Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Starving and desperate people are more likely to commit crime.
The more equality within a society the lower the crime rate.

Frazzled wrote:
or its stealing money from some people to give to other people.

But what does Wall Street have to do with Whitney Houston's death?

CT GAMER wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
or its stealing money from some people to give to other people.

But what does Wall Street have to do with Whitney Houston's death?

Both millionaires, and all clearly working for the Zionist Space Nazis as a prelude to interplanetary invasion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sonophos wrote:Starving and desperate people are more likely to commit crime.
The more equality within a society the lower the crime rate.

Crime rates were lower during the Great Depression than now. Next excuse?

Detected and enforced crime was lower and so was the population.

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html

Sonophos wrote:Detected and enforced crime was lower and so was the population.

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html

There was also a lot more "vigilante justice" and "corner cutting" law enforcement back then as well. You didn't try to rob anyone unless you were willing to be shot at or possibly die.

There's your reason. People aren't afraid anymore. At least they aren't in cities with strict gun laws.

biccat wrote:
I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service.

Frazzled wrote:

Sonophos wrote:Starving and desperate people are more likely to commit crime.
The more equality within a society the lower the crime rate.

Crime rates were lower during the Great Depression than now. Next excuse?

Well done Frazzie.

If you want to reduce crime have more society not more socialism.

Stormrider wrote:
There's your reason. People aren't afraid anymore. At least they aren't in cities with strict gun laws.

Houston is in the top 20 cities with regard to robbery rate.

I suspect the issue isn't gun control, so much as community size. I live in a major city, and I don't care about 99% of the people that also live there. It would likely be different if I knew everyone that lived nearby.

Orlanth wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Sonophos wrote:Starving and desperate people are more likely to commit crime.
The more equality within a society the lower the crime rate.

Crime rates were lower during the Great Depression than now. Next excuse?

Well done Frazzie.

If you want to reduce crime have more society not more socialism.

Interestingly, economic booms tend to coincide with increases in the crime rate, at least in the US.

dogma wrote:

Stormrider wrote:
There's your reason. People aren't afraid anymore. At least they aren't in cities with strict gun laws.

Houston is in the top 20 cities with regard to robbery rate.

I suspect the issue isn't gun control, so much as community size. I live in a major city, and I don't care about 99% of the people that also live there. It would likely be different if I knew everyone that lived nearby.

Houston also is still living with many of the fine upstanding homeless citizens of NO that didn't go back, and interesting levels of the drug trade. Nothing ups your rate like cartels shooting it out on your freeway.

Frazzled wrote:
Houston also is still living with many of the fine upstanding homeless citizens of NO that didn't go back, and interesting levels of the drug trade. Nothing ups your rate like cartels shooting it out on your freeway.

Sure, but if we compare California (border state with high gun control) to Texas (border state with low gun control) we see a comparable rate of violent crime. Then we look at Tennessee and realize there's more violent crime than either, and look at New York and see there's less violent crime than all three. Granted, this was in 08-09.

This is both an argument for, and against gun control.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Houston also is still living with many of the fine upstanding homeless citizens of NO that didn't go back, and interesting levels of the drug trade. Nothing ups your rate like cartels shooting it out on your freeway.

Sure, but if we compare California (border state with high gun control) to Texas (border state with low gun control) we see a comparable rate of violent crime. Then we look at Tennessee and realize there's more violent crime than either, and look at New York and see there's less violent crime than all three. Granted, this was in 08-09.

This is both an argument for, and against gun control.

Having lived in both, I can vouch that California is an example of illusory gun control, but thats a side issue.
I'm not actually disagreeing on the high population = high crime though.

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:It says a lot about you that you consider taxing the populace in order to provide public services 'progressive'....

I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service, and the day we consider something the Romans did to be 'progressive' by today's standards is the day the world has finally gone mad. Or conservatives have gone mad.

And I say that as a Conservative (big 'C', not small 'c').

Frazzled wrote:
Having lived in both, I can vouch that California is an example of illusory gun control, but thats a side issue.

I'm basically making the point that, in the US, gun control is a joke issue; for a number of reasons.

dogma wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Sonophos wrote:Starving and desperate people are more likely to commit crime.
The more equality within a society the lower the crime rate.

Crime rates were lower during the Great Depression than now. Next excuse?

Well done Frazzie.

If you want to reduce crime have more society not more socialism.

Interestingly, economic booms tend to coincide with increases in the crime rate, at least in the US.

I agree, its the rise of greed not need that fuels more crime. Booms also leave the less desirable members of society further behind but with the yearning to 'catch up' with the good times.
Actual poverty rather than expressions of wealth is not a major cause of crime. Very few steal to eat, many steal to buy flash footwear, or steal flash footwear. Its a social problem, not an inequality problem per se.

Albatross wrote:

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:It says a lot about you that you consider taxing the populace in order to provide public services 'progressive'....

I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service, and the day we consider something the Romans did to be 'progressive' by today's standards is the day the world has finally gone mad. Or conservatives have gone mad.

And I say that as a Conservative (big 'C', not small 'c').

Well, you're wrong.

But I've got a Fantasy game to get to. Plus, this is about a dead cocaine addict, not whether giving lazy people money is a public good.

Albatross wrote:

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:It says a lot about you that you consider taxing the populace in order to provide public services 'progressive'....

I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service, and the day we consider something the Romans did to be 'progressive' by today's standards is the day the world has finally gone mad. Or conservatives have gone mad.

And I say that as a Conservative (big 'C', not small 'c').

Social welfare is a fine concept, but it's gotten to the point that it isn't a safety net and has become a subsidy.

Saying people on welfare are all lazy is pretty rude TBH, not to mention stereotyping. You might as well ask every black fella you see if he can share his koolaid and fried chicken. Or asians if they can help with your math home work.

This thread is taking twists and turns enough to break a snake's back.

Orlanth wrote:Its a social problem, not an inequality problem per se.

I consider it more a matter of consequence than a problem.

biccat wrote:
Well, you're wrong.

There is no reasonable definition of "public service" that does not include social programs (welfare).

biccat wrote:
...not whether giving lazy people money is a public good.

Public goods are not the same thing as public services. You probably know this, and you probably just wanted to sound off on welfare.

Stormrider wrote:
Social welfare is a fine concept, but it's gotten to the point that it isn't a safety net and has become a subsidy.

There's no meaningful distinction between the two.

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:It says a lot about you that you consider taxing the populace in order to provide public services 'progressive'....

I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service, and the day we consider something the Romans did to be 'progressive' by today's standards is the day the world has finally gone mad. Or conservatives have gone mad.

And I say that as a Conservative (big 'C', not small 'c').

Well, you're wrong.

Are you going to explain how, or do you just have no adequate reply?

But I've got a Fantasy game to get to. Plus, this is about a dead cocaine addict, not whether giving lazy people money is a public good.

You do have a habit of deflecting, don't you? If you're in a rush, take all the time you need to refute my point. This discussion isn't taking place in real time, after all. Good luck with the fantasy game.

well, i didn't really listen to any of her music but I've heard good things RIP Whitney

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:It says a lot about you that you consider taxing the populace in order to provide public services 'progressive'....

I was talking about welfare, not public services.

Welfare is a public service, and the day we consider something the Romans did to be 'progressive' by today's standards is the day the world has finally gone mad. Or conservatives have gone mad.

And I say that as a Conservative (big 'C', not small 'c').

Well, you're wrong.

But I've got a Fantasy game to get to. Plus, this is about a dead cocaine addict, not whether giving lazy people money is a public good.

Once again your dedication to spewing yet more sweeping generalizations is truly impressive.
I guess it is nice to be good at something...

darknessforbid wrote:well, i didn't really listen to any of her music but I've heard good things RIP Whitney

She really was one the greatest female pop vocalists on record.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Having lived in both, I can vouch that California is an example of illusory gun control, but thats a side issue.

I'm basically making the point that, in the US, gun control is a joke issue; for a number of reasons.

for that purpose, I agree.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Albatross wrote:

darknessforbid wrote:well, i didn't really listen to any of her music but I've heard good things RIP Whitney

She really was one the greatest female pop vocalists on record.

agreed.

Albatross wrote:Are going to explain how, or do you just have no adequate reply?

I know you read the rest of my post; I had a fantasy game, which unfortunately got interrupted by a family emergency. Everything's good now. Well, no fantasy game, but family first and all that.

But welfare isn't a public good because it's not provided to all members of the public, it's a necessarily limited resource, the consumption of which leads to a lower availability of the good for others.

KingCracker wrote:Saying people on welfare are all lazy is pretty rude TBH, not to mention stereotyping. You might as well ask every black fella you see if he can share his koolaid and fried chicken. Or asians if they can help with your math home work.

Welfare is racially based now? Who knew!

I think welfare recipients are universally a problem for society, regardless of their race. Perhaps you should examine some of your own biases?

Besides, I love Kool-Ade, fried chicken, and math homework.

biccat wrote:
But welfare isn't a public good because it's not provided to all members of the public, it's a necessarily limited resource, the consumption of which leads to a lower availability of the good for others.

I'm still wondering when you decided that public goods and public services were the same.

Snrub wrote:Hello all.

I am here to apologise for my for tactless and insensitive posts regarding Whitney Houstons death the other day. It is apparent that i may have upset some people and greatly annoyed a whole mess of others. My first post honestly wasn't intended as a troll post and after a chat with Reds8n (amicable and understanding chap that he is) he is also aware of this.

I could prattle on and on but i won't.

Posting this was a class act and my respect for you has greatly increased.

Ouze wrote:

Snrub wrote:Hello all.

I am here to apologise for my for tactless and insensitive posts regarding Whitney Houstons death the other day. It is apparent that i may have upset some people and greatly annoyed a whole mess of others. My first post honestly wasn't intended as a troll post and after a chat with Reds8n (amicable and understanding chap that he is) he is also aware of this.

I could prattle on and on but i won't.

Posting this was a class act and my respect for you has greatly increased.

I agree. Good Show.

In the interest of removing extraneous debate from what most would want to be a solemn thread I started another thread on the issue.

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:Are going to explain how, or do you just have no adequate reply?

I know you read the rest of my post; I had a fantasy game, which unfortunately got interrupted by a family emergency. Everything's good now. Well, no fantasy game, but family first and all that.

But welfare isn't a public good because it's not provided to all members of the public, it's a necessarily limited resource, the consumption of which leads to a lower availability of the good for others.

KingCracker wrote:Saying people on welfare are all lazy is pretty rude TBH, not to mention stereotyping. You might as well ask every black fella you see if he can share his koolaid and fried chicken. Or asians if they can help with your math home work.

Welfare is racially based now? Who knew!

I think welfare recipients are universally a problem for society, regardless of their race. Perhaps you should examine some of your own biases?

Besides, I love Kool-Ade, fried chicken, and math homework.

Examples are examples. You saying that everyone on welfare is lazy, is the same as saying what my examples were. Do people abuse the welfare system? Yes, they make it to easy not to. That doesnt mean that some people that are on, dont actually need it.

Yes, they make it to easy not to.

Probably because of how much people scream and bitch when anyone tries to fix the welfare system.