X hashtag analyse

t #dkmedier sidste 24 timer

t #dkmedier seneste måned

t Mest aktive brugere

• 1
  

  Julle (@Jullemand007)

  9 tweets

• 2
  

  Rasmus Buchtrup Sand (@RasmusOfDenmark)

  7 tweets

• 3
  

  polnyt.dk - borgerlig borgerjournalistik og satire (@polnytdk)

  7 tweets

• 4
  

  Kenneth@Riedel (@KennethRiedel1)

  6 tweets

• 5
  

  Kristian (@KayAgeOfEl)

  4 tweets

t Seneste tweets

• 

  23:34

  Tom B. Nielsen (@Terry230784)

  RT @Nordentoft1993 (Daniel Nordentoft): DR-værten Anna Ingrisch skjuler sandheden om ydmygelsesvold!🚫 Indvandrerdrenge retter stort set altid deres ydmygelsesvold mod etniske danskere. Ydmygelsesritualet har rod i en fremmed dominans- og æreskultur. Alligevel lyver DR om, hvem ofrene og gerningsmændene er i disse sager. Ligesom dækningen af optøjerne i Frankrig har vist os, så kan vi ikke stole på de etablerede medier. De skjuler virkeligheden, hvis den ikke passer ind i deres narrativ. #LukDR #dkpol #dkmedier

• 

  23:14

  Svenning Haaning Dalgaard (@SvenningDalgard)

  RT @NielsPhilip1 (Niels Philip Kjeldsen): »Lad mig sige det helt klart. Jeg anfægter ikke, hvad islam mener er rigtigt eller forkert. Hvordan straffesystemet skal udføres, det kan jeg ikke have en holdning til,« svarer Abud Mustafa. Spørgsmål: Du kan vel godt have en holdning til om, at dét der står i Koranen og haditherne er idealsamfundet? Er det dit idealsamfund? »Ja, altså islam, hvis det bliver implementeret 100 procent, jamen så er det det. Det skal jeg ikke lægge skjul på,« understreger Abud Mustafa. Spørgsmål: Men så er det svært ikke at udlede, at du så faktisk – i dit idealsamfund – er enig i, at homoseksuelle skal slås ihjel? »Ja, hvis du udleder det derfra, så må det vel være det,« svarer Abud Mustafa og fortsætter: »Nu har du fået det (svaret, red). Hvad så? Kan vi to ikke sidde her, drikke en kop kaffe og have en samtale?« spørger han. Lyt til Borgerlig Tabloid! #dkpol #dkmedier #Højskolen @JoachimBOlsen

• 

  22:58

  Lasse Jacobsen (@Jacobsen12345)

  Tænker du ser nogle perspektiver i det her @rothbardDK #dkpol #dkmedier "So what does predict crime? [...] Self-control [...] Cognitive ability matters too [...] Behavior can change. Which means responsibility is real [...] If every crime is a social failure, every crime justifies a new program, a new budget, a new agency. Crime becomes the business model of bureaucracy [...]" Er det fx nogle af de faktorer (ikke de eneste) der forklarer, hvorfor når man renser for socioøkonomiske forhold, fortsat finder en overrepræsentation af 1.- 2. og 3. generation i kriminalitetsstatistikkerne? Ping @hrmarcussen måske det har interesse QT @brivael (Brivael Le Pogam) "You reduce crime by eliminating poverty." This is one of the greatest intellectual confusions of our century. It sounds compassionate. It feels obvious. And the moment you actually test it, it falls apart. Let's look at the data. First, the correlation is real. Nobody serious denies that poorer areas have more crime. In Sweden, kids from the poorest 20% of families are about 7 times more likely to be convicted of a violent crime than kids from the richest 20%. But correlation is not causation. So Swedish researchers did something brilliant: they compared siblings. Same parents, same home, same upbringing, but different family income at different points in their childhood, because parents' income moves over time. Result, on more than 500,000 children (Sariaslan et al., British Journal of Psychiatry, 2014): once you account for what's shared inside the family, the effect of income on violent crime goes from 7x to nothing. The hazard ratio drops to 0.95. No effect. Finland ran the same test on 650,000 people. Same result: the income-crime link disappears when you compare siblings. What predicts crime isn't the bank balance. It's what travels inside families. Second test: what happens when poverty spikes for everyone at once? 2008. US unemployment doubled from 5% to nearly 10%. 15% of Americans officially poor. If poverty creates crime, crime should have exploded. Instead it fell. Year after year. Robbery, the most "economic" crime of all, dropped 10% in 2010 alone. Criminologists literally said they were stumped. Same story in the Great Depression: 25% unemployment, and crime went down in many cities. Third test: take families out of poverty and see. The US government ran a randomized lottery called Moving to Opportunity. Thousands of families in public housing got vouchers to move to low-poverty neighborhoods. For boys, violent arrests dropped at first, property crime arrests went up, and over time the effects faded. New zip code. Same behavior. Fourth: the claim that police don't matter. This one is just false. Chalfin et al. (American Economic Review: Insights, 2022): each additional police officer prevents about 0.1 homicides. And per capita, the lives saved are twice as many among Black victims as among white victims. The people who suffer most from "police don't matter" are the poorest neighborhoods. So what does predict crime? The Dunedin study followed 1,000 children from birth to age 32. Self-control measured between ages 3 and 11 predicted adult criminal convictions, even after controlling for social class and IQ (Moffitt et al., PNAS, 2011). Cognitive ability matters too: across 700,000 Swedish men, lower cognitive scores at 18 track with violent convictions, and the link barely moves when you control for childhood socioeconomic status (Frisell et al., 2012). And here's the part nobody quotes: in Dunedin, kids whose self-control improved over time did better than predicted. Behavior can change. Which means responsibility is real. Why does this matter? Because "poverty creates crime" isn't just wrong. It's toxic. It turns criminals into victims. The man who robbed you becomes a symptom of "the system," and you, the real victim, become a footnote in someone else's narrative. It merges two completely different things. "You're poor, we'll help you" is one policy. "You're poor and you committed a crime, so we'll excuse you" is another. Fusing them insults the millions of poor people who work, raise their kids, and never hurt anyone. The vast majority of poor people are not criminals. That alone kills the theory. It removes responsibility. Build a political system on "your circumstances made you do it" and you destroy the one thing that actually changes behavior: the certainty that you own your choices. Every excuse the state manufactures is an incentive. And it feeds the state forever. If every crime is a social failure, every crime justifies a new program, a new budget, a new agency. Crime becomes the business model of bureaucracy. The alternative is simple and old. A lighter state that protects instead of explains. The same rules for everyone, from the projects or from a gated community. Certain, swift punishment for anyone who commits a crime. And never, ever telling someone their crime was written in their social condition. Treating someone as responsible is respecting them. Excusing someone because they're poor is the most condescending thing you can do to them.

• 

  22:55

  Julle (@Jullemand007)

  Hvor mange flere beviser skal der til før man indser at islam ikke høre til i den vestlige verden 🤷‍♂️ #dkpol #dkmedier https://t.co/ZCorLhjxie

• 

  22:55

  Asger Baunsgaard (@AsgerBaunsgaar1)

  RT @ninapalesabonde (Nina PB): Når jeg i en weekend som denne ser både demoer i Danmark og demoer i Frankrig og Milano, er jeg ganske glad for at være på X. Bare det rene videomateriale, som jeg kan søge verificeret, og som også fører mig videre til grundigere udenlandske medier i pågældende lande og andre lande, giver mig et HELT andet billede af, hvad der foregår. Et fyldigere. Et grundigere. Bare bedre end #dkmedier Jeg har respekt for en valgt dansk, redaktionel linje. Det er valg og fravalg, men jeg har ikke respekt for så store huller, som det her viser. Da DR via en korrespondent grinende fortalte, at der intet var at være bekymre for med studenterne og de farvede vestene, og at man bare skulle spise sin gode croissant, var det timer før raserede butikker og bål i gaden. Noget andre nemt forudså. Jeg beder ikke om særlig vinkling. Den kan være rød, blå what ever. Men viden. Den har jeg en forventning om adgang til. Og hvad gør jeg så, når jeg ser et heftigt klip ude fra verden? Jeg ser på de lokale nyhedsstationers hjemmeside og youtube, jeg emnesøger og stedsøger, jeg leder efter andre tegn på, at den er god nok. Og der mangler aktuelt noget i Danmark i fortællingen. Både ifht voldsomhed, metode, modus (hvilke forretninger blev ramt i forskellige områder), synlige symboler på politisk tilhørsforhold og meget andet. Bare faktuel viden, som kan leveres med et "der sås x,y,z". (En absurd sjælden begrænsning i svartråd, da jeg lige holder den bot og anonym hetzer fri) https://t.co/4i8nbWJGuy