Trump Admin takes over D.C. Policing

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 47K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
Nah...... because arresting, charging and imprisoning criminals doesn't bring down violent crime, anyway. oh, and it's racist.

"</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Too bad he never said anything about arresting or charging. Mass incarceration is indeed not an effective anti-crime solution. Sorry to burst your balloon again, but the estimate of the effects of incarceration as an anti-crime strategy is a 10-15% reduction. Which isn't nothing, but doesn't remotely come close to justifying the massive costs.

But anyway, I am confident that Trump's deployments are increasing crime, not decreasing it. An assault is an assault, whether by ICE thug or private citizen. When the history books are written, they will show a sharp increase in disappearances. That is how it happens. Every. Single. Time.
 
Duke Mu said:
Large cities like Chicago that are being targeted by Trump should ask for more Fed $$ to hire thousands of new cops instead of sending federalized troops. Take a page out of Bill Clinton. Triangulate the issue. Even as crime has been already falling. Also say - we don't want to be like Memphis, St. Louis, NOLA, Little Rock, Jackson, MS, and Birmingham. Send a message that Dems are strong on crime prevention, while Trump just wants to be a dick-tater.
Click to expand...
Problem is Brandon Johnson doesn't want any more cops on the street. He believe more cops mean more arrests for minorities and higher incarceration. Johnson's still living in a defund the police world where social workers can replace police officers. He was asked by Joe Scarborough at least 6 times this morning whether he would like to have all of his dream social programs PLUS 5,000 additional cops on the street in order to reduce crime. He wouldn't answer each time so his answer was NO. Morning Joe lobbed him soft balls and he wiffed.

Trump choses his foes wisely.
 
Ramrouser said:
Problem is Brandon Johnson doesn't want any more cops on the street. He believe more cops mean more arrests for minorities and higher incarceration. Johnson's still living in a defund the police world where social workers can replace police officers. He was asked by Joe Scarborough at least 6 times this morning whether he would like to have all of his dream social programs PLUS 5,000 additional cops on the street in order to reduce crime. He wouldn't answer each time so his answer was NO. Morning Joe lobbed him soft balls and he wiffed.

Trump choses his foes wisely.
Click to expand...
Trump is a classless bully. He doesn't pick foes, he chooses victims, because he doesn't actually want a fight. It's why TACO against Russia and China. It's why he rapes women and children. He is a scared little bitch, like all his supporters.
 
The Chicago Tribune reports that over the past 60 years, more than 40,000 men, women and children have been murdered in the City. More than 1 million have been wounded. It's like its a forever war but the Mayor claims it doesn't need any help and doesn't need any more cops - only more social workers.
 
superrific said:
Too bad he never said anything about arresting or charging. Mass incarceration is indeed not an effective anti-crime solution. Sorry to burst your balloon again, but the estimate of the effects of incarceration as an anti-crime strategy is a 10-15% reduction. Which isn't nothing, but doesn't remotely come close to justifying the massive costs.
Click to expand...
So, by that logic, incarcerating nobody would be a better solution?
superrific said:
But anyway, I am confident that Trump's deployments are increasing crime, not decreasing it.
Click to expand...
Of course you are.
superrific said:
An assault is an assault, whether by ICE thug or private citizen. When the history books are written, they will show a sharp increase in disappearances. That is how it happens. Every. Single. Time.
Click to expand...
That doesn't sound crazy at all.
 


“… President Trump has been absolutely remarkable and he’s not planning on going anywhere, so those communities that are noticing a difference, they’re going to be transformed by the fact that we have individuals here in law e for cement that are allowed to do their jobs for the first time …”
 
ZenMode said:
So, by that logic, incarcerating nobody would be a better solution?
Click to expand...
No, because the relationship between incarceration and crime is non-linear, in much the same way as tax revenues and income tax rates.

In most forms of economics or other models of social systems, the key observables are equilibrium values. That means there's a turning point in their graph. The output function of firms is like that: the most profitable production level is not 0 and it's not necessarily "as much as the factory can possible produce." There's an optimal level.

This will perhaps be difficult for you to understand so I will simplify: if there is an optimal level of something, it means the relationship is non-linear and the slippery slope doesn't apply. There's an optimal level of taxation. We can debate what it is exactly, but clearly tax revenue is 0 at 0% taxation and 100% taxation (one supposes in certain special circumstances, 100% taxation could still produce revenue but as a general rule, of course not). Thus, there must be some tax level at which raising or lowering the rate would decrease revenue.
 
Ramrouser said:
Problem is Brandon Johnson doesn't want any more cops on the street. He believe more cops mean more arrests for minorities and higher incarceration. Johnson's still living in a defund the police world where social workers can replace police officers. He was asked by Joe Scarborough at least 6 times this morning whether he would like to have all of his dream social programs PLUS 5,000 additional cops on the street in order to reduce crime. He wouldn't answer each time so his answer was NO. Morning Joe lobbed him soft balls and he wiffed.

Trump choses his foes wisely.
Click to expand...

Except Mayor Johnson DID hire more police officers, despite a hiring freeze because of a lack of revenue. Maybe if the Feds and Speaker of the House Johnson (whose home state has far more crime ridden cities such as Shreveport, NOLA, and Baton Rouge in Louisiana) provided funding??!

But the city still made hires and promotions across departments – including the mayor’s office and the City Council. The Chicago Police Department saw the most new hires and promotions with 83, and of those 61 were police officers. The Chicago Fire Department saw 14 new hires, with 12 new paramedics.

www.wbez.org

Despite a hiring freeze, Mayor Brandon Johnson’s administration still made hundreds of new hires

A WBEZ analysis shows the city of Chicago hired or promoted 490 people since a hiring freeze was put in place in September.
www.wbez.org www.wbez.org


Sure, bad messaging on Morning Joe. But facts are facts. Mayor Johnson hired more police and now there is less crime.

police Chicago.jpg
 
nycfan said:


“… President Trump has been absolutely remarkable and he’s not planning on going anywhere, so those communities that are noticing a difference, they’re going to be transformed by the fact that we have individuals here in law e for cement that are allowed to do their jobs for the first time …”
Click to expand...

What an incredible alternate universe these clowns live in.
 
superrific said:
No, because the relationship between incarceration and crime is non-linear, in much the same way as tax revenues and income tax rates.

In most forms of economics or other models of social systems, the key observables are equilibrium values. That means there's a turning point in their graph. The output function of firms is like that: the most profitable production level is not 0 and it's not necessarily "as much as the factory can possible produce." There's an optimal level.

This will perhaps be difficult for you to understand so I will simplify: if there is an optimal level of something, it means the relationship is non-linear and the slippery slope doesn't apply. There's an optimal level of taxation. We can debate what it is exactly, but clearly tax revenue is 0 at 0% taxation and 100% taxation (one supposes in certain special circumstances, 100% taxation could still produce revenue but as a general rule, of course not). Thus, there must be some tax level at which raising or lowering the rate would decrease revenue.
Click to expand...
Federally we've been on the high side of the dreaded Laffer curve after the 1981 tax bill.

The Clinton years with tax hikes targeting the wealthy raised revenues. Bush tax breaks, 9/11, Great Recession wrecked revenue.

usgr_chart3p22.png
 
Ramrouser said:
The Chicago Tribune reports that over the past 60 years, more than 40,000 men, women and children have been murdered in the City. More than 1 million have been wounded. It's like its a forever war but the Mayor claims it doesn't need any help and doesn't need any more cops - only more social workers.
Click to expand...
Memphis, Little Rock, St. Louis, Jackson, Birmingham are more dangerous than Chicago.

Chicago and Mayor Johnson hired more cops...and crime decreased. Given Chicago more funding and they will hire a stronger and more able police force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top