urbanSTL

framer wrote:^^Arch, you're right, of course; sometimes even kids from the "best" families go bad. I'm just tired of people passing the blame and looking for complicated excuses. I'm more of an Occam's Razor kind of a guy.

The people on the bottom in every time, in every place, and in every society with which I've had any experience at all have always shown less inclination to follow the rules established by those at the top. Not passing judgment on the rules themselves. Some are clearly good; don't kill your neighbor; some are probably a bit more silly; don't cross the street against the light; most are probably somewhere in between. But rules are passed by people with power in a society. (Kind of the only way to do it. Axiomatic, you might say.) And people who feel powerless might have less inclination to care about those rules. They can't change them, so if they're an inconvenience or detriment . . . why bother with them? Given crime both petty and serious happens everywhere and always, and given that it always seems to happen more often in those dispossessed communities, and further, that there's a wide variety of different family and societal systems between Ancient Rome, Modern Vietnam, and Victorian England, might it be that any explanation that looks solely to that system for explanation is not, in fact, the simplest possible solution? Could there not, in fact, be some degree of commonality to the causes of visually and situationally similar problems in different times and places? I'm all in favor of Occam's Razor. It's a great tool. But even the simplest possible explanation to a problem in a complex system can be rather complicated. When a plane crashes it's not usually as simple as "this bolt broke." There's usually more to it. (If nothing else there's at the least rather complicated reason that the bolt was insufficient to the task, even though the designers thought it would be, since aerospace engineers often ride their own creations and don't like dying any more than the rest of us.) So saying "the bolt broke" can be, even if true, misleading. If you think the problem occurred because the bolt broke you might simply try to make a stronger bolt and fail to look at what was causing the stress. Maybe it's not possible to make a stronger bolt, or put one in that spot. But you still need to find a way to make the plane fly. And planes are a lot simpler than societies. Families are themselves a complex system. Saying "the family broke" can be misleading, even if it's true. It's worth asking why and what we can do to strengthen families, or what we can do to spread the load so it's not all on a single bolt . . . or family. After all, we all have to ride this society together.

St.Louis1764 wrote:I was reading this very article last night.
I would like to say how dumb are you to say that its not the parents fault? I mean really its not the parents fault? Then who fault is it? The teachers city leaders others etc?
We all have a responsibility and if you have kids then thats your responsibility to take care of your children..
Crime has nothing to do with race nor does age we all could commit a crime if we actually want to however its not even worth it theres so much out there to be discovered..
Anyways its very reckless to say its not the parents fault but put the blame on others...

In some respects, it is the parent's fault - and in others - certainly not. How many times did you do something contrary to the way you were reared? How many times did you get into trouble as a child/teen/young adult/adult and it disappointed your parent(s)?

Why do some children from the same household stay out of trouble while others from the same household go astray?

It is easy to point to parents - especially if you DON'T KNOW or are making judgments how the child(ren) was(were) raised. A person with an objective frame of mind - particularly if you have worked professionally with families, teens and children as I do - knows that children/teens/young adults are capable of making decisions outside of the way they were reared.

Again, a parent/caretaker is responsible for providing a basic foundation for their children. But if a teen goes and robs a convenience store or burglarizes a home with some friends after school - it is not the parent's fault. The blame should go to the perp with consequences as deemed necessary. If a kid decides to hide their synthetic drug use/experimentation - it is not the fault of the parent. I could go on and on. I don't believe the right-wing bullsh*t that everything is the parent's fault - especially after being in the trenches professionally and encountering such issues first hand with families, teens, friends (with their children), etc. that I've counseled.

It's too simplistic and myopic to blame parents for everything gone awry with their child - especially if you are not doing the work.

A good foundation SHOULD start at home - for sure. But when there are clear problems and breakdown for portions of society, it is up to those of us who care to help society along. I agree with Anne McCullough. It's not always the parent's fault. It's not always the children's fault. And our cities/government could do more to support families and children who are struggling with resources and sustenance.

Although I am not opposed to bootstrapping, we would all be better off over the long-term by thrusting resources into stablizing struggling communities - regardless of where they exist.

Occam's Razor is a cute toy of an organizing principle. Unfortunately it doesn't apply to complex systems, and society is about as complex a system as you can get.

Body Cameras Are Betraying Their Promise
They’re not transparent. They’re not independent. They’re not even turned on when they should be.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/a ... ul/502421/

Poor neighborhoods are basically factories built by society to manufacture crime. And then society complains about all the crime. Conservatives say "it's not the environment, it's personal responsibility!" and then when you ask why some environments create far more criminals than others they say "it's the parents!" as if parents are people with perfect agency and not grown-up children from those same environments.

To say that crime happens because individuals behave badly is like saying the tide happens because the water goes up and down. It's a perfectly correct non-answer.

I think it's kind of a chicken-egg thing. On one hand, the lack of economic development and educational opportunities in the city of St. Louis causes many of these problems, but these problems are also a major deterrent to most people (regardless of race, socioeconomic standing etc.) from living or doing business in the city. I think we need real reform in St. Louis on so many levels or these problems will continue to harm the quality of life and perception of the city as a whole, which has real life consequences.

Obviously, stop and frisk is a very sticky subject. For one, it will almost certainly be used to harass any black male of a certain age, whether they are a "criminal" or not. This alone makes it dangerous. The fact is we "DO" have some racist police officers and they "WOULD" use it as an excuse to harass any and every black male they come across, which is why it was met with so much backlash in NYC. On the other hand, we simply cant let the criminal element run rampant and wild throughout the city of St. Louis and region. White people are up in arms when an "innocent" white person gets beat up by a black "mob", just like black folks are up in arms when an "unarmed" black man gets gunned down by a white "cop". The fact remains, the majority of people murdered, robbed, and assaulted in the city of St. Louis live in impoverished, Afro-American neighborhoods and were likely involved in illegal activity. What is truly sad is that there are open air drug markets, rolling gun battles, armed robberies, etc. throughout the city of St. Louis everyday and somehow the police can never catch the perpetrators. The people who suffer the most are the children who get hit by stray bullets, the family that is forced to leave North St. Louis because they are constantly getting their house broken into, the elderly person who is scared to walk to church because gangbangers are hanging on the corners, and the people who are trapped in food deserts because no grocery store will open in a neighborhood with open air drug markets. How do we continue to let this happen in St. Louis? Many cities are starting to clean up their act, some even "blacker" and "poorer" than St. Louis. It truly is a shame. Everybody talks about Chicago, but if we had their murder rate we would have about 50 murders/year, if they had ours they would have about 1500 murders/year.

goat314 wrote:How do we continue to let this happen in St. Louis?

the eternal question is how do we stop it? the two big problems are drugs and poverty, which the cartels exploit to move the drugs. i do wonder sometimes if some segment of the STLPD isn't involved in organized crime as well. i still think it's absolutely absurd that they were never "able" to catch the f*ckers that were stealing band equipment from tour vans for years. whatever happened with that? haven't heard anything in a while.

Isn't stop and frisk supposed to get guns of the street? Carrying guns is legal in Missouri, so what would cops be trying to accomplish?

urban_dilettante wrote: the eternal question is how do we stop it? the two big problems are drugs and poverty, which the cartels exploit to move the drugs.

Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

^ not sure that would be enough on its own, though.

‘Do Not Resist': A chilling look at the normalization of warrior cops
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 793decb5e5

MarkHaversham wrote: Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

I think this is the biggest misconception about poverty. Obviously money is a big factor. But poverty is more than just lack of physical resources. A big component is the shame and embarrassment due to the inability to take care of yourself and your family. It's also about a lack of opportunity, and being burdened with feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness. Poverty robs people of their sense of worth.

Basically, giving people gobs of money isn't going to fix the root of the problem

MarkHaversham wrote:Isn't stop and frisk supposed to get guns of the street? Carrying guns is legal in Missouri, so what would cops be trying to accomplish?

urban_dilettante wrote: the eternal question is how do we stop it? the two big problems are drugs and poverty, which the cartels exploit to move the drugs.

Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

Or pay to train people then pay them to do infrastructure work that society needs, as I suggested at the end of my piece here.

http://www.stlstrong.org/urbanreducatio ... anwindfall

In St Louis, it would pay for itself in increased property values.

imthewiz wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote: Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

I think this is the biggest misconception about poverty. Obviously money is a big factor. But poverty is more than just lack of physical resources. A big component is the shame and embarrassment due to the inability to take care of yourself and your family. It's also about a lack of opportunity, and being burdened with feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness. Poverty robs people of their sense of worth.

Basically, giving people gobs of money isn't going to fix the root of the problem

But the inability to care for your family and lack of opportunity is also due to lack of physical resources. So, yeah, money will basically fix the problem.

gary kreie wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote: Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

Or pay to train people then pay them to do infrastructure work that society needs, as I suggested at the end of my piece here.

http://www.stlstrong.org/urbanreducatio ... anwindfall

In St Louis, it would pay for itself in increased property values.

Sure, if there were hundreds of millions to spend. Good luck getting that budget passed.

As you read, I proposed raising the money with a property tax factor of 0.0023 on average per year for 12 years for all metro area homes, since their property values would go up by 20 times that on average, based on other Midwest cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey, you sold me, I just don't think there's much chance of gaining traction more broadly.

onecity wrote:The city needs to adopt more policies that make it harder to concentrate poverty. Only X percent of properties on any given block can be rentals. Only X% of rentals can accept section 8. All rental properties must be maintained to a very high standard (such that it drives up minimum rent) or they are shut down, levied with huge fines. Etcetera.

You need to create or subsidize affordable housing elsewhere to make up the difference, otherwise you're just creating piles of homeless people.

MarkHaversham wrote:

imthewiz wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote: Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

I think this is the biggest misconception about poverty. Obviously money is a big factor. But poverty is more than just lack of physical resources. A big component is the shame and embarrassment due to the inability to take care of yourself and your family. It's also about a lack of opportunity, and being burdened with feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness. Poverty robs people of their sense of worth.

Basically, giving people gobs of money isn't going to fix the root of the problem

But the inability to care for your family and lack of opportunity is also due to lack of physical resources. So, yeah, money will basically fix the problem.

gary kreie wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote: Well, the easiest way to eliminate poverty is to give people money, but that's politically infeasible and probably beyond the city's resources to do on its own.

Or pay to train people then pay them to do infrastructure work that society needs, as I suggested at the end of my piece here.

http://www.stlstrong.org/urbanreducatio ... anwindfall

In St Louis, it would pay for itself in increased property values.

Sure, if there were hundreds of millions to spend. Good luck getting that budget passed.

According to BetterTogether, we overspend by about $750M every year on governance between the City and County. Couldn't that money, in an event where we merge, be allocated for ideas like Gary's?

Transit, infrastructure, clean energy, parks, maybe tax credits for modernizing the many outdated 50's levittown homes throughout the county?

A guy can dream, I gotta believe St. Louis can move itself ahead.

onecity wrote:The city needs to adopt more policies that make it harder to concentrate poverty. Only X percent of properties on any given block can be rentals. Only X% of rentals can accept section 8. All rental properties must be maintained to a very high standard (such that it drives up minimum rent) or they are shut down, levied with huge fines. Etcetera.

The city? No the region.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Letter to the Editor in the Post today re the Gravios Park gang attacks.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/ma ... a974f.html

Anne McCullough's comment was silly. the parents are responsible to an extent. society is also responsible to an extent. but it's laughable that Ms. Hoerr is going to lecture the Cherokee Street business owners on allowing neighborhoods to crumble. for *****'s sake, they're the reason the neighborhood is coming back, and they're actually making an effort to INCLUDE the existing neighbors and neighborhood kids rather than displace them. I'm sure Ms. Hoerr is proud that she has an opinion, but it's one that wasn't worth the writing or the reading.

Another letter in the Post today pointing out the absurdness of blaming everyone except those directly responsible:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/ma ... 1180e.html

While here is the Post's editorial placing the blame on poverty:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/co ... 1b556.html

Nice.