Why should I vote Republican?

[Smash255]

Dazzleman while Giukiani does deserve some of the credit for the reduction in crime in NYC, keep in mind that during the same span crime & violence nationally also dropped sharply (the drop was greater in NYC than other areas) but nationally throughout the mid to late 90's crime dropped quite a bit nationwide as well.

[Smash255]

Dazzleman while Giukiani does deserve some of the credit for the reduction in crime in NYC, keep in mind that during the same span crime & violence nationally also dropped sharply (the drop was greater in NYC than other areas) but nationally throughout the mid to late 90's crime dropped quite a bit nationwide as well.

Nationwide crime didn't drop anywhere near as much as it did in NYC.  In NYC, crime was down about 60% within 4 years of Giuliani becoming mayor.  The nationwide drop was nowhere near this magnitude.

This debate is important because we need to know how to keep crime down.  I believe that in NYC, the Democrats would not be capable of keeping crime down, because they are heavily dependent for votes on a constituency that opposes effective anti-crime policies, and no Democratic mayor would be able to stand up to that constituency.  The result would be that, like under Dinkins, the police would be handcuffed, in the name of "tolerance" and "understanding" and the criminals would run the streets once again.

Rudy does deserve some of the credit no question, however saying criminals would "run the streets again" I think is a bit absurd.  As I said crime was also down on a national level, it was also down by even more in NYC, no question Rudy deserves some of that credit.  However part of the reason is also economically driven.  The biggest drops in crime in NYC tend to happen in the higher crime neighborhoods.  When crime was at its worst in NYC in the late 80's & early 90's  the economy was pretty lousy, especially in the high crime inner city neighborhoods.  In the 90's as crime rates decreased keep in mind that the economy was getting better on a national level, and was getting much better in many of the inner city neighborhoods.  Granted the economy there still wasn't all that good, and the level of poverty was still rather high, but their were vast improvments in the poverty rates & overall economic conditions in many of these areas.

[Smash255]

Dazzleman while Giukiani does deserve some of the credit for the reduction in crime in NYC, keep in mind that during the same span crime & violence nationally also dropped sharply (the drop was greater in NYC than other areas) but nationally throughout the mid to late 90's crime dropped quite a bit nationwide as well.

Nationwide crime didn't drop anywhere near as much as it did in NYC.  In NYC, crime was down about 60% within 4 years of Giuliani becoming mayor.  The nationwide drop was nowhere near this magnitude.

This debate is important because we need to know how to keep crime down.  I believe that in NYC, the Democrats would not be capable of keeping crime down, because they are heavily dependent for votes on a constituency that opposes effective anti-crime policies, and no Democratic mayor would be able to stand up to that constituency.  The result would be that, like under Dinkins, the police would be handcuffed, in the name of "tolerance" and "understanding" and the criminals would run the streets once again.

Rudy does deserve some of the credit no question, however saying criminals would "run the streets again" I think is a bit absurd.  As I said crime was also down on a national level, it was also down by even more in NYC, no question Rudy deserves some of that credit.  However part of the reason is also economically driven.  The biggest drops in crime in NYC tend to happen in the higher crime neighborhoods.  When crime was at its worst in NYC in the late 80's & early 90's  the economy was pretty lousy, especially in the high crime inner city neighborhoods.  In the 90's as crime rates decreased keep in mind that the economy was getting better on a national level, and was getting much better in many of the inner city neighborhoods.  Granted the economy there still wasn't all that good, and the level of poverty was still rather high, but their were vast improvments in the poverty rates & overall economic conditions in many of these areas.

I don't agree that there's any real link between crime and the state of the economy.  Crime rose for decades whether the economy did well or not.  The economy was booming in the late 1980s as crime went through the roof.  People don't steal, rob and kill because they have financial problems; they do it because they think they can get away with it.

As far the the economy in the late 80's, I was mainly referring to the local economy in many of the higher crime areas of NYC was real bad.  While the national economy got a bit better during the late 80's, the local economy in many of the high crime areas was as bad as the early 80's.  The National economic boom in the late 80's did not have any impact on many of these high crime & inner city areas.  The economic boom during the 90's however, was something that was also felt in the inncer-cities and these areas experienced rather large economic growth as well, something they did not experience in the late 80's.

[Smash255]

As far the the economy in the late 80's, I was mainly referring to the local economy in many of the higher crime areas of NYC was real bad.  While the national economy got a bit better during the late 80's, the local economy in many of the high crime areas was as bad as the early 80's.  The National economic boom in the late 80's did not have any impact on many of these high crime & inner city areas.  The economic boom during the 90's however, was something that was also felt in the inncer-cities and these areas experienced rather large economic growth as well, something they did not experience in the late 80's.

Dude, there was a decades-long trend of increasing crime no matter what was happening with the economy.  Crime increased substantially during the period when the government was spending billions of dollars on urban "improvements."  So I must respectfully reject the connection between poverty/economic conditions and crime. 

More likely, there is an intertwining between the thought processes and patterns that produce long-term intractible poverty, and those that produce criminal activity.  Though all poor people are not criminals, and all criminals are not poor, there is some overlap here.

Money was spent both in the 80's & 90's, I believe more money was spent in the 90's.  Anyway the economy in the inner-cities did NOT improven during the 80s.  Unemployment, poverty artes & whatnot showed little change during this time in many of the high crime areas of NYC.  However during the 90's, the economic recovery in many of these areas was vast.  Unemployment rates (although still high compared to other areas) & poverty artes (although still high compared to other areas) dropped sharply in the inner ciiy parts of NYC during the 1990's.  The differnces from lets say 1998 to 1988 were stark.

During the early 1980's the economy was bad & was getting worse across the country, in the mid & late 1980's the economy improved nationwide as a whole was getting a bit better, but it had no impact on the economy in he inner-cities.  The economic conditions there were still real bad & in some cases got worse.

During the economic boom of the 1990's however the boom expanded into the inner city regions of NYC, as stated earlier poverty rates & unemployment dropped sharply in the 90's not only nationally, but in the inner cities as well, something that did not happen during the 1980's