I think the decentralization of city social services that often leads to the creation of 'hubs' of poor performing schools, single parent families, gangs etc etc would be a great start. Rather than have homes, neighborhoods and apartment complexes that are built almost solely for and because of section 8 and other subsidies, we have to create a different mechanism. There aren't any perfect solutions that come to my mind, though lots of ideas do... but it seems the one we've engaged in for the past 50 years is among the worst.

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

Do you honestly believe there is A reason? That this problem can be traced to ONE President and ONE policy?

(03-24-2016 11:22 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

Do you honestly believe there is A reason? That this problem can be traced to ONE President and ONE policy?

Perhaps not one president and one policy but you'd have to be crazy not to admit that what happened during the Reagan administration was a significant factor. The statistics are there for you to see.

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:14 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 10:15 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's common knowledge that under the Reagan administration, cocaine was allowed to be send to the United States and sold in the inner cities in order to fund the Contras in South America.

This was the impact.

Using an index that combined indicators like crack cocaine related deaths and medical emergencies, arrests and seizures, and media coverage, researchers Steven Levitt and Kevin M Murphy found that the drug's worst impact was on the Northeastern and South Atlantic States, headed by New York and Maryland. 70% of the impact of crack was felt in large cities, and the rates per capita were 10 times higher in larger cities than in the rest of the nation. During the time period studied, cities with the worst crack problems were Newark, Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle. Other cities that rank high include New Orleans, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.[18]

Crime[edit]
Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]

Well, I see fit derailing and changing the conversation once again after several people trying to explain some reasons for higher black arrests. No rebuttal, no further questions, no but, but, but - just another move the goalposts .......................................

Reagan funneled cocaine to inner city blacks to pay for Contras??????

I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

(03-24-2016 11:26 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:14 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 10:15 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's common knowledge that under the Reagan administration, cocaine was allowed to be send to the United States and sold in the inner cities in order to fund the Contras in South America.

This was the impact.

Using an index that combined indicators like crack cocaine related deaths and medical emergencies, arrests and seizures, and media coverage, researchers Steven Levitt and Kevin M Murphy found that the drug's worst impact was on the Northeastern and South Atlantic States, headed by New York and Maryland. 70% of the impact of crack was felt in large cities, and the rates per capita were 10 times higher in larger cities than in the rest of the nation. During the time period studied, cities with the worst crack problems were Newark, Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle. Other cities that rank high include New Orleans, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.[18]

Crime[edit]
Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]

Well, I see fit derailing and changing the conversation once again after several people trying to explain some reasons for higher black arrests. No rebuttal, no further questions, no but, but, but - just another move the goalposts .......................................

Reagan funneled cocaine to inner city blacks to pay for Contras??????

I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

Read what I posted again. I've given you all the numbers.

(03-24-2016 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:26 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:14 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 10:15 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's common knowledge that under the Reagan administration, cocaine was allowed to be send to the United States and sold in the inner cities in order to fund the Contras in South America.

This was the impact.

Using an index that combined indicators like crack cocaine related deaths and medical emergencies, arrests and seizures, and media coverage, researchers Steven Levitt and Kevin M Murphy found that the drug's worst impact was on the Northeastern and South Atlantic States, headed by New York and Maryland. 70% of the impact of crack was felt in large cities, and the rates per capita were 10 times higher in larger cities than in the rest of the nation. During the time period studied, cities with the worst crack problems were Newark, Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle. Other cities that rank high include New Orleans, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.[18]

Crime[edit]
Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]

Well, I see fit derailing and changing the conversation once again after several people trying to explain some reasons for higher black arrests. No rebuttal, no further questions, no but, but, but - just another move the goalposts .......................................

Reagan funneled cocaine to inner city blacks to pay for Contras??????

I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

Read what I posted again. I've given you all the numbers.

You've given proof of nothing.

(03-24-2016 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:26 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:14 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 10:15 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's common knowledge that under the Reagan administration, cocaine was allowed to be send to the United States and sold in the inner cities in order to fund the Contras in South America.

This was the impact.

Using an index that combined indicators like crack cocaine related deaths and medical emergencies, arrests and seizures, and media coverage, researchers Steven Levitt and Kevin M Murphy found that the drug's worst impact was on the Northeastern and South Atlantic States, headed by New York and Maryland. 70% of the impact of crack was felt in large cities, and the rates per capita were 10 times higher in larger cities than in the rest of the nation. During the time period studied, cities with the worst crack problems were Newark, Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle. Other cities that rank high include New Orleans, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.[18]

Crime[edit]
Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]

Well, I see fit derailing and changing the conversation once again after several people trying to explain some reasons for higher black arrests. No rebuttal, no further questions, no but, but, but - just another move the goalposts .......................................

Reagan funneled cocaine to inner city blacks to pay for Contras??????

I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

Read what I posted again. I've given you all the numbers.

Which don't prove your point.

(03-24-2016 11:32 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:26 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:14 AM)Crebman Wrote:  Well, I see fit derailing and changing the conversation once again after several people trying to explain some reasons for higher black arrests. No rebuttal, no further questions, no but, but, but - just another move the goalposts .......................................

Reagan funneled cocaine to inner city blacks to pay for Contras??????

I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

Read what I posted again. I've given you all the numbers.

You've given proof of nothing.

If you want to keep your head in the sand that's up to you. I've laid out the facts for you.

(03-24-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:22 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

Do you honestly believe there is A reason? That this problem can be traced to ONE President and ONE policy?

Perhaps not one president and one policy but you'd have to be crazy not to admit that what happened during the Reagan administration was a significant factor. The statistics are there for you to see.

The statistics show the rapid rise of incarcerations, drug use, and single parent households far predates the regan administration. Hell the very graphs have been posted here.

Out of wedlock birth rate



Starts increasing in the mid 50's. Hit's it's stride in the mid 60's and the rate of increase begins to fall in the 80's.

Incarceration Rates



The total incarceration rate is about where it was in the 50's. The difference is that we systematically shut down public mental health services starting in the mid 50's which led to a dip that then spiked back up to the same rate it had been with more people in prison and less getting mental help.

Now we can argue why these things happened when they did and there are points to be made all around. But the fact of the matter is that neither of them was caused or made worse by Regan. He's not some boogeyman you can pin all minority problems to.

(03-24-2016 12:17 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:25 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:22 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

Do you honestly believe there is A reason? That this problem can be traced to ONE President and ONE policy?

Perhaps not one president and one policy but you'd have to be crazy not to admit that what happened during the Reagan administration was a significant factor. The statistics are there for you to see.

The statistics show the rapid rise of incarcerations, drug use, and single parent households far predates the regan administration. Hell the very graphs have been posted here.

Out of wedlock birth rate



Starts increasing in the mid 50's. Hit's it's stride in the mid 60's and the rate of increase begins to fall in the 80's.

Incarceration Rates



The total incarceration rate is about where it was in the 50's. The difference is that we systematically shut down public mental health services starting in the mid 50's which led to a dip that then spiked back up to the same rate it had been with more people in prison and less getting mental help.

Now we can argue why these things happened when they did and there are points to be made all around. But the fact of the matter is that neither of them was caused or made worse by Regan. He's not some boogeyman you can pin all minority problems to.

I guess I'll have to post it again.

"Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

So, a drug addict at home is better than a drug addict in prison for children? I don't see much of a difference.

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

Homicide rates and drug use among teens and 20-somethings are a lagging indicator of problems, not a leading one.

Think about it fit... Those kids, thrust into a no fathers culture from the mid 50's through the 70's were turning 15-35 when the 80's came around.

Kids born into a dysfunctional community are not killers today, they are killers in 15-25 years.

These same kids became more prone to use drugs (low birth weight high infant mortality).

The war on drugs, for better or worse, was not an action it was a reaction and the laws were passed by a democratic congress not by Reagan.

It's not like perfectly find African American 12 year olds became 13 year old monsters because Reagan won in 1980 and took office in 81. There were a lot of damaged 12 year old with real problems that bloomed as they got older.

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I guess I'll have to post it again.
"Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

None of which proves your point.

(03-24-2016 12:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I guess I'll have to post it again.
"Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

None of which proves your point.

What exactly did you think my point was?

(03-24-2016 12:27 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 12:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I guess I'll have to post it again.
"Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

None of which proves your point.

What exactly did you think my point was?

That decisions made in the 80's seemed to be the genesis of the real decline of the African American Community?

(03-24-2016 12:10 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:32 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:29 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:26 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I've given you the reason for higher crime rates. You are just in denial.

state it one more time for us then. Evidently we are all hard of hearing.

Read what I posted again. I've given you all the numbers.

You've given proof of nothing.

If you want to keep your head in the sand that's up to you. I've laid out the facts for you.

That's your opinion on the data. You have given absolutely zero definitive reasons. You should really try to understand the definition of "facts" and how to apply them to critical thinking exercises.

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

http://www.drugfreeworld.org/drugfacts/c...story.html

Quote:According to the US Drug Enforcement Agency, by the late 1970s there was a huge glut of cocaine powder being shipped into the United States. This caused the price of the drug to drop by as much as 80%. Faced with dropping prices for their illegal product, drug dealers converted the powder to “crack,” a solid form of cocaine that could be smoked.


Broken into small chunks, or “rocks,” this form of cocaine could be sold in smaller quantities, to more people at bigger profit. It was cheap, simple to produce, easy to use, and highly profitable for dealers.

As early as 1980, reports of crack use were appearing in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston and the Caribbean.

The biggest surge in the use of the drug occurred during the “crack epidemic,” between 1984 and 1990, when the drug spread across American cities. The crack epidemic dramatically increased the number of Americans addicted to cocaine. In 1985, the number of people who admitted using cocaine on a routine basis increased from 4.2 million to 5.8 million.


By the end of 1986, crack was available in twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia. By 1987, crack was reported to be available in all but four states in the United States. Since then, use of the drug has continued to spread throughout North and South America and into Europe and the rest of the world.

Hmmmmm......is it just me or are the dates in my quote strangely similar to the ones in Fit's quote?

(03-24-2016 12:25 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

Homicide rates and drug use among teens and 20-somethings are a lagging indicator of problems, not a leading one.

Think about it fit... Those kids, thrust into a no fathers culture from the mid 50's through the 70's were turning 15-35 when the 80's came around.

Kids born into a dysfunctional community are not killers today, they are killers in 15-25 years.

These same kids became more prone to use drugs (low birth weight high infant mortality).

The war on drugs, for better or worse, was not an action it was a reaction and the laws were passed by a democratic congress not by Reagan.

It's not like perfectly find African American 12 year olds became 13 year old monsters because Reagan won in 1980 and took office in 81. There were a lot of damaged 12 year old with real problems that bloomed as they got older.

The Great Society was launched in '65. The first of those children would have been 15-16 when Reagan took office.

(03-24-2016 12:23 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  So, a drug addict at home is better than a drug addict in prison for children? I don't see much of a difference.

maybe, the addict isn't one in either housing....

open ended, yes......however, I would prefer the one with the children and increase the knowledge base through education as opposed to incarceration.....

both my parents stopped smoking when I started......

fk the bullshite.....I've lived my life that way in observation and sadomasochism.....

(03-24-2016 12:25 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-24-2016 12:20 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "Between 1984 and 1989, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced a 20%–100% increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care.[19] In 1996, approximately 60% of inmates incarcerated in the US were sentenced on drug charges. The United States remains the largest overall consumer of narcotics in the world as of 2014.[18][20]"

Homicide rates and drug use among teens and 20-somethings are a lagging indicator of problems, not a leading one.

Think about it fit... Those kids, thrust into a no fathers culture from the mid 50's through the 70's were turning 15-35 when the 80's came around.

Kids born into a dysfunctional community are not killers today, they are killers in 15-25 years.

These same kids became more prone to use drugs (low birth weight high infant mortality).

The war on drugs, for better or worse, was not an action it was a reaction and the laws were passed by a democratic congress not by Reagan.

It's not like perfectly find African American 12 year olds became 13 year old monsters because Reagan won in 1980 and took office in 81. There were a lot of damaged 12 year old with real problems that bloomed as they got older.

I understand what you are saying. But lets not pretend that the problems you mention were exclusive to black families. The problems you speak of faced most inner city families regardless of race. However, the statistics I presented represent how it effected the black community during this time. That is the point I am trying to make. While any president can have policies that are positive or negative, it's going to effect different people in different ways.

In this case, the influx of cocaine into inner cities effected black communities on a wider scale than most other people. If you want to talk about a lagging effect. It was the campaign against drug use that only escalated when it began to effect the suburban areas of America.