Your Ad Here
Welcome to Capital Elector
Register Today

Crime and Economic Development


The Sacramento Bee continues to focus on a few vocal opponents to the proposed gang prevention initiative. The real story is about economic development and helping our kids.

You think a quarter cent sales tax increase creates an economic disadvantage? Try gang infested shopping centers.

The proposed gang prevention measure may not be perfect. And, its handlers could learn a thing or two about coalition building. But, it will enable us to finally do gang prevention in a substantive manner. Less gangs = kids with a greater chance of becoming producitve members of society = safer neighborhoods = stronger communities.

Give it your consideration.

Tags:

Next entry: Harm Principle

Comments

Tim's avatar

Tim wrote on July 15 2008:

[report]

“The real story is about economic development?”

An interesting concept for sure, Gary—however, in all the articles and stories I’ve seen on this issue, I’ve never read or seen Roger D. claim this is an “economic development” issue.  What info do you have to back it up? 

Gang prevention definitely offers some bang for the buck, but if it’s a priority, shouldn’t it be reflected in the budget process instead of calling for a county-wide tax?  According to the bee, Citrus Heights move to its own PD has resulted in a drop in gang activity without raising taxes.  They set their priorities and spent what they already had.

As you know, this stems from the axing of services due to the passage of Prop 13.  I could grudgingly agree’s RD’s proposal should get some consideration—and not just the automatic “no new taxes” dismissal as I would typically do—but there’s got to be a heck of a lot more info for this to move forward.  Without the stated benefits, objectives, statistics, projections, and a SUNSET clause to justify any new tax meets its purpose(like the renewal of Measure A had), it’s hard to take RD’s proposal seriously.  It smacks of political theater.  With his district, he’s not in any danger of getting himself unelected for floating this. . .


Comments

Dan's avatar

Dan wrote on July 15 2008:

[report]

Ever wonder why drug dealers live still live with their mothers?

Read Freakonomics to understand more. Basically they live with Mom because they are paid very low wages.

The moral is, according to the authors of Freakonomics, is gang membership is done as a matter of economics. Perhaps if there were decent paying jobs, not so many youth would belong to gangs.

A point worth pondering.


Comments

Jason Daniel's avatar

Jason Daniel wrote on July 15 2008:

[report]

I love that book. And that is my fav. chapter.


Comments

Tim's avatar

Tim wrote on July 15 2008:

[report]

I thought kids joined gangs primarily because they are a substitute for family.  Many gang members originally came from single-parent households, and the paternal gang structure gave them stability and a sense of belonging. . .  I’ve been wanting to read Freakonomics.  Guess I need to now.


Comments

Jason Daniel's avatar

Jason Daniel wrote on July 15 2008:

[report]

Go get a copy now. You will never put it down. As far as Drug Dealers living w/ mom - it boils down to the fact that a majority of them are of very low education which allows them to be taken advantage of by higher educated kingpins who call the shots but earn all the money. The major trouble makers are the ones who make the least. They have little to lose. they are the once that we have to worry about on the streets.


Related Documents

Today's Top Articles

ABOUT THE CAPITAL ELECTOR

Conceptually, capitalelector.com is an internet hybrid. An original online news portal hosting a powerful collaborative blog. The mission of the Capital Elector is to serve as a strong and lively alternate New Media source for California Politics.

How to advertise your campaign or business

Capital Elector FAQ

We are still in a beta phase so please allow for any unforeseen glitches as you are reading. Help us by Reporting them, please.

Contact The Elector