Alright

They got torn apart in the comments section. These people are losing ground within their own party because everyone realizes they have no idea what they're talking about, and their policies cause nothing but mass suffering and harm with no sane defense.

Good intentions are worthless in policymaking. Outcomes are all that matters.

I think people that are willing to prioritize their abstract notions of social justice over the literal safety of children should be completely excluded from discussions on these topics and ostracized from polite society until they can get their heads on straight.

I'm seeing nothing but pretty insults from the people that I'm replying to. Do you expect me to just take it while you ignore their insults and petty behavior?

> You see, the problem with living in a republican far-right propaganda bubble, is you can’t defend Jack shit you say. We can defeat you with facts with whatever stupid talking pint you come up with. Bye dumbass.

Will be very interesting to see if the children and mother were known to child protective services. We already had a discussion about CPS this week: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/z1lj0f/comment/ixdj00j/

Fuck people who normalize crime.

And still nothing constructive. You have nothing of value to offer and weren't worth the responses to begin with.

And yet you offer nothing even remotely constructive or insightful in your responses.

What specifically is stupid? What specifically is self-righteous? And why should anyone care about your feelings here over the real-world outcomes that I'm talking about?

Maybe just for a moment consider the fact that your feelings don't really matter compared to the other things at stake here.

Is that the best you can do?

Honestly, who cares about your feelings and naive political identity when the stakes are so high for these policies. I'd rather prevent more kids from being abused. Go cry somewhere else.

Yep. It's yet more magical thinking. The disparate outcomes are proof of racist intent from these organizations!... even though we can't actually point to a single employee acting with racist intent, and the organization is overwhelmingly black, and each case's outcomes are justified by the circumstances noted by each worker.

magic

Oh I never said it was your goal, and you can go back and re-read everything I've said above to verify that. I said that a big chunk of people will ignore abusers and criminals using magical thinking as part of their goals for equity and ignore hard reality and choices. They will choose to favor abusers and criminals in various situations and just hope that it doesn't cause more victimization. When it inevitably does... they ignore it. It's pretty simple.

> Even the numbers in the article you gave for homicides don't begin to track the outcomes we're talking about here.

Please explain what you mean. You asked a question, I did my best to answer, and now you're giving a non-response. Those numbers give proof of very different starting conditions that would rightfully support different outcomes.

> Unraveling systematic biases would make stopping child abuse impossible?

No, the implied proposed solution of this article is not unraveling systematic biases, it's reducing policing and intervention by child protective services which, again absent magical thinking, is going to result in more abused and murdered children.

Solving systemic racism would be great, but I don't believe any solutions you would propose here would work.

> Who would like that? Who's saying it? Please be specific.

You do, and many like you on this sub. You'll never say it out loud, you won't admit it to yourselves, you don't think you do, but you do. You're interested in letting any number of incidents of crime and abuse slide a bit, loosening standards of reporting, etc to try to help abusers and criminals that you see as victims.

The article talks about raising the standard for what constitutes abuse and neglect of children. It's just part of the larger pattern of magical thinking that you can somehow "go easier" on abusers and criminals without necessarily hurting their victims. It doesn't work that way.

> I know it’s hard to fathom, but you can certainly reform something to treat people more equally while still protecting victims.

What if the goals are diametrically opposed? What if abuse is more common in some groups than others, and you simultaneously want to protect children and have equal outcomes? They are at odds. It's magical thinking to say otherwise.

> And without “ignor[ing] crime and child abuse” (nobody in this article offers ignoring them as a solution).

Of course not! It sounds terrible... but it is nonetheless the policy that many people would like because again, they engage in magical thinking that says mutually incompatible outcomes can occur simultaneously. They'll just ignore the evidence that suggests otherwise, which is part of the reason this crime thread was set up. It doesn't matter if you don't believe that, that's what is effectively happening.

> If Black parents are 13x more likely to have their children removed from their homes then white children, are the benefits for children here really outweighing the disparities this program is perpetuating? Do we believe that Black parents are actually 13x less fit to parent?

I'm not going to make such a broad claim, but I also don't see any reason for removals and interventions to be identical across all groups; there's a notable lack of data to back that up. Meanwhile, the article says plainly: "A New York Times analysis of 83 child homicides from 2016 to 2022 found that Black children in the city were killed by family members at about seven times the rate for white and Asian children and three times the rate for Hispanic children."

If those statistics are sound, I see no reason for outcomes to be identical across groups.

Ah sorry, edited with the unlocked link.

Is N.Y.’s Child Welfare System Racist? Some of Its Own Workers Say Yes.

It's sad when people get put in jail, and it's sad when people have their kids taken away, but to look at those situations and say "it's systemic racism, so we should stop doing these things" implies that you either aren't aware of the victims of the crimes that carry these penalties, or just don't care. Or perhaps that if we ignore the crime and child abuse, things will somehow work out okay. It's just magical thinking.

EDIT: And they're getting torn to pieces in the article comment section. The nonsense, hand-wavy "equity" arguments fall apart immediately when you're weighing them against the very real safety of children.

You're pretty pro-crime. You've argued in favor of ignoring it as much as possible in this sub, and you post here constantly despite claiming you're above it.

Own your beliefs and policies. Or just admit you don't have anything helpful to say.

> Because the act of dismissing the concern of someone tends to make the concern become more intense.

Yep. It's one thing to have a problem. It's an entirely worse thing to have a problem and realize that half the population denies its existence and will actively fight attempts to solve it.

They also report accurately on a number of important stories that other outlets in the city ignore because they reflect poorly on the Democratic party that controls the state. Recently, that includes stories about crime in the city.

Since these stories are ignored by more reputable outlets, demands to remove the Post generally just look like attempts to censor information that is unflattering to your political leanings.

I'm angry because I actually give a shit, and I'm tired of innocent people suffering for your abject stupidity and complete lack of life experience.

> Ahhh, my data is worthless. Your feelings are more accurate I assume?

Snark doesn't make.up for missing data. Nobody gives a shit how confidently wrong you are.

Like I said, feel free to ignore things. The progressives are going to get curbed stomped by other constituencies going forward. They have an abysmal record on the quality of life in major American cities. Their policies are unrecognizable to European progressives. None of them are so stupid as to try to ignore crime and try to solve homelessness by throwing more money at ignoring root causes. Vulnerable groups in the US deserve better than your brain-dead logic. American progressives deserve to suffer.

And you dodge the question again! Amazing! You honestly won't even acknowledge these policies. That's incredible. It's like talking to a wall or one of the robots from West World. "Doesn't look like anything to me!"

> You keep arguing that your fear is justified. And I am telling you that is not based in reality. (Or math)

Per-rider subway crimes are up at least 50% and in some parts of the pandemic, double. Harassment and menacing are simply unreported en masse, and dozens of high profile crimes this year have been committed by mentally ill or drug addicted homeless people with dozens of prior arrests, which is totally preventable and totally unacceptable. And the best you can do is just hope that people stop calling you out on that to your face. You don't even have a response. It's laughable.

Your responses are complete nonsense. Feel free to keep ignoring crime and blaming everyone else, it doesn't matter to me. The Democratic party is blaming you just like they should be, and progressives will become more and more marginalized with these idiotic policies as time goes on.

In terms of comparison of absolute numbers, there is no accurate data on unreported crimes like menacing and harassment on the subway, including serious threats of violence and even many assaults. I'm telling you that your data is worthless, and a huge chunk of the city that has been victimized on the subway with no police report involved agrees with me.

Keep ignoring the problem, you just lost the Democrats the US House. I only hope that progressives will bear the brunt of their own stupidity.

> Something tells me you don't know what this phrase means. . .

It means a hyper-focus on lower murder and shooting rates while ignoring skyrocketing per-rider subway crime rates, assaults, and countless other major quality-of-life crimes in pursuit of a political agenda.

> Remind me again how many house seats in NYC flipped?

House seats in New York State flipped because of state-wide light-on-crime policies that are pushed through by progressives in NYC, and those seats have changed the balance of power across the country. Progressives are getting thrown under the bus for that, and rightfully so.

Murders and shootings are down while burglaries, robberies, assaults, etc are up, and per-rider subway crimes are way up. I'm glad the murder rate continues to fall, but you don't get to straight up ignore these other major crimes, as much as you'd like to.

>This fear is not based on reality...

Fear of being assaulted or robbed is absolutely based on reality. Fear or being harassed or menaced is also absolutely based on reality. You even agreed above that these crimes are up.

>robberies and burglaries are up (which is not surprising in an economic crisis).

What kind of nonsense excuse is this?

Does it bother you that you just ignored a core part of my argument?: "instead of trying to gaslight the majority of the population, why not... address the crime and the policies that allow serial offenders and dangerous people to walk around with dozens of priors and continue hurting innocent people?" Does it not make sense to try to fix that?