Streetcar Update on Development

I guess I just don't buy the argument that crime is a static quantity, and you can't reduce it, you can only move it. I don't think the bum becomes a mailbox, but I think there is room to bring the overall level of crime down, not just move it around. I think that is achieved by decentralizing the existing criminal element and making it more difficult for the culture to continue like it has been allowed to for so long.

Just to be clear, I don't think the streetcar is the magic solution. I think the problem is ignoring the city core. The streetcar, and the projected private development surrounding the streetcar line combined with other ongoing projects like the Banks, the Quarter, Fountain Square and , are a step in reversing the deteriorating conditions in downtown and OTR.

If you have rats in your basement, do you just accept it, because setting out traps and poison in your basement won't affect the overall rat population?

Quote:

---

The Drop In Center will be moved. The backdoor shenanigans are already in play, it's just the proposed sites are still in flux. I can't really substantiate any of the rumors that I've heard about it, but if people heard half the things I have heard about this move, they would vote everyone out of City Hall, burn down the place and 3CDC, and salt the Earth. It's going to be a disaster.

---

Thor, man in the know. Aren't you the same guy that said people were going to start burning to death left and right when the fire department budget was cut? Forgive me if I don't get caught up in your hyperbole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xeus

Interesting comparison Kahns - 1990 West Chester compared to 2010 at the corner of 14th & Vine. Not sure I follow. You see, there's more to this than rehabbing some old properties and opening some cool little storefronts. This involves more than populating those rehabbed buildings. This involves displacing a well-rooted culture from OTR - a poor population, beset with crime..

---

All true. I wasn't trying to draw a direct comparison between 1990 West Chester and present day OTR. I was responding to someone who made the argument that investing in OTR made no sense because there wasn't anything there. Places change. Populations change. Infrastructure changes.

I don't get the argument that the poor population - and in particular the criminal population - somehow has exclusive rights to OTR. It hasn't always been that way. Do we as a city just give up on an area because the crime rate has risen?

Snipe, I do not only blame the Republicans for the commodity inflation as the Dems definitely played a role. You are a bit off on the timing of the Dems taking control of congress as the election would have been in November of 2006 and not at the beginning of 2006. That puts the gold price according to your chart at about 650. Considering it started around 250 to 300 when Bush took office with a Republican majority I'd say the Bush years were a disaster for inflation and during complete Republican control it was a mess with well over 100% in 6 years.

The two biggest factors for the commodity inflation was the war and the collapse of the debt bubble. The debt bubble is primarily the fault of Greenspan which was condoned or encouraged by Clinton and Bush. The War was primarily Bush and the Republicans but most Democrats went along with it too. The debt created by the war plus the uncertainty of oil supplies pushed commodities higher. This war was terrible for the country in so many ways it is pathetic that it was allowed to happen. Spending is the most detrimental long-term impact but obviously the loss of life and injured soldiers is horific.

The intitial Obama budget was inherited due to the bank bailouts Bush signed into law before he left office. This was another blunder of historical proportions and set the stage for continued inflation for years to come. Because inflation does not occur immediately and stop abruptly you could argue the inflation from 2000 to 2004 was due to Clinton/Greenspan and 2004 to current was Bush/Greenspan (give or take a year). In addition to the budget and war Obama inherited he also inherited a collapsing economy so you cannot blame him or the Democrats for the budget gaps. There was nothing anyone could do to avoid deficits or produce jobs. While some uninformed talking heads or "analysts" argue the infrastructure spending didn't stimulate it did same hundreds of thousands of jobs. While I hate unemployment benefits due to my believe that they discourage personal responsibility, the extension of these benefits also saved hundreds of thousands of jobs. I would also argue that the bank bailout did the same thing but it guaranteed the prolonging of this crisis. Without the bailout the banking system would have collapsed and jobs would have been lost and a deep recession/depression would have occurred but the system would have cleansed itself in the matter of a few years. growth would have resumed from a healthy economic base, compensation for executives to movie stars to athletes would have become more reasonable. The corruption would have been reduced dramatically from the system. Instead the bad debts went to the government, companies were left with the good assets and crazy bonuses were paid to the leaders that destroyed the companies and required federal assistance to avoid bankruptcy. The corruption continues and the US government is now in a huge financial hole while dealing with the after effects of a financial collapse. Deleveraging will continue and jobs will be slow to come by. The economy will peak and go into a new recession well before the stock market can regain lost ground and definitely before the lost jobs can be recovered. Joblessness will rise and stocks will test old lows and possibly set new ones.

Commodity inflation is here to stay for at least another decade with some ups and downs along the way but if drastic steps are taken by the government it will lead to a currency collapse rather than the somewhat orderly decline over the past decade. That is what I fear from the Republicans - they believe so strongly in their ideology without reflecting on changing conditions that a collapse become more probable under their leadership. Buy gold, silver, paladium, crops, oil, nat gas, etc as neither party can stop inflation. I didn't mention China and the emerging markets but they obviously play a role in commodity inflation due to demand. China and Japan however have been adding stability to the US currency by holding huge dollar reserves. Should China ever get enough internal demand to sustain its economy, the US will become their servant. They will simply need to threaten to sell dollar assets and cause a currency collapse and the US will have no choice but to comply.

The US must get ahold of their budgets but they have to do it through more effective governing. Stop the fraud, remove the waste, incentivize management, get control of educational and healthcare costs. Pot must be legalized to reduce government costs and raise taxes. I'd argue for legalizing all drugs as it appears to be a war that can't be won and it goes along with personal responsibility but that is a bit to radical for most. I'd say the same about prostitution but both are the libertarian side of me. Taxes must go up for the wealthy, $250 being the correct starting point is debateable, but someone must sacrifice. I'm all for cutting individual taxes once the budgets are under control but you must cut spending first.

The other item to keep in mind about the deficits graph, in addition to the impacts of the recession, is that social security and medicare become larger portions of the budget each year. Holding spending flat in all other areas would still result in higher deficits than the year before. I suspect Ron Paul was the only candidate for president last election that wouldn't have had crazy deficit numbers.

I'm guessing this is something most of you don't want to hear but legalizing abortion has helped to reduce the crime rate. Should this ruling ever be overturned you will see a spike in crime years later as more parents and/or children become desparate and look for easy ways out of their situation.

The streetcar is unlikely to reduce overall crime unless it dispurses the negative influence on some of those that may get involved in criminal acts if associating with the wrong people. There is also the potential monetary gain from rising home values that could help some families get on their feet. These are long shots and most likely the crime does shift to a new area or remains where it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by madness31

I'm guessing this is something most of you don't want to hear but legalizing abortion has helped to reduce the crime rate.

---

I suppose if we legalize murder, theft and assault, the crime rate would be reduced even further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XU 87

I suppose if we legalize murder, theft and assault, the crime rate would be reduced even further.

---

I think he was restating the theory of a chapter from Freakonomics that most aborted babies are from low income mothers and therefore more likely to be criminals which in turn lowers the crime rate because there are less would be criminals in the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juice

I think he was restating the theory of a chapter from Freakonomics that most aborted babies are from low income mothers and therefore more likely to be criminals which in turn lowers the crime rate because there are less would be criminals in the country.

---

If you read his second sentence, I think he was actually arguing that if abortion were to become illegal, people will still have illegal abortions and therefore we would have more crime.

I think if we try to run a streetcar on the track of this thread, it will derail on Day 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kahns Krazy

I think if we try to run a streetcar on the track of this thread, it will derail on Day 1.

---

But at least we wouldn't be losing $2 million a year

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xeus

But at least we wouldn't be losing $2 million a year

---

The federal interstate highway system 'lost' over $40 billion in 2008 (before the stimulus spending that will likely dramatically increase that figure). I guess that thing is a bad idea too.