Being poor isn’t an excuse for being a violent criminal. A theif perhaps, but being poor is no excuse for arbitrarily cold-cocking someone. There’s something else going on. Besides, I don’t buy the supposed impossibility of leaving a ghetto.
. [/quote]
Well I can say that I agree with that simply because it is true (the former part). At the same time I agree with the principle of the second part being that you are responsible for your actions and therefor position in life (not saying that it will all be magically solved, but only YOU can decide how to react to a situation, the situation you can’t control). Unfortunately in the real world not all people have the mental capacity to reach this “epiphany” and accumulate enough knowledge and wisdom to change the course of their lives. To think that you can fix these problems or that it should be legislation is naive. It doesn’t mean we should stop trying but just accept that every effort for improvement is by grace and not by responsibility.
The bottom line is if you really want to see a change you have to be the one that goes out there and does it, you can not expect someone else to carry the responsibility which brings us to the rift between ideal and feasible.
“life is tough, get over it”[/quote]
I think this is going to be the closest we will get to agreement. Having said that, mankind has trended towards becoming more compassionate since it’s antiquity. I fully believe this grace will be a reality even if not in our lifetime.
[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Besides, I don’t buy the supposed impossibility of leaving a ghetto. If your life is so bad that it’s actually risking your sanity, at least grab a tent and gtfo.
[/quote]
You don’t really believe this, do you?
Your assigned reading for the weekend: “Bridges Out of Poverty” by Dr. Ruby Payne. You will learn that America operates under what’s typically known as “Middle Class Values.” These values, which include anything from knowing how to mail a certified letter to opening and maintaining a savings account, are second-nature for people like you and me. However, in the same way that the middle class has its own values and culture, so does the upper class and, yes, the lower class.
I work for a social service organization that works to prevent homelessness in Dallas and rehouse those who are currently homeless. We’re incredibly successful–80% of people who graduate from our programs never return to social services in their lifetime–largely because of the 3 theories under which we operate, one being recognizing the Culture of Poverty. You’d be amazed at what we have to teach our clients. Really, you would. We have to teach them how to balance a checkbook, how to talk to a customer service representative on the phone, etc. It’s not uncommon for a client to pay their cable bill before their electric bill, not thinking about how if they don’t have electricity, they won’t have cable either. In short, we have to teach them how to live in the middle class in order to climb out of poverty.
All this to say, if you really believe getting out of poverty is that easy, you’re just a fool. Or perhaps just an idealistic 17-year-old.[/quote]
Please mi amore, don’t confuse him with reality. Text books and theory only. Practice and life have no place in this “debate”! He’s got a neat little theory that he is quite fond of and when he’s not patting himself on the back for his genius, he will be happy to tell you about his theories. [/quote]
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.
[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
So China has low crime rate, but as a police state punishes crime strictly and severely. Your rebuttal?
And am I to understand you are arguing that Russia is a 1st-world country?[/quote]
This is… Actually a good argument. I’m glad to see there’s at least one persons here using relevant points, other than outlaw… then again that seemed to have been a one time deal and looking back it was more a matter of me having low standards than him posting a good argument.
/Tangent
Anyway, relatively speaking, no I cannot honestly say that Russia is as developed as North America. Then again, I’m basing this on statistics and apparently statistics mean nothing in comparison to ones limited first person experiences according to some, but whatever.
Russia is less developed and has a harsher government. Southern Africa is even less developed and has an even harsher government. This is the trend I see. I assert that more developed nations are generally safer places to live and I don’t think that statement is terribly controversial.
China certainly appears to be an exception, but when you look a little deeper than its politics the reason is clear. The United States incarcerates 726 prisoners per 100,000 persons. This in contrast to China’s 118. That’s right, being in the U.S. makes you over 6 times more likely to go to prison than in China. So once again you see this trend of a stricter nation having higher homicide rates. Granted, Russia actually comes second to the U.S. in terms of incarceration, but it has much harsher punishments to compensate (for example, capital punishment is carried out with bullets).
Something worth noting, Colombia has the longest average prison sentence length, at 137 years. It also leads the world in kidnappings (total, per $ GDP and per capita), murders per capita, mortality due to assaults by explosive material(total and per capita), mortality due to assaults by other and unspecified firearm discharge per capita, and mortality due to assaults by sharp objects per capita.
Colombia is second for murders with firearms (total and per capita) and third for total murders. It is also in the top five for mortality due to assault in 18 of the 22 recorded categories.
If there is a solution to violent crime, harsher prison sentences is not it. [/quote]
You just walked right around the China issue and dug up something that supports your thesis. Address China genius.
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.[/quote]
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement.
China certainly appears to be an exception, but when you look a little deeper than its politics the reason is clear. [/quote]
It was so clear, you ignored it, and moved onto finding another statistic to support your thesis.[/quote]
Didn’t you just write this? Anyway, China by virtue of being communist doesn’t automatically make it’s government harsher than ours. I don’t know what you mean by ignoring it, I very explicitly addressed China and its prison statistics. You’re not making any sense here.
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.[/quote]
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement. [/quote]
You know, It’s not as though I personally made up these theories. Man’s actions are limited to psychological and chemical reasons, more compassionate nations are safer, mankind is moving towards greater compassion, rehabilitation has a greater track record of rehabilitating than an arbitrary sentence in prison does, capitalistic societies have less poverty… These have all been said before by men much older than me with more degrees than me and have been shown in statistics for longer than I’ve been alive.
I’m not wrong by virtue of my age, perhaps I don’t have much first-persons experience in life, but that’s the point of statistics, to show the first-person findings of many persons.
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.[/quote]
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement. [/quote]
You know, It’s not as though I personally made up these theories. Man’s actions are limited to psychological and chemical reasons, more compassionate nations are safer, mankind is moving towards greater compassion, rehabilitation has a greater track record of rehabilitating than an arbitrary sentence in prison does, capitalistic societies have less poverty… These have all been said before by men much older than me with more degrees than me and have been shown in statistics for longer than I’ve been alive.
I’m not wrong by virtue of my age, perhaps I don’t have much first-persons experience in life, but that’s the point of statistics, to show the first-person findings of many persons. [/quote]
I’m growing weary…really.
It’s not your age, it’s your lack of experience.
I am aware of these theories, and I’m aware that they are not your own, that they have been put forth long ago.
If you’re counting “social” with psychological and chemical as impetus for man’s actions, I agree but the way you explain your theories, does not account for social factors, which are very real hurdles and challenges.
The connection you’re NOT making, but dancing around, concerns compassionate nations as you put it and capitalism. “Compassionate” cannot be measured. So let’s throw that term away. “Wealth” however, CAN be measured. The reality is that crime is higher in impoverished nations and even impoverished neighborhoods. Drive by shootings and open air drug dealing do not occur in our better neighborhood. However, they are common place in impoverished neighborhoods.
Just as you attempt to turn the justice system on it’s head by saying rehabilitation should be the aim rather than punishment, I can expose your theory to the same logic and say that poverty should be addressed to effectively address crime.
You’re not breaking any new intellectual ground by pointing out the sometime arbitrariness of the justice system and it’s sentences. And no intelligent person could be opposed to “rehabilitation”. We all understand that most criminals are again released AMONG the tribe. So stop with the false intellectual chest thumping. You’re missing the PRACTICAL hurdles to your imagined Utopia. POVERTY.
Capitalism does not solve poverty. Under such a system, which we do enjoy in the US, there will always be “haves” and “have nots”. The “have nots” commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. To address crime, you must therefore address poverty. Addressing poverty is a complex social and economic issue. We don’t, and never will, just give the “have nots” money to not be impoverished - we give aid for survival, but not to thrive. Poverty is also a viscous cycle, involving family structure, social issues and education. There are people in impoverished neighborhoods who do not know how to do the simplest things, like paying a bill online, opening a bank account, etc. Things the middle class takes for granted. If you’re a 3rd generation child from the grandmother with a drug use problem, and your mother had you when she was merely 16, and she’s impoverished, you can only imagine what her relative parenting skills, education and expectations for you are. Basically, “statistically” (because you’re such a fan of statistics), you are FUCKED FROM BIRTH. That my young friend, is an example of a cycle of poverty that is difficult to break.
So while you’re off in Utopia rehabilitating everyone, the statistical majority of those offenders will return to poverty, and thus crime. And under your plan, we would euthanize many under your so called plan of “compassionate” - because putting down someone like a bad dog that was fucked from birth through no fault of their own is definitely “compassionate”. LOL.
You also proclaim that man is growing “more compassionate” yet you cite rising crime statistics. I have news for you. Man is not growing more compassionate. We still wage war, we still hate each other based on class, race and creed and religion. We are still doing ALL of the things that we did in antiquity. I assure you my young friend, the Utopia you dream of in “your lifetime” will NOT happen. At best, we are more tolerant as a society and even that is situational depending on your geography in the world.
Capitalism is not the cure to our current ills. Yes, in nations where capitalism is allowed, the nation is generally more prosperous and “civilized”. However, capitalism does not address the complexities of generational and inherited social poverty. And poverty is where most of our crime problems lie and where the problem will continue to exist.
This is the most thoughtful reply I could put together for you. No one wants to do this, because it’s time consuming and your idealism is shining thru in all your posts. No one wants to debate someone that really doesn’t “get it”. It’s not an exchange of thought, you’re just exchanging what you learned last semester at University in a text book. Ultimately, such a debate is no debate at all.
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.[/quote]
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement. [/quote]
You know, It’s not as though I personally made up these theories. Man’s actions are limited to psychological and chemical reasons, more compassionate nations are safer, mankind is moving towards greater compassion, rehabilitation has a greater track record of rehabilitating than an arbitrary sentence in prison does, capitalistic societies have less poverty… These have all been said before by men much older than me with more degrees than me and have been shown in statistics for longer than I’ve been alive.
I’m not wrong by virtue of my age, perhaps I don’t have much first-persons experience in life, but that’s the point of statistics, to show the first-person findings of many persons. [/quote]
I’m growing weary…really.
It’s not your age, it’s your lack of experience.
I am aware of these theories, and I’m aware that they are not your own, that they have been put forth long ago.
If you’re counting “social” with psychological and chemical as impetus for man’s actions, I agree but the way you explain your theories, does not account for social factors, which are very real hurdles and challenges.
The connection you’re NOT making, but dancing around, concerns compassionate nations as you put it and capitalism. “Compassionate” cannot be measured. So let’s throw that term away. “Wealth” however, CAN be measured. The reality is that crime is higher in impoverished nations and even impoverished neighborhoods. Drive by shootings and open air drug dealing do not occur in our better neighborhood. However, they are common place in impoverished neighborhoods.
Just as you attempt to turn the justice system on it’s head by saying rehabilitation should be the aim rather than punishment, I can expose your theory to the same logic and say that poverty should be addressed to effectively address crime.
You’re not breaking any new intellectual ground by pointing out the sometime arbitrariness of the justice system and it’s sentences. And no intelligent person could be opposed to “rehabilitation”. We all understand that most criminals are again released AMONG the tribe. So stop with the false intellectual chest thumping. You’re missing the PRACTICAL hurdles to your imagined Utopia. POVERTY.
Capitalism does not solve poverty. Under such a system, which we do enjoy in the US, there will always be “haves” and “have nots”. The “have nots” commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. To address crime, you must therefore address poverty. Addressing poverty is a complex social and economic issue. We don’t, and never will, just give the “have nots” money to not be impoverished - we give aid for survival, but not to thrive. Poverty is also a viscous cycle, involving family structure, social issues and education. There are people in impoverished neighborhoods who do not know how to do the simplest things, like paying a bill online, opening a bank account, etc. Things the middle class takes for granted. If you’re a 3rd generation child from the grandmother with a drug use problem, and your mother had you when she was merely 16, and she’s impoverished, you can only imagine what her relative parenting skills, education and expectations for you are. Basically, “statistically” (because you’re such a fan of statistics), you are FUCKED FROM BIRTH. That my young friend, is an example of a cycle of poverty that is difficult to break.
So while you’re off in Utopia rehabilitating everyone, the statistical majority of those offenders will return to poverty, and thus crime. And under your plan, we would euthanize many under your so called plan of “compassionate” - because putting down someone like a bad dog that was fucked from birth through no fault of their own is definitely “compassionate”. LOL.
You also proclaim that man is growing “more compassionate” yet you cite rising crime statistics. I have news for you. Man is not growing more compassionate. We still wage war, we still hate each other based on class, race and creed and religion. We are still doing ALL of the things that we did in antiquity. I assure you my young friend, the Utopia you dream of in “your lifetime” will NOT happen. At best, we are more tolerant as a society and even that is situational depending on your geography in the world.
Capitalism is not the cure to our current ills. Yes, in nations where capitalism is allowed, the nation is generally more prosperous and “civilized”. However, capitalism does not address the complexities of generational and inherited social poverty. And poverty is where most of our crime problems lie and where the problem will continue to exist.
This is the most thoughtful reply I could put together for you. No one wants to do this, because it’s time consuming and your idealism is shining thru in all your posts. No one wants to debate someone that really doesn’t “get it”. It’s not an exchange of thought, you’re just exchanging what you learned last semester at University in a text book. Ultimately, such a debate is no debate at all. [/quote]
Compassion can be measured in psychoclassess. In terms of wealth, those with low intelligence levels tend to earn less, they also tend to be more violent, but earning less doesn’t mean you have to be more violent. This is just a correlation. Solving this would be a matter of education, not long prison sentences.
Our current system is loaded with coercive monopolies and subsidizing of the poor. This ensures high prices for government services and gives insensitive for the poor to remain poor. Notice, the most capitalistic countries also have the richest “poor”.
Here’s some statistics on the poor in the U.S.:
-76 percent have air conditioning.
-66 percent have more than two rooms of living space per person.
-97 percent own at least one color television.
-62 percent have either cable or satellite television.
-Almost 75 percent of households own a car (30 percent own two or more).
-73 percent own microwave ovens.
-More than 50 percent have stereos.
-33 percent have automatic dishwashers.
-99 percent have refrigerators.
-Virtually none lack running water or flushing toilets.
-46 percent own their own home, the average of which is a three bedroom house with 1.5 baths, that has a carport and porch or patio, and the average value of which is 70 percent of the median American home.
Compare this with the poor in non-capitalistic nations.
Here’s an article going into greater detail what I’m talking about: The Poor | Mises Institute
Of course I’m idealistic. Everyone is. Nobody puts forth a proposition because they DON’T think it’s the best option. Actually, that’s exactly what a debate is; the clashing of opposing ideas to find out which one is more logically sound. Besides, I’m going to university for kinesiology, nothing I’ve said here comes from the classes I take here.
Between you and me, YOU are the only one who has bragged about anything. I don’t know why, but you’re projecting this ridiculously pompous personality on to me so hard you could stand next to a blank wall and give a power-point presentation on it.[/quote]
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement. [/quote]
You know, It’s not as though I personally made up these theories. Man’s actions are limited to psychological and chemical reasons, more compassionate nations are safer, mankind is moving towards greater compassion, rehabilitation has a greater track record of rehabilitating than an arbitrary sentence in prison does, capitalistic societies have less poverty… These have all been said before by men much older than me with more degrees than me and have been shown in statistics for longer than I’ve been alive.
I’m not wrong by virtue of my age, perhaps I don’t have much first-persons experience in life, but that’s the point of statistics, to show the first-person findings of many persons. [/quote]
I’m growing weary…really.
It’s not your age, it’s your lack of experience.
I am aware of these theories, and I’m aware that they are not your own, that they have been put forth long ago.
If you’re counting “social” with psychological and chemical as impetus for man’s actions, I agree but the way you explain your theories, does not account for social factors, which are very real hurdles and challenges.
The connection you’re NOT making, but dancing around, concerns compassionate nations as you put it and capitalism. “Compassionate” cannot be measured. So let’s throw that term away. “Wealth” however, CAN be measured. The reality is that crime is higher in impoverished nations and even impoverished neighborhoods. Drive by shootings and open air drug dealing do not occur in our better neighborhood. However, they are common place in impoverished neighborhoods.
Just as you attempt to turn the justice system on it’s head by saying rehabilitation should be the aim rather than punishment, I can expose your theory to the same logic and say that poverty should be addressed to effectively address crime.
You’re not breaking any new intellectual ground by pointing out the sometime arbitrariness of the justice system and it’s sentences. And no intelligent person could be opposed to “rehabilitation”. We all understand that most criminals are again released AMONG the tribe. So stop with the false intellectual chest thumping. You’re missing the PRACTICAL hurdles to your imagined Utopia. POVERTY.
Capitalism does not solve poverty. Under such a system, which we do enjoy in the US, there will always be “haves” and “have nots”. The “have nots” commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. To address crime, you must therefore address poverty. Addressing poverty is a complex social and economic issue. We don’t, and never will, just give the “have nots” money to not be impoverished - we give aid for survival, but not to thrive. Poverty is also a viscous cycle, involving family structure, social issues and education. There are people in impoverished neighborhoods who do not know how to do the simplest things, like paying a bill online, opening a bank account, etc. Things the middle class takes for granted. If you’re a 3rd generation child from the grandmother with a drug use problem, and your mother had you when she was merely 16, and she’s impoverished, you can only imagine what her relative parenting skills, education and expectations for you are. Basically, “statistically” (because you’re such a fan of statistics), you are FUCKED FROM BIRTH. That my young friend, is an example of a cycle of poverty that is difficult to break.
So while you’re off in Utopia rehabilitating everyone, the statistical majority of those offenders will return to poverty, and thus crime. And under your plan, we would euthanize many under your so called plan of “compassionate” - because putting down someone like a bad dog that was fucked from birth through no fault of their own is definitely “compassionate”. LOL.
You also proclaim that man is growing “more compassionate” yet you cite rising crime statistics. I have news for you. Man is not growing more compassionate. We still wage war, we still hate each other based on class, race and creed and religion. We are still doing ALL of the things that we did in antiquity. I assure you my young friend, the Utopia you dream of in “your lifetime” will NOT happen. At best, we are more tolerant as a society and even that is situational depending on your geography in the world.
Capitalism is not the cure to our current ills. Yes, in nations where capitalism is allowed, the nation is generally more prosperous and “civilized”. However, capitalism does not address the complexities of generational and inherited social poverty. And poverty is where most of our crime problems lie and where the problem will continue to exist.
This is the most thoughtful reply I could put together for you. No one wants to do this, because it’s time consuming and your idealism is shining thru in all your posts. No one wants to debate someone that really doesn’t “get it”. It’s not an exchange of thought, you’re just exchanging what you learned last semester at University in a text book. Ultimately, such a debate is no debate at all. [/quote]
Compassion can be measured in psychoclassess. In terms of wealth, those with low intelligence levels tend to earn less, they also tend to be more violent, but earning less doesn’t mean you have to be more violent. This is just a correlation. Solving this would be a matter of education, not long prison sentences.
Our current system is loaded with coercive monopolies and subsidizing of the poor. This ensures high prices for government services and gives insensitive for the poor to remain poor. Notice, the most capitalistic countries also have the richest “poor”.
Here’s some statistics on the poor in the U.S.:
-76 percent have air conditioning.
-66 percent have more than two rooms of living space per person.
-97 percent own at least one color television.
-62 percent have either cable or satellite television.
-Almost 75 percent of households own a car (30 percent own two or more).
-73 percent own microwave ovens.
-More than 50 percent have stereos.
-33 percent have automatic dishwashers.
-99 percent have refrigerators.
-Virtually none lack running water or flushing toilets.
-46 percent own their own home, the average of which is a three bedroom house with 1.5 baths, that has a carport and porch or patio, and the average value of which is 70 percent of the median American home.
Compare this with the poor in non-capitalistic nations.
Here’s an article going into greater detail what I’m talking about: http://mises.org/daily/4652
Of course I’m idealistic. Everyone is. Nobody puts forth a proposition because they DON’T think it’s the best option. Actually, that’s exactly what a debate is; the clashing of opposing ideas to find out which one is more logically sound. Besides, I’m going to university for kinesiology, nothing I’ve said here comes from the classes I take here.
Nice Stats. Cherry picking stats to make what point? That American poor have it better? What does that have to do with anything? I said social and educational issues were at the root. So go fix them when you’re “king of the world”. If you think they have it so good, as evidenced by your stats, I challenge you to spend a year in one of our smaller inner cities. And when you come out the other end with experience, you can wow us with your stats.
But these stats are reality. Camden, NJ:
As of the census[4] of 2000,[41] there were 79,904 people, 24,177 households, and 17,431 families residing in the city. The population density was 9,057.0 people per square mile (3,497.9/km²). There were 29,769 housing units at an average density of 3,374.3 units per square mile (1,303.2/km²).
In 2007, the racial makeup of the city was 50.35% Non-Hispanic Black, 6.84% Non-Hispanic Whites, 2.45% Asian, 0.54% Native American, 0.07% Pacific Islander, and 22.83% from other races. 3.92% of residents were from two or more races. 42.82% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race, majority of which are Puerto Ricans. 5.9% of the population is foreign-born.
There were 24,177 households out of which 42.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 26.1% were married couples living together, 37.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 27.9% were non-families. 22.5% of all households were made up of individuals and 7.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 3.52 and the average family size was 4.00.
In the city the population is quite young with 34.6% under the age of 18, 12.0% from 18 to 24, 29.5% from 25 to 44, 16.3% from 45 to 64, and 7.6% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 27 years. For every 100 females there were 94.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 90.0 males.
The per capita income for the city was $9,815. 35.5% of the population and 32.8% of families were below the poverty line. 45.5% of those under the age of 18 and 23.8% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line.
Based on 2006 data from the United States Census Bureau, 52% of the city’s residents live in poverty, the highest rate in the nation. The city had a median household income of $18,007, the lowest of all U.S. communities with populations of more than 65,000 residents, making it America’s poorest city.[42] The unemployment rate was 17.0%, more than twice the average of New Jersey. Camden had the highest crime rate in the U.S. with 2,333 violent crimes per 100,000 people while the national average was 455 per 100,000 [9] Camden public schools spend $17,000 per student per year and two thirds of the students graduate. Two out of every five residents are below the national poverty line.
For population 25 years and over in Camden:
* High school or higher: 51.0%
* Bachelor's degree or higher: 5.4%
* Graduate or professional degree: 1.9%
* Unemployed: 15.9%
* Mean travel time to work: 26.7 minutes
For population 15 years and over in Camden city:
* Never married: 47.8%
* Now married: 29.8%
* Separated: 6.9%
* Widowed: 6.4%
* Divorced: 9.2%
People in group quarters in Camden:
* 1575 people in local jails and other confinement facilities (including police lockups)
* 1175 people in state prisons
* 452 people in college dormitories (includes college quarters off campus)
* 420 people in nursing homes
* 277 people in other noninstitutional group quarters
* 250 people in halfway houses
* 58 people in other group homes
* 47 people in homes for the mentally ill
* 34 people in training schools for juvenile delinquents
* 31 people in religious group quarters
* 27 people in other nonhousehold living situations
* 13 people in homes or halfway houses for drug/alcohol abuse
* 13 people in homes for the physically handicapped
* 3 people in homes for the mentally retarded
#10 on the list of “Top 100 least-educated cities (pop. 50,000+)”
#11 on the list of “Top 100 cities with lowest ratio of median house value to median household income (pop. 50,000+)”
#18 on the list of “Top 100 cities with old houses but young residents (pop. 50,000+)”
#41 on the list of “Top 100 cities with youngest residents (pop. 50,000+)”
Estimated median household income in 2009: $26,752 (it was $23,421 in 2000)
Camden:
$26,752
New Jersey:
$68,342
Estimated per capita income in 2009: $12,808
Camden city income, earnings, and wages data
Estimated median house or condo value in 2009: $92,900 (it was $40,800 in 2000)
Camden:
$92,900
New Jersey:
$348,300
THE ABOVE IS TYPICAL OF OUR SMALLER CITIES. AND THE PICTURE IS BLEAK. Now, I gave you a thoughtful reply in the post above. You danced around it with more statistics, but you did not REPLY to the points I raised. This is the end game and pretty much why nobody wanted to debate you.
[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
This man clearly has some anger issues. I’m pretty sure prison won’t cure his anger, but I suppose we just live in a world where revenge equals justice… =/[/quote]
Aaaaaaaaaaaand that’s where it went wrong.
Nice way to hang the bait out there. I’m curious. What makes you go onto a message board and start this kind of crap? Are you that lonely?
You said you’re in university. You should be out fucking girls and getting drunk, not getting in a pseudo-intelligent discussion about the penal system on a fucking bodybuilding website…
I don’t do pompous so again, although you appear to be bright, you are not yet at the point where your theories tie into the real world. Your comments about poverty were unbelievably off the mark and you were properly rebuked by Chela, who does actually work with the impoverished. It’s the difference between reading something in a book (or on this forum) and forming an opinion and, actually experiencing it and forming an opinion. And although you are a bright young man and apparently a thinker, you lack the latter in the foregoing statement. [/quote]
You know, It’s not as though I personally made up these theories. Man’s actions are limited to psychological and chemical reasons, more compassionate nations are safer, mankind is moving towards greater compassion, rehabilitation has a greater track record of rehabilitating than an arbitrary sentence in prison does, capitalistic societies have less poverty… These have all been said before by men much older than me with more degrees than me and have been shown in statistics for longer than I’ve been alive.
I’m not wrong by virtue of my age, perhaps I don’t have much first-persons experience in life, but that’s the point of statistics, to show the first-person findings of many persons. [/quote]
I’m growing weary…really.
It’s not your age, it’s your lack of experience.
I am aware of these theories, and I’m aware that they are not your own, that they have been put forth long ago.
If you’re counting “social” with psychological and chemical as impetus for man’s actions, I agree but the way you explain your theories, does not account for social factors, which are very real hurdles and challenges.
The connection you’re NOT making, but dancing around, concerns compassionate nations as you put it and capitalism. “Compassionate” cannot be measured. So let’s throw that term away. “Wealth” however, CAN be measured. The reality is that crime is higher in impoverished nations and even impoverished neighborhoods. Drive by shootings and open air drug dealing do not occur in our better neighborhood. However, they are common place in impoverished neighborhoods.
Just as you attempt to turn the justice system on it’s head by saying rehabilitation should be the aim rather than punishment, I can expose your theory to the same logic and say that poverty should be addressed to effectively address crime.
You’re not breaking any new intellectual ground by pointing out the sometime arbitrariness of the justice system and it’s sentences. And no intelligent person could be opposed to “rehabilitation”. We all understand that most criminals are again released AMONG the tribe. So stop with the false intellectual chest thumping. You’re missing the PRACTICAL hurdles to your imagined Utopia. POVERTY.
Capitalism does not solve poverty. Under such a system, which we do enjoy in the US, there will always be “haves” and “have nots”. The “have nots” commit a disproportionate amount of the crime. To address crime, you must therefore address poverty. Addressing poverty is a complex social and economic issue. We don’t, and never will, just give the “have nots” money to not be impoverished - we give aid for survival, but not to thrive. Poverty is also a viscous cycle, involving family structure, social issues and education. There are people in impoverished neighborhoods who do not know how to do the simplest things, like paying a bill online, opening a bank account, etc. Things the middle class takes for granted. If you’re a 3rd generation child from the grandmother with a drug use problem, and your mother had you when she was merely 16, and she’s impoverished, you can only imagine what her relative parenting skills, education and expectations for you are. Basically, “statistically” (because you’re such a fan of statistics), you are FUCKED FROM BIRTH. That my young friend, is an example of a cycle of poverty that is difficult to break.
So while you’re off in Utopia rehabilitating everyone, the statistical majority of those offenders will return to poverty, and thus crime. And under your plan, we would euthanize many under your so called plan of “compassionate” - because putting down someone like a bad dog that was fucked from birth through no fault of their own is definitely “compassionate”. LOL.
You also proclaim that man is growing “more compassionate” yet you cite rising crime statistics. I have news for you. Man is not growing more compassionate. We still wage war, we still hate each other based on class, race and creed and religion. We are still doing ALL of the things that we did in antiquity. I assure you my young friend, the Utopia you dream of in “your lifetime” will NOT happen. At best, we are more tolerant as a society and even that is situational depending on your geography in the world.
Capitalism is not the cure to our current ills. Yes, in nations where capitalism is allowed, the nation is generally more prosperous and “civilized”. However, capitalism does not address the complexities of generational and inherited social poverty. And poverty is where most of our crime problems lie and where the problem will continue to exist.
This is the most thoughtful reply I could put together for you. No one wants to do this, because it’s time consuming and your idealism is shining thru in all your posts. No one wants to debate someone that really doesn’t “get it”. It’s not an exchange of thought, you’re just exchanging what you learned last semester at University in a text book. Ultimately, such a debate is no debate at all.
te]Compassion can be measured in psychoclassess. In terms of wealth, those with low intelligence levels tend to earn less, they also tend to be more violent, but earning less doesn’t mean you have to be more violent. This is just a correlation. Solving this would be a matter of education, not long prison sentences.
Our current system is loaded with coercive monopolies and subsidizing of the poor. This ensures high prices for government services and gives insensitive for the poor to remain poor. Notice, the most capitalistic countries also have the richest “poor”.
Here’s some statistics on the poor in the U.S.:
-76 percent have air conditioning.
-66 percent have more than two rooms of living space per person.
-97 percent own at least one color television.
-62 percent have either cable or satellite television.
-Almost 75 percent of households own a car (30 percent own two or more).
-73 percent own microwave ovens.
-More than 50 percent have stereos.
-33 percent have automatic dishwashers.
-99 percent have refrigerators.
-Virtually none lack running water or flushing toilets.
-46 percent own their own home, the average of which is a three bedroom house with 1.5 baths, that has a carport and porch or patio, and the average value of which is 70 percent of the median American home.
Compare this with the poor in non-capitalistic nations.
Here’s an article going into greater detail what I’m talking about: http://mises.org/daily/4652
Of course I’m idealistic. Everyone is. Nobody puts forth a proposition because they DON’T think it’s the best option. Actually, that’s exactly what a debate is; the clashing of opposing ideas to find out which one is more logically sound. Besides, I’m going to university for kinesiology, nothing I’ve said here comes from the classes I take here.
Nice Stats. Cherry picking stats to make what point? That American poor have it better? What does that have to do with anything? I said social and educational issues were at the root. So go fix them when you’re “king of the world”. If you think they have it so good, as evidenced by your stats, I challenge you to spend a year in one of our smaller inner cities. And when you come out the other end with experience, you can wow us with your stats.
But these stats are reality. Camden, NJ:
As of the census[4] of 2000,[41] there were 79,904 people, 24,177 households, and 17,431 families residing in the city. The population density was 9,057.0 people per square mile (3,497.9/km�??�?�²). There were 29,769 housing units at an average density of 3,374.3 units per square mile (1,303.2/km�??�?�²).
In 2007, the racial makeup of the city was 50.35% Non-Hispanic Black, 6.84% Non-Hispanic Whites, 2.45% Asian, 0.54% Native American, 0.07% Pacific Islander, and 22.83% from other races. 3.92% of residents were from two or more races. 42.82% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race, majority of which are Puerto Ricans. 5.9% of the population is foreign-born.
There were 24,177 households out of which 42.2% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 26.1% were married couples living together, 37.7% had a female householder with no husband present, and 27.9% were non-families. 22.5% of all households were made up of individuals and 7.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 3.52 and the average family size was 4.00.
In the city the population is quite young with 34.6% under the age of 18, 12.0% from 18 to 24, 29.5% from 25 to 44, 16.3% from 45 to 64, and 7.6% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 27 years. For every 100 females there were 94.3 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 90.0 males.
The per capita income for the city was $9,815. 35.5% of the population and 32.8% of families were below the poverty line. 45.5% of those under the age of 18 and 23.8% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line.
Based on 2006 data from the United States Census Bureau, 52% of the city’s residents live in poverty, the highest rate in the nation. The city had a median household income of $18,007, the lowest of all U.S. communities with populations of more than 65,000 residents, making it America’s poorest city.[42] The unemployment rate was 17.0%, more than twice the average of New Jersey. Camden had the highest crime rate in the U.S. with 2,333 violent crimes per 100,000 people while the national average was 455 per 100,000 [9] Camden public schools spend $17,000 per student per year and two thirds of the students graduate. Two out of every five residents are below the national poverty line.
For population 25 years and over in Camden:
* High school or higher: 51.0%
* Bachelor's degree or higher: 5.4%
* Graduate or professional degree: 1.9%
* Unemployed: 15.9%
* Mean travel time to work: 26.7 minutes
For population 15 years and over in Camden city:
* Never married: 47.8%
* Now married: 29.8%
* Separated: 6.9%
* Widowed: 6.4%
* Divorced: 9.2%
People in group quarters in Camden:
* 1575 people in local jails and other confinement facilities (including police lockups)
* 1175 people in state prisons
* 452 people in college dormitories (includes college quarters off campus)
* 420 people in nursing homes
* 277 people in other noninstitutional group quarters
* 250 people in halfway houses
* 58 people in other group homes
* 47 people in homes for the mentally ill
* 34 people in training schools for juvenile delinquents
* 31 people in religious group quarters
* 27 people in other nonhousehold living situations
* 13 people in homes or halfway houses for drug/alcohol abuse
* 13 people in homes for the physically handicapped
* 3 people in homes for the mentally retarded
#10 on the list of “Top 100 least-educated cities (pop. 50,000+)”
#11 on the list of “Top 100 cities with lowest ratio of median house value to median household income (pop. 50,000+)”
#18 on the list of “Top 100 cities with old houses but young residents (pop. 50,000+)”
#41 on the list of “Top 100 cities with youngest residents (pop. 50,000+)”
Estimated median household income in 2009: $26,752 (it was $23,421 in 2000)
Camden:
$26,752
New Jersey:
$68,342
Estimated per capita income in 2009: $12,808
Camden city income, earnings, and wages data
Estimated median house or condo value in 2009: $92,900 (it was $40,800 in 2000)
Camden:
$92,900
New Jersey:
$348,300
THE ABOVE IS TYPICAL OF OUR SMALLER CITIES. AND THE PICTURE IS BLEAK. Now, I gave you a thoughtful reply in the post above. You danced around it with more statistics, but you did not REPLY to the points I raised. This is the end game and pretty much why nobody wanted to debate you.[/quote]
Danced around the subject? WTF are you talking about? You said compassion cannot be measured, I showed you a way it can, you said capitalism doesn’t solve poverty, I show you statistics suggesting otherwise… What exactly did I miss? Also, cherry picking? My statistics encompassed all poor in the U.S., you posted statistics on a few cities, of which doesn’t refute anything I’ve written and merely points out that poor persons exist. If anyone is cherry picking, it’s you.
Also, you posted a lot of statistics, but… Why? To show how many persons where poor in those cities? What’s your point? Showing me that there are poor persons and wealthy persons doesn’t negate my argument about capitalism raising the lower class. Did you even read the article???
I don’t know what your talking about others not wanting to debate me. This whole thread has been everyone vs. me.
[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
This man clearly has some anger issues. I’m pretty sure prison won’t cure his anger, but I suppose we just live in a world where revenge equals justice… =/[/quote]
Aaaaaaaaaaaand that’s where it went wrong.
Nice way to hang the bait out there. I’m curious. What makes you go onto a message board and start this kind of crap? Are you that lonely?
You said you’re in university. You should be out fucking girls and getting drunk, not getting in a pseudo-intelligent discussion about the penal system on a fucking bodybuilding website…
[/quote]
I feel as though the title “Get a Life” pretty much answers all these questions. We’re all here because we had time to kill.
