Sorry, and this is the mountain of statistical evidence?

You think the only factor relevant in comparing the economies of two countries is the skin colour of the inhabitants?

Seems legit.

Yeah and you can obviously boil complex economical and sociological changes down to how much melanin is in someone’s skin.

I can’t personally, I don’t know enough about African economies.

I can tell you it has nothing to do with skin pigments, because that’s obviously stupid.

Edited by EverybodyDannsNow (15 Jan 2024 2.18pm)

Edited by EverybodyDannsNow (15 Jan 2024 2.20pm)

Both Australia & Haiti seem to have been colonised, dare i say Founded, by fellas in Chains. Trafficked there against their will. And forced to work for a pittance, The economics of the two places today ? it is clearly some kind of a hidden conspiracy to make Sidney & Melbourne wealthy ?

Edited by PalazioVecchio (15 Jan 2024 2.40pm)

Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford

Again; you think economic differences between two vastly different places can be explained simply by the skin colour of the people living there.

I think that’s an argument so severely lacking in an even basic level of common sense that an average primary school kid could disprove it.

Can you name a predominantly black country that's thriving ? Can you name a predominantly black area that's thriving ? Korea is 70 years old and it's one of the richest countries in the world. Thailand and the Philippines are both developing countries, compare manilla and Bangkok to any city in sub Saharan Africa. Before we start using colonisation as an excuse, India probably suffered worse at the hands of the British, they're now one of the richest countries in the world. Then we can compare Arabic African countries to sub Saharan ones.