See the comment above where I specifically showed that at least in nyc that’s not even remotely true.

Okay seriously why would you link to an income map from 2007 in good faith?

Here’s a map with more recent data that’s broken down in a more visually easy to read way (at least for the purpose of verifying what you’re trying to say).

So it says right there that the median household income in the city was $69k in 2019 and on the map I linked, that income falls under the second lowest income band which is the second darkest blue.

It shows that the poorest areas in the city voted for both parties and it can better be broken down by demographic. Looking at Brooklyn, ENY, most of Crown Heights and Flatbush are deep blue on the electoral map and also some of the poorest areas in the city. Similarly, Williamsburg, that lil dot in Crown Heights and Borough Park are deep red on the electoral map and also some of the poorest areas in the city.

Meanwhile, that deep red at the bottom of SI is also one of the wealthiest parts of the city (admittedly the least wealthy of the wealthy people but still much higher than the median). The tip of Rockaway is also right behind SI in terms of wealth. Bergen Beach and Howard Beach are also markedly wealthier than the areas they’re directly next to and have incomes higher than median.

The only thing that the deep red nyc areas have in common across them is how markedly white they are.

Ranking the top 10 nyc neighborhoods by white population, those deep red areas are #2, 4, 5, 7 and 8.

For the record, the #1, 3, 6, 9 and 10 whitest neighborhoods (which are all blue on the election map) have much bigger populations of people of color than the whitest neighborhoods who voted red.

I’ve worked with a ton of kids with varying backgrounds and let me tell ya, they don’t want to read books encouraging people to dislike or disrespect others because of their traits.

That would be purely for the adults.

Kids ask too many questions to just accept the idea that it’s okay to call someone something they specified they don’t want to be called.

So many of my greatest childhood memories were in or around the three nearest local BPL branches.

I got tutoring, activities, computer access (when home internet access was still newish for poor people), free books every week of the summer and free tickets for other nyc institutions.

All of that in addition to a magical amount of books from all over the world. Like my first encounter with the fact that colorism exists everywhere was when I was like 12 years old and picked up a Peach Girl manga randomly from the shelves. That’s wild!

Even more recently while doing childcare, the BPL was a destination. They have a massive amount of resources available to local residents and many local residents utilize them. They still give out free books and tbh their events have only gotten better.

People complaining about them expanding their services to others and implying it’s at some great detriment to local residents, are very unfamiliar with just how much the Brooklyn public library does. (And probably how interlibrary loans work)

I’m gonna get a bit nerdy because social science is my field (which feels really weird to say). There’s been a focus on quantitative statistical methods in social science to “legitimize” the research and it’s been a disservice.

Basically, social science journals prioritize publishing this kind of research, so schools prioritize teaching these particular research methods. It becomes less about actually trying to explain the world around us as a complex interconnected beast than about isolating one particular issue, disregarding the complexities (because that’s too difficult to calculate) and trying to use stats to make an argument.

In the article linked, the professors do exactly that and simply dismiss the complexities of policing in the US because it fucks up their models and their arguments.

Thanks for linking this!

I also looked into the article and I saw an old professor of mine (who literally wrote one of the most cited recent books on criminal justice AND has extensive experience working with people in Rikers) called their ideas nonsense and a waste of resources.

They’re misquoting their favorite “source”. They do it every day.

The study was not testing for poverty as a root cause of violence, poverty was a variable that they considered in relation to what they were actually testing.

The source did say that exposure to violence is a strong predictor for violent offending which is common knowledge. It did not say that being tougher on crime is a solution at all.

Honestly even the source identified in their results the effects of poverty/neighborhood disarray on violent offending and said this:

“As expected, youth who reported higher levels of ETV (exposure to violence) and more perceptions of police bias also reported higher levels of CoS (code of the street/something that they said mediates the relationship between ETV and violent offending). In addition, youth who lived in neighbor- hoods with higher levels of disorder and in counties with more poverty reported higher CoS.”

The article ends by saying we can’t just solve this issue by reacting to exposure to violence after the fact, we have to prevent the violence from happening overall.

The don’t say how in the article, but as arresting/jailing people/reinstating cash bail are all reactions to exposure to violence, I’d bet money that’s making sure there’s a social safety net to help BEFORE a crime is committed is a much better option.

Oh don’t even get me started on when they try to bring up POC and the issues we face as if it supports their beliefs.

So many white redditors cosplaying care about poc in an attempt to shut down conversations about justice. They’re doing it in this thread right now.

They were all over the last article about a person dying at Rikers insinuating (based on nothing but their own biases) that the person was killed by another inmate.

All of these people think that sprinkling in some vaguely liberal-sounding buzzwords is enough to conceal the fascism inherent in their beliefs.

It’s a half measure that is still so much better than literally nothing.

We can acknowledge wins and still expect better. This country has had amnesties before, at the very least they could do it again to clear backlogs.

The article itself links to NYS law that specifically says that when an arrest for a bench warrant is made, the person needs to be brought before a judge without delay.

So no, that’s not how this works at all.