6 ms·

Scotland doesn't have the extreme levels of inequality that result in extreme levels of shoplifting, and therefore the shoplifting comparison doesn't hold up.

UberFly 2y ago
Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Poverty still isn't a green light to commit crimes though. There are plenty of places to seek help legally. Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else.
- OJFord 2y ago
  > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. ...relative to others with less of that; hence an inequality.
  - Gormo 2y ago
    It's absolute poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness that constrain people's circumstances and influence their decisions. How similar or dissimilar a person's circumstances are to those of strangers they have no relationship with are not relevant.
- Schnitz 2y ago
  The problem is the large amount of people with nothing to loose and no realistic path to a better future. If your day to day reality is as bad as jail, you might as well shoplift or camp illegally or whatever. What are they going to do? House and feed you?
  - chaostheory 2y ago
    There are plenty of government programs and nonprofits that help the needy. They work for 80% of the homeless. The issue with the chronically homeless who make up the other 20% is that they refuse the help because they don't want to follow rules such as curfews and no drugs & alcohol. The main reason for this is that most of them suffer from mental illness. This is a medical issue.
    - readyman 2y ago
      You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. Also, the US is incapable of even reproducing itself, which falls far short of my definition of "works."
      - chaostheory 2y ago
        I'm not forgetting them. They fall into the category of 20% of the homeless who are mentally ill, and who need to be supervised in a safe medical facility. However, we cannot do that without their consent, and they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. I'm also not sure that these people, suffering from mental illnesses like schizophrenia, are cognizant enough for giving consent.
        QuarterReptile 2y ago
        >However, we cannot do that without their consent >they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. ...because of the underlying mental illness. Do you really believe that you can get consent from this group of people who you say should be in medical facilities, when they have self-sorted into that group mostly by being too unwilling or unable to conform to any rules or structures?
        chaostheory 2y ago
        No, which is exactly why I pointed it out as a problem.
      - ohmyiv 2y ago
        > You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. A lot of that is exactly for the reason the previous comment points out: mental health issues that unhoused people refuse to get treated. As someone who now works in that field, that person is correct. There is no way for case managers to "make" them get help. If the person is having a non-violent incident, then no one can really assist unless the person wants help. Even in some violent cases, police and PETs (Psychiatric Emergency Teams) can't help. I work with the unhoused in LA, a city with one of the highest unhoused population counts. There is very little we can do if the people don't want help, which is a bigger majority than you assume. We also have a housing shortage for people that can afford rent, let alone landlords willing to help the unhoused. You make it sound easy, but it seems to me, you actually have no real experience in the field, which may be fine. But don't say a system isn't working when the services system can't help those that really need it. Sure, maybe the US government can do more. They provide a lot of our funding and we also get a lot of assistance from private donors. But at this point it's yelling into the wind. Without fully supportive communities and government assistance, we're really moving nowhere. And it isn't just some shortcomings of the government. It's also private property NIMBY types that don't want services in their area. Example: our main office is in the Venice/Santa Monica area. We have rules and regulations brought upon by local NIMBYs on what time we can be there, who can be there, what services we can provide, and more. So while we help the unhoused in that area, we have offices elsewhere that some clients can't make it to, which reduces the assistance they are able to receive. So while it's easy to say "it isn't working", how hard has everyone else really tried? I don't see many people quitting their dev jobs to make 1/2, sometimes 1/4 of the wage to do a more strenuous job. The only reason I did is because the agency I now work for also helped me when I was on the streets and they're willing to pay me more because of my lived experience. I still do web dev and IT stuff on the side to make up some of the wages I lost transitioning, but it was somewhat difficult to adjust to. So, what are your experiences helping the unhoused? How have you been able to help those around you? How were you able to help those that refused? Do you have a contact list of agencies that may help theunhoused? If so, can we collaborate so hopefully more people can get assistance? Well, maybe not, since you're probably in a different part of the world than me, but here's a starting point for the LA area: https://www.lahsa.org/get-help https://www.lahsa.org/get-help. Also on that site is a careers page that has a full listing of agencies in the different SPAs in LA county. But if you know of national agencies that can assist the unhoused population, please, let me know. We are in dire need of real assistance, not empty words. Edit: spelling
- readyman 2y ago
  >Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Inequality is absolutely the correct term. The rich wield their means to exploit the poor. Without the rich, the poor are not exploited and poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness all decline. Every. Single. Time.
- antisthenes 2y ago
  > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Just curious where you think those last 3 things stem from. Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality due to bad policies (lack of social safety nets). > Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else. Right, part of crime is cultural, and part is economic. But culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities.
  - gottorf 2y ago
    > Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality If the first half of your statement is true, then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? > culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities Similarly, it's rather the other way around; lack of access to economic opportunities is caused by a culture that values human capital less. Of course, the two compound over time; but history is empirically full of examples of minority cultural groups that were discriminated against (whether legally, socially, or otherwise) but nevertheless succeeded economically due to the culture placing a high value on human capital[0]. [0]: Sowell, T. Discrimination and Disparities.
    - thaumasiotes 2y ago
      > then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? As stupid as the idea that inequality in itself causes these problems is, it doesn't have trouble explaining why this would only happen in developed countries. Historic levels of inequality, including urban "anyone can easily see that their downstairs neighbor is a hundred times richer than they are" inequality, were much greater than modern ones and involved a lot less social pathology; maybe look in that direction. > What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? Looking for a root cause seems unnecessary for this question; mental illness can easily just cause poverty directly.
- __loam 2y ago
  This is a stupid take, frankly. Lots of crime in major American cities would go away if much more affordable housing was available. High cost of living causes poverty and stress, which can lead to drug use and mental illness. It's very obvious that these things are related.
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    We tried building solid but low-frills housing developments in major American cities that impoverished people could live in for basically no cost. They became crime-infested hellholes.
  - nullc 2y ago
    If low cost housing is the silver bullet that solves the whole issue why doesn't the existence of low cost housing elsewhere solve the problem? The one time cost of transport to those locations would be insubstantial and irrelevant.
Nextgrid 2y ago
I'm not even sure inequality/poverty is the main driver. If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation. It's just that for a long while, enforcement or the illusion of there being enforcement mostly kept everyone in order, but nowadays the illusions are breaking down. More and more people are pushing the boundaries and realizing that no actual enforcement is happening, so why should they stop? We see the same in white-collar crime where companies constantly push the boundaries in blatant bad faith and this keeps happening because the illusions that kept everyone in order have broken down and actual enforcement isn't sufficient to deter the bad behavior. Keep in mind that shoplifting isn't merely a survival issue, there are "professionals" who steal for resale.
- nathan_compton 2y ago
  "If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation." True sociopath logic, my man. Most people do not base their actions on some kind of spreadsheet where they are optimizing for economic success. Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie. Most people are pretty chill and don't want to screw around with other people's livelihoods regardless of legal consequences.
  - Nextgrid 2y ago
    > Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie How do you then explain every company out there being hostile to their customers and constantly pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable, or even things like wage theft which is surprisingly common? Or is there a double-standard here, where individuals are supposed to act in good faith but companies are not just allowed to be assholes, but rewarded for doing so by the market and lack of adequate law enforcement actions? It's true that morality and good-faith behavior has mostly kept things working well, but it's clear that morals and good faith alone isn't good enough since there are entities that abuse the system so laws and enforcement should be there. If it's not, then I'm not going to be particularly angry about the little guys acting antisocially when the entire economic system is encouraging & rewarding it. Look at it from an IT security perspective: it's great that most users are acting in good faith and are not trying to exploit your system, but you still need to plan for the worst and make sure your system can survive hostile encounters. The same should apply to our legal system.

UberFly 2y ago

Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Poverty still isn't a green light to commit crimes though. There are plenty of places to seek help legally. Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else.

OJFord 2y ago
> Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. ...relative to others with less of that; hence an inequality.
- Gormo 2y ago
  It's absolute poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness that constrain people's circumstances and influence their decisions. How similar or dissimilar a person's circumstances are to those of strangers they have no relationship with are not relevant.
Schnitz 2y ago
The problem is the large amount of people with nothing to loose and no realistic path to a better future. If your day to day reality is as bad as jail, you might as well shoplift or camp illegally or whatever. What are they going to do? House and feed you?
- chaostheory 2y ago
  There are plenty of government programs and nonprofits that help the needy. They work for 80% of the homeless. The issue with the chronically homeless who make up the other 20% is that they refuse the help because they don't want to follow rules such as curfews and no drugs & alcohol. The main reason for this is that most of them suffer from mental illness. This is a medical issue.
  - readyman 2y ago
    You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. Also, the US is incapable of even reproducing itself, which falls far short of my definition of "works."
    - chaostheory 2y ago
      I'm not forgetting them. They fall into the category of 20% of the homeless who are mentally ill, and who need to be supervised in a safe medical facility. However, we cannot do that without their consent, and they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. I'm also not sure that these people, suffering from mental illnesses like schizophrenia, are cognizant enough for giving consent.
      - QuarterReptile 2y ago
        >However, we cannot do that without their consent >they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. ...because of the underlying mental illness. Do you really believe that you can get consent from this group of people who you say should be in medical facilities, when they have self-sorted into that group mostly by being too unwilling or unable to conform to any rules or structures?
        chaostheory 2y ago
        No, which is exactly why I pointed it out as a problem.
    - ohmyiv 2y ago
      > You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. A lot of that is exactly for the reason the previous comment points out: mental health issues that unhoused people refuse to get treated. As someone who now works in that field, that person is correct. There is no way for case managers to "make" them get help. If the person is having a non-violent incident, then no one can really assist unless the person wants help. Even in some violent cases, police and PETs (Psychiatric Emergency Teams) can't help. I work with the unhoused in LA, a city with one of the highest unhoused population counts. There is very little we can do if the people don't want help, which is a bigger majority than you assume. We also have a housing shortage for people that can afford rent, let alone landlords willing to help the unhoused. You make it sound easy, but it seems to me, you actually have no real experience in the field, which may be fine. But don't say a system isn't working when the services system can't help those that really need it. Sure, maybe the US government can do more. They provide a lot of our funding and we also get a lot of assistance from private donors. But at this point it's yelling into the wind. Without fully supportive communities and government assistance, we're really moving nowhere. And it isn't just some shortcomings of the government. It's also private property NIMBY types that don't want services in their area. Example: our main office is in the Venice/Santa Monica area. We have rules and regulations brought upon by local NIMBYs on what time we can be there, who can be there, what services we can provide, and more. So while we help the unhoused in that area, we have offices elsewhere that some clients can't make it to, which reduces the assistance they are able to receive. So while it's easy to say "it isn't working", how hard has everyone else really tried? I don't see many people quitting their dev jobs to make 1/2, sometimes 1/4 of the wage to do a more strenuous job. The only reason I did is because the agency I now work for also helped me when I was on the streets and they're willing to pay me more because of my lived experience. I still do web dev and IT stuff on the side to make up some of the wages I lost transitioning, but it was somewhat difficult to adjust to. So, what are your experiences helping the unhoused? How have you been able to help those around you? How were you able to help those that refused? Do you have a contact list of agencies that may help theunhoused? If so, can we collaborate so hopefully more people can get assistance? Well, maybe not, since you're probably in a different part of the world than me, but here's a starting point for the LA area: https://www.lahsa.org/get-help https://www.lahsa.org/get-help. Also on that site is a careers page that has a full listing of agencies in the different SPAs in LA county. But if you know of national agencies that can assist the unhoused population, please, let me know. We are in dire need of real assistance, not empty words. Edit: spelling
readyman 2y ago
>Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Inequality is absolutely the correct term. The rich wield their means to exploit the poor. Without the rich, the poor are not exploited and poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness all decline. Every. Single. Time.
antisthenes 2y ago
> Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Just curious where you think those last 3 things stem from. Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality due to bad policies (lack of social safety nets). > Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else. Right, part of crime is cultural, and part is economic. But culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities.
- gottorf 2y ago
  > Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality If the first half of your statement is true, then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? > culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities Similarly, it's rather the other way around; lack of access to economic opportunities is caused by a culture that values human capital less. Of course, the two compound over time; but history is empirically full of examples of minority cultural groups that were discriminated against (whether legally, socially, or otherwise) but nevertheless succeeded economically due to the culture placing a high value on human capital[0]. [0]: Sowell, T. Discrimination and Disparities.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    > then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? As stupid as the idea that inequality in itself causes these problems is, it doesn't have trouble explaining why this would only happen in developed countries. Historic levels of inequality, including urban "anyone can easily see that their downstairs neighbor is a hundred times richer than they are" inequality, were much greater than modern ones and involved a lot less social pathology; maybe look in that direction. > What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? Looking for a root cause seems unnecessary for this question; mental illness can easily just cause poverty directly.
__loam 2y ago
This is a stupid take, frankly. Lots of crime in major American cities would go away if much more affordable housing was available. High cost of living causes poverty and stress, which can lead to drug use and mental illness. It's very obvious that these things are related.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  We tried building solid but low-frills housing developments in major American cities that impoverished people could live in for basically no cost. They became crime-infested hellholes.
- nullc 2y ago
  If low cost housing is the silver bullet that solves the whole issue why doesn't the existence of low cost housing elsewhere solve the problem? The one time cost of transport to those locations would be insubstantial and irrelevant.

Nextgrid 2y ago

I'm not even sure inequality/poverty is the main driver. If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation. It's just that for a long while, enforcement or the illusion of there being enforcement mostly kept everyone in order, but nowadays the illusions are breaking down. More and more people are pushing the boundaries and realizing that no actual enforcement is happening, so why should they stop? We see the same in white-collar crime where companies constantly push the boundaries in blatant bad faith and this keeps happening because the illusions that kept everyone in order have broken down and actual enforcement isn't sufficient to deter the bad behavior. Keep in mind that shoplifting isn't merely a survival issue, there are "professionals" who steal for resale.

nathan_compton 2y ago
"If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation." True sociopath logic, my man. Most people do not base their actions on some kind of spreadsheet where they are optimizing for economic success. Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie. Most people are pretty chill and don't want to screw around with other people's livelihoods regardless of legal consequences.
- Nextgrid 2y ago
  > Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie How do you then explain every company out there being hostile to their customers and constantly pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable, or even things like wage theft which is surprisingly common? Or is there a double-standard here, where individuals are supposed to act in good faith but companies are not just allowed to be assholes, but rewarded for doing so by the market and lack of adequate law enforcement actions? It's true that morality and good-faith behavior has mostly kept things working well, but it's clear that morals and good faith alone isn't good enough since there are entities that abuse the system so laws and enforcement should be there. If it's not, then I'm not going to be particularly angry about the little guys acting antisocially when the entire economic system is encouraging & rewarding it. Look at it from an IT security perspective: it's great that most users are acting in good faith and are not trying to exploit your system, but you still need to plan for the worst and make sure your system can survive hostile encounters. The same should apply to our legal system.