Hacker News Reader

Comment by setgree | Hacker News Reader

So I'm not the OP, but I found this letter interesting because I think it's a nice illustration of ways in which so-called 'liberal' policies drive some people to become more conservative.

Politics is about perception, and whether or not a well-identified paper finds a causal link from bond policies to crime is kind of neither here nor there. His anecdotal evidence (gunfire within earshot, drug-dealing behind his house) suffices for him. It's really hard to argue with that kind of reasoning by pointing to abstractions, i.e. a statistical model.

Basically when I see even faint signs of folks' favoring more authoritarian policies (e.g. being "tough on crime,") I want us to notice those signs, and think hard about how to keep that instinct from getting a full head of steam.

View on HN

If there’s a workable progressive solution to degraded qualify of life due to crime, including nonviolent crime—where is it working? SF? Portland? Chicago? DC? NYC?

It’s not like there are republicans in any of these places, so what’s the issue?

The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.

The issue is that the people in power are not progressives, or have not gotten full support and the time needed to enact change. Establishment Democrats are just as pro-punishment as Republicans; take the President’s history as a legislator. NYC is literally run by a cop. Trolls started blaming the progressive mayor of Chicago for crime before he even took office. LAPD contains a literal gang. The system progressives want to change is too deeply rooted to change in just an election.

I don’t know if progressive policies are the answer to everything, but we’ve steadily been throwing money in the other direction so consider whether that strategy is a failure.

Reply to sibling: lol, Lightfoot is not a progressive. Toni Preckwinkle was the progressive candidate. Anyone can claim the label, but if the teacher’s union hates you and you’re a former prosecutor, you might not be a progressive.

I specifically did not say to vote more, but that an election is not enough. It takes constant public pressure, and of course good strategy to effect change. Even if Lightfoot really did want to reform the CPD, it’s too powerful to face without a collective effort focused on small, achievable policy to start. I respect the outsiders, but she was not very political. Maybe Johnson, as a former organizer, will do better.

Was Lori Lightfoot not a progressive? How long are we going to have to just vote harder before we start seeing some results, somewhere?

No true progressives, because if they were true progressives there would be progress!

Wonderful logic.

> If there’s a workable progressive solution to degraded qualify of life due to crime, including nonviolent crime

Here's a workable solution: stop spending over 3x what China does on "defense" and maintaining military bases all over the world and spend that money on homelessness, education, infrastructure, and jobs programs to get our middle class back.

I always found this chart interesting:

https://www.longtermtrends.net/us-debt-to-gdp/

especially when you look at it from the perspective of the drastically lower taxes rates of the 80s.

So you’re saying is that progressives mayors have no ability to effect positive change and if we want livable cities we shouldn’t bother voting for them?

this pudding?

https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-two-decade-red-state-mur...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35915958

not saying things don't need fixing, but the idea there's a blue solution or a red solution flies in the face of history and data.

One problem is the richer you are the easier it is to flee the problems and let someone else clean up the mess. But it cant be government or cost any taxes...

I genuinely don’t know if progressive politicians care about my quality of life concerns. If they don’t even consider them real problems, it’s highly unlikely they’ll fix them.

We're stuck with a bad choice between authoritarian right and authoritarian left these days.

One side is 'tough on crime', the other is 'tough on speech'. As a disillusioned lefty, and thankfully not in the US, one of these scares me more than the other.

aka squeaky wheel gets the grease

Reply on news.ycombinator.com