News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by eevilspock on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:26AM (#27760304)
The upper and middle castes can be pragmatic about the symptoms when the disease does not touch them.

Whether SF or NYC, inequality and racial segregation have increased, corporations build glass and steel temples of capitalism, billionaires treat the world as their lab and playground, and even the middle class hoards the world's production and labor resources from the comfort of their couches, advantages all accumulated over centuries of exploitation, colonization, slavery, genocide and ecological debt that the poor and future generations will have to pay back.

But to keep things simple, let's just consider the "anarchy" in light of where SF and NYC (shining lights on the hill of liberalism) rank in the dimension of racial segregation:

- https://gothamist.com/news/new-yorks-schools-are-still-the-m...

- https://belonging.berkeley.edu/most-least-segregated-cities

- https://belonging.berkeley.edu/roots-structural-racism

- Most major metropolitan areas have become more racially segregated, study shows: https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/us/housing-segregation-cities...

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by bradleyjg on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:55AM (#27760546)
You guys would be more convincing if you were willing to acknowledge that progress has been made. Anyone that has studied history, or even just been alive for a few decades, knows that this is not the worst time ever. The constant catastrophizing rhetoric just discredits you.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by jfengel on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @02:54PM (#27764562)
And you'd be more convincing if you hadn't just said, "You didn't phrase your argument in a way that suited me, therefore I am going to ignore the problem you just raised."

It's not the worst time ever. There, I said it. Happy? Now, are you going to say "'Not the worst time ever' can still be pretty bad and in need of fixing"?

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by bradleyjg on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @04:39PM (#27765510)
Not the worst time ever' can still be pretty bad and in need of fixing

Who do you think has been making all the progress to get us to not the worst time ever? You’re welcome, by the way.

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by jfengel on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @04:53PM (#27765621)
I'm pretty sure it's not the people who say "I've done enough and you don't get any more".
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:35AM (#27760371)
> let's just consider the "anarchy" in light of where SF and NYC (shining lights on the hill of liberalism) rank in the dimension of racial segregation

Sorry, is the argument that public safety can’t exist in a desegregated city?

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by eevilspock on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:39AM (#27760403)
you read me backwards.

if anything, the upper castes rely on segregation to feel safer, thereby making things worse.

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:43AM (#27760435)
Defending the current state of San Francisco on the basis of not being as racially segregated on one measure as New York City sort of implies that it’s one or the other. If that’s not the implication, it’s irrelevant.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by eevilspock on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:48AM (#27760483)
you really misread me. I'm not defending either city. They are both incredibly segregated, unjust and oppressive to the lower castes.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:53AM (#27760532)
Is there evidence that supports this against the more likely causes, e.g., rich people just want to live around other rich people, people of any SES prefer to live around those who are culturally similar (and culture correlates with race in America), etc? In other words, I don’t think we have to resort to mustache-twirling caricatures to explain an increase in racial segregation.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:43AM (#27760441)
I agree with you that inequality and “socialism for the rich” are real problems, but I don’t think they adequately explain the 5-year crime surge across the country, specifically inequality didn’t increase commensurate with this surge in the same time period.

Most likely this is the result of our flat-footed “defund the police!” rhetoric that manifest as either explicit de-policing policies or else as unofficial pressure on police to reduce preventative policing practices like routine stops. I don’t think anyone disputes this correlation even if they don’t subscribe to the causation hypothesis.

With respect to racial segregation, I know ordinary liberals and moderates are generally on board with increased integration but I’m not sure how that will hit the I-oppose-race-mixing-but-in-a-woke-way crowd, particularly in SF?

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by AlexTWithBeard on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @09:46AM (#27761053)
It keeps me puzzled: why inequality per se is a culprit?

Poverty? I would get it. But how the fact that someone is richer than you justifies shoplifting is beyond my understanding.

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @10:00AM (#27761196)
I can’t speak for anyone besides myself, but growing inequality implies more poverty (more poor people, poor people get poorer, etc). So if poverty begets crime and (growing) inequality begets poverty, then inequality begets crime. There may also be other vectors through which inequality begets crime as well.

Maybe it’s possible to have a kind of inequality where the rich get richer without the poor getting poorer (although I suspect it would just mean that the purchasing power of a dollar falls even though the poor have as many dollars as they had before) but in practice in America I think we have the kind of inequality where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer (and more numerous).

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by AlexTWithBeard on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @10:12AM (#27761328)
According to [1] the official poverty rate in 2019 was 10.5 percent, down 1.3 percentage points from 11.8 percent in 2018.

[1] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-27...

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @10:19AM (#27761405)
Hmm, interesting. Any idea how the picture looks at the 5-year or 10-year trend (year over year clouds just be an anomaly)? What about the degree of poverty (we could have fewer poor people but they could be getting poorer)?
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by AlexTWithBeard on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @10:34AM (#27761573)
From [2] it looks like poverty has been going up and down staying within 10-15% range for the past 50 years.

I'm sure it's possible to construct a measure which will show that poverty went up - as it's equally possible to show the opposite - but either will mostly likely be overfitting, i. e. hand-picking data to prove the desired point.

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:31PM (#27767304)
To be clear I’m not trying to construct anything; I’m just expressing a curiosity.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by bradleyjg on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @11:28AM (#27762214)
I don’t get where this notion comes from. As late as the early 1970s we had actual starvation in the US (not “food insecurity”).

Poverty is definitely definitely going down, not up.

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by throwaway894345 on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @08:32PM (#27767307)
I wasn’t thinking on 50 year timescales, more like the last decade. But I may well be wrong even on that point.
Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by eevilspock on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @11:48AM (#27762431)
fairness matters. Especially as this is a shared planet. Rich people should not be able to monopolize it, nor monopolize political power, have better criminal justice, be treated as better people, and then leverage this monopoly to make people work for them for the lowest possible wage and extract all the value from that labor as "their" profit.

What if one argued that some enslaved people in 1850 Georgia were better fed than before they were kidnapped from Africa. All ok then?

And why should rich people complain if there were a revolution and they were relegated to the middle class? The middle class of 2021 live longer and have better healthcare than the kings of even 100 years ago. What rights does anyone have to anything? By what reason doed anyone have a claim to injustice?

Re:SF's crime debate turns nasty by AlexTWithBeard on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @11:56AM (#27762539)
The problem is that unlike poverty and equality, fairness is a vague philosophical category.