@alien
It was a marketing based question.

I threw out the population metric because it's anomalous. Although China has a population of 4-5x the USA, does it also have a proportional "crime" rate. The last time I looked at global incarceration rates - to try to correlate ballpark metrics on fraud - the ballpark global metric for incarceration was around 2%, while China was running around 3%.

So, while the "population" metric may appear meaningless, according to my quick ballpark analysis - theoretically China should have 4-5x as much "crime" as developed nations (plus a margin to account for the 3% thing), but either I don't see it or it's not uniformly distributed - i.e. certain cities, regions, or provinces have abnormally skewed metrics.

Usually, when I have zero information to go on - I turn to demographics as gross population metrics are generally order-of-magnitude similar globally and it's better than guessing with nothing or not guessing at all.

The metric analysis was done to guesstimate the probability of risk for rural projects - theft of rural investment - example greenhouses and then how to develop mitigation plans to minimize the risks.

@nnoble. I love those blank stares here...error, does not compute.

When I have zero information to go on I immediately produce a polysyllabic and excessive verbose tirade of double speak nonsense motivated by my obviously eminently massive knowledge of all known topics then factor this by several magnitudes and employ the requisite natural logarithm followed by an exponential institution of the second derivative of 2x factored by my self determined IQ squared using the additive operator of demographics regressed to the isodiametric constituency of something or other including FCPA analysis avoiding corruption related aerodynamics of od resulting in a nonsymmetrical basis for all thoughts extracted from my orifice centered below my lower back. Confident GoK readers will be dazzled with my verbose legerdemain I will repose with confidence in the delusion I exhibit as I love the USA often and repeatedly.

@Geezer Thats really very funny :) But I honestly dont get y u get so worked up about it. If u dont like his stuff then dont read it.

And he says he loves the US; u say he doesnt. So what? A fight about love?
Personally I like reading Laotou's opus magni. But if I didnt...I wouldnt.

@daithi
Thanks for the comment. I don't post to beat people up, mock them, call them names, or ridicule. The posts are to solicit other opinions, not engage in argumentative name-calling and mocking loosely disguised as opinions.

I got baited by @geezer AGAIN...that guy's pretty good at baiting and mocking. I wasn't paying terribly close attention, but now that I know what kind of person he is...won't happen again.

@Daithi: If you read carefully what is sometimes written it is comedic. I do find writings with an agenda and based on provably incorrect facts to be intellectually dishonest. To deny an existent fact, a written law, is less than honest. To have an opinion on the efficacy of that law is quite fine with me, I have no quarrel. To base endless opinions and massive verbiage on a mistake of fact is tedious. To resort to ad hominin references of delusion and intransigence because one holds fast to an easily provable fact is.... Actually, I don't have word for that. I used a PC incorrect word; "lie." For that I apologize. My inability to acceptably characterize the repeated misstatement of fact in spite of, and in the face of, clear references to the existence of that fact, is my failing.

The world is full of wannabees. Those are "coulda, shoulda, woulda," types and those that, for some reason, were unable to achieve. Often it isn't the right time or place but that is life. Often it is a personality issue, or, something in experience, relationships or attitude that prevents one's success. I've been there, done that. Hell, I knew I was smarter, better educated, confident to beyond arrogance, and with a bit of PTSD in the mix, I was doing good work. My then boss, a racist pig, and corrupt to boot, whose corporate ass I had saved, told me, "You have to get along or you'll never go along for long." After some introspection, I changed jobs, stopped acting like an entitled asshole and life came to me.

To those who become bitter, feel victimized, cheated and frustrated while feeling so superior they feel the need to feign arrogance, I say go a buy a small pocket mirror. When you get pissed off, pull out that little mirror and look at the reason for your anger, unhappiness and problems.

So Daithi, thanks for appreciating my warped humor. ;-)

Uhhhh laotou, you refer to "crime rate". Crime is mostly referred to as a RATE. A rate of what? Amount of crime in terms of population.

So saying "the crime rate" doesn't reflect the population is stupid, the crime rate already includes the population. You are saying "yes, but the 1 in 100k people murder rate does not reflect the population". Uhh.... its 1 in 100k people... it is, at its heart, a statistic that is based on population. That does not mean that if one country has 1 in 100k murders per year, another should have 5 in 100k because its population is 5x the size to be "even", it means that they both should have the same crime rate to be "even".

You are a smart guy, did you have a brain fart or are you baiting?

@HFCAMPO
NOW I get it...geezer = blobbles?

@blobbles - assuming you're NOT geezer or some incarnation - your style of writing is similar - personal, vitreous character attacks.

"You are a smart guy, did you have a brain fart or are you baiting?" is baiting. The need to call people derogatory names or make derogatory remarks as part of a response is baiting and is typical of @geezer's recent responses.

I respect his opinion(s) and have gone back to review the foundations of some of my beliefs or data, I do NOT respect the name calling or anyone's name calling for that matter. If you look through my prolific and verbose posts, I even respected the former @gaoxing's hunt for free intimate female companionship - that kid was NEVER vicious in his posts. I endeavor to NEVER attack people personally, no matter how vicious, how vitreous their posts. I also attempt to avoid pointless argumentative discussions, unless I'm procrastinating and it's entertaining.

Debate to learn something new - that's great. I love learning new things and how other people of other cultures think and their beliefs.

What's the difference between debate and bullying - the name calling and personal attacks. Name calling is and always will be an attempt at coercion or bullying, whether in person or online and it reveals the author's basic character.

This incessant need of some posters to add personal character attacks and so forth is simply not polite, uncouth, and obviously designed to create an argumentative inflammatory response and unpleasant online environment.

It's characteristic of the need to win at all costs and if the aggressor can't win in a fair debate - they resort to name calling, personal attacks, and other tools of the bully.

So if you or geezer want to discuss things in a civil manner - I'm good with that. If you're looking for someone to mock and bully online - you're all barking up the wrong tree - I have no time for those kinds of people, unless I want to resharpen my interpersonal skills in dealing with mean, ugly, and hurtful people.

As for your argumentative, ridiculing, mocking post topic:
Crime rate, population size, age categories - these are all demographic metrics, used by governments AND the CIA to try to understand domestic and foreign population clusters.

When there is a general lack of information, we resort to demographics, in an attempt to scientifically model aka guess, in lieu of any other tangible information.

Scientific guessing is not quantitative (precise), but qualitative in nature, designed to give the author and the audience a gross order of magnitude or bird's eye view of data.

Demographic statistics are used by the US government, the CIA, the CDC, the FBI, the NSA. China has massive organizations to collect massive statistics in the same manner. They're used in telecom, police and security, military, almost every marketing segment.

I realize my posts are epic, verbose, and boring - so it's easy to either misunderstand, misinterpret - or in my case - mistype or misrepresent - either intentionally or unintentionally.

geezer claims I'm a liar - that implies I'm intentionally skewing data or facts.

You claim I'm "stupid" and suffering from a "brain fart" and potentially baiting.

Demographics and other statistical analytical methods also include scanning communiques to understand intent. Intent biases data, as data can always be and is frequently skewed to align with intent - a form of deception or "disinformation".

Taking comments out of context - whether innocent or intentional - is by geezer's demonstrated rhetoric - lying or in your case - simply used to create an argumentative point, to extend the opportunities for you to and geezer to use further rhetoric to sustain and perpetuate the flaming.

Your lead-in paragraph is petty and argumentative and not designed to actually ask for further information, but to draw out and sustain an engagement (baiting) so you can continue to revel in calling me names and other bullying coercive tactics.

Hey - look - it worked - I responded. I'm feeling masochistic today - shall we continue with laotou bashing? Bring it on! Learning how to bully and belittle people is sometimes a necessary skill, when learning how alternate techniques for people who use bullying and belittling as social skills and unfortunately, I have to return to that life for a little while longer.

So - please teach me something new.

All the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't teach Humpty ever again. Alice sighed.

@geezer=blobbles=nnoble
Bring it on...show me what darkness resides inside you. Let the beasts out to play. Maybe it'll be cathartic for you. Shall we start a new thread, so we can keep the hammering on topic?