Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off, math. With less people in jail due to basically not enforcing crime, of course it will "cost more" per prisoner. The facility and personnel costs for NYC corrections won't change yet are spread out between less prisoners. What changes? Food? That's a minimal cost compared to the baked in expenditures that are not dependent upon X amount of prisoners.
First off, math. With less people in jail due to basically not enforcing crime, of course it will "cost more" per prisoner. The facility and personnel costs for NYC corrections won't change yet are spread out between less prisoners. What changes? Food? That's a minimal cost compared to the baked in expenditures that are not dependent upon X amount of prisoners.
If less people commit crime, should facility and personnel costs for NYPD change?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Yeah but at the same time "we're" so intuitive to know there's a problem, funny how that works
It isn’t intuition. It is a widely acknowledged fact that the costs are at all time highs and record breaking and is only escalating. It is also far and above the costs in other cities. There clearly is a problem. Just a google search reveals this:
It isn’t intuition. It is a widely acknowledged fact that the costs are at all time highs and record breaking and is only escalating. It is also far and above the costs in other cities. There clearly is a problem. Just a google search reveals this:
If less people commit crime, should facility and personnel costs for NYPD change?
Some could, but there's a huge difference between incarcerating people and providing the gamut of police services throughout the city.
Think in terms of a delivery service. If you longer hold packages at a facility, you don't need that facility. But if you are still moving them from point A to point B, you still need to support that portion of the industry.
The best way to save money on the police is to stop providing police services to areas that don't want them. Downsize and shift the remaining resources to the areas that want cops.
Some could, but there's a huge difference between incarcerating people and providing the gamut of police services throughout the city.
Think in terms of a delivery service. If you longer hold packages at a facility, you don't need that facility. But if you are still moving them from point A to point B, you still need to support that portion of the industry.
The best way to save money on the police is to stop providing police services to areas that don't want them. Downsize and shift the remaining resources to the areas that want cops.
Someobdy's not going to get a paycheck off of that idea, what do you tell them?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
NYPD cops retire at a rate that negates the need for layoffs. Simply don't replace whatever the number is that are serving in neighborhoods that hate cops. Problem solved.
NYPD cops retire at a rate that negates the need for layoffs. Simply don't replace whatever the number is that are serving in neighborhoods that hate cops. Problem solved.
I agree, let the people who have money pay for their private security anyway
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.