Is Covid a Death Tax on Stupidity?

Yes…we know. Everyone already said this!

I don’t watch conservative media as much as I watch left leaning media because it’s more widely available. Give me a break. Not everyone is a brain wash partisan hack. People can see how these cities ran by democrats for decades have become. You cant blame it on it’s just part and parcel of a city. Be the adult and open your eyes to these places.

Then why start parroting their talking points. The Democrat cities ramped up with Trump this summer and the protests. Right around the same time you started posting this nonsense. Coincidence? I think not.

I’ve been to these places. Walked all around San Francisco. Very clean, nice city.

I’ve always said this. Because it’s true. You don’t know me IRL buddy. Stop trying to make up shit.

It’s not. I’ve been back, the problem has become worse. There are nicer areas than some. My sister lives in LA, I visit her and she says it’s become worse. She would leave if she didn’t work in Hollywood.

No, it isn’t. I used to work at a startup that was originally based near Twitter HQ. The entire Market Street area was a shithole. Some of our employees didn’t feel safe, and one of our biggest investors commented on the environment every time he’d visit the office. Finally, we relocated to San Mateo.

I personally know people who have been mugged by thugs, harangued by junkies looking for money, had their cars broken into, etc. in broad daylight in parts of SF that are home to many companies. So telling me that things well-documented in the media and that anybody who has lived or spent time there knows to be true is, well, :roll_eyes:.

1 Like

San Francisco is off the rocker liberal. My sisters are both Democrats and they said they vote like Republicans there.

2 Likes

Not it’s not. None of the data backs a causation between party affiliation and crime. I don’t need to know you IRL to know you’re full of :poop:. Not to mention, I can literally search when you started parroting this stuff.

You know you don’t have an argument when your strongest evidence is my sister, aunt, uncle said so…

Statistical analysis does not bear out your conclusion. Sorry you’re wrong.

www.nber.org › system › filesPDF
Do Political Parties Matter? Evidence from US Cities - NBER

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w13535/w13535.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiZne6WmpftAhU1NKYKHbWAD-4QFjABegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw3RIIVumliL9lyuRT5czc5P&cshid=1606084880535

we find no evidence of a strong partisan influence on the size of city government, the
allocation of local public spending across important functions, or on property or violent crime rates.
These conclusions depend critically on controlling for the endogeneity of which party wins the
mayor’s office with a regression discontinuity design that relies on the quasi-experimental variation
from closely contested races.
That partisanship does not always dominate suggests that future research in this area

Go ahead and search then, I talk about situations most relevant to current politics, just like you. I know it’s really hard for you to grasp some people aren’t looking at everything so biased like yourself, and they are capable of thinking outside of party loyalty. But try?

I looked at the study, it only collected data from up to 2007. If you look at data in let’s say SF to be specific, crime rates have held steady with slight dips during the recession and a significant rise again post recession. This is a stark contrast with crime rates steadily falling throughout the US all during this time. So I wonder if the approach would find the same result.

Although it’s worth noting

as OLS estimates of specifications controlling for a host of local traits indicate that a city which elected a Democrat in the last mayoral election spends 7% more per capita, raises 8% more per capita in taxes, and employs 8% more public workers per capita than an otherwise equivalent city
that elected a Republican. Although OLS estimates find no partisan differences in the allocation of those resources across functions such as police, fire, and parks and recreation, they do indicate that cities led by a Democrat mayor have higher violent and property crime rates.

They decided another approach was more credible. I’m not exactly sure why it’s more credible. They didn’t seem to give a reason that I found.

I’m actually taking a course on econometrics right now, pretty cool to see that I can actually read this study. :smiley:

You seem to look at everything through libertarian :dark_sunglasses:. You see me as biased and I see you as biased so I guess we’re even. How about you try and I’ll try too? :wink:

The only reason I am loyal to one party over another is because the GOP has no policy. They are a cult of personality. I don’t even know what they stand for…tax cuts? Conservative judges? All of your arguments are knocking democrats with no proposed solutions. Same as Trump. Same as RBE in his complacence that nothing can be done at the federal level to control the virus. If we were in Europe, I would have no problem supporting those on the other side. Problem is everyone on that side in our country have lost all common sense of decency and don’t really stand for anything.

My ideas are always changing, I’m open to new ideas if they make sense to me. I reject old ideas that no longer make sense to me. This is why I vote across party lines, even during this general election. I did not vote GOP all across, though admittedly, I did vote mostly GOP and 3rd party this time around as I’m not pleased with the Dems this last 4 years.

If you want solutions, just ask!

Let’s stick with SF since we are on the topic, and it’s probably one of the worst right now. The city is very generous, I was actually applauding some of the things they did. They offer homeless $520 a month, free transit tickets, free shelter, and food stamps, needle exchanges. (I’m not against needle exchanges, but it’s not a viable solution unless the end goal is rehabilitation.)

All of which I truly applaud, they wanted to be kind and generous. But it isn’t working, it’s making it worse. A lot worse. It’s the Cobra effect. It turns out, homeless and drug addicts will go there if you offer these things. And most of the homeless seem to be drug addicts.

SF has a tough choice, IMO the solution is jail or rehab. They clearly have enough resources to give out 520 a month, they should use this money for rehab. It’s not the perfect solution, but it’s better than what they’re doing now. It’s so bad that you can not leave anything in your car in SF now, it’s one of the highest rising crime rates with people breaking into cars these days.

Regulations preventing buildings that makes sense providing more housing also hurt the city and prevent any homeless from getting off the street. I get that people want to keep the city the same…but it’s really causing a problem. I’m not saying to tear it all down, but allow more surgical approaches to certain places to build to alleviate the problem. Housing is too damn expensive, some of these buildings in SF are millions of dollars that I would not pay half a million for.

1 Like

You’re not running for office. I’m referring to the GOP. It’s a constant blame game against Democrats for everything. Riots… because democrats. Forest fires…because democrats. They are in power and have done nothing. So I’m supposed to believe that electing them again will solve this? They had 4 years and did nothing for healthcare, tanked the economy and bungled the virus response. The only policy I have heard from Republicans for years is pushing through judges and tax cuts. Roe V. Wade doesn’t bother me and I want our government funded to provide basic services. So yes I am biased against the GOP and will be until they disassociate themselves from Trump and actually stand for something other than Democrats are terrible.

And I can say the Dem have done nothing but try to get rid of Trump, that’s not enough for me to vote for them. I will vote for them once they start making policies that make sense to me again, they did not.

Trump was an existential threat. It was impossible to get anything done with him around. And the democrats did pass plenty of laws to help people but the grim reaper got in the way. So saying they did nothing is not true either.

I think once people see what it’s like to return to sanity for four years they’ll have a good case study of what works and what doesn’t. I have a feeling Biden will do far better to bring stability and not sew chaos or constantly blame the other side. As he said, he is president for all Americans and that will be refreshing for many people. Those that cling on to hyper-partisanship will just look like sore losers incapable of bringing any solutions.

So like the Democrats for the past 4 years?

The US is not going to come together under Biden. It will be nice to be done with Trump’s insanity, but that’s about all we’ll get. And when his healing powers don’t work as he expected and he comes under pressure, it’s possible we’ll be seeing a lot of Mean Joe.

2 Likes

Yup, why they lost my vote after voting for them previously.

Right here. Of course you will use the argument “I didn’t say the word ‘Democrat’ when I replied to the comment saying (sarcastically) ‘Democrats cities or Democrat states cause all the problems’ so it doesn’t count.”

1 Like

Yeah, I said many places are. You’ve taken it past that. You two are the ones to bring that up. I haven’t before you guys did :roll_eyes:

I suspect he’s going to find himself waaaay in over his head. I could be wrong, but he strikes me as a middle-manager type who can do a competent job in a middle-manager position where stuff is basically rolling along OK and he just needs to shuffle his people into the right positions, wind up the big key in the backs, and let them get on with things. He’s not a visionary, he’s not a mover-and-shaker, and he’s not the kind of man who can hold a big plan together when the world is turning to shit around his ankles.

It’s hard to get kind, well-meaning, well-brought-up people to understand that heroin addicts are not thinking like rational human beings, and that by far the most humane solution is to march them off to rehab by force and keep them there until they come to their senses - which may be a very long time. They are beyond any form of self-help, so throwing money etc at them does no good at all.

Marching people off to rehab requires money. That’s a socialist solution. Republican solution would be to let the free market handle it. Eventually private businesses will be fed up and institute their own measures to clean up the city and charity will take care of the addicts. As always with Republican/Libertarian solutions, you’ll have to wait for shit and needles to be all over every street or 1M dead from Covid, before the free market kicks in and saves us all.

Aiyo. Stop putting labels on things and think about what’s likely to work, what has worked in the past, and what governments are (supposedly) for. If you want private individuals to sort this out, then the most likely outcome is that you’ll get roving bands of gangs with guns, solving the problem in the simplest and cheapest way possible. That’s what happens, I understand, in certain South American cities where the government shirks its responsibilities. Nobody wants that, not even the people who hire the gangs.

In any case, if rehab costs money, then the addicts can pay for it once they’ve recovered. Everything costs money. That in itself is never an argument for not doing something.

So does leaving them on the street to do their thing. Just decide where you want to spend the money - making things worse, or making things better.

1 Like