- Joined
- Oct 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,353
- Reaction score
- 1,708
One thing that pretty much everyone agrees on, is that poor people are more likely to be violent criminals and that a large presence of poverty increases violent crime.
The easiest and most cost effective solution to reducing crime in a major city is to discourage poor people from living there. There are several easy ways you can do that.
I realize some people will object to this because they think it would be cruel to enact policies that would result in the relocation of the poor. However, this is actually the most compassionate thing you can do for the poor. When too many poor people gather in one spot, they tend to murder, rape, and rob each other. This would help them not do that.
The tricky part would be assisting the poor in relocating to somewhere else, but I think this would be doable as long as you spread the poor out rather than putting them all in one spot. In general, the goal would be to place them where they would do the least harm. Pick extremely isolated areas and put government housing there rather in big cities. Offer much of the government services there rather than in big cities. I do think government services are needed and play an essential role in reducing suffering, but you have to be careful where you offer it. In general, I think offering too much subsidized housing and government services inside of big cities is a terrible idea because you just encourage poor people to flock there in big numbers and this increases inequality and crime in major cities.
Imagine how much more peaceful and nice cities like Chicago, Baltimore, New York, San Francisco, and Seattle would be if they didn't have so many poor people living there. It would save lives and improve the quality of life for everyone living there.
That being said, if you know of a better and more cost effective way of reducing crime in big cities I would like to hear it.
The easiest and most cost effective solution to reducing crime in a major city is to discourage poor people from living there. There are several easy ways you can do that.
- Severely limit subsidized housing in big cities. I would limit it to elderly, disabled, and meet with business leaders to determine how many would be needed for workers in traditionally low income industries. I would specifically not provide it to single mothers since fatherless children are statistically much more likely to grow up to commit crimes.
- Severely limit government services to the poor in big cities unless they are elderly or disabled since elderly and disabled since rarely commit crimes.
- Set rent minimums.
- Aggressively encourage gentrification. You can do that by significantly raising property taxes in areas with the most blight. Have the property taxes reflect on the area's potential rather than its current status as a warzone. Then offer large incentives for investors to revitalize these blighted areas.
- Ban people who have already been convicted of serious crimes from renting in major cities and require landlords to do background checks.
I realize some people will object to this because they think it would be cruel to enact policies that would result in the relocation of the poor. However, this is actually the most compassionate thing you can do for the poor. When too many poor people gather in one spot, they tend to murder, rape, and rob each other. This would help them not do that.
The tricky part would be assisting the poor in relocating to somewhere else, but I think this would be doable as long as you spread the poor out rather than putting them all in one spot. In general, the goal would be to place them where they would do the least harm. Pick extremely isolated areas and put government housing there rather in big cities. Offer much of the government services there rather than in big cities. I do think government services are needed and play an essential role in reducing suffering, but you have to be careful where you offer it. In general, I think offering too much subsidized housing and government services inside of big cities is a terrible idea because you just encourage poor people to flock there in big numbers and this increases inequality and crime in major cities.
Imagine how much more peaceful and nice cities like Chicago, Baltimore, New York, San Francisco, and Seattle would be if they didn't have so many poor people living there. It would save lives and improve the quality of life for everyone living there.
That being said, if you know of a better and more cost effective way of reducing crime in big cities I would like to hear it.
