4 ms·
Right. In Berlin, we have a district called Neukölln, a poor district accumulated a lot of social and economic problems, such as high levels of violent crimes,
by ernst_klim 3y ago
Right.
In Berlin, we have a district called Neukölln, a poor district accumulated a lot of social and economic problems, such as high levels of violent crimes, drug abuse, a lot of homeless, gang wars etc.
The solutions for Neukölln problems devised by left-leaning municipal and city govs were absolutely fabulous, such as public swimming pools. At some point when it became clear that the district (or rather Berlin in general) is an eternal money pit, it was decided to cut its funding.
What was the response of local gov? Cut unnecessary and redundant services (sarcasm) like school security, drug addiction helping centers among others. Basically what they do is an open blackmailing, "you cut the funds, we are fucking things up", but that's how political blanket-pulling game works. Nobody likes funding cuts, so it's not uncommon that executives, local governments and various institutions sabotaging such initiatives.
- ilikerashers 3y agoWhat should they have cut in your opinion?
- Jensson 3y agoBureaucrats, there are too much of them almost everywhere so they could probably cut their own numbers. Instead they choose to cut the workers, which is why it is so hard to do anything about them and why we have too many of them everywhere.
- seec 3y agoPretty much. And since they are seen as "better" or more "educated" than the actual workers they are most of the time paid much more, so even though technically there might be less of them, they cost quite a lot more to society, for providing "services" that very often have negative value.