Gender confusion

[ken_sylvania]

We have deliberately disinvested in poor and minority communities for over half a century.

As I documented earlier, education is far higher (over twice as high) in Baltimore as opposed to the school district I live in.

So how is this “deliberately disinvesting”? My school district doesn’t have a long roster of 6 figure jobs. Baltimore’s does.

And turned them into dumping grounds. Really since the end of WW2 which was nearly 80 years ago. It is not a surprise that many urban areas (and rural ones too) look the way that they do today. We did that on purpose through a complex web of public policy and subsidized private investment.

A good place to start would be to simply stop doing the things that make things worse. But complicated problems have complicated solutions.

How is any of this an excuse to allow violent criminals to rob, steal, kill, rape, and deal addictive drugs?

I'm not talking about schools, or even Baltimore specifically. The fact is that over the past 50-70 years we have spent trillions of dollars subsidizing endless suburban expansion while starving inner cities of economic development and resources. Much of it deliberate and overt through things like redlining, freeway expansions through poor neighborhoods, and both public and private disinvestment in cities. Baltimore is the end-result of that many decades-long process. All of it deliberate and predictable.

Sounds like you better change your practices.

[Josh]

I'm not talking about schools, or even Baltimore specifically. The fact is that over the past 50-70 years we have spent trillions of dollars subsidizing endless suburban expansion while starving inner cities of economic development and resources. Much of it deliberate and overt through things like redlining, freeway expansions through poor neighborhoods, and both public and private disinvestment in cities. Baltimore is the end-result of that many decades-long process. All of it deliberate and predictable.

I’m still not understanding how building suburbs excuses men choosing to steal, rob, deal drugs, kill, murder, and rape.

As I documented earlier, cities actually get huge amounts of investment in things like schools. One of the reasons suburbs exist in the first place is people wanted to escape rising levels of unpredictable crime. Simply put, some of us don’t want to live where our house gets broken into, wife assaulted at the grocery store, and car stolen. And that means we won’t be investing in a business in places that happens either.

It seems a great deal of Americans would prefer to live in a historical city but only if they can be assured of their safety: no house breakins, no car thefts, no random street assaults, no car window smashing, no stray gunfire.

[Soloist]

Ken,

You basically are saying that elected officials for quite some time perpetuated laws that bred crime?

You are saying we need to fix the laws to address the societal problems?

You are not saying to ignore crime?

You are not saying to stop prosecuting crime?

Part of the problem is Americans have no patience for long term solutions for problems.

[temporal1]

Soloist:
Part of the problem is Americans have no patience for long term solutions for problems.

i see this as a system failure, and i do not see a constructive human reasoning way around it.

The U.S. is based on free elections, with some term limits. This invites short-sighted thinking, kicking cans down the road, etc.,
because competitive politicians are all about WINNING in the short term. They believe long term thinking is their death sentence.

Example:
The U.S. southern border. A ROYAL MESS. No excuse for it. Every nation in history has had national borders, Civics 101.
Over the DECADES of my life, politicians (both parties) have refused to address it in any reasonable way. It’s shameful.

Not just regarding borders, i see it as a system flaw with no acceptable answer. No one would vote for a dictatorship.

Thing is, when no decisions are proactively made, typically what follows is AN ANSWER NO ONE WANTS.

THE ANSWER, of course, is Jesus Christ. Those who choose wisely are rewarded. Without exception.

[Ken]

I'm not talking about schools, or even Baltimore specifically. The fact is that over the past 50-70 years we have spent trillions of dollars subsidizing endless suburban expansion while starving inner cities of economic development and resources. Much of it deliberate and overt through things like redlining, freeway expansions through poor neighborhoods, and both public and private disinvestment in cities. Baltimore is the end-result of that many decades-long process. All of it deliberate and predictable.

I’m still not understanding how building suburbs excuses men choosing to steal, rob, deal drugs, kill, murder, and rape.

As I documented earlier, cities actually get huge amounts of investment in things like schools. One of the reasons suburbs exist in the first place is people wanted to escape rising levels of unpredictable crime. Simply put, some of us don’t want to live where our house gets broken into, wife assaulted at the grocery store, and car stolen. And that means we won’t be investing in a business in places that happens either.

It seems a great deal of Americans would prefer to live in a historical city but only if they can be assured of their safety: no house breakins, no car thefts, no random street assaults, no car window smashing, no stray gunfire.

You have it backwards. Suburbs exist in part due to racism and overt government policies to subsidize them to the tune of trillions of dollars in a myriad of ways. They would not have happened in their existing form simply due to economic forces alone.

Conservatives such as yourself most definitely believe that social conditions lead to sin. That is why, for example, people have always opposed easy availability of pornography. It is due to the belief that if pornography is everywhere and readily available to children then it will be used more often. People make the same exact argument about things like tobacco and alcohol and drugs. When it is too easily available it is abused more. Is this not your view of drug legalization? That it is a mistake because it will increase drug abuse?

Crime is absolutely no different. If we create the social conditions that we know lead to more crime, we are likely to get more crime. And if we reduce the conditions that lead to crime we are likely to see less crime. This is not rocket science. It is not even complicated.

[Ken]

Ken,

You basically are saying that elected officials for quite some time perpetuated laws that bred crime?

You are saying we need to fix the laws to address the societal problems?

You are not saying to ignore crime?

You are not saying to stop prosecuting crime?

Part of the problem is Americans have no patience for long term solutions for problems.

It is not so much laws as policies. Just to cite one small example. Our tax structure and economic development policies are such that it encourages companies to abandon factories and facilities in older cities and build new ones in distant suburbs. There are dozens of policies large and small that have this effect. Everything from hazardous waste laws that make it more expensive to redevelop older industrial land compared to fresh farmland in the distant suburbs to cities and suburbs that compete with either other on tax breaks, to subsidies for highway and utility expansion to make that all possible. The end result is abandoned industrial wastelands that you see throughout much of the upper-Midwest. Those did not just happen organically. We created them. And the people who are left behind? They are not stupid. They know they have been left behind and that their country is not investing in them. Is that an excuse for crime? No, of course not. People still have individual agency. But it is an explanation for why crime rates and social dysfunction are higher in some places than others.

We can also blame big complicated trends like globalism and tax policies that encourage things like offshoring. All combined they have created the landscape we live in today where some parts of the country are abandoned and others prosper. This isn't just an urban thing either. We are gutting much of our rural landscape through many similar decisions. Some of it is sheer economics. But a whole lot of it is due to deliberate policies that have obvious consequences.

[Josh]

You have it backwards. Suburbs exist in part due to racism and overt government policies to subsidize them to the tune of trillions of dollars in a myriad of ways. They would not have happened in their existing form simply due to economic forces alone.

I understand your opinion is that “suburbs exist due to racism” but I respectfully disagree.

Some people want to live in a dense city. Other people want to live on a cul de sac with a nice big yard. Neither choice is “racist”.

They are also not subsidised. Suburb construction has to pay to build new schools, build new roads, drainage and so on. Often the infrastructure costs are over half of the cost of a new home in a brand new subdivision.

Conservatives such as yourself most definitely believe that social conditions lead to sin.

I’m not a conservative and I think sin is caused by listening to the devil.

That is why, for example, people have always opposed easy availability of pornography. It is due to the belief that if pornography is everywhere and readily available to children then it will be used more often.

I think for example that child pornography is very evil and hurts both the people involved in creating it and the people who consume it. It should obviously be outlawed.

People make the same exact argument about things like tobacco and alcohol and drugs. When it is too easily available it is abused more. Is this not your view of drug legalization? That it is a mistake because it will increase drug abuse?

Tobacco is highly addictive but also very profitable to sell. I think people selling addictive drugs induce others to sin, but both parties are still responsible for their own sin.

#1. The drug dealer is responsible.
#2. The addict is responsible for choosing to steal to indulge his addiction.

A true church of God that follows Jesus will teach against pornography, tobacco use and sale, and other addictive drug dealing.

Crime is absolutely no different. If we create the social conditions that we know lead to more crime, we are likely to get more crime. And if we reduce the conditions that lead to crime we are likely to see less crime. This is not rocket science. It is not even complicated.

Okay. So what “social conditions” do you blame as causing all this crime? As I said above, the criminal is still responsible for his decision to kill, steal, murder, rape, deal drugs, and rob. Nobody forces him to do these things. He makes a free choice to do so.

The correct “social condition” is punishment for doing those things.

[Josh]

And
the people who are left behind? They are not stupid. They know they have been left behind and that their country is not investing in them. Is that an excuse for crime? No, of course not. People still have individual agency. But it is an explanation for why crime rates and social dysfunction are higher in some places than others..

Why should I want to invest in a business in a community where people think it’s OK to commit crime against me and my business and employees?

[Ken]

And
the people who are left behind? They are not stupid. They know they have been left behind and that their country is not investing in them. Is that an excuse for crime? No, of course not. People still have individual agency. But it is an explanation for why crime rates and social dysfunction are higher in some places than others..

Why should I want to invest in a business in a community where people think it’s OK to commit crime against me and my business and employees?

We aren't talking about you. We are talking about big corporations who go wherever they are paid and incentivized to go. Crime is not a factor in such decisions. Subsidizes and tax breaks are. Whether we are talking about moving a factory out to a distant suburb or to Mexico or Vietnam.

[Falco Knotwise]

And
the people who are left behind? They are not stupid. They know they have been left behind and that their country is not investing in them. Is that an excuse for crime? No, of course not. People still have individual agency. But it is an explanation for why crime rates and social dysfunction are higher in some places than others..

Why should I want to invest in a business in a community where people think it’s OK to commit crime against me and my business and employees?

Right. Invest your business in an area with racial tensions and where Black Lives Matter has a presence. What could possibly go wrong?