Free speech in the politics section

hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Maybe if the Republicans would quit fucking with those cities and help the people living in them to overcome the decades of suppression they wouldn't be as overpopulated and have far less crime.

But they won't, because it is the entirety of their political agenda to be able to scare their voters with 'them' so that they can keep the political power to keep from having to pay taxes which would go a long way in making our nation far more economically successful.
 
xtsho

xtsho

Well-Known Member
You are free to speak whatever you want. That doesn't mean everyone is going to let you pollute their website with garbage.
 
R

rollupreader

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Cities in general tend to lean democrat, but that doesn't mean you get to blame every city problem on democrats. Cities are also where you find Carl's Jr, but you don't hear people blaming Carl's Jr. Socioeconomics are more complex than that. Do you know what problems you find in rural areas? Meth, opiates, theft, garbage dumped on the side of the road, and a shit-ton of white christians. But again, socioeconomics is more complex than that.
Click to expand...
I do blame defund the police on dem cities. I also blame cities that let shop lifters walk in and steal. Businesses are leaving in droves. Drug stores, etc. That can't be good for the communities. Those cities that allow that are democratic run cities. And I question where you get your data, you sure most cities lean democrat? Maybe it's most large cities? Maybe not. But I don't see any republican run cities pushing to defund the police. Another great liberal idea lol.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
hanimmal said:
Maybe if the Republicans would quit fucking with those cities and help the people living in them to overcome the decades of suppression they wouldn't be as overpopulated and have far less crime.

But they won't, because it is the entirety of their political agenda to be able to scare their voters with 'them' so that they can keep the political power to keep from having to pay taxes which would go a long way in making our nation far more economically successful.
Click to expand...
Helping a specific group of people is difficult, because the same laws that corrected the issue, also handicap you from making it better. Addressing social problems is crazy hard. There's a reason why pretty much all of them still exist.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
rollupreader said:
I do blame defund the police on dem cities. I also blame cities that let shop lifters walk in and steal. Businesses are leaving in droves. Drug stores, etc. That can't be good for the communities. Those cities that allow that are democratic run cities. And I question where you get your data, you sure most cities lean democrat? Maybe it's most large cities? Maybe not. But I don't see any republican run cities pushing to defund the police. Another great liberal idea lol.
Click to expand...
If you want the protests against police brutality to stop then stop the police brutality.

You fascist pigs make things overly complicated.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
rollupreader said:
Yeah, it's the poverty. Not the defund the police or allowing public shop lifting, not prosecuting bad guys... Lots of poor folks don't shoot other folks...
Click to expand...
How many people are shot in Chicago?

Screen Shot 2021-10-14 at 8.42.33 PM.png

4k? What kind of population does it have? 2.7 million people in a 240 square mile area.


I was going to look up the statistics for Wyoming, a state that has under 600,000 people living in about 98,000 square mile areas, but they don't actually show statistics that I could easily find on gun shot wounds.

Hah, oddly enough they bury that shit.

http://4e5ae7d17e.nxcli.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Mandatory-Reporting-of-Non-Accidental-Injury-Statutes-by-State.pdf
Screen Shot 2021-10-14 at 8.52.56 PM.png
Click to expand...
But, about 110 people die of GSW in Myoming every year, and Chicago has about 770.

So based on population per death, Wyoming percentage is 0.00018, Chicago is 0.00028.

Seems like a big difference, but then you figure that the amount of people stuffed into a square mile being 11,250 in Chicago, and 6 in Wyoming, you can get a pretty good idea of why it might be the case that people firing a gun is a lot more likely to hit someone in one area vs the other.

If these honest caring people who would like to see violence decreased in our cities, we would try to overcome the decades of redlining that came after the utter destruction of land that 'minorities' owned when white men decided they wanted it and murdered them until they left it for the cities, that they are crying have high crime now.

But they won't, because they are lying race baiting trolls.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
rollupreader said:
I do blame defund the police on dem cities. I also blame cities that let shop lifters walk in and steal. Businesses are leaving in droves. Drug stores, etc. That can't be good for the communities. Those cities that allow that are democratic run cities. And I question where you get your data, you sure most cities lean democrat? Maybe it's most large cities? Maybe not. But I don't see any republican run cities pushing to defund the police. Another great liberal idea lol.
Click to expand...
If I didn't say that most large cities lean dem, that is what I meant. I assumed you weren't talking about crime in small cities, because that usually kills the "dem cities are bad" talking point.

I also hate the way large cities allow criminals to walk, but it's not out of a love for criminals, it comes from having more crime than your infrastructure/resources can handle. A certain percentage of people will always be shitty. If it's 1:100, then a small town of 1000 only has ten people to deal with. If it's a city of a million, that's ten thousand and that's not easy to deal with. If you want to deal with crime directly, then you're going to have to raise taxes and probably need to double however much we spend on the criminal justice system and all of the ancillary offshoots.

If you don't want to spend that on criminals, but still want to improve the situation, then you're going to have to spend probably the same amount in jobs/education programs. Now, you show me the one republican that's cool with spending money to help his fellow americans and let me know how many trillion he has in his pocket. Basically, the american people are too shitty of a group of people to afford how awful we are. At some point, all of us will have to either work in food/agriculture, infrastructure, or at a prison, unless you want to invest in a better future.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Helping a specific group of people is difficult, because the same laws that corrected the issue, also handicap you from making it better. Addressing social problems is crazy hard. There's a reason why pretty much all of them still exist.
Click to expand...
It is crazy hard because it was designed to be that way and has been kept up for decades because people say it is hard and gets ignored when right wing racists start snow flaking about 'them' getting help.

Driving people off their land so that they could steal it and stuffing them into a handful of large cities was easy though.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
hanimmal said:
It is crazy hard because it was designed to be that way and has been kept up for decades because people say it is hard and gets ignored when right wing racists start snow flaking about 'them' getting help.

Driving people off their land so that they could steal it and stuffing them into a handful of large cities was easy though.
Click to expand...
But in order for that to be true, that it's only hard because people say it's hard, then you'd also have to think that at no point in the history of a city/county/state/country have there ever been any decent people at the helm. I think people have rose colored glasses when it comes to our abilities, because the only way these problems can still exist over centuries, is if we're either shitty in an overpowering majority, or not as awesome as we think we are at solving problems.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
But in order for that to be true, that it's only hard because people say it's hard, then you'd also have to think that at no point in the history of a city/county/state/country have there ever been any decent people at the helm. I think people have rose colored glasses when it comes to our abilities, because the only way these problems can still exist over centuries, is if we're either shitty in an overpowering majority, or not as awesome as we think we are at solving problems.
Click to expand...
I think that you are forgetting that those cities are generally at the whims of the state governments who have been designed around keeping the power out of those cities.
 
R

rollupreader

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
If I didn't say that most large cities lean dem, that is what I meant. I assumed you weren't talking about crime in small cities, because that usually kills the "dem cities are bad" talking point.

I also hate the way large cities allow criminals to walk, but it's not out of a love for criminals, it comes from having more crime than your infrastructure/resources can handle. A certain percentage of people will always be shitty. If it's 1:100, then a small town of 1000 only has ten people to deal with. If it's a city of a million, that's ten thousand and that's not easy to deal with. If you want to deal with crime directly, then you're going to have to raise taxes and probably need to double however much we spend on the criminal justice system and all of the ancillary offshoots.

If you don't want to spend that on criminals, but still want to improve the situation, then you're going to have to spend probably the same amount in jobs/education programs. Now, you show me the one republican that's cool with spending money to help his fellow americans and let me know how many trillion he has in his pocket. Basically, the american people are too shitty of a group of people to afford how awful we are. At some point, all of us will have to either work in food/agriculture, infrastructure, or at a prison, unless you want to invest in a better future.
Click to expand...
I just don't believe in the lack of infrastructure support. If it's a priority, then you'll find the money. Maybe stop providing free health care for illegal immigrants. You know that's true in NYC. I hate to use Guliani since he's a shell of a man now, about as senile as biden, but look at what he did in NYC versus prior and after democratic mayors. He cleaned up the city. I didn't live there at the time, but that seems to be the consensus opinion of new yorkers back in the day. That may be before your time, dunno. But back in the day, Rudy was the man.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
rollupreader said:
I just don't believe in the lack of infrastructure support. If it's a priority, then you'll find the money. Maybe stop providing free health care for illegal immigrants. You know that's true in NYC. I hate to use Guliani since he's a shell of a man now, about as senile as biden, but look at what he did in NYC versus prior and after democratic mayors. He cleaned up the city. I didn't live there at the time, but that seems to be the consensus opinion of new yorkers back in the day. That may be before your time, dunno. But back in the day, Rudy was the man.
Click to expand...
Imagine being a healthcare worker....heck, imagine just being a human being with the ability to help someone in bad shape, and you tell them to go pound sand because they didn't pay their dues. That's not an easy thing to do. Jesus teach you that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top