Submitted by mightyIllusion t3_zpr42b in baltimore
Cunninghams_right t1_j0urlwp wrote
while turnover of businesses is always going to happen, Baltimore city residents spend far too little time thinking about economics. if the city isn't a place people want to live and work, it will die. there is a "survivor bias" with us current residents. we, by nature of still being here, have accepted a certain amount of lawlessness and BS, so we tend to dismiss people's fears and annoyance with such things. however, we aren't the majority case. most people in the US don't want to live with the BS that happens in baltimore and will avoid the city, which includes people who work at large companies and make decisions about where their offices are located. the tax revenue lost by a squeegee kid shooting someone is astronomical. every carjacking is another huge loss. every gang shooting is a huge loss. if we want programs to help folks pull themselves out of poverty, we need tax revenue. it seems like folks are ok with the human tragedies that result from the BS in this city with people shot in carjackings or from squeegee kids, but even if you don't care about the victims of crimes, at least think about the economics of the situation and the revenue the city loses.
as unpopular is law enforcement is, it's a requirement for being a place where people live and work. we need to stop thinking about policing as a 1-dimensional line from "more shitty police or less shitty police" but start thinking about how to have better, more auditable, more effective police combined with evidence-based diversion, bond, and parole programs. the fact that we're not putting up more license plate scanners is a disgrace; that's the kind of police budget item that isn't corrupt. the fact that we won't try out a Tile program for tracking cars is ridiculous considering how little it would cost and how it puts the power in citizens' hands instead of the police's. there are actions we can take, but we're not taking them. we need a sense of urgency and we need a sense of "I'm not sure this will work, but lets give it a try"
mightyIllusion OP t1_j0utexj wrote
> it seems like folks are ok with the human tragedies that result from the BS in this city with people shot in carjackings or from squeegee kids, but even if you don’t care about the victims of crimes
I’m not sure where this idea comes from? People aren’t okay with it, but it’s not something that can be easily curtailed by just “adding more law enforcement” or by having a “sense of urgency” because these problems are systemic to citizens of this city being put down by government malfeasance, redlining, and lack of opportunity resulting from those prior two issues. This requires a large change through education (the schools need improvement, that’s obvious) and government incentive (potentially UBI) to encourage a shift in attitude that will take the course of decades.
lolokaydudewhatever t1_j0uummy wrote
What are some examples of US cities that have successfuly undergone this large change?
PuebloEsNoBueno t1_j0uvhe5 wrote
DC and NYC improved via gentrification.
8bitliving t1_j0vcsvr wrote
Nashville? Atlanta? Pittsburg?
Illustrious_Listen_6 t1_j0vhbd8 wrote
Visited Pittsburgh recently, was very surprised. Beautiful! You could really feel the growth of the city
rockybalBOHa t1_j0vj1um wrote
Pittsburgh's population is dropping faster than Baltimore's. Also has more poverty. However, I do really like Pittsburgh. I say these things only to show that Baltimore isn't as bad as you might think.
lolokaydudewhatever t1_j0vxhhn wrote
Baltimore has 3x+ murder rate, 2x+ robbery rate, 2x+ assault rate, and nearly 4x car theft rate.
rockybalBOHa t1_j0xf0rh wrote
I wasn't talking about crime. Comment was re: beauty and growth of Pittsburgh.
Cheomesh t1_j0vufgl wrote
NYC, famously.
Cunninghams_right t1_j0v6oj0 wrote
> but it’s not something that can be easily curtailed by just “adding more law enforcement”
this is exactly what I'm talking about. people keep thinking of this as a 1-dimensional problem of more/less of our existing law enforcement. it does not have to be. I even enumerated 2 simple things that could make a big impact (Tile trackers and license plate scanners), that are not simply "more police" but could make an impact.
>problems are systemic to citizens of this city being put down by government malfeasance, redlining, and lack of opportunity resulting from those prior two issues. This requires a large change through education (the schools need improvement, that’s obvious) and government incentive (potentially UBI) to encourage a shift in attitude that will take the course of decades.
I don't disagree, but those things need tax revenue and time. that's kind of the point. people want things like UBI and better schools but don't think about how little things like dirt bikers, or squeegee kids, or carjackers, driving away jobs and tax revenue.
therbler t1_j0vg2h3 wrote
> this is exactly what I'm talking about. people keep thinking of this as a 1-dimensional problem of more/less of our existing law enforcement
No dude, this is exactly and specifically what you're doing. The answer to "why is a Danish company moving its US HQ to Times Square?" is only "free Tile trackers!" if you got slapped on the back at the wrong moment during a TED talk in 2014 or so.
The NYC property's going to be 1/3 the size of their square footage in Baltimore. Given what the last 2-3 years have been like specifically in terms of commercial real estate, it's reasonable to think this would be playing out the same way even if we'd built out the entire Baltimore metro network and most people were commuting in via transit.
Cunninghams_right t1_j0vlrno wrote
none of what you said makes any sense.
DfcukinLite t1_j0ybjeh wrote
It actually made perfect sense.
therbler t1_j0vpgby wrote
What part? The link's to the Commercial Observer about a pretty normal corporate relo. You've decided that this supports your (amply expressed) preexisting worldview, and I'm laughing at both the underlying leap in logic and the specific application here.
But please, correct me if I'm wrong: is there anything to suggest that this has anything to do with crime other than your/one's personal fixation on crime?
Cunninghams_right t1_j0vvvwq wrote
>The answer to "why is a Danish company moving its US HQ to Times Square?" is only "free Tile trackers!"
first off, I said that relocations happen often, but that we have to think about making sure the city is a place where people want to live and work since we don't know the motivations of moving, which may include the perception of the city by prospective employees.
second, I gave multiple examples of things we should be considering, not one, and I did not imply that the examples I gave were an exhaustive list.
>if you got slapped on the back at the wrong moment during a TED talk in 2014 or so.
is lacking any explanation, and the the implied explanation wouldn't even make any sense. if you want to illustrate a point, explain the point and support it, don't just make flippant allusions and expect it to be taken as a serious and coherent argument. well, if you're arguing just to hear your own argument, then that is fine. if you want to have a discussion or to add any value, then form a coherent argument with your reply.
>The NYC property's going to be 1/3 the size of their square footage in Baltimore.
and you give no explanation as to why the size of the space should matter so much. are you saying that baltimore has no office space for rent that is 1/3rd of the size of their current offices? you don't explain, so it makes no sense.
>Given what the last 2-3 years have been like specifically in terms of commercial real estate, it's reasonable to think this would be playing out the same way even if we'd built out the entire Baltimore metro network and most people were commuting in via transit
I don't think you can make that assumption. if it was easier, safer, and more pleasant to work in the city, I think companies would be more inclined to have offices here. you just state that for "real estate reasons" the demand for baltimore office space would have nothing to do with transit and imply that it would have nothing to do with the city's reputation, public safety, or general livability/workability of the city. I don't think that makes sense because I think it should be obvious that those things do have an impact, and you did not explain why the real estate market would obviate those factors.
so, each of your points don't make sense. maybe you can make them make sense, but as-stated, they're not adding anything to the conversation.
Japak121 t1_j0vl13e wrote
> these problems are systemic to citizens of this city being put down by government malfeasance, redlining, and lack of opportunity resulting from those prior two issues.
Corruption. One word sums it up. But, that won't change until the people do something to make it change. Voting in a favorite of one or the other party over and over again is never going to work. It hasn't in the past and it's naive to think it will in the future. We need to prop up those who genuinely care and have shown that they work for the people. This of course require the citizens of the city to put in the effort. In the meantime, while more law enforcement is not a perfect fix, it is an effective stop-gap in that it allows the local population to ease some stress, earn more money and turn there attention to doing something about ineffectual local government. After that, then you can roll back law enforcement as needed.
Waiting is exactly what got us into the mess we're currently in. All of our politicians keep saying "just wait, things will get better" and then they end up hitting term limits or whatever with little to know noticeable results and everyone forgets what's been happening and focus on the new people.
bril_hartman t1_j0v4kwe wrote
But isn’t it also bad PR and media coverage that’s allowed it to get to a point where more people leave the city than come in? If more people focus on what is good (which is a lot), we’ll have more quality individuals and thus, more taxpayer money. Not to mention the fact that people feel safer when they’re surrounded by more people (the old “safety in numbers). Hence why I always cringe when people let one shooting keep them away from Fells or Canton. Chicago and New Orleans are two cities with similar crime issues to us, yet they never get the reputation as the crime and murder cities, and have great tourism industries. I think that’s something that could definitely stand to change for the better.
Cunninghams_right t1_j0v8qcw wrote
we don't put as much money into our tourist districts or as much effort into making sure the criminals stay out of the tourist areas. cities with good tourism make more of an effort to keep armed squeegeers and dirtbikers out of the core tourist district.
Cheomesh t1_j0vux70 wrote
>Chicago and New Orleans are two cities with similar crime issues to us, yet they never get the reputation as the crime and murder cities
Chicago famously does - which is weird considering they're not even the most dangerous city in Illinois anymore, and haven't been for a while.
therbler t1_j0uvraa wrote
> Baltimore city residents spend far too little time thinking about economics
Proceeds to write 350 words about 'what if economics is really how people feel about crime?'
Scrilla_Gorilla_ t1_j0w51ec wrote
Hey, could you elaborate on the Tile Tracker thing in regards to policing? I haven't heard of it and when I tried Googling it just came back with people finding ones stalkers put on their car or whatever and taking them to police.
S-Kunst t1_j0we356 wrote
Much of what you say is correct. But, like any place unless the citizenry takes to the streets the politicians ignore the people's ideas until next election cycle. Currently city land is being cleared of the old and given away. Part of the citizens think new is better than old so they defend these actions. But the actions give nothing to the city or the city coffers. So the "leaders" are like so many from outside the city who sell its assets and give nothing back.
rfg217phs t1_j0uxk9f wrote
Pretty sure people in poverty are pretty much constantly thinking about economics and not too worried about business dealings of cheap jewelry but go off champ.
Cunninghams_right t1_j0v6xsd wrote
there is a difference between thinking about their own budgets vs thinking about how a city can add jobs and tax revenue.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments