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.
NYC had a lot of rot in the late 1800's but it was from too many new immigrants in a already crowded city. The problem resolved itself from immigrants moving west or south but mainly settling the west.
2nd reply.
NYC had its own riots between the 30s and 40s. Harlem is where they happened.
It's not just New York City I'm talking about. Memphis has been a rough town from the very beginning. Memphis had a high murder rate in the early 20th century. It was the murder capital of America, far worse than NYC was during that time. And Memphis built public housing in the 40s and 50s in response to the slums that already existed in Memphis. Chicago had alot of rot in certain areas, particularly the South Side. And it predated welfare. Same goes for St. Louis. This has been a problem for a long time.
The cities are human meat grinders even to this day. That's all they are. People only went there for jobs, but now those manufacturing jobs moved elsewhere. People have to do what the generations did before them, move to where the jobs are.
Scumbag rammed a police car and then got out with a gun in his hand, he got exactly what he was asking for. They ought to round up all the leeches that destroyed taxpayer property and give them a nice little timeout.
Wasn't this the plan all along? They are guaranteed democrat voters for life, after all. And when democrats have problems, what do they do? Expand the size of the government, and make the rest of us pay.
Wasn't this the plan all along? They are guaranteed democrat voters for life, after all. And when democrats have problems, what do they do? Expand the size of the government, and make the rest of us pay.
They are the ideal subjects for the Democrats; those unable to make rational decisions and predisposed to violent reaction to even minor situations.
This seems to be more and more common. The police involved should always have a unbiased, external third-party investigation.
There is so much rage and anger in many of these cities from people who were raised by terrible, absentee parents that literally any thing that can be used as an excuse to riot sets a large number of people off.
I would venture to guess that the tax-base being as depleted as it is many cities, means that only one or two police officers can show up to defuse a very dangerous situation. So they likely tend to overreact more than they would if these nearly-bankrupt cities had an adaquate response.
But the level of anger, rage and social unrest seems to be ever increasing in many American cities.
There is deep social rot in many cities. Generations of unwed pregnancies, lack of community, massive amounts of children raised by low-IQ people who can't take care of themselves means these cities are likely to have major problems in the near future.
^It's called anger. This is what some people do when they are angry. It isn't going to matter what the details are. Not say they should. I'm saying it is what it is. This is how some people handle perceived injustices: Violence. The idea of "violence is the only way to get someone's attention".
Angry? Lol, they are not angry, they are violent opportunist.
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.
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.
3 rules to stay out of poverty
