Just casual news reading has shown different numbers here.
Edit: oh I get it hellgatenyc is looking for s story and saying that the people they caught only amounted to 104k in fares at like 3 bucks a fare or something around that that’s a lot of people. I’m not a fan of the NYPD but no way they didn’t deter way more than that by their presence. Whether or not you think policing fares is right this is bullshit sensationalism. Think for yourself.
At the same time, $150 million could fund a shitload of free or discounted rides for poor people if it was administered as a social program with the same decrease in fare skipping.
Public transit trips create positive externalities by reducing car trips. In order to maximize societal good, the best fare price for public transit is $0 for everybody.
lol the wealthiest people that work in New York don’t live in New York, they mostly live in Connecticut and other close states. I’m all for it. Tax the companies that need their execs to show up the most, based on their salary, and then watch the boomers that don’t like working remote get feisty about the tax, especially because they usually have equity in the company they work for
Of the estimated $690 million annual loss, buses accounted for the largest share with $315 million, subway evasion cost $285 million, about $46 million was due to drivers avoiding tolls and commuter rail evasion totaled $44 million, the report said. Source
Overall, there were 48 fewer serious crimes like murder, rape and robbery reported in the subway system this year than in 2022, according to NYPD data. The biggest change was 65 fewer reported robberies, where someone stole property by using force or the threat of force. There were also seven fewer reported rapes this year and four fewer murders, according to the newly released data shared with Gothamist. Assaults were an exception, rising by 5%. There were 26 more assaults this year than 2022, according to data. Source
So numbers are the same.
And then there’s this gem …
The vast majority of New Yorkers ticketed and arrested for fare evasion this year – 82% and 92% respectively – were not white, according to NYPD data. That’s a pattern that’s stayed consistent since 2017, when the NYPD first started publicly reporting fare evasion arrest data. Black New Yorkers are 10% more likely now to be ticketed for fare evasion than they were six years ago.
First, fantastic job tracking down the actually relevant stats rather than the person above you who was trying to debunk.
Second - and this would only make your argument stronger and I’m not saying you needed to go this far - we would need to see if there has been an overall drop in crime rates. The tough on crime types love to tout numbers that reflect general trends as if they’re a justification or proof of the effectiveness of their policies. You need to demonstrate using proper statistical analysis to show that the falloff can accurately be attributed to a given policy.
Right… But they spent $89m to prevent 104k in shrinkage…
If you’re the executive at Walmart who handles loss prevention, and you put $89m into a program that reduces shrinkage by $104k, your new duty position becomes “don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out”. It’s a gross mismanagement of public money, and while it was obviously glowed up considerably, that was what was implied In the title.
The lack of a comparison in overall losses specific to skipped fares before and after is a contemptible omission though, I’ll definitely join you on that hill :)
Best quote in the comments by Freethought sums it up for me:
If what Trump says is the standard that a US president has immunity to commit any crime they see fit to do while in office, then the premise of the rule of law is meaningless.
Only if it’s a federal crime. Crimes like assaulting police officers, and even bank or election fraud are often filed at the state level. The charges Trump are facing in Georgia are just one example.
Fascists worship power. They don’t care about hypocrisy, they care about the position that gives them more power.
A prime example of this is free speech. Fascists love to complain about being silenced yet the moment they take power one of the first things they do is silence the press and shutdown dissenting opinions. Free speech is a tool to get them power, quickly discarded when it comes to maintaining or expanding power.
Fascists know they are hypocrites, they don’t care. They’ll abandon positions the second they don’t lead to getting them more power.
Trumps flat out wrong about this immunity claim, and it would pretty much destroy all checks and balances if allowed, but he’s only claiming it for acts while he was still in office. Jan 6th happened while he was still legally the President. He’s claiming that he has immunity for actions as President.
Obama hasn’t been president in 7 years. Anything he does now is as a normal citizen. An equal comparison would be if Obama were charged today for something that happened in 2016, and he claimed immunity.
It would mean that Biden would be immune from prosecution for anything though now, which would set up for him just ignoring any election, legally.
I meant if the SC accepted trump’s argument that he’s got unconditional immunity even for things even after he left office (which they won’t, but hypothetically if they did), it would mean that would apply to Biden, Obama, and Clinton, too.
He’s trying the immunity argument for the classified docs thing, too, not just J6. If he can still claim immunity after leaving office, Obama could go on a crime spree and claim immunity, too.
None of that matters, though, because this whole claim is laughably unconstitutional.
This article seems to gloss over the fact that wages really haven’t risen with inflation. There may be more job openings than unemployed people, but do those jobs pay a livable wage?
If consumers are being forced into relative poverty because expenses are rising faster than incomes are, that is the definition of a bad economy. Whoever wrote this headline is bought and paid for.
Not great, but better than the 10+ years before that. Wage growth has mostly been stagnant since the 1970’s but there’s occasional periods where it’s done better. Like now, and I think about 10 years ago when a long period of crappy wage growth was broken following the GFC. It’s one of the few genuinely good things about the economy recently, people are finally earning more and if that keeps up for a few more years a whole lot of people are going to see their lives improved.
Lol your whole argument that it’s better now is based on your own argument it has been stagant for a decade and your pinnacle argument that fixes the mess is… 1 year of lukewarm wage growth? How the fuck does that fix anything?
I think you are misunderstanding me or projecting things onto me that aren’t there. I’m pointing at one of the few good things in the economy and saying if it continues then we will begin to see real change for the better. Also, it’s not been lukewarm wage growth, it’s been relatively strong and especially so for lower income workers. Labor is finally winning some and it’s bizarre that people are getting mad at me for pointing it out. It’s not a joke, it’s more money in people’s pockets finally and I hope it continues.
You know what it looks like to me? It looks like you made a claim before double checking the evidence, and when you got called out, instead of just admitting you were wrong you double and then triple down with some of the dumbest attempts at arguments I’ve ever seen.
Then you are jumping to conclusions and making assumptions that have misled you. Up until the 1970s wage generally grew with worker productivity and then everything changed and it’s been much more stagnant with most of the productivity gains turning into shareholder profits instead of rising wages. About 10 or so years ago we started more frequently having periods where wage growth outpaced inflation after a long period of very flat wages. More recently the whole covid and post-covid situation has transformed the labor market and led to wage growth. In 2023 we saw strong wage growth, particularly for lower income workers. If the current trend continues with falling inflation and rising wages then the coming years will lead to meaningful improvements in the lives of workers. What is dumb about this argument? More money in the hands of workers, especially lower income workers, is a good thing.
The vast majority of first-worlders complaining about not having enough money already have more than people whose needs are not being met.
The problem is that they think they should get more before others who have less. It’s an issue that exists all the way to the top, which is why it’s hypocritical to call out billionaires while not looking at our own contributions to the problem.
This is part of the issue. My local grocery store pays $15/hour and mostly hires part time to avoid benefits.
1 bedroom apartments start at $1,200/mo. Most places require rent to be no more than about 33% of income. Don’t even get me started on gas/car, insurance, utilities, etc.
There is a huge disconnect.
The economy is NOT in good shape. It is according to metrics they choose to measure, but jobs that pay a living wage are very hard to come by.
To be fair, it hasn’t been good by THAT standard in decades probably. It just feels worse right now because there was a rise in wages for a bit there that was totally lost to inflation.
It’s normalized by CPI, so a flat line would be no wage growth.
Depends on the the sector, obviously. I’m guessing service sector wages have not kept up with inflation, since it seems like every place is understaffed (they’re not offering enough to attract workers). I also don’t think it accounts for part-time and gig worker wages.
The GOP establishment, which the Federalist Society that now controls the SCOTUS represents, never liked Trump.
They spent decades turning their base into conspiratorial, counterfactual nitwits through the media they own because then they could easily tell them “climate change isnt real! Give rich people all the money! Poor people made bad decisions!” etc, and rob everyone blind to thunderous applause and their nitwits defending the owner’s grift from the rest of us.
Then one day a notorious opportunist got up on stage, said the quiet parts out loud, co-opted that engineered willfull ignorance, and stole their nitwit brigade right out from under them. Remember, the turning point for Trump was the day he told the crowd he’d like to take protesters out back and “beat the shit” out of them. Prior to that he was hiring extras to attend his rallies.
The Machiavellian Mitch McConnells and John Roberts have been quietly seething ever since. Trump makes them feel dirty because he embodies the crassness of the con they’ve been leading their nitwit voters around by from a sterile distance. Their crass nitwits aren’t supposed to bleed into their halls of power! Their careful, coordinated long game grift compromised by a 2 bit snake oil song and dance grifter.
I think the people who want Trump removed from the ballot most are establishment Republicans. Not because of the fascism, but because of the populism and repeated lost elections. They won’t challenge him in public because they might get primaried (or assassinated).
Well said. This is something I was thinking recently when discussing the matter of Trump’s disqualification from being on the ballot with my partner – on the one hand, it’s tempting to think that the Conservative appointees would definitely rule in favor of Trump and that the 14th amendment doesn’t apply to him.
But on the other hand, at the end of the day isn’t Trump really just a useful idiot for the real power behind the Republican party? He certainly didn’t invent all the “issues” he ran on – he just co-opted them while (as you say) saying the quiet parts out loud. Now he’s getting even more divisive and a lot of people that previously thought he was harmless have seen how insane and dangerous he really is, even before January 6th.
With all that in mind, I think it’s more likely that SCOTUS will wind up ruling that Trump is indeed disqualified under the 14th amendment so they can finally get him out of the way of the more serious candidates that will do what they want.
I think it’s more likely that SCOTUS will wind up ruling that Trump is indeed disqualified under the 14th amendment so they can finally get him out of the way of the more serious candidates that will do what they want.
And also protect their majority in the court by appearing unbiased.
The GOP establishment finally got its own “leopards eating MY face?” moment, which is a reversal they thought would never happen. Even though they caused it.
I enjoy I eating their faces as much as the next filthy socialist, the sad thing is, in their cold, sociopathic mission to turn our country into a locked down, stable, generational capital farm/labor camp, they unleashed a fascist blaze that very well may burn them, their nitwits, and everyone else alive.
From the people’s perspective, I’m honestly not sure what’s worse, the ice of perpetual servitude for sociopaths, or the by comparison fast, unsustainable blaze of murderous, scapegoating hatred.
We got a fajita truck last year! And I don’t like peppers or smoked pulled pork (I also keep my meat consumption to a minimum), so I didn’t even eat any. And when I told my bosses this, they basically just said “that’s too bad” and went on with their day. Gotta love being a valued employee. Especially when literally every order that is placed goes through you.
Most just get shit on and the reward is more work.
My day job is boring policy and process. It ends at a fixed time and I get to eat on the daily.
My side gig is dynamic, challenging as fuck, rewarding in spades, absolutely not guaranteed as I’ve been in danger of the work drying up and the contract ending for 22 years.
The reward to good work is more work, but make sure you can eat and sleep and live.
No one should have a child unless they are willing to commit themselves to that child 100%. I have a daughter. She’s the most wonderful thing that ever happened to me. And if anyone willingly took substantially less effort than I’ve taken to try to raise her in a safe, healthy environment and prepare her for her future as best I can- fuck you, you should have worn a fucking condom.
Interesting/sad how simply due to circumstance, somebody’s absolute honest best at max effort/sacrifice can still be raising a kid in a favela.
Consider the top vs. bottom billion: I expect the latter half’s kids would appear neglected if they were suddenly transported to the former’s McMansions overnight.
That’s not to say the kisses and the love are any less, but the clothes and the education and the soccer practice? I’d bet certainly.
I hope within by two generations from now this kind of pondering is only possible from a historical perspective. The kids deserve it.
I also have kids and love them dearly. However I think that it is important that parents have their own interests and time for their own lives, independent of their roles as parents. Of course with very young children there’s barely time to sleep, but humans grow up quickly! 😄
When whatever conflagration that MAGA causes is over, those who survive will have a duty to record what Trump and his supporters were. No Milgrahm experiments to explain why people reflexively obey authority. No excuses about how Trump was so charismatic and could sway and persuade.
Nobody is being tricked or persuaded. Trump is paradoxically the most transparent politician in American history. He’s no great persuader. Listening to him speak is like watching a drunk man cross an icy street. The truth is LOTS of Americans fucking love fascism! They want people to be harmed and killed. They’ll suffer hardships, and take losses to make it happen. They raise Trump on their shoulders because he tells them what they want to hear. And they’ll happily hoist someone else up should Trump stumble.
Remember the Dominion lawsuit against Fox reviled that the network presenters were cowed and intimated by the viewership. All these years people like Jon Stewart told us that Fox news radicalized Memaw and Poppop. Maybe all along it was the deplorables that radicalized Fox.
At some point, people will be standing in the rubble of American cities asking “how could this happen”? Tell them Americans wanted it; Americans voted for it; and Americans gleefully held hands and jumped into the abyss.
Bruh you cannot apologize for Fox. Their on-air people lie to anyone who will listen every God damn day, why would they stop lying just because they’re under oath?
People want to believe that deep down, most people are good. I believe this to be a lie people tell themselves. No, most people are awful and would fuck over anyone they don’t know if they do much as think it will make them better off.
People are good, until they aren’t. That’s the trick: Creating environments where people become more awful, more quickly. Like upgrading your barracks in a RTS game.
I think you’ve got it twisted. People do awful stuff because they think it’s good. The Nazis thought Jewish extermination was helping. Theirs a Documentary on Netflix about German soldiers tasked with shooting Jews. For most of them it was a horrible ordeal. One of the biggest motivators for continuing was the thought that shirking one’s “duty” meant your comrade was going to have to do it for you. (one of the rationale for the concentration camps was to spare the death squads from PTSD)
I mentioned the Milgram experiment. If you take psy101 they’re going to tell you that that experiment proved that humans will harm each other for the sake of an authority figure. But that’s not true. Repetitions of that experiment that replaced the lab-coat guy with one wearing a military or police uniform and you went from the vast majority willing to harm people to the vast majority refusing. People weren’t obeying authority, they were volunteers who wanted to help science. They thought continuing a harmful experiment was their duty.
You’ve probably heard that quote from Fred Rogers about how when something tragic happens, “look for the helpers”. Well, it turns out that many of the people who cause tragedy think they’re helping.
Yes, Trump supporters honestly believe that the vast majority of undocumented migrants are criminals and terrorists. They honestly believe that the Democrats are trying to create a Soviet style dictatorship. They honestly believe we need a strongman to rid the country of people who are genuinely trying to destroy it. I know a bunch of them; they think they’re helping.
I think it depends on context. If you’re brought up in a wholesome environment with respect and positive values, you’ll realize that living like that is better. If you’re brought up in a cesspool of fear and violence, you’ll think that’s the way the world is, and you’ll behave accordingly.
It’s not that America is inherently bad, or any particular cultural system. It’s that when a society doesn’t maintain its values and spiritual core, it will rot from the inside out.
The problem is our society has sold out so much of our community, our education, our values for convenience and corporate greed. This is like what the Right used to blather on about, but they’re to blame for most of the real depravity. In any case, we’re just seeing the fallout.
I’m seeing a lot of Newsweek posted here and that is disheartening, to say the least. Newsweek is half a step from the dailymail’s level of bombastic misrepresentation. Continued use of Newsweek as a source is not ideal as a result.
At times I wonder if medically assisted suicides are frowned upon due to not being able to further drain the money out of patients and their extended credit lines.
They’re also frowned upon because it’s pretty cruel to tell someone “well, you could just die” because they can’t afford medical treatments or a place to live.
How is that any different than it is now? You can choose to die with dignity, or, in the current system, drain your funds, your families funds, put everyone in debt, THEN die.
Not on topic but I recently listened to the Rush Limbaugh episodes of “Behind the Bastards”. I didn’t think I could dislike Rush more than I already did but I found out he was worse than I thought.
You don’t have to wonder any longer. You’ve figured it out. Take the morality out of many political decisions and you have the right answer. Abortions? – nobody gives a shit about those children. It’s a convenient cover so they don’t have to say “Mothers are killing the thing that we will enslave and drain later on in the economy!” Everyone says that they care about the child until it’s born – they don’t even care before that point. And the lack of care/suffering/poverty of the child afterwards is the point of exploitation. So the system is working as intended. They need more workers, they need to siphon every ounce of production out of those workers.
Abortions? – nobody gives a shit about those children. It’s a convenient cover so they don’t have to say “Mothers are killing the thing that we will enslave and drain later on in the economy!"
What sort of purpose does it serve to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term when the fetus has a Fatal fetal abnormality?
It’s for the useful idiots who follow these politicians to believe that those politicians’ choices are driven by moral principles rather than cold personal upside maximization and a sociopathic disregard for others: for appearances’ sake, same as going around kissing babies and shaking the hands of people they look down on.
This might sound crazy to any normal person because normal people wouldn’t sacrifice others like that merely for the sake of “the message”, but sociopaths don’t feel any guilt or shame when they hurt or harm others, so they’re capable of sacrificing others to quite an extreme level merelly for some minor benefits to themselves, if the victims are powerless to reciprocate (which in this case they are).
They should all be able to vote. From prison, too. The punishment never needs to be to take their voting rights away. If they commit fraud, stop them from committing fraud again.
I think if you’re overthrowing the government, you’re basically tapping out of the democracy. That’s literally the only crime I could see not being allowed to vote. I also think they should be removed from the country they tried to destroy. But then I have no idea how would they remain detained in that situation.
Make a new permanent US penal colony, call it New Australia, located in Texas. TX as been wanting to secede anyway, let’s give them a helping hand. Deport all seditionists there with all visa/passport privileges being revoked.
And the final chef’s-kiss: Enact all of the cruel immigration laws against New Australia that they’ve been wanting so bad, see how they like it.
Sovereign citizens believe they are not under the jurisdiction of the federal government and consider themselves exempt from U.S. law. They use a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods to justify their beliefs and their activities, some of which are illegal and violent.
I mean we’d basically be making them the same thing, no? Only legitimate?
The Amish are just members of a fairly extreme religion. They don’t reject the existence of government itself. Sovereign citizens are people that believe they aren’t subject to the laws of the country the reside in.
I’d prefer compulsory voting from all able people of voting age. Prisons should have full in-person voting locations with private voting booths. Mail-in ballots should be a freely available option for all.
It doesn’t guarantee good results, but I feel it is the most straightforward way to rid ourselves of voter suppression campaigns, which I think are fundamentally evil.
Hey, you’re talking to the country that has you actively apply to get a right to vote. The US is seemingly incapable of keeping track of their own citizens.
Compulsory voting doesn’t mean you literally have to vote for something. You can cast a blank ballot in protest. Sales tax is compulsory. Gas tax is compulsory. There are lots of things that are already compulsory.
If the number of violent criminals in your society is enough to affect the outcome of an election, you’ve got much bigger problems. And if you take away the right to vote for violent crimes, politicians will attempt to redefine what “violent” means to disenfranchise more people.
I got a felony 14 years ago for running from a cop. He got a scratch on his hand and charged me with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. Bogus public defender didn’t even help try to fight for me and their charges stuck like glue.
I disagree with this approach without even touching the morality aspect.
There should be no way to lose your voting rights once you are of age and a citizen of the US for the very simple reason of limiting the bureaucratic overhead of elections. If every citizen above the age of 18 can vote, you can just completely remove the ridiculous notion of “voter registration”.
Just register everyone based on their legal address (which the government should have anyway because taxes). Just like a real democracy.
Even people who make mistakes should be entitled to vote. Even while paying for their mistakes frankly. They may have lost their freedom, but they are still citizens of the Republic.
The only compelling argument I know of is that voting in local elections is a mess because there would be counties that’d suffer from the over representation due to the location of the prisons. I would just consider those to be absentee voters myself, and they just keep the last address they had before going in or next if kin instead.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.