. So would have no impact until the late '80s at the earliest.

But oh look, as soon as there aren't any unwanted 17+ year olds walking around mugging people come 1990, you have an economic boom. Strange, dat. I wonder what could possibly be the connection? :rubschin:

[redgunamo]

No, that's all homo-talk, I'm afraid. Though it probably does illustrate why you feel you need a Ph.D. in whatever-it-is :rubchin:





It may be how it works, but it shouldn't be.

Crime fell in the '90s in NYC. Why? Cos Roe vs Wade meant there weren't millions of unloved scrotes running round mugging each other.

Imagine Rashford loses and loads of Manc chavs have oik kids they can't feed.

The hunger pains drive young Johnny Manc mad, and after years of starving and hatred of his betters in London who didn't agree with Rashford, he bunks the train down, stabs your glw and munches one of her body parts. And then, now with a full belly, rapes poor old Goonersaurus out of spite.

All because we wouldn't let the govt buy him a spam sarnie each day.

It's all that Abrahamic eye-for-an-eye shît, Red. You are now to blame for the sins of the father going being visited not just on the son, but on your beloved and Goonersaurus to boot.

I hope you feel suitably chastised.

[AFC East]

It may be accepted by some, GG, but it is hardly a consensus.

So error number one is that you said crime in NYC. Roe v Wade established a constitutional right to an abortion but that had no impact in NYC because NY state already had the most liberal abortion laws in America before Roe v Wade. And after Roe v Wade, NYC had the worst crime rates in its history for the remainder of the 70s and the 80s, it wasn’t until the economic boom of the late 80s that the city’s finances turned around, and it wasn’t until Rudy spent the money and established zero tolerance that crime really came down.

I worked in NYC in the 90s and lived there for 3 1/2 years in the early 00s, GG. It was incredibly safe simply because Manhattan was flooded with cops. You couldn’t walk a block in any direction without seeing one.

An increase in abortion rates, if that actually happened in NY, had a trivial impact compared to the investment in NYPD.

Stop muddying the water with facts ffs

[Arsenal Alcoholic Review]

New economic research resurfaces debate about the link between legalized abortion and crime reduction

May 24, 2019

Crime rates in the U.S. have fallen by about half since the early 1990s. A new working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research finds that legalized abortion following the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 accounts for 45% of the decline in crime rates over the past three decades.

The paper’s authors, Stanford University economist John Donohue and University of Chicago economist Steve Levitt, take new data and run nearly the same model they used in their influential — and controversial — 2001 analysis published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, where they first suggested an association between abortion and crime.

In the 2001 paper, they found that legalized abortion appeared to account for up to half of the drop in rates of violent crime and property crime to that point. They also predicted crime would fall an additional 20% over the next two decades. Levitt featured the research in the 2005 bestseller Freakonomics. The new paper also looks at violent crime and property crime.....

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/abortion-crime-research-donohue-levitt/

Accepted academic consensus now, I'm afraid. Has been accepted since their first paper in 2001 and this latest research on the post-2001 period backs it up.

If you hadn't spent a decade sticking pins into your Rambo voodoo doll, you might have had some more time for a little light research.

It's not a great argument for a civilised society where you have to commit mass murder on a certain race to bring the crime stats down.