It’s so meaningful and powerful and symbolic that the sexual abuser ex-Governor’s appointee continues to lead the state after his resignation.

You realize these “wing nuts” are running the city…

This isn’t just Twitter drama, it’s public civic discourse with civic leaders related to civil rights.

Hear the signal from the noise.

Oh yeah the flat 29% raises for the layman are going to arrive in our bank accounts with the 20% Christmas bonuses.

Where would they live? Jersey? Affordable housing is 2+ hours away by car.

Would they be eligible for food stamps themselves? A box of cereal is like 8 dollars. A box a week would come out to fucking 2% of their annual salary.

> Not only does the city — and state — not have enough childcare in general, but existing state and federally funded social programs present their own challenges for people who are undocumented or awaiting a change in their immigration status, Schwartzwald said. And just getting into an immigration courthouse requires people to stand outside for hours, only to join a backlog of more than 120,000 pending cases in New York City.

It almost sounds as if the city’s social services and legal systems aren’t infinite, and can’t scale quickly enough to support unlimited illegal migration. How could that be though?

If adding ten minutes to the wait for a train saves a billion, I say save the billion. Isn’t that the reasonable choice?

knowing how emotionally salient this issue is you'll probably discard the robust evidence on some totally arbitrary reason you pull out of a hat.

knowing how emotionally salient this issue is you'll probably discard the robust evidence on some totally arbitrary reason you pull out of a hat.

“Children of mothers who increased their employment status during children’s preschool years had over 2.6 times the odds of being overweight/obese at 7 to 11 years of age compared with children of nonworking mothers,”

From your own link. That’s an absolutely massive effect.

You've misinterpreted that sentence and it applies exactly to what you're discussing. It's direct evidence.

It's indicating that children with mothers who have only one month of maternity leave fare worse, with the negative effect decreasing with more months of maternity leave. i.e. that motherhood contact matters, with effects up to 24 months, and the strongest effects up to 11 months.

Maternity leave duration, as a continuous variable in months, increased the risk of impaired performance on the MSD scale (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.02, 1.05). Indeed, confirmation of this relationship was found when maternity leave duration was entered as a categorical variable (see Table 2) with the exception of the category for the longest duration of leave. The greatest association was found in the 1 to 11 months of maternity leave with the effect reducing as maternity leave duration increased.

There's actually multiple decades of evidence showing varying degrees of gaps between children who have a mother at home with them before the first 3 years, and those that don't. It's not like we haven't asked the question -- but the answer isn't one we want to hear. The cold truth of it is sitting in any number of econometrics and sociology longitudinal research studies.

Here's one article showing a clear effect, but knowing how emotionally salient this issue is you'll probably discard the robust evidence on some totally arbitrary reason you pull out of a hat.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378378207001089

The notion that a child doesn't positively benefit from being around its mother (and the inverse) in its first 3 years of life is preposterous.

>I would love for you to consider why you think traffic accidents are not controllable or worth considering, but violence is controllable and worth considering.

I never claimed either of those things. Re-read my post, you've overlooked my central points.

Are you suggesting that voters should only care about crime if the per capita rate reaches a certain threshold? Would the threshold be benchmarked against other cities, states, or other countries? And once it's high enough (i.e. crime rate in Mainstreet USA reaches Venezuela's crime rate), what course of action should be taken? Are voters allowed to act on it then, and what should their action be in your view?

p.s. Americans can overestimate minority population sizes for any number of reasons besides news media, including over-representation in fictional media, as is the case with African Americans.

>Rule 11: No complaint posts, rants or private conversations in the subreddit

Might fall under this. At least there's a rule for it.

>Except people are bad at judging what's actually a threat to them and what's not.

How do you know that it's not you who's bad at judging threats? You've compared apples to oranges in your naive threat assessment - motor vehicle accidents are accidents. Subway beatings, slashings, stabbings, pushings, and attacks are not accidents.

The preventative strategies aren't comparable, the causes aren't comparable, the voting and governing strategies to mitigate the issues aren't comparable either.

Or would you, o wise one, have us believe being hit by a car and being hit by a knife is just the same, so we can vote in the direction of your choosing?

So, just to get this right, if you lose your entire wallet you're going to not cancel your credit cards, but just hope that a good samaritan finds it before anyone else?

Just getting a sense of your naivete and lack of financial common sense here.

They're not obligated to allow the community to post about what it wants to, you're right. Mods are allowed to censor posts, comments, and entire communities. Which is what they do. Which is what I just said.

Safety and crime are top issues for voters. If you want to control a narrative, then keeping stories about an issue you want to draw voter attention away from is a great way to do it, i.e. censorship.

Finally, are you suggesting that a voter populace shouldn't care about an issue if it's relatively less severe compared to other parts of the world? So if pollution is higher in X city, we shouldn't concern ourselves with pollution in NYC? That's a strange take.

/r/NewYorkCity seems heavily censored, strongly left wing, and the community downvote bombs even vaguely dissenting opinions.

If you look on the front page you’ll notice that mods there only approve feel-good news stories and posts- there’s very little real world coverage there. Every post goes under moderation.

lol, naive take. Did you know that waiters will copy the card using a piece of paper and pencil shading over it? It takes them seconds.

But my point stands. You'd get your wallet back and not reset your account numbers? You'd have to be a kid or a moron to keep the same security codes on your cards after losing your wallet in NYC.

You'll learn for yourself one day. Kids think they know everything.

Should have just destroyed it. You can’t keep them anyway since they have been outside your possession, need a new card number for it no matter what.

You think it’s responsible and considerate of other people’s lives to drive like this?:

https://youtu.be/xKe-U1Uanvw

You can also “see” the road without your headlights on- that doesn’t change the fact that it’s fucking dumb to purposely make your car MORE DANGEROUS for pedestrians on purpose.

Also can the pedestrians see you? Or you want your privacy? Pedestrians being able to see you and make eye contact is a key safety consideration.

I key cars with 40% tint btw. If you’re ever wondering where a scratch came from it was probably me.

Do you know why tint restrictions exist? It’s not because the government is mommying you.

It’s because when you can’t see through your fucking windows, and the pedestrians can’t see through your fucking windows, then you’re more likely to fucking hit people with your car and kill them and put them into caskets.