If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politicker)   Michael Bloomberg says his administration has saved 9,200 lives, not including the three people who were denied buying Big Gulps   (politicker.com) divider line 44
    More: Unlikely, Big Gulp, Michael Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, homicide rate  
•       •       •

271 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Dec 2013 at 7:50 AM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-30 07:04:53 AM
That's OK. Here on fark, people are treating his successor, De Blasshole as some sort of messiah.
 
2013-12-30 07:12:11 AM
img.pandawhale.com

In Chicago, during the 80s and early 90s, when the crime was really, really bad and the city clocked 900 murders a year, the authorities decided to raze the project towers that dotted the city.  Thousands and thousands of these residents were pushed out into suburban Cook County.  Of course, the city saw a big drop in crime beginning in the mid-90s.  A lot of these project towers were in neighborhoods that now have Whole Foods and multi-million dollar condos.  The residents are long-gone.  The crime moved, it did not disappear.  Chicago used dynamite to get rid of their tenement slums.  NYC uses rent control, zoning, economic policy.  The effect is the same.  The crime moves to the suburbs.  It follows the poor, the people who get priced out of their neighborhoods.

Stop-and-frisk is not about saving lives or reducing crime, it's about moving crime.  It's about moving crime away from the playground of the super rich and making sure the poors know their place.
 
2013-12-30 07:57:17 AM

mikemoto: That's OK. Here on fark, people are treating his successor, De Blasshole as some sort of messiah.


Funny how people react when somebody in power doesn't automatically fellate the rich.  It's so surprising they kinda go overboard.
 
2013-12-30 08:01:39 AM

mikemoto: That's OK. Here on fark, people are treating his successor, De Blasshole as some sort of messiah.


awfully quick to already announce him a failure. He hasn't even taken office yet.
 
2013-12-30 08:05:44 AM

somedude210: mikemoto: That's OK. Here on fark, people are treating his successor, De Blasshole as some sort of messiah.

awfully quick to already announce him a failure. He hasn't even taken office yet.



But by then, it will be too late!
 
2013-12-30 08:08:23 AM

Snarfangel: somedude210: mikemoto: That's OK. Here on fark, people are treating his successor, De Blasshole as some sort of messiah.

awfully quick to already announce him a failure. He hasn't even taken office yet.


But by then, it will be too late!


it's like when Obama destroyed the economy in 2008
 
2013-12-30 08:16:30 AM

Fark It: In Chicago, during the 80s and early 90s, when the crime was really, really bad and the city clocked 900 murders a year, the authorities decided to raze the project towers that dotted the city.  Thousands and thousands of these residents were pushed out into suburban Cook County.  Of course, the city saw a big drop in crime beginning in the mid-90s.  A lot of these project towers were in neighborhoods that now have Whole Foods and multi-million dollar condos.  The residents are long-gone.  The crime moved, it did not disappear.  Chicago used dynamite to get rid of their tenement slums.


here's the rub - did it work?

it's not like chicago ever got bored with shooting people or anything, but the project towers had an intent....and that intent didn't work out. stacking people on top of each other like little slum cord-wood didn't work.

when Cabrini et al fell, it wasn't just the immediate suburbs that absorbed the flow of people - i'm about 2 hours south of Chicago and neighborhoods that used to be dying or were circling the HUD drain of property values are now chock full of the folks that used to be in those towers...a few years on, i can't help but think that everybody involved is better off. those that moved here have a different stab at life than they had prior, and the area they moved into got more than crime out of the deal - we got whole new life breathed into areas of the economy and physical neighborhoods that were on the way out no longer are.

(this is tangential to giving a shiat about bloomberg, i know - but the whole 'good intentions/bad result' thing is the legacy we're living with now - how that shiat gets addressed currently entertains me more than it probably should)
 
2013-12-30 08:21:53 AM

Fark It: In Chicago, during the 80s and early 90s, when the crime was really, really bad and the city clocked 900 murders a year, the authorities decided to raze the project towers that dotted the city.  Thousands and thousands of these residents were pushed out into suburban Cook County.  Of course, the city saw a big drop in crime beginning in the mid-90s.  A lot of these project towers were in neighborhoods that now have Whole Foods and multi-million dollar condos.  The residents are long-gone.  The crime moved, it did not disappear.  Chicago used dynamite to get rid of their tenement slums.  NYC uses rent control, zoning, economic policy.  The effect is the same.  The crime moves to the suburbs.  It follows the poor, the people who get priced out of their neighborhoods.

Stop-and-frisk is not about saving lives or reducing crime, it's about moving crime.  It's about moving crime away from the playground of the super rich and making sure the poors know their place.


Every public policy and urban planning expert I've ever talked to has said roughly the same thing - the single biggest factor in crime is concentrated areas of poverty.  The problem is, nobody wants to tackle poverty on a large scale again, because we spent a generation hearing about how the Great Society failed (it didn't; urban renewal did, because it ran counter to a lot of what Johnson's programs were intended to do, and was often driven by localized monied interests).  What happened/happens in large cities most often is a solution that's cheaper in the short-term.  They re-distribute the symptom - the criminal activity - without addressing the cause.  And like you said, once it's out of someone's neighborhood, their incessant demands to clean up the crime dissipates.
 
2013-12-30 08:29:59 AM

UNC_Samurai: the single biggest factor in crime is concentrated areas of poverty.  The problem is, nobody wants to tackle poverty on a large scale again,


again, not just trying on the devil's advocate hat for this one, i'm actually kind curious - why would 'de-concentrate the poverty, put the people where there might actually be jobs' be a solution that shouldn't be attempted?

i get the fact that we aren't talking about numbers, and 'uprooting' and 'government' in the same sentence is the start of a very bad sentence typically - but when you get down to it, if the opportunity for a better outcome hasn't come about yet, i'm less inclined to reduce possible options because it gives me a stomach oogie.
 
2013-12-30 08:30:47 AM

heap: here's the rub - did it work?

it's not like chicago ever got bored with shooting people or anything, but the project towers had an intent....and that intent didn't work out. stacking people on top of each other like little slum cord-wood didn't work.

when Cabrini et al fell, it wasn't just the immediate suburbs that absorbed the flow of people - i'm about 2 hours south of Chicago and neighborhoods that used to be dying or were circling the HUD drain of property values are now chock full of the folks that used to be in those towers...a few years on, i can't help but think that everybody involved is better off. those that moved here have a different stab at life than they had prior, and the area they moved into got more than crime out of the deal - we got whole new life breathed into areas of the economy and physical neighborhoods that were on the way out no longer are.


If it worked for Chicago, more power to them.  Baltimore, unfortunately, hasn't been as effective.  Developers gentrified the Inner Harbor; Locust Point and Federal Hill used to be lower-middle- to lower-class neighborhoods.  When everything went yuppie, the poverty (and consequently the crime) migrated westward.
 
2013-12-30 08:36:10 AM

heap: UNC_Samurai: the single biggest factor in crime is concentrated areas of poverty.  The problem is, nobody wants to tackle poverty on a large scale again,

again, not just trying on the devil's advocate hat for this one, i'm actually kind curious - why would 'de-concentrate the poverty, put the people where there might actually be jobs' be a solution that shouldn't be attempted?

i get the fact that we aren't talking about numbers, and 'uprooting' and 'government' in the same sentence is the start of a very bad sentence typically - but when you get down to it, if the opportunity for a better outcome hasn't come about yet, i'm less inclined to reduce possible options because it gives me a stomach oogie.


I'm curious, how is the public transit network for that region?  I would not be surprised if that's a huge contributing factor.  Raleigh has been developing a bit of a problem in some eastern suburbs just beyond the Inner Beltline, because the housing got cheaper out that way when many downtown and near-downtown neighborhoods became popular with the yuppies in the 90s/early 2000s.  As much as I love the Triangle, public transportation outside of core city areas is abysmal.

/And keep in mind, I'm not professing to be a public policy or urban planning expert; I've just spent a lot of time dealing with people in those fields as it relates to historic preservation.
 
2013-12-30 08:36:37 AM

UNC_Samurai: If it worked for Chicago, more power to them.


well, see - that's just it. i'm not even willing to say 'it worked' for chicago - from the outside looking in, and from the perspective of somebody 2 hours off that saw the effects of those towers falling...it doesn't seem horrific. i do realize that isn't the only ( or even the important ) perspective, tho.

there just seems to be a reflexive 'you're tearing down poor housing, thus it's bad for the poors' answer here....but when my experience runs counter to that, it starts a path of questions i don't really have answers for.
 
2013-12-30 08:36:50 AM

Fark It: The effect is the same.  The crime moves to the suburbs.


Although crime is down across the board. I'm not saying razing the slums contributed or anything (I think the banning of leaded gas and easy access to abortion have more to do with the drop in crime), just that more happened than simply "moving" crime. This is also why the "broken windows" theory is probably bullshiat- the crime drop in NYC is roughly the same as it was everywhere else, even places that weren't trying the "broken windows" approach.

UNC_Samurai: nobody wants to tackle poverty on a large scale again,


It's not just because of the "failure" of the great society. It's a cultural problem, too. There is an idea that's prevalent in American society, that poverty is a  moral failing. As a result, social assistance is simply a reward to the shiftless and lazy, and that there is an underclass of "those people" who would rather suck at the government teat than contribute to society.

As a society, we don't want to confront the reality of poverty because it would require us to recognize that the United States is  not a land of opportunity, where anyone can succeed with hard work. We don't want to deal with the relationship of institutional racism and poverty. Dealing with poverty requires us to take a long, hard look in a mirror that will show most people something they don't want to see.
 
2013-12-30 08:39:39 AM

UNC_Samurai: If it worked for Chicago, more power to them. Baltimore, unfortunately, hasn't been as effective. Developers gentrified the Inner Harbor; Locust Point and Federal Hill used to be lower-middle- to lower-class neighborhoods. When everything went yuppie, the poverty (and consequently the crime) migrated westward.


Similar thing is happening in Boston. Southie is now upper-middle class townhouses and condos. Chinatown is a bunch of overly expensive apartments. All the poverty and crime is moving to surrounding areas. Those immigrant communities are no longer around. The Asian population has now moved to Quincy. Everett and Revere are getting the East Boston riff-raff. Mattapan and Roxbury are still hotbeds of crime and poverty though.
 
2013-12-30 08:42:58 AM

UNC_Samurai: I'm curious, how is the public transit network for that region?


fairly non-existent - there's a twice a day amtrak between here and chicago, and that's about 50 bucks (and manages to take 3 to 4 hours - you can get there on gravel roads if you really tried in 2 hours)
 
2013-12-30 08:45:58 AM

somedude210: UNC_Samurai: If it worked for Chicago, more power to them. Baltimore, unfortunately, hasn't been as effective. Developers gentrified the Inner Harbor; Locust Point and Federal Hill used to be lower-middle- to lower-class neighborhoods. When everything went yuppie, the poverty (and consequently the crime) migrated westward.

Similar thing is happening in Boston. Southie is now upper-middle class townhouses and condos. Chinatown is a bunch of overly expensive apartments. All the poverty and crime is moving to surrounding areas. Those immigrant communities are no longer around. The Asian population has now moved to Quincy. Everett and Revere are getting the East Boston riff-raff. Mattapan and Roxbury are still hotbeds of crime and poverty though.


Boston and the Central Artery are an excellent example of the problems with the post-war concept of urban renewal.
 
2013-12-30 08:45:58 AM

UNC_Samurai: If it worked for Chicago, more power to them. Baltimore, unfortunately, hasn't been as effective. Developers gentrified the Inner Harbor; Locust Point and Federal Hill used to be lower-middle- to lower-class neighborhoods. When everything went yuppie, the poverty (and consequently the crime) migrated westward.


Baltimore is a much smaller area.

What happened here in Philly, to some degree in Baltimore, and what I bet happened in Chicago is that poverty leapfrogged a lot of areas as poor people moved to declining inner suburbs outside of the city limits or to secondary towns in the city's orbit, taking their poverty with them.

Here poor areas are gentrifying, but older inner suburbs are getting worse, and places as far afield as Reading and York are seeing a rise in crime (ie, drug crime).
 
2013-12-30 08:53:32 AM
And ruined at least twice as many.

Good job, Mike!
 
2013-12-30 08:53:37 AM

UNC_Samurai: Boston and the Central Artery are an excellent example of the problems with the post-war concept of urban renewal.


Care to explain that more? I'm curious what you think (being an outsider and older/wiser than I)

/not snark, generally curious
 
2013-12-30 09:03:28 AM
...less than 340 murders logged so far this year.

And that's good, right?
 
2013-12-30 09:04:48 AM

somedude210: Care to explain that more? I'm curious what you think (being an outsider and older/wiser than I)


I'm no Bostonian, but at a guess, it was part of the "Since cities are dirty and full of poors and ethnic types, let's convert our cities to highways so that good, American WASPs don't have to deal with that." As a note, the Central Artery actually was installed in the 20s, not typically what we mean by "post war".

Pittsburgh has a good example from the 60s, called "Penn Circle". The idea was that they'd put a ring road in. The center of the ring would be parking. The outer section of the ring would be shopping. This would draw people from the suburbs into the city, they thought. The reality is that they created a traffic snarl and completely destroyed the neighborhood of East Liberty. The area is  just recovering, and they're starting to re-vamp Penn Circle into something more pedestrian friendly.

For a big chunk of the 20th century, urban planners worshiped at the altar of the car. They redesigned cities to have more roads, more parking, and more traffic. Their hope was to draw suburbanites back to the cities to work and play, while they would return home to sleep. The actual result was that they came for work and left, causing cities to close up shop at 5pm.
 
2013-12-30 09:07:09 AM

quatchi: ...less than 340 murders logged so far this year.

And that's good, right?


well, 20 years ago, you could almost add a zero to the end of that tally.

good being a relative measure and all, i'd call it good. good-ish, at the very least.
 
2013-12-30 09:10:39 AM

somedude210: UNC_Samurai: Boston and the Central Artery are an excellent example of the problems with the post-war concept of urban renewal.

Care to explain that more? I'm curious what you think (being an outsider and older/wiser than I)

/not snark, generally curious


The West End is probably the most infamous neighborhood when it comes to urban renewal.  It was an old urban neighborhood with very strong blue-collar and Italian (and a bit of Jewish) ethnic identities.  The locals - around ten thousand people - were displaced in the late 1950s to make way for a number of high-rise apartments.  The theory was the increased revenue from the high-rises would filter down into the local community.  Then the Central Artery project further severed the West End (and the North End) from downtown.  The economic boom for the neighborhoods didn't really materialize, and the neighborhoods became isolated by the highway.  For a long time, in sections of those neighborhoods it was almost impossible to get an insurance policy, so businesses left or stayed away.
 
2013-12-30 09:11:02 AM

t3knomanser: For a big chunk of the 20th century, urban planners worshiped at the altar of the car. They redesigned cities to have more roads, more parking, and more traffic. Their hope was to draw suburbanites back to the cities to work and play, while they would return home to sleep. The actual result was that they came for work and left, causing cities to close up shop at 5pm.


pretty much. If Boston is any indication, it looks like cities are going to go back to a more pedestrian/biker friendly atmosphere

which brings up the "bike riders are idiots who think they're untouchable gods" argument for bike lanes
 
2013-12-30 09:13:13 AM

t3knomanser: there is an underclass of "those people" who would rather suck at the government teat than contribute to society.


Why wouldn't there be? Poor does not equal noble any more than it equals shiftless. Look around wherever you work and chances are there is a small but not negligible number of people just mailing it in, screwing around on some website when they should be working. The nerve of those people.
 
2013-12-30 09:13:56 AM

quatchi: ...less than 340 murders logged so far this year.

And that's good, right?


It's about 4 murders for every 100,000 people. That's not a great murder rate, but compare that to the small city I grew up in, which averages 4.5 murders / 100,000 people. Now, mind you, it's such a small city that's one murder a year, but hey- NYC looks pretty good. I currently live in Pittsburgh, which has 13 murders / 100,000 people. The national average is 5 / 100,000.
 
2013-12-30 09:14:00 AM

UNC_Samurai: The West End is probably the most infamous neighborhood when it comes to urban renewal. It was an old urban neighborhood with very strong blue-collar and Italian (and a bit of Jewish) ethnic identities. The locals - around ten thousand people - were displaced in the late 1950s to make way for a number of high-rise apartments. The theory was the increased revenue from the high-rises would filter down into the local community. Then the Central Artery project further severed the West End (and the North End) from downtown. The economic boom for the neighborhoods didn't really materialize, and the neighborhoods became isolated by the highway. For a long time, in sections of those neighborhoods it was almost impossible to get an insurance policy, so businesses left or stayed away.


ah, good point. I was always curious why we mention East Boston and Southie but rarely the North End and the West End (which is now being gobbled up by Newton/Allston-Brighton college towns
 
2013-12-30 09:14:13 AM

t3knomanser: For a big chunk of the 20th century, urban planners worshiped at the altar of the car. They redesigned cities to have more roads, more parking, and more traffic. Their hope was to draw suburbanites back to the cities to work and play, while they would return home to sleep. The actual result was that they came for work and left, causing cities to close up shop at 5pm.


Yup.  The plan in every major city was "cut the city center off with highways to both serve and protect it, and work to make the city convenient for the suburban middle and upper-middle class and no one else."  In the city where it was carried out, they're still very screwed.  In the cities where the city planners were stopped (Robert Moses in NYC, Edmund Bacon here in Philly) are the better off for it.
 
2013-12-30 09:19:09 AM

somedude210: which brings up the "bike riders are idiots who think they're untouchable gods" argument for bike lanes


I'm one of those cyclists that confuses motorists by obeying traffic lights and signaling my turns. I do my best to be courteous to other drivers, and get annoyed at cyclists who don't do the same, but you know what? I think cities would be better served by making key streets bike/ped only and keeping motor traffic off of them. Streets used to be vibrant places where people congregated,  not dead zones where you have to be extremely cautious. We can blame the auto manufacturers and their advocacy wing, AAA, for changing this. AAA's "safe streets" campaigns were entirely built around boosting the adoption of the car by teaching people that streets were for cars. To this day, AAA advocates against walkable cities.

Some cities have closed streets and created pedestrian oriented districts. The ones I saw in Denver and its surrounding areas were just wonderful places to be. Vibrant, bustling, and colorful.
 
2013-12-30 09:23:48 AM
This reminds me of when Giuliani claimed to be tough on crime, when every other major city say a larger drop in crime rates than NYC.

Those 9200 people live in spite of Bloomberg, not because of him.

/except for the big gulp drinkers of course
 
2013-12-30 09:30:09 AM

somedude210: UNC_Samurai: If it worked for Chicago, more power to them. Baltimore, unfortunately, hasn't been as effective. Developers gentrified the Inner Harbor; Locust Point and Federal Hill used to be lower-middle- to lower-class neighborhoods. When everything went yuppie, the poverty (and consequently the crime) migrated westward.

Similar thing is happening in Boston. Southie is now upper-middle class townhouses and condos. Chinatown is a bunch of overly expensive apartments. All the poverty and crime is moving to surrounding areas. Those immigrant communities are no longer around. The Asian population has now moved to Quincy. Everett and Revere are getting the East Boston riff-raff. Mattapan and Roxbury are still hotbeds of crime and poverty though.


Everett and Revere have been god-awful for years.  Especially Revere.  Nothing new for that area.
 
2013-12-30 09:35:07 AM

TheSelphie: Everett and Revere have been god-awful for years. Especially Revere. Nothing new for that area.


Fair point, Most cities/towns on the North Shore are hellholes. But you can still argue that Revere and Everett have managed to get worse in that time
 
2013-12-30 09:35:48 AM
Our little mini-emperor sure thinks highly of himself. He sure has done a lot to shake off the rich old jew stereotype, hasn't he?
 
2013-12-30 09:37:55 AM

Fark It: [img.pandawhale.com image 644x748]

In Chicago, during the 80s and early 90s, when the crime was really, really bad and the city clocked 900 murders a year, the authorities decided to raze the project towers that dotted the city.  Thousands and thousands of these residents were pushed out into suburban Cook County.  Of course, the city saw a big drop in crime beginning in the mid-90s.  A lot of these project towers were in neighborhoods that now have Whole Foods and multi-million dollar condos.  The residents are long-gone.  The crime moved, it did not disappear.  Chicago used dynamite to get rid of their tenement slums.  NYC uses rent control, zoning, economic policy.  The effect is the same.  The crime moves to the suburbs.  It follows the poor, the people who get priced out of their neighborhoods.

Stop-and-frisk is not about saving lives or reducing crime, it's about moving crime.  It's about moving crime away from the playground of the super rich and making sure the poors know their place.


They tore down Cabrini Green, but the area just west of Old Town still has a lot of public housing and some places that are shady as fark. I'll never forget the day I was riding a bus past a very new Target, a CPD station, and a fire department, only to see the CPD and CFD trying to break up one of the largest fights I've ever seen. Had to have been 50-60 teenagers just beating the fark out of each other. There were at least 10-12 cop cars blocking off the parking lot and a line of hundreds of kids milling around and/or away the Target parking lot.

In a shocking display of restraint, I think I only saw a few guns drawn and CPD was trying to get kids to stop hitting each other (CFD was mostly blocking off the street), except the kids would stop and then run up and hit people the police were restraining. This all happened while my bus was stuck in place for about 20 minutes before we took a longish detour around that particular area.
 
2013-12-30 09:39:44 AM

LemSkroob: Our little mini-emperor sure thinks highly of himself. He sure has done a lot to shake off the rich old jew stereotype, hasn't he?


I found that funny, but only because I heard it in the French waiter voice Eric Idle uses at the end of The Meaning of Life.

Right before he gets the vomit bucket on his head.
 
2013-12-30 09:56:47 AM

t3knomanser: Although crime is down across the board. I'm not saying razing the slums contributed or anything (I think the banning of leaded gas and easy access to abortion have more to do with the drop in crime), just that more happened than simply "moving" crime. This is also why the "broken windows" theory is probably bullshiat- the crime drop in NYC is roughly the same as it was everywhere else, even places that weren't trying the "broken windows" approach.


The evidence for lead abatement as major crime reducer is stunningly strong. I'm sad that your comment is the only one which has mentioned it.
 
2013-12-30 09:58:06 AM

t3knomanser: quatchi: ...less than 340 murders logged so far this year.

And that's good, right?

It's about 4 murders for every 100,000 people. That's not a great murder rate, but compare that to the small city I grew up in, which averages 4.5 murders / 100,000 people. Now, mind you, it's such a small city that's one murder a year, but hey- NYC looks pretty good. I currently live in Pittsburgh, which has 13 murders / 100,000 people. The national average is 5 / 100,000.


I just looked up Vancouver's stats. Apparently we had 6 murders this year 3 of which were gang related which is just under 2/ 100,000 which is pretty good.

Best is PEI (ie Canada's Rhode Island) and Yukon Territories who have effective 0 rates.

The other two territories are pretty bad though. Nunavit is the worst by far with a 15 per 100k rate. NWT is second worst with 12 per 100k. Canada's national average is 1.56/ 100, 000.
 
2013-12-30 09:58:36 AM

Marcus Aurelius: /except for the big gulp drinkers of course


Um, point of information, that rule got struck down by a judge before it was implemented.  You're still welcome to be fat here.

//we'll just judge you.
 
2013-12-30 09:59:01 AM

TofuTheAlmighty: The evidence for lead abatement as major crime reducer is stunningly strong


It's amazing, and it makes you stop and think: what's today's lead? What are we doing, blindly, that's ruining lives and making the world a worse place to live in? (Ignoring all the things we do on  purpose that ruin lives and make the world a worse place to live in)
 
2013-12-30 10:08:03 AM

t3knomanser: TofuTheAlmighty: The evidence for lead abatement as major crime reducer is stunningly strong

It's amazing, and it makes you stop and think: what's today's lead? What are we doing, blindly, that's ruining lives and making the world a worse place to live in? (Ignoring all the things we do on  purpose that ruin lives and make the world a worse place to live in)


I officially nominate Facebook.
 
2013-12-30 12:10:11 PM
My statistics show that the 9,200 lives nurse bloomberg claims to have saved are offset by the 22,306 lives that his policies cost. My statistics also show my figures are every bit as real and scientific as his are.
 
2013-12-30 06:14:17 PM

Arkanaut: Marcus Aurelius: /except for the big gulp drinkers of course

Um, point of information, that rule got struck down by a judge before it was implemented.  You're still welcome to be fat here.

//we'll just judge you.


So much for freedom, eh!

/oh wait
 
2013-12-30 07:41:14 PM

Fark It: In Chicago, during the 80s and early 90s, when the crime was really, really bad and the city clocked 900 murders a year, the authorities decided to raze the project towers that dotted the city.  Thousands and thousands of these residents were pushed out into suburban Cook County.  Of course, the city saw a big drop in crime beginning in the mid-90s.  A lot of these project towers were in neighborhoods that now have Whole Foods and multi-million dollar condos.  The residents are long-gone.  The crime moved, it did not disappear.  Chicago used dynamite to get rid of their tenement slums.  NYC uses rent control, zoning, economic policy.  The effect is the same.  The crime moves to the suburbs.  It follows the poor, the people who get priced out of their neighborhoods.

Stop-and-frisk is not about saving lives or reducing crime, it's about moving crime.  It's about moving crime away from the playground of the super rich and making sure the poors know their place.


This. God forbid we actually try and do something about poverty.
 
2013-12-30 10:03:18 PM
So long as rich people are happier, the system works!
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report