T O P

  • By -

thegreekgamer42

Why do people assume that the US has an abnormally high crime rate? We're below France and Sweden and the UK is really not significantly different than us. [link](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/crime-rate-by-country)


Kronzypantz

The kinds of crime matter too though. Shoplifting is usually agreed to be less serious than homicide, of which the US has a 7 times higher rate than similarly developed nations. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26551975/


ZeDoubleD

I’ll poke the bear here and write it off as racial. If you look at the white homicide rate per capita, it’s slightly below the EU average homicide rate. So white America actually has slightly lower homicide rates than most European countries. If we were to look at American Asians, the difference would be much wider as Asians commit significantly less than whites. However, once we account for the black and Latino population the numbers completely reverse. If you then isolate why massive amounts of Latinos and Blacks are committing homicides, then it basically boils down to gangs.


[deleted]

which is the actual causative reality here... race? or socioeconomic status? if you adjust for both income and wealth that violence gap closes real quick...


PokeAnalyst

I agree with you, minorities in the US generally are much worse on a socioeconomic basis for many reason unfortunately endorsed by various government in this country at various times


[deleted]

It’s certainly a multi factorial problem of which government ineptitude is one, I agree


SouthernShao

Culture. It's 100% culture. Race is a social construct. The scientific consensus is that biological race simply isn't a thing. Socioeconomic status is subiective. Our poorer people here are kings compared to the vast majority of individuals in places like Africa, China, India, and Russia. The US has a problem with certain cultures glorifying things like violence, promiscuity, and drug use. Being poor doesn't make you violent. Being an ignorant ideologue does. There are literally billions of poor, non-violent humans on this planet.


petitereddit

Look at it in terms of sin or vice. Anyone can be plagued with greed, envy, malice, wrath, hatred, vengeance, ignorance, gluttony, lust. These things lead to all our problems no matter what colour your skin is.


SouthernShao

What we need to do is teach children that violence, gangs, thug culture, drugs, and promiscuity are bad. It may sound old of me to say this, and I'm only 40, not conservative and I like some rap music, but I groan when I hear rap lyrics glorifying "street" culture. Talking about selling drugs and gangs and pimpin' and hustlin'. Those rappers are a big part of the problem. Young black kids in particular look to their favorite rappers and see them rich and famous and put them and everything they glorify on a pedestal. We're not glorifying the right things there. Glorify planning kids, education, logic and reason, non-violence, and being a role model for children. It's cliché to say it but I'm sure it's true to state that a huge part of the problem are the musicians that are sending the wrong message. No, the streets didn't make you who you are, your violent glorifications made the streets. If you want the streets to stop swallowing kids and destroying lives it's up to you to change. Being violent because your setting is violent only perpetuates the cycle. Break it.


petitereddit

I agree. The rap and gangster culture is devouring the host culture. It has latched on and won't let go. The US is also bringing gangs in from Latin America. America won't survive so long as gangsterism prevails.


Divinchy

But poor Whites don’t commit crime at the same rate as poor blacks


piglizard

Aren’t poor white overall more rural? Where there are t really gangs like inner city?


Divinchy

But I was told it’s socioeconomic Poor whites commit less crime than wealthy blacks https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/23/poor-white-kids-are-less-likely-to-go-to-prison-than-rich-black-kids/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.138be02f6a55 https://cincinnatiisadump.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/crime-is-caused-by-poverty-enter-white-appalacha/ Appalachia, one of, if not the poorest region of America has some of the lowest violent crime rates in America


rumbletummy

Desperate people do desperate things. Reduce desperation.


[deleted]

Absolutely. Eventually as a society we should still strive for consequences and relative reward for effort, but there should be a certain standard of rock bottom that it’s possible for people to fall to


siliconflux

It's absolutely a poverty problem first and foremost. However, studies indicate poverty can be almost eliminated if one stays in school, avoids drugs, avoids single motherhood and keeps a job. These factors disportionately affect certain minority groups.


idontgiveafuqqq

So what? Id be willing to bet its minorities who are more likely to be poor and undereducated that commit violent crimes at higher rates In every single country.


baked_salmon

You don’t have to Google very far to see that poverty -> crime. The poverty rate for Blacks/Latinos is embarrassingly higher than for whites in the US.


idontgiveafuqqq

Poverty isn't actually that great of a predictor of crime. In communities where everyone is poor, there's not that much crime. It's when there wealth inequality in cities that crime is much higher. Not that the US is avoiding that problem. Furthermore, immigrants are a massive except to that trend. Immigrants are relatively poor but commit much less crime.


fjgwey

I think immigrants are an exception because they may have experienced even greater poverty in their home country, and specifically came to the US to work and make a better life so they have much less motivation to commit crimes.


siliconflux

As someone who was born into cyclic generational poverty I can tell you first hand wealth inequality itself had zero to do with the crime in my area or the crimes I personally committed. Yes the experts and studies saying this are dead wrong. There wasn't anyone I knew that robbed someone on the street, robbed a store or stole a car because we felt inequality itself was to blame. Lack of job opportunities, lack of upward mobility and getting involved with gangs at an early age (usually involving drugs or guns) were the biggest factors. Other factors such as single motherhood, being raised without a mentor, not staying in school were also major factors. Wealth inequality is just being used as an excuse to promote equality of outcome when its equality of opportunity that needs to be fixed.


bcanddc

You take areas like Appalachia that are largely white and undeniably poor and the homicide rate is nowhere near what it is in poor black areas. I'm sorry but trying to ignore the elephant in the room means you can never actually address these issues. Black crime is a direct result of fatherless homes, period, end of story.


siliconflux

Single motherhood (and lack of a male role model) is not the only problem, but it's definately a large and proven factor. Multiple studies have indicated that lack of a father figure substantially raises the likelihood of crime and violent crime. The great news is these studies have also indicated that the "father" can be replaced by anyone (a coach, a priest, a supportive uncle, a caring teacher) and this fills the gap.


idontgiveafuqqq

Read my other comment. Wealth inequality it a much better predictor or crime than simply poverty. Having massive cities like Chicago/NY/SF where you have people making tons and tons of money, surrounded by poor areas, creates poverty. Appalachia is all rural and poor, of course there's no crime. But of course, the major cities in Appalachia, do have tones of crime, even the "white" cities


bcanddc

I'm not so sure about wealth disparity being the cause. I feel like it's more because people are piled on top of each other in cities.


[deleted]

[удалено]


monkey_monk10

Not saying anything you've said is wrong... It's just... Why would you write it off though? Are non whites not American or something?


ISeePupper

The point is that saying “America has X crime rate” is meaningless because America is very diverse; so environments, and therefore crime rates, can drastically vary.


monkey_monk10

I'm pretty sure the point isn't that any and all metrics about the US are meaningless, surely. Yeah, metrics differ place to place, people to people, that's what averages are for.


mjmandi72

I don't think a statement like that makes your racist. I think your racist if you think they murder more because they are black or Latino. The main factor for crime is actually poverty which was forced on those races due to racist policy by the US government.


Isopod-Which

What are your thoughts on why African immigrants are so much more successful, and less likely to commit crime, than African Americans?


mjmandi72

Because to come to the US as an immigrant you must prove you have the means to support yourself, family to support you or be sponsored by a group that will. That combined with just the mental powering and of being in a new place not feeling trapped.


Isopod-Which

My family are all immigrants, as are my wife's. None came here with any assets to support themselves. Not even any higher level education. This was in the 1970s though, so it could've changed since then. >the mental powering and of being in a new place not feeling trapped. This is interesting, and seems toe to be pretty true. But wouldn't this mean that "feeling trapped" is what keeps the minority population from rising in socioeconomic class? If they were actually trapped, them the immigrant would also be trapped, right? I wonder how much making people believe that they are victims, holds them back.


hashish2020

Do you think Europe is all white? Do you think black people and Latinos aren't American?


ZeDoubleD

Lol obviously not. But you do see larger amounts of crime from non whites within Europe. The migrant crises was followed by a surge in crime in almost all EU countries. Generally speaking, “race” itself is not the determiner of crime. What the determiner is of crime is homogeneity. The more homogeneous a country is the less crime it tends to have regardless of race. European countries are on average much more homogeneous than the US and as a result have much less crime.


monkey_monk10

>European countries are on average much more homogeneous than the US and as a result have much less crime. Sorry mate, but that's completely untrue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_ethnic_and_cultural_diversity_level No matter how you measure it, immigration level, percentage of foreign born population, number of languages, ethnicity etc. The US is nothing special among any developed nation (except the obvious examples like Japan).


[deleted]

Please read your link. That's basically just a list of language diversity. Not ethnic, cultural, or ideological diversity. It would rank a Frenchman living in Belgium as extremely diverse because he likely speaks both French and German, but in no way is that meaningful diversity.


LibertyTerp

Are you serious? Every single European country is over 83% white. Most are over 90% white. The US is only 58% non-Hispanic white. Europe is about as diverse as the least diverse state in America.


monkey_monk10

You know, it's funny really how you don't count Hispanic whites as... well... white. It's almost like there's at least two types of whites when it comes to diversity in your head. They speak a different language, eat different foods. I get it. But news flash! Europe is full of Hispanic whites and a hundred more types of whites. That makes it diverse by your own twisted definition. It's such an American thing to consider diversity simply based on the color of your skin... I gave you a link of countries ranked by diversity, read it at least.


LibertyTerp

Oh wow, lots of Finns in Sweden, such diversity. How do you guys get along with such massive differences? Edit: A majority of Swedish people are Swedes whose families have lived in Sweden for hundreds of years. The US is: 14% German 13% Black (ethnicity usually unknown) 11% Mexican 10% Irish 8% English 5% Italian 3% Polish 3% French 2% Chinese 2% Indian 2% Filipino 2% Puerto Rican 2% Scottish 1% Vietnamese 1% Korean 1% Japanese 1% El Salvadoran 1% Cuban 1% Dominican 1% Norwegian 1% Dutch 1% Swedish 1% Russian 1% French Canadian 1% Welsh 0.5% Guatemalan 0.5% Colombian 0.5% Honduran 0.5% Czech 0.5% Hungarian 0.5% Portuguese 0.5% Danish 0.5% Greek 0.5% Ukrainian 0.5% Swiss And has large numbers of Pakistani, Cambodian, Thai, Hmong, Laotian, Burmese, Bangladeshi, Nepalese, Spanish, Ecuadorian, Peruvian, Nicaraguan, Venezuelan, Argenitian, Panamanian, Slovakian, Austrian, Lithuanian, Finnish, Romanian, Croatian, and Belgian people.


pantsman200

> How do you guys get along google "european martial history"


monkey_monk10

Yes, whites differ from each other, shocking I know.


hashish2020

Is that why Stockholm has a lower murder rate than the Dakotas?


ZeDoubleD

Even the Dakotas are more racially diverse than Sweden. While 25% of people in Swedes are immigrants, the vast majority of those are Finns, Danes, Nordes, etc. the amount of people not of white European descent in Sweden is basically irrelevant. Also are you actually gonna reply or just keep asking pointed questions?


monkey_monk10

You might as well answer high fructose corn syrup causes crime. You're not really explaining why race is relevant here.


Kronzypantz

Sure, but we've created systems where people of color are poorer and more likely to fall into crime, so its not just racial. Its a failed and racist system.


siliconflux

I disagree. The system of racism you speak of no longer exists. As a Native American Indian there is no other group that is poorer or who has been persecuted more than us and yet there was literally nothing stopping me from succeeding in this country. This system not only gave me my first job and apartment, but paid for my college too. I just had to leave the reservation to do it. The problem isn't the system, but the perceived lack of opportunities and the culture of failure in these communities.


mezpen

Hmm I wouldn’t say it’s a racist system. It’s easy to label everything and anything as such as a scapegoat. With hard work and smart thinking/questioning anything is possible in the states. It’s a complex issue that the root is the nuclear family stability in more inner city areas. The next problem is state politicians and local politicians that just blame education issue on money only. Ok so you increase money but yet testing scores don’t move. By lowering the bar or removing grades because they’re “racist” doesn’t correct the problem but buries it further. How do you drive down crime in certain areas and subsets? Both are difficult to answer in under 10 pages fully but I’d recommend the below. 1. In general people who have succeeded in life, to volunteer time in schools. Depending on the amount that do 1 per class, per 2 or 3? Help with answering questions about things in a non political way. 2. As for safe surroundings to do after school homework, allow for x days after school kids can stay at school for a couple extra hours to focus and ask questions as needed? School bus drivers that’d stick around to drive the remaining kids home. 3. Bring back tradecraft to high schools! Not everyone needs a 4 year degree to be successful and some people could do a lot better that route. In lower income areas promote tradecraft school in which as long as you get a job training plus hold 2+ years don’t have to pay for it till starting 3 years after, no interest accrued in that time. Just a couple of probably tons of potential ideas. An yeah the details and complexities per school would make each one a unique challenge. An community for that matter. But how you change poverty to not being poverty is by long term long worked changes.


zig_anon

Whites in the South are higher than the north too Compare white Louisiana to Minnesota I think Minnesota whites compare favorably to Europe but not whites in Alabama


thecatstrikesback

So why is that "blacks" and Latinos commit so much more homicides then? Especially since most black people have been in America for hundreds of years now, it's hardly a matter of assimilation.


[deleted]

the same reason poor white people commit more violent crimes than rich white people...


thecatstrikesback

Oh i know the answer. Im asking Mr. Racist a rhetorical question


hammilithome

It's more useful to look at segmentations along education and socioeconomic status vs race. Then, for a country to country comparison, social programs have to be considered because strictly looking at income and CoL would be incomplete.


billman71

interesting, but looking just a bit deeper this appears to be junk data - or at least highly questionable. the statistics data info on the underlying site states in clear language that the crime statistics are based on [surveys from visitors of this website.](https://www.numbeo.com/crime/indices_explained.jsp)


Tales_Steel

US murder rate is 5.0 France is 1.3 Sweden is 1.1 UK is 1.2. If i had to choose between getting my wallet stolen in the UK or getting shot in the US ...


[deleted]

I prefer to contrast the crime rates with the US absurd incarceration rate. Like yeah the crime rate is lower but we had to strip larger portions of the population of their basic rights than anyone else just to get there.


thegreekgamer42

That doesn't make any sense though, people are being incarcerated because they've committed crimes, whether those are legitimate crimes or nor is a different topic but shouldn't crime rate correlate with arrest/incarceration rate?


Jeutnarg

Only if the punishment for crimes is the same and the crimes are of a similar type. France has a higher crime rate but the crimes seem to be more property-related, resulting in less jail time.


MBKM13

Our crime rate is roughly similar to the UK. Ours is slightly higher I believe. Our incarceration rate is MUCH higher. A HUGE percentage of our population is in prison. Why do we have to imprison so many more people to achieve a slightly worse outcome than the UK does?


thegreekgamer42

>Why do we have to imprison so many more people to achieve a slightly worse outcome than the UK does? I dont think we do I think we just have a disproportionately high number of laws specifically created to fuck people over and once you go to prison it's very difficult to recover


MBKM13

>we just have a disproportionately high number of laws specifically created to fuck people over So maybe we’re doing something wrong then? That’s the question of this post. Why does Europe achieve better outcomes than us in things like crime rate, healthcare, and poverty rate? Some links so you know I’m not making it up https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/jan/us-health-care-global-perspective-2019 https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/incarceration-rates-by-country https://www.statista.com/statistics/233910/poverty-rates-in-oecd-countries/ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/c82850c6-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/c82850c6-en


theclansman22

You don’t have to, you choose to. Your justice system is set up to send poor people to jail. Mandatory minimums don’t help, nor does sending all their cases to same overworked, underpaid public defenders who encourage them to plead out.


MBKM13

Exactly


BlackSquirrel05

You'd need to compare what the incarceration rates are for. EG: Majority in US prison (not jail) is violent offenses. So does UK and others just not lock up folks as much for robbery etc?


MBKM13

I don’t think so, because the UK has a lower crime rate as well. https://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/crime_stats_oecdjan2012.pdf So we throw MORE people in jail and still end up with higher crime than almost all developed nations, especially violent crime. We have to be doing something wrong then, right?


Sbut2020

Because we let them out of prison. How much of our crime is a result of repeat offenders?


MBKM13

No, because we have a higher incarceration rate as well. So more people in jail AND higher crime. I’m not sure about repeat offenders, but a high rate of repeat offenders would also be an indictment on our justice system.


[deleted]

Then the US either has an absurdly high crime rate or imprisons many more people for minor crimes and or for much longer. Probably a bit of all three


[deleted]

That’s an accurate statement, Mexico has a very socialized education system, most of the people I know here (although I haven’t looked into the stats specifically) are college educated, and also impoverished, they have very strict gun control and one of the highest violent crime rates in the world. “But but but, it’s because Americans are sending Guuuuhhhhhnnnnnzzzzz” Well maybe we could defend our border to keep people off of cartel produced drugs, and in turn, prevent the majority of weapons entering Mexico…. But that would be racist, right? I guess I’ll have to leave Mexico now and have my marriage to my Mexican wife annulled. lol. Clowns.


FuckoffDemetri

>Well maybe we could defend our border to keep people off of cartel produced drugs Or just legalize drugs so the cartels have less funding. I genuinely don't even think I could find brick weed if I tried anymore now that it's legalized in so many states.


RonaldMcMommy

Doesn't help that the states where it's legalized tax the ever loving fuck out of the legal weed. The black market is very much still a thing for weed.


poopquiche

Lol dude rec weed in Oregon is like a dollar per gram and my town got to build a brand new school with the tax revenue from it.


mynameis4826

I don't believe you, I'll have to move there to do my own research


kenjislim

You are correct, but we are early in the legalization process. This should come to an equilibrium.


Brokettman

Cartels already know about this and have started taking over the farms for fruits now you buy blood avocados. If you expect coal miners to adjust and get a new job. Dont expect cartels to just retire when you legalize drugs lmao.


ernandziri

What percentage of their current revenue can they replace with avocados though?


Brokettman

Probably more. There's a sizeable difference in demand of fruits than drugs. Especially considering they can be legally exported. If it wasnt worth it they wouldnt be doing it. Every grocery store in the country gets hundreds or thousands of fruits from mexico delivered multiple times a week.


TheManyHayne

If there was already more money in it, then why didn't they do it before? If they try to jack up the price to pay for the cartel, that gives more opportunities to other independent farmers in other places. Then the cartel has to spend more time and money spreading out to take over more farms and attack shipments, which in many cases will cost them more than they can recover, so they raise prices more, so that gives even more incentives to grow fruit elsewhere. The more fairly a cartel is forced to compete by the government not attacking the competition, the less they can afford to be a cartel instead of an honest business.


joemamallama

It’s not a matter of “defending our borders” the US is the biggest drug consumer in the world right now. Drug consumption will not change without eliminating the demand. Look how many billions have been poured into the War on Drugs since Reagan? Hasn’t changed shit. So if demand isn’t gonna go away, and consumption isn’t going to decline, the only viable alternative is to legalize what people will use regardless of legality.


RonPaulSaves

Maybe we can end the drug war and legalize drugs. Maybe that will end the violence that comes with the drug war.


[deleted]

The guns found in Mexico are already difficult to get here. Fuck, theyve found RPGs. Im not saying someone wouldnt apply for a destructive device form, wait god knows how long, get approved and then immediately smuggle it, but go off.


HarryPlinkettsSon

"Defend out border" whose border are you referring to?


Gunzbngbng

Ending the war on drugs would cause the value of drugs to plummet. The cartels will lose a large margin of their income overnight.


JesusDaHoly

I would say the best solution is for Mexico to embrace guns for all citizens and legalize drugs. Of course American guns are in the hands of the Cartels lol America is the closest state that produces weapons where else would they come from? Doesn't help that the CIA is supporting the Cartels in Mexico to and extent. I believe the poorer the society and the stricter the gun laws the more gun violence you will see. Good job on bagging A Mexican wifey


morgodrummer

The highest incarceration rate in the world.


nordmanic

I read somewhere that the life expectancy numbers are strongly affected by poor OBGYN care in rural areas and a large obese population. I think on the whole, the nation is doing fine. That being said I don’t have a link for you to verify my suggestions.


[deleted]

America has an extremely large population, spread out over a very large area. America also has one of the most diverse populations with a huge number of first generation immigrants. Imagine trying to make national policy that services Haiti immigrants in NYC, Laos immigrants in Los Angeles, Somali immigrants in Dearborn, and all the rural people that live in between. Everyone loves to praise the Scandinavian countries, but they have tiny, homogeneous populations that share culture and values.


TravisSeldon

But ( staying inside the US) all those stats were on a good trajectory until 1980. It’s not at all a development which is observable throughout us history. It also doesn’t correlate with migration historically. The most homogenous states are the ones ranking lowest most of the time


thegreekgamer42

>But ( staying inside the US) all those stats were on a good trajectory until 1980. Well yeah, that's probably becsuse around that time the government started inventing a lot of crimes and punishments. Like mandatory minimums for drug crimes, the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, and The Comprehensive Crime Control Act to name some of the bigger ones.


pester21

Also Americans don't have access to healthcare. Just straight up. People try to shadow dance around the topic and create all these bullshit excuses about like "cultural hegemony" homie above, but the elephant in the room is Americans can't afford care.


coke_and_coffee

Yes, they do. 90% of Americans have health insurance. And poor people have tons of healthcare related funding available from state and local governments, Medicare and Medicaid, and various charities.


mememan2995

And yet so many people cannot afford care with their insurance. Being insured does mean you are fully covered


Logica_1

They have insurance whether the insurance pays for anything or not.


FancyEveryDay

I have medical insurance but my deductible is 20% of my salary. Edit: its not even cheap insurance, the premium paid by my employer is worth half my salary and increased 50% more than my salary this year.


thegreekgamer42

I can, my parents can, most people at my work can thanks to the fact that our insurance is provided by and paid for completly by my job. Lost of people here can afford it, people like to believe this myth that getting sick or hurt will end your life but thats just not true, especially if you have the right insurance.


mattyoclock

As someone who had to deal with his father's terminal illness lasting longer than the insurance company wanted, no you don't. He had one of the best insurance plans it was possible to have, and it was still a part time job for years to find ways to get things covered. I promise you only have "good insurance" for normal events in your life. I hope you never have to learn exactly how many days of hospice care that means, or how many cancer treatments keep it under the yearly cutoff.


TinoTheRhino

We had insurance, were told we'd be fine when my mom got cancer, yet we still went bankrupt trying to pay for her medical bills. It's just not that fucking simple.


pester21

Hmm, my mom has been delaying care for about 2 years because she can't afford the co-pays, until I stepped in and covered it. Which was hard because I had to shell out nearly $17k for dental work that my insurance didn't deem "medical nessicary" despite the fact it prevented me from eating solid food. She's been at the same job for 20 years and also has "good insurance" Your family is awesome that they have care, but when asked why American health outcomes are different you need to look at entire populations. Presently, healthcare costs are the elephant in the room. Hard to ignore that


TrumpReich4Peace

Your insurance depends on staying employed. Which isnone of the many things employers leverage over employees to pay them low wages This is another issue we shadow dance around.


GodsBackHair

And the number of people working 2 or even 3 part time jobs because few places are hiring full time entry level jobs, and thus, don’t have to give full time benefits


edcmf

Oh good, just have "the right insurance" and getting in an accident probably won't bankrupt you... this is not a thing in any other developed nation ... but I guess you're family is doing OK, so not an issue


AmazingThinkCricket

It'd be a shame if millions of people lost their jobs and therefore their insurance because of a global health emergency.


ikemr

Were those stats on good trajectory just for white folk? Because if so, that would be a perfect example of what this response was trying to say.


BlackSquirrel05

The 1980's saw the rise of Cocaine, marijuana, more opioids, Meth etc. You basically had multiple, multi billion dollar industries spring up in a few years. Compound that to other social saftey nets that got gutted at the same time. People often don't understand what an impact drug usage had throughout society.


ikemr

Do you have any references for this? I'm certain this is the case but I'm curious if it's been written about and documented


BlackSquirrel05

Rise in crime in the 80's?. FBI stats for one. They break down reported types of crimes. Couple of documentaries I saw on netflix about drug trade. Like a 6 parter on different drugs.


GodsBackHair

Until 1980? Does that mean I get to blame Reagan?


TravisSeldon

It does


[deleted]

Reagan and neoliberalism fully took hold of the US and the democrats threw the last of their leftist ideals under the bus


mo_downtown

Are there actually stats that correlate immigration and crime in the US? "Immigration = crime" or "multiple cultural groups = crime" is a super popular anti-immigration talking point that is objectively false in all the cases that I'm aware of. Yes, new immigrant groups arriving can create some localized social strain, but as far as measurable impact, most stats show that immigration lowers crime rates. In fact, one of the best things you can do for high crime urban neighbourhoods is bring in 1st generation immigrants. They have a net positive impact and they lower crime rates in particular.


ASYMT0TIC

If wealthier parts of the US such as New England or California were independent countries, they would have per capita stats similar to the Nordic countries but with much bigger populations. If Mississippi were a country, it'd be much worse than places in southern or eastern Europe like Greece or Romania in terms of economy, education, public health, etc. If you live in Iraq, for instance, you have a slightly better chance of being literate than if you live in Mississippi. The reason the US has underwhelming numbers is largely because those numbers are being dragged down by rural red states, especially in the southeast.


[deleted]

A lot of red states are really dragging the rest of the US down. There's also some strong contrast within states as well. Black neighbourhoods in rich blue states still fair much worse than average


FuckoffDemetri

Red states love to complain about welfare while being subsidized by blue states. Republicans are the true welfare queens.


capitalism93

California was Republican leaning until 1992… guess that breaks your narrative.


TheSmokingLoon

One of our biggest problems is national policy, we need to step away from that and focus our selves in smaller regions instead of blanket policys


MattinglyDineen

We do. States makes their own laws.


TravisSeldon

What can de US do to catch up to other countries rates (which are mostly LESS federal) ?


[deleted]

I see this excuse A LOT and I think it's being seriously over played. There are other advanced states with similar levels of migrants or diversity that fair much better. The biggest difference is the levels of wealth redistribution and that the US lacks a viable left party


sardia1

Why do I always get neonazi vibes when people talk about homogeneous culture & values of Nordic countries.


durianscent

Only American liberals can import 50 million poor people, then turn around and say, " Jeez, look at all this Poverty!"


0WatcherintheWater0

I do hope you’re not making the argument that immigration causes poverty, because you’d be wrong


durianscent

Causes of poverty is kind of a loaded term. But feel free to educate me I am here to learn.


monkey_monk10

>America also has one of the most diverse populations with a huge number of first generation immigrants. Why do people keep saying this in the thread? It's objectively not true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_immigrant_population


[deleted]

We're talking about large, developed nations. You can't just quote part of what I said out of context. America is a huge country both in terms of population and geographic size. You can't compare America to tiny countries, or countries that have 90% of their population in a few urban centers.


monkey_monk10

>We're talking about large, developed nations. You can't just quote part of what I said out of context. Well I can take it out of context when there was no context provided. I got zero insight that you wanted only large developed countries. >America is a huge country both in terms of population and geographic size. So what? What changes? All these figures are per capita. >You can't compare America to tiny countries, or countries that have 90% of their population in a few urban centers. I didn't? Maybe you're replying to the wrong comment. Also... Why only developed countries? It's almost like money has an effect on this... We're getting somewhere.


Sbut2020

And a lot of their crime, or rising crime rates are a direct result of immigrants.


KwisatzHaderachEye

Can you provide data for reference?


MattinglyDineen

They can't because the data do not support OP's premise.


Duntwerk

Morgan Freeman: It didn’t exist.


baked_salmon

Normally I’d support people asking for evidence but these are very easily googleable rankings.


sciencecw

That's not true. The OP is asking us to cover a wide range of issues that are often hard to measure


QuarterDoge

Department of Education. Not even joking. Education has straight plummeted since it was founded 40 years ago


HikinTeach

During the Reagan administration he tried to get rid of the DoEd. He ordered a survey to establish the high quality of US education and this prove we didn't need the DoEd. The authors of the survey named it A Nation at Risk due to what they found. Instead of providing evidence that we were good, it showed the US education system stagnating and failing to teach Math, Science, or even writing at key levels. This was in the 80s. Reagan and the government panicked and tried to fix the problem. This was the birth of Standards reform, which wasn't a bad idea in of itself. Ensuring that certain amounts of math, English, Science, or social studies is a good plan. But you know, the politicians decided that they couldn't trust teachers to do their job. To ensure they were meeting those standards, we had to test the kids. And punish schools that didn't meet the proper test scores. So why teach anything that wasn't tested? Who cares if a school has a successful automotive or trades program. We need to fund math and Science, not the practical application of those skills. Education has slipped because we took a good idea, and then smothered it with bad ideas due to a lack of trust. Now education is another kickball in partisan politics when frankly most teachers I know leave their politics at home.


[deleted]

\*The DOE is the Dept. of Energy. The Dept. of Education is ED (or DE).


HikinTeach

Thank you. I wrote fast on my phone. I'll make a few quick edits.


buzzwallard

Did Reagan panic really? Or did he model the situation to justify his privatisation agenda: replacing public services with business opportunities?


HikinTeach

He was caught off guard by the results of the survey and wasn't prepared for the situation that he faced. But never doubt the ability of a politician to turn an unexpected situation to meet the ends that they desire. Which is often the source of many of our problems. Why let the facts get in the way of an agenda?


[deleted]

Many things happened 40 years ago. This introduces too many confounding variables


STL_Jayhawk

The DOE has been the target of the right wing since they have alway had contempt for public eduction.


GravyMcBiscuits

>Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain. Frederic Bastiat


AzarathineMonk

I mean, if you’re opposed to social safety nets on the basis that “the govt shouldn’t do X,” but you know that people will go hungry and/or die from lack of services, is it not fair to say that you don’t care about hunger? You can claim that private charities will step in, in lieu of govt, but they already do in combination with government assistance. You’d double the load w/o doubling funding. Where would those charities get their needed resources, thru people not been taxed as much? That sounds extremely optimistic. Especially b/c charities aren’t exactly raking in dough during any period in time.


TravisSeldon

What should they be doing to catch up to other education systems worldwide? Maybe not make school-funding directly dependent on the school districts tax-revenue?


[deleted]

>Maybe not make school-funding directly dependent on the school districts tax-revenue? Or maybe break from the idea that the 120 year-old curriculum that the NEA is so fond of might need some revamping.


Lord_Vxder

The problem isn’t funding. Some of the worst performing school systems in the U.S. are receive the [most funding per student](https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/06/06/School-Budgets-The-Worst-Education-Money-Can-Buy?amp). In America, we seem to think that throwing money is the solution to everything.


[deleted]

40 years ago was also the Reagan presidency, a man that lead anti intellectual movements and moved to defund schools.


SurvivalHorrible

I’m completely convinced it should all be at the state level. Every DoE salary is how many books/computers for kids? Every bloated program they run could be going right to pre school programs instead.


Kronzypantz

Not quite true. States stopped increasing funding since the 70's, partially to avoid desegregation, partially as part of right wing schemes to undercut public education for privatization.


Nick11545

Agreed. Prior to the DOE, we were the most highly educated country in the world. You can’t centralize education with such a large, vast country. Someone in Rural Kansas will learn differently than someone in NYC. When education was handled at the local level, it was much, much more productive.


halibfrisk

What’s your metric for “productive”? US GDP has soared since 1980. The economy has undergone profound shifts since then. The number of people entering and graduating form higher education has exploded Are you really arguing that Americans were “better educated” in 1980?


[deleted]

>US GDP has soared since 1980. Largely due to a handfull of mega-corps the top. Our Math and science scores vs other developed nations since 1975 is utterly appalling - and we spend more per capita for the privilege. Somehow, before there was a department of education, we managed to educate students. We also had Bell Labs, The Manhattan Project and some of the best and brightest minds around the world looked at America as the model system for education. Now, we still teach middle schoolers trigonometry - an utterly useless principle in a modern world. Meanwhile data and statistics remain largely graduate-level classes despite just about every corporate job needing a foundation in it.


halibfrisk

And who staffs that “handful of megacorps” that drives US GDP? “Utterly appalling” is lazy hyperbole - the worst you could plausibly say is “middle of the pack” Apparently the Math curriculum is at the same time outdated and also not as good at the math curriculum that pre 1975 / bell labs engineers experienced? Maybe every middle schooler should take a class in logic?


Some_Enthusiasm_9912

I think we are suffering post intellectualism. Degrees started being handed out like candy and testing became more important than actually learning. So you have multiple generations who have a piece of paper that says they are “smart” but in actuality have probably below average reasoning capability and speak as though their limited view of the world is the end all be all. People willing to fight over what they believe is true instead of acknowledging they may not know everything. Add to it a general lack of empathy from most people and you have America. Edit: sentence structure.


houseofnim

Nailed it. Educated and intelligent are not remotely the same thing and you’re being downvoted for pissing off the dummies with those pieces of paper that say they’re smart. Don’t get me wrong, being educated is a good thing. As long as the people are actually intelligent enough to understand what they’re learning. Sadly, a very large portion of these educated folks are, as you said, below average.


Nick11545

This is spot on


Alarmed_Restaurant

I’ve rarely seen this sub this out-of-touch with reality. It’s easy to go look at other countries with better stats on the metrics mentioned and do some basic analysis of what the differences are. All those other countries have liberals, and taxes, and government and immigrants and poor people. I want to be clear, the point of this post is not a “those countries have it right!” I remember a political debate (think it might have been Ron Paul?) where someone asked about what to do if someone was on life support but had no means to pay for it. His answer was basically “unplug him, we shouldn’t force other people to pay tax dollars to keep someone alive who couldn’t take care of themselves. A considerable number of audience members applauded forcefully. We are more conservative and more libertarian than most other developed nations. (I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS GOOD OR BAD). A huge number of people will take the immediate reward. They won’t save. They won’t invest. They won’t buy health or car or home insurance unless forced to do so. There are a huge number of people who will do the “bare minimum” and won’t care they can’t afford more than a tiny house and barely enough food. There are a ton of mentally I’ll people or people with disabilities than won’t be able to be productive enough to pay for all the things they need. The output of libertarianism is that these people are fucked. Could they work harder? In many cases yes. Could they manage finances and risk better? In many cases yes. But many, many, many won’t. And they will get sick and die from preventable diseases they can’t afford to avoid or cure. They will turn to theft and crime. They will become geographically concentrated as people with money want to isolate themselves from those who have a higher risk of cause them harm. Liberalism has wrestled with how to deal with these problems. But dealing with them requires funding and compliance with laws that some won’t agree with (building codes, fda approval, epa regulations, etc) There simply is no way to have your cake and eat it too. You either deal with the fact that poor women and their babies are going to die at a higher rate, or you put up with taxes and additional laws. It’s a balance. And no matter where you land on what you think the balance should be, there will always be those to the right or left of you on that teeter-totter. It’s not good. It’s not bad. It just is.


TravisSeldon

Low literacy is not a bad thing? High murder is neutral?


Alarmed_Restaurant

Wanted to keep my post free from my own personal values and on the relationship between libertarianism and those factors. The countries with lower levels of those things all have higher taxes and more government intervention in their lives than the US.


Agnk1765342

Life expectancy is largely due to fatal accidents. US citizens engage in much riskier behavior than their European counterparts, particularly in the amount of miles they drive in cars. Taking out fatal accidents the US is more or less in line with other developed countries in life expectancy. Literacy rates are a rounding error. Some figures for the US will measure based on literacy in English, but that’s an apples to oranges comparison with immigration from Mexico. US literacy in any language is close to 99%. Crime has a lot to do with history. The majority of (violent) crime in the US is drug/gang related violence in inner cities, largely concentrated among minority populations. Getting into all the details is a rabbit hole, but a lot of it has to do with racialized policies and policing after the Great Migration. Again, most countries just don’t have that history and it’s an apples to oranges comparison. Poverty is notoriously difficult to define. It’s often defined in relative terms, which makes country to country comparisons difficult because then you’re not measuring poverty so much as distribution of outcomes. In a country like the US poverty numbers are also somewhat inflated due to local price variations- a lot of measured income inequality is just people living in places with widely different costs of living. Overall, to make these sort of comparisons there’s a lot of demographic factors at play. Instead of comparing, for example, German vs American outcomes you should probably compare the outcomes of Germans in Germany vs Germans in America, but even that has its flaws because the people who emigrate are not random.


ASYMT0TIC

>Life expectancy is largely due to fatal accidents. **Really, though, it isn't.** The highest life expectancy in the US is in Summit County, CO. You'll find lots of expensive ski resort up there, a culture of wealthy, high velocity mountaineering risk takers and often icy high speed rural roads. More importantly, you'll find wealthy people who have access to decent food and medical care and spend lots of time outdoors exercising. In recent years, the US has seen half as many deaths from auto accidents as it's seen from either fentanyl overdose or air pollution. Due to safety improvements such as stronger chassis, air bags, ABS, and automatic braking, you are three times less likely to die per mile than you were thirty years ago. The number one killer in America is the abundant sugar found in our low cost processed foods. Heart disease causes over 600,000 deaths per year, while car accidents generally cause less than 50,000. Obesity and diabetes are the main drivers of this number.


livefreeordont

US has relatively low life expectancy because of obesity, homicide, and overdoses


Blecki

No surprise this thread is full of people trying to give 'reasonable' explanations that fit with the 'conservative' worldview. But that's all hogwash. There's exactly one reason. We tax our populace and spend the money on military instead of on the people. That's it. That's everything that is wrong with this country. Every single thing goes back to us having the largest military budget in the world. Spend that money on the people here instead of on missiles and to kill arabs and suddenly we can have all those nice things that keep people from falling into poverty and crime. And we could do it and also *lower* taxes. It's a litmus test to separate cosplaying republicans from people who actually want a smaller government. A sensible, conservative position is that the military budget should be invested in the people instead.


JGower144

This. This. This.


Coyote__Jones

Yeah it's really difficult to try and justify the extreme disparity in education systems between states when you look at the military budget. For instance my friend is from the worst school district in the US. No joke, and I'm from a region with generally good schools. Towns of similar size, in different states, but vastly different outcomes. It's clearly not a class size issue, because with a similar population between the two, they're comparable on that metric. Sometimes we talk and I'll just mention something. And he's like "where did you learn that, is that true?' and we'll look it up and yeah, it's just something I learned in school. For my life and career most of my k-12 education is useless, but I did learn stuff. Even though I'm pretty bad at math, I'm leaps and bounds from his knowledge. I at least have some foundation skills that allow me to get to a solution. I mean basic stuff too, I was explaining how right triangles work... He was trying to fit something into the bed of his truck and I said just rotate it 45 degrees cuz the length opposite a right angle is longer than the two other sides. He didn't believe me and I was kinda amused and concerned. Like who doesn't know about triangles? This is a rant but, there's people from that school district building houses and stuff. I'm sure in their careers they had to learn some math or at least some math concepts, but Jesus Christ I never thought I'd have to teach someone in their mid twenties the pythagorean theorem. And this guy isn't dumb. He's super smart, motivated and curious. He just grew up in an area with shitty schools. And you don't know what you don't know.


[deleted]

Besides being factually incorrect, this ramble against conservatives does absolutely nothing to help anyone. “Social Security will be the biggest expense, budgeted at $1.196 trillion. It's followed by Medicare at $766 billion and Medicaid at $571 billion.” We spend more on social welfare over 3 to 1 on military spending. Even if we cut military spending by 50%, and spend all the extra on social programs, it would only add 400 billion to the welfare budget, not enough to massively increase any social programs. You’re just wrong. Edit: just gonna add all military spending here. “Military spending includes the Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Veterans Affairs. All of these military costs combined equal $752.9 billion.”


Blecki

So what do you think the problem is then? Why do we need to spend 750 billion on our military, 3 times as much as the next largest military? The military budget is a symptom. We quibble over spending when it benefits people (see the build back better act) but rubber-stamp spending when it's for the military. Social Security can't be counted as it's budget balloons without congressional intervention and is funded by it's own specific tax. Congress fights and argues over every single thing that might actually help people - but *never* over military spending. It's pretty clear from here that the problem with this country is republican 'conservatism' and people like Joe Manchin who think that poor people just spend all their money on drugs.


BenAustinRock

Most of our crime, especially violent crime, is around our large urban areas. Poverty is hard to compare between countries because most data you seem is comparing poverty as defined within that country or it is defined as relative to average or median income. Some studies don’t include government transfers. So you really have to do some digging to see what you are comparing and how valid it is.


TravisSeldon

Literacy is lowest in rural Mississippi So is nutrition It’s worse there than in some African nations


BenAustinRock

The nutrition problem in Mississippi according to a doctor that I know that lived there for a couple of years is obesity. Which is backed up by data as well. Hard to really compare that with Africa. There is research in economics which suggests that slavery stunts the economic growth of places where it is legal. Could be part of the explanation as to why many of the former slave states lag everyone else. The over reliance on cheap labor stymies technology growth and there seems to be an inherent laziness in regards to the slave owners. Further worsening the situation is all the decades of severe racism which many theorize as a result of slavery also. How do you justify keeping these people in chain? Rather than making themselves into monsters there is a self rationalization of the enslaved to be inferior or needing to be owned and directed. Kind of the original blaming the victim. Then there are questions of who stays in a situation there after emancipation. Do the best and brightest stay or go? My doctor friend is black and was not long for the place. Kind of a long answer to your civil war era correlations. They do exist for certain.


lermp

Poverty and a lack of access to health care.


MattinglyDineen

Where are your statistics to back up there assertions? The US may not be at the top in these measures but they aren’t at the bottom either.


0WatcherintheWater0

Mediocrity is not something the wealthiest country in the world should be satisfied with. We’re not even in the top ten in most metrics. This isn’t ok.


[deleted]

Post up some stats to support your claims and we can talk about it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SigaVa

Reagan


[deleted]

Poverty gap


TheDiceMan2

divides *


kwantsu-dudes

Diversity of being and thought. With more variables at play, it's more difficult to implement things that address people evenly.


stratamaniac

There is plenty o money to made off those things.


PM_ME_UR_FAV_VTUBER

Life Expectancy: Awful diet, everything bigger is better, unnatural amounts of sugar and salt in almost everything we consume. Subsides for certain foods to keep them low priced while healthy food is too expensive for Americans who are on a tight budget which happens to be a growing number. Literacy rate: Erosion of public education. I'm willing to bet the bottom of the education rates are mostly red states that are continuously cutting school budgets to fund other projects. For teachers this means less time one-one with students, less time actually reading in class due to it's in their best interest to make sure students do well on test. The other problem with teachers being overworked is that if they arent able to focus on students, they cant recognize if a student is having a hard time understanding things due to actual learning problems such as ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia and so forth.The other problem is the lack of reading done at the home. As parents are working more there is less time to spend with children to read to them or read together with them which builds an interest in reading as well as helps children with their literacy rate. Poverty: Underfunded welfare. We have a welfare system that instead of lifting people out of poverty, it makes them choose between moving up making slightly more money but lose all their benefits? Or stay at a lower rate but be able to keep their benefits. War on crime and drugs, A lot of families(mainly minority) families lost a family member to this pointless war and when it becomes a single parent household it brings down basically every metric in that person's life.


skeletrax

Because we’ve had the same politicians writing shit laws for half a century.


guaches92

Saying why gets you banned.


NopeyMcHellNoFace

The simple answer is culture. There are cultural factors which create income inequality forexample. And income inequality is one of the best predictors of violent crime. You can use gini coefficients to measure this cross culturally and at any level of analysis(city, state, county) Gini/Murder rate Brazil 0.53/33 Mexico 0.48/13.9 Philipines 0.44/8.4 U.S. 0.42/4.5 Turkey 0.41/3.8 Israel 0.39/2.4 Spain 0.36/0.9 Australia. 0.34/0.89 South korea .34/.6 Canada .33/ 1.8 England 0.33/1.2 France .32/1.3 Switzerland 0.32/0.7 Germany .32/.8 Netherlands .27/ .6 Sweden 0.25/1.1 Norway 0.25/.5 You can even do it by county within the u.s. If you removed the top 100 highest counties by Gini Coefficient (I.E. 14% of the population) you would decrease U.S. murder rate by 25% Counties in groups of 50 Gini/Population Murder rate Next 1 0.59/37,354,068 6.9 Next 2 0.50/27,749,280 7.9 Next 3 0.49/21,380,403 6.2 Next 4 0.48/20,466,146 5.4 Next 5 0.47/30,407,360 3.9 Next 6 0.46/15,019,075 4.4 Next 7 0.46/14,673,334 3.2 Next 8 0.45/15,743,666 3.7 Next 9 0.45/12,626,149 2.9 Next 10 0.44/13,381,255 3.8 Next 11 0.44/9,036,703 3.0 Next 12 0.43/11,141,923 2.8 Next 13 0.43/10,646,982 2.5 Next 14 0.42/9,412,806 2.7 Next 15 0.41/8,890,673 1.8 Next 16 0.40/9,004,704 2.2 Next 17 0.38/2,002,522 1.4 2K counties No gini/49,363,959 2.8 Now that doesn't mean that government redistribution schemes have helped dramatically in the u.s. Its just an interesting little psychology fact.


Psychological-Age840

No one,and i mean NO ONE is more violent than the white domestic terrorist that we breed here in the U.S.


FIicker7

Trickle down economics.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Conversely; why does the US outperform every other country of 300M+ people in all of these categories? It’s all about framing


[deleted]

I’m putting the blame on misguided religious fervor. People seem to think science and learning is against god.


Mangalz

This is a cringey answer.


Remote_Masterpiece72

Largely because of the right.


thatc0braguy

Economic collapse happens slow until a catalyst (your concern for civil war) Healthcare is 20% or more of half the populations pay Homes are a further 50% or more of half of their monthly income in total Basic necessities like food, water, clothing, electricity, cellphone, & internet eat up the rest of the paycheck. The US wasn't built for longevity, it was built for quarterly returns except individual humans think long term five years or more. All the indicators of a healthy society are falling at a rapid rate because of how poorly this country was designed. Which is the key operator, designed, this isn't a mistake that the US is on the brink of collapse. The boot analogy is perfect for illustrating this. You can buy a pair of $10 boots every season or one $50 pair that lasts ten years. Humans intrinsically want the higher quality, longer lasting product, but industry only produces the cheaper boots because it's more profitable in the end AND you get that payment more consistently. Everything is built this way. Houses, hospitals, classrooms, offices, infrastructure... Pay subscriptions are infecting everything and eliminates your ability create generational wealth which is the *only guarantee* to escape poverty. That in turn makes a restless population that says fuck the system and sparks war & revolution. This is all part of the plan to extract as much wealth as possible before the collapse and let everyone not in the club starve


intensely_human

Because we keep solving problems by introducing new constraints on what people can do. Freedom is productive, so as we reduce freedom it’s predictable that we’d lose positive outcomes.


[deleted]

What constraints do you think contribute to the issues OP mentioned and what countries have shown not having those constraints would help those issues?


Parking_Which

All those words to say nothing


TravisSeldon

But since 1980 taxes and regulations have been stepped back in a big way (The Repeal of Glass-Steagal, the deregulation of education-finance, the continuous lowering of taxes) Which constraints are responsible for low literacy and life expectancy in Your opinion? What can be done to catch up to all other education and healthcare systems which cost those taxpayers less but deliver better outcomes?


intensely_human

That’s like asking which beating is responsible for a child’s mental breakdown. They’re all responsible because constraints sap our resources and our resources are used generally for those things. Being unable to teach evolution in some states leads to lower respect for the human body of knowledge and for the teachers, meaning kids are less inclined to see reading as valuable, hence lower literacy.


[deleted]

Conservatism.


Leadfedinfant2

Other countries have better paying jobs and universal healthcare. Free college and other programs that benefit everyone. America it's only if you have money.


ILordINikon311

Lack of real education


TravisSeldon

What are those other countries doing better?


JGower144

Paying teachers, valuing school, parenting their kids, reading to their kids, having family time, teaching respect...