None of those things reduce criminality, not even employment. Poor areas already receive all of those things but it hasn't reduced crime a bit. And why should college be any kind of a goal? It's a debt trap, you're much better off in a vocational school, you don't even need to finish high school and you could be making $50,000 a year after 2 years in a vocational school. Education isn't some kind of magic bullet, nor is it really necessary, the best schools in the world are in Finland and they have the least school hours and the least homework.
Others have brought up multiple issues with your argument, and to be honest I don't use sites like this to get into pissing matches or to try in vain to change someone's opinion. Suffice to say, though, that your description of the situation is inaccurate at best and flat-out wrong at worst. A few things: -I never mentioned anything about college (edit: my bad, I did mention it in passing, but I didn't advocate for universal college education, as you seem to imply; see below for why I think college "being a dream" is indicative of low quality education), so I'm not sure why you brought that up. When I mean "quality education," I mean education that 1) is provided in a safe environment and 2) enables students to, should they desire to do so, pursue a college education. I agree with you that the goal of universal college education is a stupid one. A college education is simply not necessary for the average person to achieve his/her vocational goals. Not to mention that it comes at a hefty price. -You claim that "poor areas already receive all of those things but it hasn't reduced crime a bit." Based on what? Where did you get this information? How many urban centers did you look at? Where's the data? You make quite a claim there and then link to a website which itself provides no actual evidence other than "many studies say." And no offense if you're a student there, but I'm not going to accept carte blanche what some FSU professor has to say about social issues like this without some kind of substantiation - ESPECIALLY if that person is involved in criminology (versus, say, sociology or another field that actually looks at things like this). The topic is too politically contentious for me to trust sources of authority in that way. Again, where's the data? -You're correct that social programs do exist, but can people get to them? Are they adequate and efficacious (i.e., do they actually do any good)? I'm in a major US city (one of the top 5 largest) in a state that is generally considered to be "liberal." I also happen to be a healthcare provider in an area that is racked with poverty. I can tell you from first-hand experience that the resources these people are offered by the city/county/state are pathetic and sorely lacking. As an example, the poor can get "free" medical care and medications at the large county hospital, but how can they possibly do that when it takes 2+ hours to get there by mass transit? At present, people that need meds are told to go to the county hospital and wait at the pharmacy starting at 7am and going until 5pm until their prescription is ready. There is no mechanism for dropping off and picking up prescriptions. You MUST drop your prescription off in person, and you MUST pick it up in person. If you're not there by 8-9am, the likelihood that you're getting your meds that day are next to zero. Even if these people do want to come to clinic, are they supposed to miss work for that? What if they can't afford to miss the wages they would've earned during that time? What do you say to the people that don't live within 15-20 blocks of a grocery store that provides food other than processed, manufactured crap a la chips, Twinkies, and sodas? The point here is that poverty is a multifactorial problem that cannot be pinned on one issue, be it education, employment opportunity, health, etc.. All of these things coalesce to enable or hold back poverty. Your analysis doesn't even discuss these other things - things which, I would argue, are substantially more important to one's socioeconomic status than education alone. I'm more than willing to entertain the claims you make, but you have to show us the primary data. Otherwise your claim is nothing more than that - a claim.
uh...I live in the poorest congressional district in America, the South Bronx. Poor areas dont just "already receive all of those things." I just want to point that out. Those things do stop people from committing crimes.
If you ever had to talk to a person in a situation where crime is the only means of accessing money, the means of survival in this society, maybe your opinion would change. Perhaps its worth considering exactly whats happening in people's lives where crime is legitimately viewed as the best alternative. I agree on the point about college. Currently, I am of the opinion that its a waste if you arent a STEM major and certain branches of the arts.
> Poor areas dont just "already receive all of those things." Yes they do, they're just not taken full advantage of. >Those things do stop people from committing crimes. Evidence shows they do now. > If you ever had to talk to a person in a situation where crime is the only means of accessing money, the means of survival in this society, maybe your opinion would change. Crime is not the only means for accessing money, they may feel it is, but again there is no empirical link between poverty and crime, however there may be a link between crime and poverty. That is to say people may be impoverished because they are criminal. In any case, there is no excuse for committing a crime especially when there are so many social institutions in place for you. There is a link to dense urban populations and crime however. But I think researchers just use that as a code word for black people as the same results can't be found in majority white areas.
Really show us a paper. I will apply my it is probably racism to say that the over policing and incarceration of black folks leads to more poverty.no empirical link between poverty and crime, however there may be a link between crime and poverty.
I already posted a paper. And are black neighborhoods over policed or are they policed because blacks are more criminal? Criminologists will be the first to tell you that blacks are simply more criminal. http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-statistics-of-black-on-white-violence-with-links-and-mathematical-extrapolation-formulas http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/time-young-black-men-murder-14-times-more-than-young-white-men/ http://www.wnd.com/2001/03/8380/ Are federal statistics made up because of racism?
Are any of your actions because of racism? If so why not theirs?