> this is 100% in big cities

Comparing Brazil with Mexico with Madrid with Tokyo and coming to the conclusion that "is all the same" seems farfetched.

Policies that see "the poor" as the problem instead "poverty" create violent dystopian cities. Good policy works and make big cities great places to live. Reducing inequality, giving good safety nets to citizens, treating drug addiction as a disease, etc. make a difference. Not 100% of big cities are the same.

I think they meant big cities in Brazil vs the countryside in Brazil.

Not big cities across the world.

Yes, I meant in Brazil.

Off-topic: I really need to add more context to my replies without considering the parent comment, it's not the first time that caused confusion.

It works wonders in San Francisco, doesn't it?

I am not American, so I could be wrong, but is San Francisco a good example of a city with low inequality? My understanding is that the opposite is true.

Neither am I. I just wanted to point out that the policies suggested in the parent comment didn't work out.

I read the parent comment as being sarcastic.

Most of the 50 most violent cities in Brazil aren't even the biggest in their State. The top 3 are all between 100 thousand and 150 thousand inhabitants. They all have homicide rates that are 2x to 4x as much as the national average. By comparison, São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro are much, much safer.

https://g1.globo.com/sp/sao-paulo/noticia/2023/07/20/anuario...

Reading down the list, I’m not sure the US is doing much better than Brazil. Mexico is stand out terrible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_homicide_rat...

This list does not have the latest data from Brazilian cities. The Brazilian list I linked has dozens of Brazilian cities with a homicide rate of around 80 per 100.000.

New York City is one of the largest and safest places to live.

As someone who had a broken lock on their outer front door for a very long time, I could attest to this.