[Stylo]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

Same way Brookfield was strip mined.

Huh?

[mikelizard860]

Originally Posted by JViello

No stop, you are destroying the liberal argument that it's because they are poor they steal and kill...and we should give them the rich people money to fix it.

Again to continue the theme above. Murders in Manchester NH in 2009? 2.

Crime index for New Haven 772. Manchester 332.

Per capita income Rockland ME? $16,600. Not a run down part of the city, not a thug in site, downtown vibrant (very much so), services in tact, nice place.




Money doesn't buy decency, nor morality.

What's the cost of living in rockland maine vs. new haven? 16,600 in rockland maine is very different than 16, 600 in new haven. 16,600 is what you'd spend on rent for a descent one bedroom apt in new haven for a year. lol. If you think money has nothing to do with the crime rate than you're delusional. That being said, of course it's not the only factor. It's just one of the contributing factors. Someone who can't really afford to keep a roof over his head is going to take more chances than someone that is comfortable. Just common sense. Money is not the ONLY factor, but to completely dismiss it is simply ignorant. Look at any place that has a large gap in income(income inequality). The lower income area generally has a ton of crime.(ie many South American countries)

[Stylo]

Something to consider, on a thread about NYC crime: https://www.city-data.com/forum/1307279-post21.html

[DanaMarley]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Shootings have happened in the "nice" parts recently, including the downtown/entertainment district. Not good, and some new leadership indeed. Until the mayor stops catering to those who feel entitled, nothing will chance.

You got that right Kidyankee. We see this all the time in once nice towns near Hartford too... The ones who were given free housing, free medical care, etc. etc, are now thinking they OWN the towns they live in. Very arrogant, very rude, very careless, & sadly enough, often times violent abusive people.

So.. what the mayor of New Haven, laid off police men in an area where violence often occurs? That doesn't make any sense.

We got cops in areas outside Hartford that don't seem to want to enforce the law either.
We just were travelling down the Main Street in Manchester a short time ago and saw this huge tractor trailer, blocking like 6 different cars, which were parked outside of stores.
There was a cop car behind the trailer, but the cop was not giving the driver of the tractor trailer a ticket for blocking all those cars! Why wouldn't he?
You yourself would get a ticket for blocking another car, if you were a driver of a regular car.
I also noticed it took them quite awhile to start getting posters all around town, of that guy who murdered the convenience store clerk. Why wouldn't they put those posters up right away all over the town?
All they had the poster of the murderer, was in the very small shopping center where the crime was committed. That's nuts. Like that guy who killed that clerk is going to come around to the same place he committed the crime?
None of this makes much sense to us.

[DanaMarley]

Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73

Ummm...it's not some nameless, faceless "CT" that is allowing this. It is the deliberate execution of a policy created by a cynical group of union hacks, whose members understand only one thing: PLEASE LORD DON'T EVER LET ME SINK TO BE LOW MAN ON THE TOTEM POLE. The play only works when you create new members with less seniority, fast, who will keep pushing YOU up by comparison.

It's funny watching it happen in real time. Notionally, here's how it works. Less than a month ago some young woman was simpering on the front page of the Courant, politicking for a new underprivileged children's bureau with herself as the head. Thank heavens the union leadership got to her and told her to cut it out until after the contract vote. She vamoosed abruptly like a good girl. My money sez there'll be a new underprivileged children's bureau created after the contract vote that we will not hear about until it is slipped in as a line item in next year's budget. The simpering woman, of course, will head it up. She must have scratched somebody's back.

Touching, actually, to see them all in bed together. One for you, one for me, one for my buddy, one for my sis, one for my uncle, one for you, one for me.....

Next up will be some friend of Dannel's. The friend will own the land under the New Britain - Hartford bus road, and Dannel will approve the state purchase for - oh, say - $3 Billion initially. He will sweat bullets and posture for months, bringing that land price down to $1 Billion, $50K at a time, while receiving accolades. The Democrats will cheer him as a hero for containing the bus road overrun to a mere $1 Billion bucks.

The whitewash for the hanky-panky and bloated membership: THIS PROGRAM IS FOR THE POOR AND DOWNTRODDEN and WE NEED A NEW DEPARTMENT TO EXERCISE OVERSIGHT!! Thereby, new unionized headcount is authorized, new networks of backscratching between union hacks, town fathers, developers, and Planning and Zoning commissions are created. Of course, now that there is a critical mass of the poor and downtrodden, they will increase their numbers exponentially, thus justifying further increases in the unionized headcount. The sanctuary thing was insurance, a stroke of brilliance. If 800,000 people on welfare is good, 1.5 million will be much, much better. They'll need a lot more administrative departments, more jobs, more avenues for backscratching.

See how it works? Very neat, very tidy, all plausibly deniable. Even the watchers, and the watchers watching the watchers are on the take! Same way Brookfield was strip mined. By the time the party's over, all pockets will have been filled, and the pols, groaning, off to the Caymans, where they will laugh while watching those they left behind shooting one another on the streets for entertainment, sort of like Rollerball. A Hobbesian war of all against all.

It's no wonder state employees are terrified of being bumped. If I could pull it off, doing so little for so many for so long, and with such a cocksure air, I SURELY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE OUT IN A REGULAR WORKPLACE EITHER!!!

So, coldy - button it. You've been outed.

This I can agree with you upon Jane, "It's no wonder state employees are terrified of being bumped. If I could pull it off, doing so little for so many for so long, and with such a cocksure air, I SURELY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE OUT IN A REGULAR WORKPLACE EITHER!!!"

Yeah, funny how the taxpayers of the state are expected to pay their taxes on a regular & increasing basis. They also need to do whatever they need to do just to keep their jobs, including getting hardly any benefits, working more hours, getting lower wages, but the people who work for the state and local governments whose wages are being funded by the taxpayers aren't expected to do much at all, except show up for work!

There are so many inept public servants, both, state and local, who do NOT need to be working for any division of the public sector, it's absurd! These people need to be let go, not laid off!

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by DanaMarley

This I can agree with you upon Jane, "It's no wonder state employees are terrified of being bumped. If I could pull it off, doing so little for so many for so long, and with such a cocksure air, I SURELY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE OUT IN A REGULAR WORKPLACE EITHER!!!"

Yeah, funny how the taxpayers of the state are expected to pay their taxes on a regular & increasing basis. They also need to do whatever they need to do just to keep their jobs, including getting hardly any benefits, working more hours, getting lower wages, but the people who work for the state and local governments whose wages are being funded by the taxpayers aren't expected to do much at all, except show up for work!

There are so many inept public servants, both, state and local, who do NOT need to be working for any division of the public sector, it's absurd! These people need to be let go, not laid off!

Government often treats employment like an obligation to the public, not something that is earned.

[mikelizard860]

Originally Posted by DanaMarley

This I can agree with you upon Jane, "It's no wonder state employees are terrified of being bumped. If I could pull it off, doing so little for so many for so long, and with such a cocksure air, I SURELY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE OUT IN A REGULAR WORKPLACE EITHER!!!"

Yeah, funny how the taxpayers of the state are expected to pay their taxes on a regular & increasing basis. They also need to do whatever they need to do just to keep their jobs, including getting hardly any benefits, working more hours, getting lower wages, but the people who work for the state and local governments whose wages are being funded by the taxpayers aren't expected to do much at all, except show up for work!

There are so many inept public servants, both, state and local, who do NOT need to be working for any division of the public sector, it's absurd! These people need to be let go, not laid off!

Originally Posted by mkiv808

Government often treats employment like an obligation to the public, not something that is earned.

Government employees are treated well by their employers(ie the goverment). Yes, lets make it so a working stiff can't get a descent job and has to be treated like Walmart/fast food joints/most service industries treats their employees(ie **** pay, no job security, extremely difficult ultra fast paced work environment, expected to the job of many people to cut labor costs, no retirement ect.).

The question to be asked is not why do government employees get paid so well and get pensions/benefits, but why do most private sector employers treat their employees like ****?

People should be outraged by how badly the private sector pays/treats lower class people. Instead their outraged(ie jealous) at the government employees.

It's a classic case of pinning one desperate lower class person against another lower class person. They used to do this game with black slaves.

[Jpierpont]

Originally Posted by Tetto

Such a melodius, uplifting little diddy. You just reminded me why I live in Eastern CT...

You like Heroin?

[Tetto]

Originally Posted by Jpierpont

You like Heroin?

Nah, I prefer dihydrogen monoxide. Do you use heroin?

[speakingtruth]

Originally Posted by mikelizard860

What's the cost of living in rockland maine vs. new haven? 16,600 in rockland maine is very different than 16, 600 in new haven. 16,600 is what you'd spend on rent for a descent one bedroom apt in new haven for a year. lol. If you think money has nothing to do with the crime rate than you're delusional. That being said, of course it's not the only factor. It's just one of the contributing factors. Someone who can't really afford to keep a roof over his head is going to take more chances than someone that is comfortable. Just common sense. Money is not the ONLY factor, but to completely dismiss it is simply ignorant. Look at any place that has a large gap in income(income inequality). The lower income area generally has a ton of crime.(ie many South American countries)

I have to say, you're delusional. Go watch that music video. Crime and the thug mentality has long been glamorized in America. It's cultural and its a DECISION that is made. Your liberal argument has been discredited.

Wake up. Fast.