you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -8 points 3 months ago (1 child)

Then go out and give your money to people poorer than yourself

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Really holding back on saying some inflammatory stuff with you here, but try to look at it this way:

    People don’t want to give away their money individually to poor people because that doesn’t work and it’s costs them A LOT individually to support a single person with low success rate. But collectively we can pay very little to solve the problem on a mass scale. No one is expecting crime to drop to zero, but a big reduction in it for a relatively low cost is an INCREDIBLE value.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I want to agree, and i mean i usually will vote for a party that promises to enact programs like this, but i think the framing of it just being about the money or "getting them back above the poverty line" is deeply misguided and sets us up for disappointment.

    There exist some people who are career criminals... they do it because they love it.[Now, a successful criminal isn't "poor" but they tend to live as if they are, because it allows them to enlist desperate people or sell drugs to desperate people by appearing as one of them.]

    Those people aren't going to be like "huh, looks like society loves me! So i should stop being a criminal!" They're going to go "great, more venture capital for my hijacking next thursday!

    So why the government, police and voters in general don't advocate for blindly distributing wealth in the hopes it cures crime - they see it as rewarding bad behaviour. They perhaps know that criminals themselves see it as a reward for their bad behaviour (if you listen to organised criminals, this is exactly how they see it)

    Tl;dr i think crime is more down to culture and specific contextual problems (like access to guns and increased opportunity from lack of safeguarding) than poverty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Sure. I don’t think anything you said is necessarily wrong. But I think that improving the lives of many is worth the risk of some criminals getting a bit more at the expense of everyone. Plus, law enforcement isn’t something I think should go away, but it’s disproportionately funded compared to things that actually help many people.

  • source
  • parent