9 ms·

"I could demonstrate to you that every single bank robbery, that in every single case practically, the cost of the police was more than the actual money that th

by uxp100 7y ago

"I could demonstrate to you that every single bank robbery, that in every single case practically, the cost of the police was more than the actual money that the robbers took from the bank. Does that mean, 'Oh, you see, there's really no economic interest involved, then. They're not protecting the banks. The police are just doing this because they're on a power trip, or they're macho, or they're control freaks, that's why they do it.' No, of course it's an economic... of course they're defending the banks. Of course, because if they didn't stop that bank robbery, regardless of the cost, this could jeopardize the entire banking system." -- Michael Parenti Despite quoting that I'm not a hardcore leftist (anymore). But I think it's an insightful quote, and does at least explain why certain crimes are handled the way they are. That being said, this simply shouldn't be a criminal matter, and should be handled more similarly to overdue parking meters, as some say in the twitter comments. (Also, that quote is out of context, it is itself serving as an example to explain the (lack of) roi for american interventionism in South America. And yes I used to listen to a lot of Choking Victim)

free652 7y ago
But it didn't cost $22,000. If he didn't go to a jail would the city save $22k? The city lost $215,000,000 in revenue due to the fare evasion.
- addicted 7y ago
  That assumes people would pay the money otherwise. Which is almost certainly not true. The people who don’t pay likely don’t have the money in the first place or are drunk. It’s unlikely they would have paid any ways.
  - Scoundreller 7y ago
    I like the French system of school lunches. Every student has a card to pay for lunch. The exact price charged is on a sliding scale depending on family income. One child has no idea what the other is charged, it's just a swipe of the card. You're also not allowed to bring your own lunch to eat in the cafeteria, but that system can work out okay when you have dedicated chefs at each school, and cheap good cheese (and funding for... children to eat... a bizarre concept in some parts of the world).
    - david38 7y ago
      Not allowed to bring your own? You think this is a good thing? God forbid I make some food at home. Sounds like a protection racket to me or a social equality experiment gone crazy.
      - Scoundreller 7y ago
        If the provided lunch is any good, then yes, a good thing. Could some families afford the cost and time of providing a better 2-4 course lunch every day? Sure, but most won’t.
        majewsky 7y ago
        As a child, I had a wide array of food allergies, so doctors put me on a so-called rotation diet. I could only be exposed to certain food items once every 4 days. Day 1 of the cycle allowed wheat and rye, so on the other days, I could not eat any dish with sauce bound with wheat flour. (My family used carob seed flour instead.) Day 2 was potatoes, day 3 was corn, day 4 was rice. (Those were the most significant items. There was more on the diet plan.) This is why, for the first 4 years of school, I went to a specialized school for physically and mentally disabled children. I was not really disabled (besides allergies and asthma), but that was the only school where the cafeteria personnel was able/willing to accommodate my needs. (My grandmother brought in precooked food for me for the next day when she picked me up from school.) When I changed to secondary school, my parents employed some legal tricks to get me into a school close to my grandmother's apartment, so I could go to her place for lunch. I realize that I was an edge case. But I sure hope that the laws governing those French kids accommodate their edge cases.
        danielscrubs 7y ago
        It’s probably similar to the Nordics. Which is that it’s the schools responsibility to cater to your needs, no matter the costs. Just be sure to have a doctors note.
      - geofft 7y ago
- zaroth 7y ago
  And if they handed out $50 tickets for fare evasion, how much revenue would that generate?
  - free652 7y ago
    It's already a $100 fine: http://web.mta.info/nyct/rules/TransitAdjudicationBureau/rules.htm http://web.mta.info/nyct/rules/TransitAdjudicationBureau/rul...
    - zaroth 7y ago
      NYC.gov says 14,000 summons ($100 fine) in Q4. Who knows what percentage of those are paid. But relative to the size of the problem that’s a pittance.
  - bdcravens 7y ago
    You almost always have the option of going to jail to pay fines, typically at $50-100/day served. Was on the train here in Houston yesterday, and this very topic came up as some folks were chatting with a transit officer onboard. Some said they'd always sit in jail rather than pay a fine.
  - kristopolous 7y ago
    The person who can't afford $2 is now going to pay $50? From where? How?
    - failrate 7y ago
      Have them spend a shift cleaning garbage. Done.
      - geofft 7y ago
        I see we're leaning real hard into that "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted" thing.
Chris_Chambers 7y ago
“Hey everybody, I like crust punk, look at me” - the post.
CamperBob2 7y ago
Despite quoting that I'm not a hardcore leftist (anymore). I don't see that as a leftist quote. The police aren't supposed to be a profit center.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  The idea that the police are supposed to be a profit center is a neo-liberal thing not liberal or conservative. You can make an argument that based on enforcement costs, the subsidies alternative transportation receive, and the externalities of such that the optimal fare price for public transportation is negative. If the optimal fair price is negative then you shouldn't charge fares at all. You can find leftists, conservatives, fascists that agree with that.
- uxp100 7y ago
  Well the man who said it is a leftist, and was making a leftist point overall. But out of context it is more of a neutral analysis.
hi5eyes 7y ago
former anarcho crust punks rise up o7
dls2016 7y ago
Ok, but when was the last time anyone ever went to jail for wage theft? Once you look at which crimes lead to arrest and the racial/economic background of those arrested, this quote quickly stops making sense. It's the broken windows theory, plain and simple.
- uxp100 7y ago
  What do you think the meaning of the quote is I guess? One point of the quote is that protection of the concept of private property is a function of the police. It's more of a piece of (I think accurate) neutral analysis with how I've used it, but I think you have a different perspective on what this means if you think it "stops making sense."
teslaberry 7y ago
yea but the real theives here are the comptrollers of the mta and many other people pushing corruption and theft and double dealing. this is why the mta is falling apart. this is why it costs 1 BILLION dollars to build a new subway station. yes , 1 billion. for one train line station. not a like a major station, just a stop on a line extension. peak corruption at the top leads to higher prices and less money for enforcement. so you get a massive spike in fare beating mostly by people who cannot afford it. i would argue that enforcement should be extreme for quality of life in the subway and harshly punished. fare beating though is not the problem.... in fact, it is loud playing of music (still) and homeless people smelling up the subway, and people EATING on the train and this kind of thing. it should be harshly punished with jail time or worse, just massive fines backed by jail time. this way, the cost of cleaning the subway and making it useful for use will go down as those not willing to respect their fellow strap hangers will go broke if they refuse to do so. also more cameras in the subway for violations of subway code of ethics. fare beating IS associated with delinquency, but it is the only thing i would say almost makes sense. you WANT people using the subway, not cars, not cabs, not even busses. it's zero emission at point of travel. powered by electric. it's what you want people depending on . and we don't have the sophistication quite yet to deploy a pay what you cann afford system. and frankly, i hope we never do. you wanna fare beat, go ahead. if you get caught on the spot, you should get a warning and a 100 dollar fine. not jail. if you don't pay fines, you get a warrant. and it should be punished with 100 hours of compelled service cleaning the subway. that's what makes sense!
segmondy 7y ago
You can't compare bank robbery, it's usually done with force or threat of force. The tellers are usually traumatized...

by uxp100 7y ago

free652 7y ago

But it didn't cost $22,000. If he didn't go to a jail would the city save $22k? The city lost $215,000,000 in revenue due to the fare evasion.

addicted 7y ago
That assumes people would pay the money otherwise. Which is almost certainly not true. The people who don’t pay likely don’t have the money in the first place or are drunk. It’s unlikely they would have paid any ways.
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  I like the French system of school lunches. Every student has a card to pay for lunch. The exact price charged is on a sliding scale depending on family income. One child has no idea what the other is charged, it's just a swipe of the card. You're also not allowed to bring your own lunch to eat in the cafeteria, but that system can work out okay when you have dedicated chefs at each school, and cheap good cheese (and funding for... children to eat... a bizarre concept in some parts of the world).
  - david38 7y ago
    Not allowed to bring your own? You think this is a good thing? God forbid I make some food at home. Sounds like a protection racket to me or a social equality experiment gone crazy.
    - Scoundreller 7y ago
      If the provided lunch is any good, then yes, a good thing. Could some families afford the cost and time of providing a better 2-4 course lunch every day? Sure, but most won’t.
      - majewsky 7y ago
        As a child, I had a wide array of food allergies, so doctors put me on a so-called rotation diet. I could only be exposed to certain food items once every 4 days. Day 1 of the cycle allowed wheat and rye, so on the other days, I could not eat any dish with sauce bound with wheat flour. (My family used carob seed flour instead.) Day 2 was potatoes, day 3 was corn, day 4 was rice. (Those were the most significant items. There was more on the diet plan.) This is why, for the first 4 years of school, I went to a specialized school for physically and mentally disabled children. I was not really disabled (besides allergies and asthma), but that was the only school where the cafeteria personnel was able/willing to accommodate my needs. (My grandmother brought in precooked food for me for the next day when she picked me up from school.) When I changed to secondary school, my parents employed some legal tricks to get me into a school close to my grandmother's apartment, so I could go to her place for lunch. I realize that I was an edge case. But I sure hope that the laws governing those French kids accommodate their edge cases.
        danielscrubs 7y ago
        It’s probably similar to the Nordics. Which is that it’s the schools responsibility to cater to your needs, no matter the costs. Just be sure to have a doctors note.
    - geofft 7y ago
zaroth 7y ago
And if they handed out $50 tickets for fare evasion, how much revenue would that generate?
- free652 7y ago
  It's already a $100 fine: http://web.mta.info/nyct/rules/TransitAdjudicationBureau/rules.htm http://web.mta.info/nyct/rules/TransitAdjudicationBureau/rul...
  - zaroth 7y ago
    NYC.gov says 14,000 summons ($100 fine) in Q4. Who knows what percentage of those are paid. But relative to the size of the problem that’s a pittance.
- bdcravens 7y ago
  You almost always have the option of going to jail to pay fines, typically at $50-100/day served. Was on the train here in Houston yesterday, and this very topic came up as some folks were chatting with a transit officer onboard. Some said they'd always sit in jail rather than pay a fine.
- kristopolous 7y ago
  The person who can't afford $2 is now going to pay $50? From where? How?
  - failrate 7y ago
    Have them spend a shift cleaning garbage. Done.
    - geofft 7y ago
      I see we're leaning real hard into that "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted" thing.

Chris_Chambers 7y ago

“Hey everybody, I like crust punk, look at me” - the post.

CamperBob2 7y ago

Despite quoting that I'm not a hardcore leftist (anymore). I don't see that as a leftist quote. The police aren't supposed to be a profit center.

Gibbon1 7y ago
The idea that the police are supposed to be a profit center is a neo-liberal thing not liberal or conservative. You can make an argument that based on enforcement costs, the subsidies alternative transportation receive, and the externalities of such that the optimal fare price for public transportation is negative. If the optimal fair price is negative then you shouldn't charge fares at all. You can find leftists, conservatives, fascists that agree with that.
uxp100 7y ago
Well the man who said it is a leftist, and was making a leftist point overall. But out of context it is more of a neutral analysis.

hi5eyes 7y ago

former anarcho crust punks rise up o7

dls2016 7y ago

Ok, but when was the last time anyone ever went to jail for wage theft? Once you look at which crimes lead to arrest and the racial/economic background of those arrested, this quote quickly stops making sense. It's the broken windows theory, plain and simple.

uxp100 7y ago
What do you think the meaning of the quote is I guess? One point of the quote is that protection of the concept of private property is a function of the police. It's more of a piece of (I think accurate) neutral analysis with how I've used it, but I think you have a different perspective on what this means if you think it "stops making sense."

teslaberry 7y ago

yea but the real theives here are the comptrollers of the mta and many other people pushing corruption and theft and double dealing. this is why the mta is falling apart. this is why it costs 1 BILLION dollars to build a new subway station. yes , 1 billion. for one train line station. not a like a major station, just a stop on a line extension. peak corruption at the top leads to higher prices and less money for enforcement. so you get a massive spike in fare beating mostly by people who cannot afford it. i would argue that enforcement should be extreme for quality of life in the subway and harshly punished. fare beating though is not the problem.... in fact, it is loud playing of music (still) and homeless people smelling up the subway, and people EATING on the train and this kind of thing. it should be harshly punished with jail time or worse, just massive fines backed by jail time. this way, the cost of cleaning the subway and making it useful for use will go down as those not willing to respect their fellow strap hangers will go broke if they refuse to do so. also more cameras in the subway for violations of subway code of ethics. fare beating IS associated with delinquency, but it is the only thing i would say almost makes sense. you WANT people using the subway, not cars, not cabs, not even busses. it's zero emission at point of travel. powered by electric. it's what you want people depending on . and we don't have the sophistication quite yet to deploy a pay what you cann afford system. and frankly, i hope we never do. you wanna fare beat, go ahead. if you get caught on the spot, you should get a warning and a 100 dollar fine. not jail. if you don't pay fines, you get a warrant. and it should be punished with 100 hours of compelled service cleaning the subway. that's what makes sense!

segmondy 7y ago

You can't compare bank robbery, it's usually done with force or threat of force. The tellers are usually traumatized...