Hacker News Reader

Comment by sammalloy | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Note that you swapped out the word "cities" with "states". You can disagree with the premise of the article all you want, but the highest crime cities are mostly run by Democrats, mostly. When you choose where to live, you typically pick the city, or the neighborhood, not the state.

That being said, I have no plans to move to Alaska...

> the highest crime cities are mostly run by Democrats, mostly

Aren't most big cities run by Democrats, regardless of crime rate?

States have more power, the variable differences between rural and urban offer a much clearer picture of what's actually happening beyond the population differences.

So I disagree with your framing, it's fair to focus on states here.

Large cities frequently have higher crime rates than smaller cities. The fact that democrats are popular in large cities creates this perception.

Blue cities in red states have high crime—St. Louis, Atlanta, New Orleans, etc. Red state suburbs and rural areas are safe.

In other words, with higher density comes more crime. Blue and red have zero to do with it.

Are there more blues or reds in cities? I'm not talking about crips or bloods...

It doesn't seem they are talking at the state level at all, but at the city level. Even cities in red states may actually be blue. For example, they laude Tampa, which has a totally blue city council.

Violent crime isn't limited to murder. Wikipedia has very nice charts and lists for both violent crime rate and murder rate. The results are not clearly biased to any political camp but do trend by poverty and density.

"The results are not clearly biased to any political camp but do trend by poverty and density."

Here is the important part. Too many people want to jump into the red/blue yelling match instead of investigating the socioeconomic factors.

Yes, let’s investigate it:

"Republican-leaning red states tend to have less wealth and receive more federal government funds than they pay…Policy choices may partially explain this relationship…"A really conservative state might choose to tax itself at a lower rate, which means by default, they can give fewer state-funded services… "That can exacerbate the situation.”

Blue states are subsidizing red states, red states that have socioeconomic problems largely caused by red state policies.

Sure, fewer services can be one of the many socioeconomic factors. And of course the states with the highest per capita income (more industrialized blue states) end up providing the bulk of the funding.

But as others have said, this divide is not that clear cut. There are states with higher murder rates that are Democrat and states with lower rates that are Republican. Of course the definition of what category a state falls in is also up for debate (presidential vote, governor, legislature, combination?).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr...

"socioeconomic problems largely caused by red state policies."

Can you elaborate? It seems a lot of the issue with economics and opportunities is not just something that can be legislated away. You can see a lot of this is geographically concentrated looking at the county level rates and likely has a historical basis, such as how the south has been a primary sector producer while the north was a secondary sector producer. In the transition to a tertiary sector economy, it's pretty obvious which group gets left behind.

So is DC a "red state"? Why does California have insane crime? What is going on in Chicago? Why is most of the midwest, which leans quite red, the safest part of the country alongside the very blue upper eastcoast?

California was the biggest receiver of federal funds for a long, long time. It does not seem to have made a difference positively or negatively in it's violent crime rate. Texas has always paid more to the Fed than received, yet we have our own very violent cities (and some of the safest ones).

Of the ten most dangerous US states in 2023 (Alaska, New Mexico, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, Michigan), seven are red states.

So?

By your own admission, intentionally excluding DC, red states don't lock out blue states for the most violence.

What do Alaska and New Mexico have in common that makes them such dangerous places? It doesn't seem like it's their politics.

Utah, a deeply red state, is one of the ten safest states. Politically Utah looks a lot more like that deep south than Vermont, another extremely safe state.

"in 2023"

You mean 2022? 2023 data would be incomplete. Often times it takes 12-18 months from year end for the data to be compiled and verified.

And what does your comment add to the conversation anyways?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com