Recent comments in /f/dataisbeautiful
ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9scj5w wrote
Reply to comment by RagingHeretic in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
I hadn't considered them joining NATO. Seems unlikely to me though :/
Dandan0005 t1_j9scf2j wrote
Reply to comment by SaggyFrontButt2 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Fuck off.
One wants healthcare and a livable wage and one wants civil war and thinks Jewish space lasers are starting fires.
Miss me with the false equivalence.
The8thHammer t1_j9sbwce wrote
Reply to comment by ExpensiveSwordfish65 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
The Saudi's already own most of Texas' assets so it'll be mostly under their control. They'd break off completely as an arab owned state and the rest of the south would fend for themselves completely.
kompootor t1_j9sbuwh wrote
I'm assuming this map is based on a classification model that was fit to the demographics listed for each state, and that you are presenting the solution it gave you without further modification. It would be nice if you would describe the specific classification model and parameters you used, because I worry that some people might assume you just made up a bunch of regions on your own inspection and gave them alt-hist-style names -- they'll be hoping this is still a data sub and not a sci-fi/fantasy/Kevin-Costner-film-trivia sub.
SaggyFrontButt2 t1_j9sbu2w wrote
Reply to comment by WhenThatBotlinePing in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Calling for any group to be violent/riot is no excuse. Let alone Palestinians
WhenThatBotlinePing t1_j9sbr2t wrote
Reply to comment by SaggyFrontButt2 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Did you even read that article? She was talking about Palestinians.
DoeCommaJohn t1_j9sbaaj wrote
Reply to comment by Dandan0005 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Percent wise, Democrats won Colorado (14%) by more than Texas (5.5%) and Florida (3.3%) combined. Somebody either wanted to draw a map to make Republicans look popular or hasn’t paid attention to results (or more realistically watches a certain news source that hasn’t paid attention to) results in the past decade
SaggyFrontButt2 t1_j9sb1qj wrote
Reply to comment by ExpensiveSwordfish65 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Keep telling yourself that. I never saw more political violence in my life than in May 2020 when leftists took the streets and burned/looted everything in sight (I live in Chicago)-
DoeCommaJohn t1_j9sazj9 wrote
Every “swing” state and 2 Republican states went to Biden, including Colorado by 14%, Minnesota by 7%, and Illinois by 17%. Looks like somebody wanted to make their party seem far more popular than it actually is.
RagingHeretic t1_j9sadab wrote
Reply to comment by ExpensiveSwordfish65 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Russia and China can't even negotiate their own wars of expansion against neighbors. There's no chance they will manage to do it here. "New America" will become a Russian ally on the North American continent...but they have no industry, no education, no public services...just guns. Pacifica, New Canada, and New England all either join Canada proper or join NATO.
Dandan0005 t1_j9sa8ys wrote
Reply to comment by nachodorito in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Colorado isn’t even lean anymore, it’s solid.
Boebert almost lost in what was supposed to be an R+7 district, lol.
Oh, and the gdp numbers are bullshit too.
California and Washington alone account for more than 4.3 trillion GDP.
New England gdp is a trillion dollars lower than it should be.
the whole discussion is dumb as bricks and this map is even dumber.
Stop giving her attention.
ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9sa6nj wrote
Reply to comment by SaggyFrontButt2 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
I'd hesitate to call her our AOC. AOC hasn't ever to my knowledge called for violence, or denigrated people because of who they are. If I'm wrong I'm happy to see a link.
But comparing them only provides legitimacy to theocratic fascist domestic terrorist right.
muffdivemcgruff t1_j9sa4ke wrote
Reply to comment by triarii42069 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
Because, Russia.
ExpensiveSwordfish65 t1_j9s9yvv wrote
Reply to comment by RagingHeretic in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
My concern here is Russia and China manipulating those smaller states/unions and slowly taking over the former states of America one by one. But you're dam right about finding them. I'm also in a liberal net positive state and not interested in funding them.
SaggyFrontButt2 t1_j9s99mf wrote
Reply to comment by ExpensiveSwordfish65 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
She’s our version of AOC. No sane person on the right is calling for this
RagingHeretic t1_j9s900t wrote
Reply to comment by ExpensiveSwordfish65 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
I support the idea of dissolving the U.S. But the GOP's inference to a smaller federal government and blue states still paying the bills for the red ones is a non-starter. We're not doing that. Dissolution of the U.S. is fine as long as us Californians are absolved from having to support parasite states like Texas and Ohio. They want independence, they can figure out how to fund themselves, but the best thing that can happen is a breakup of the country into smaller sovereigns free to govern themselves. No more federalism is something everyone should aim for.
triarii42069 t1_j9s8l04 wrote
Reply to comment by tabthough in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
>I do not agree with the idea of dividing up the country, but it's interesting to see the numbers.
You spent significant time and effort creating a map outlining the national divorce, decided to give several recent and historically blue states to the conservative country, made the conservative country "New America", and divided up the resulting liberal countries into four...
And you want us to believe this is some impartial thought experiment?
terrykrohe OP t1_j9s8jj1 wrote
Reply to [OC]. missing persons and drug overdose death rate (compared with suicide rate and life expectancy). – 2020 election by terrykrohe
other comments for "missing persons and drug overdose death rate"
(compared with suicide rate and life expectancy)
1 "compare and contrast"
... the top two plots show random data: missing persons t-test = 0.96; overdose death t-test = 0.46. Note the SD overlaps.
... the bottom two plots show non-random data. Note the smaller t-test p-values.
What is the same about the top two? What is the same about the bottom two?
What is it about the top two that make them different from the bottom two?
2
... the curious aspect: the top two are "atypical" because of the greater "random" character of the data.
(Other data sets showing similar atypicality have not been found.)
and the bottom two are "typical" of other non-random, top/bottom, Rep/Dem data sets:
obesity, suicide, infant mortality , accidental deaths, incarceration rate, murder rate, violent crime, etc.
(summary of "typical" metrics posted 14Apr2022)
3
– the difference between "random" and "non-random" data is Systemic Bias
– Systemic Bias is either genetic or environmental
– How did 150 million voters separate the fifty states into the two distinct non-random, top/bottom, Rep/Dem groupings which exhibit quantifiable different character?
smokeyleo13 t1_j9s8ium wrote
Reply to comment by artaig in In the US, the gap between Black and White Homeownership is widening with each generation [OC] by Apartment_List
Yes, hide the data that makes us uncomfortable
ZoeInBinary t1_j9s8i2m wrote
Reply to comment by Numerous-Afternoon89 in [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
It's a gerrymandered map.
Ironically, that's the most American thing they could have possibly done.
electrons-streaming OP t1_j9s89wt wrote
Reply to comment by Kenilwort in NY Times data visualization is Russian propaganda. Uses population for circle size instead of GDP. by electrons-streaming
I am pretty surprised at the response. I wonder if data is beautiful folks are offended at the politicization of the sub or if its full of tanky pro Russian people. I think this is right to the heart of how you can use data visualization to drive different agendas using the same data. I have no idea why the NYTimes did it this way, probably just sensationalism, but the Russians push this point to try and support their narrative that the US cannot effectively sanction Russia and therefore Ukraine should just give up.
triarii42069 t1_j9s85l0 wrote
Stupid proposal and even stupider implementation. Why would the liberal states be divided up and the conservative states stay together? Why would Colorado and Georgia be red if they voted blue in the recent election? Why would you draw the political boundaries by state if you're not keeping the country that those states are tied to?
_crazyboyhere_ t1_j9s858s wrote
Reply to comment by sudden_aggression in In the US, the gap between Black and White Homeownership is widening with each generation [OC] by Apartment_List
Self identification.
terrykrohe OP t1_j9s8334 wrote
Reply to [OC]. missing persons and drug overdose death rate (compared with suicide rate and life expectancy). – 2020 election by terrykrohe
sources
missing persons
https://namus.nij.ojp.gov
drug overdose death rate
https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/deaths/2020.html
suicide rate
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm
life expectancy https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/life_expectancy/life_expectancy.htm
tool: Mathematica
​
***************
– the dashed lines are the means; the 'boxes' are ± one standard deviation (SD) from the mean
– the parenthetical percent is the "relative standard deviation" (RSD)
[deleted] t1_j9scruh wrote
Reply to [OC] National Divorce by the Numbers (Politics, Demographics, GDP) by tabthough
[removed]