Which factor causes crime: Poverty or Race
I hope my subject line was provocative !
One of the common arguments these days is that the crime in South Africa is caused by poverty.
Could this be bullshit propaganda to keep us dumbed down to the fact that crime is actually a complex multi-factor problem of which poverty is only a component ?
To help illuminate this complex issue, I've interviewed Dr Crime.
Names may have been changed. Then again, perhaps this interview did not actually occur.
SA Critic: Which do you think is the biggest predictor of criminal behaviour: race or poverty ?
Dr Crime: Here's a study done in America: http://www.nationalistpartyusa.org/crime.htm
SA Critic: Those are some pretty damning stats.
However, what if you brought poverty into the equation? You may find an equally strong correlation, i.e.
poor people commit crime
black people are poor
therefore black people commit crime?
"In 1999, for example, for every dollar of wealth held by the average white household, the average Black household held barely 9 cents."
(src http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2000/Feb00/r020800a: )
Dr Crime: A very good book on analysing the differences between correlated statistics versus causal factors in economics is Steven Levitts' book "Freakonomics". Its a lotta fun too - I'll lend it to you when I see you next.
Applying the statistical methods mentioned in 'Freakonomics' to the above facts, it is possible that ANY one of the following could be correct:
(a) poverty causes crime
(b) crime causes poverty
(c) crime and poverty are both caused by another third factor that causes both
(d) No casual relationship is in effect and they are simply correlated
It does seem interesting that black people are both poor and criminal.
So is it skin colour or poverty that causes crime ?
All that one then has to do to try and determine whether it is 'poorness' or 'blackness' that causes crime, is to look at other communities that are poor but not black (and see how they correlate with crime), and communities that are black but not poor (and see how they correlate with crime).
So how do poor white neighborhoods compare with poor black neighborhoods for crime ?
and how do rich, black neighborhoods compare with rich white neighborhoods for crime ?
So statistically one can determine what is really going on without resorting to old racial rhetoric questions such as: 'Why are the black people still so poor and backwards in America where they've shared the same constitution with their white counterparts for a 100 years ?' Why are the blacks in the rest of Africa (free from white interference) just as poor or poorer than their counterparts in America and South Africa where they are being mistreated by the whites ?
Anyway, back to the statistical argurment:
So how do poor white neighborhoods compare with poor black neighborhoods for crime ?
and how do rich black neighborhoods compare with rich white neighborhoods for crime ?
West Virginia:
1,718,777 Whites 95.0% of the population.
The incidence of violent crime in West Virginia is consistently among the lowest in the nation. Violent Crime Rate National Ranking: 44
WV is also one of the poorest states in the country. The poverty rate in West Virginia is 17.90%. The national average is 12.38%. Percentage of the poverty population that are White is 92.28%. The national average is 55.60%. So, we can conclude that poverty is NOT an indicator of crime rates.
I don't have enough statistics to test all the variations of the statistical test, but I believe you can see where this point is headed
Thank you for raising the point about poverty and crime again.
If reducing poverty in South Africa would solve crime then it would make sense to rather go and present entrepreneurship workshops in the townships, free of charge....
I'm still open for you to prove me wrong with this.
My argument is: Using completely bogus statistics here: Lets say 5% of blacks are criminals no matter what you do and 2% of whites are criminals no matter what you do. My belief is that you have to stamp these elements out of society and totally marginalise them by making it clear to them that crime is NOT acceptable.
Instead of dancing around the issue and trying to sympethise with them, and trying to find excuses for them such as: They killed that man because they are poor. SA has the highest rape stats in the world because our people is poor (reaaally?). Ditto for murder and violent assaults.
Why isn't ethiopia the most violent place on earth ?
I appreciate your argument, because these arguments are very commonly used as excuses for avoiding taking the actions needed to attack these problems directly.
Take the red pill.
SA Critic: Sorry, I'm so accustomed to using that argument that it's hard to stop :-)
You are correct: poverty does not cause crime. It's a pretty convincing argument on the surface, but it falls apart under scrutiny. I'll take the red pill.
However, "blackness" as a cause of crime is a difficult pill to swallow, let alone ask someone else to swallow (especially a black person :-)
Dr Crime: Very true. Any statistical generalisation is unfair to the individual in the group. Because tendencies do not rule over the power of the individual.
Well, as you all know I've dedicated a significant portion of my personal resources this year to establish a non-profit organization that seeks to study and promote information related to the problems in South Africa. (Crime, Incompetence, Reverse-discrimination, ANC-one-party-state)
The purpose of the organization is to have the government seriously tackle crime (and the other social ills), regardless of its racial attributes.
To you and me, would we care whether they lock up white or black murderers ? Or do we simply want government to do its job as effectively as possible? We are not interrested in racially-based solutions although we have to look at all statistics to understand the prevalance and distribution of crime to make sure our non-racial solutions will properly solve the problem across all races.
We also need to be able to understand the govenerment propaganda and people's common misconceptions and know how to conclusivly rip it to shreads with fact and argument. This requires deep understanding beyond just our stated facts.
Can one prevent people from turning into murderers (or other level criminals) by giving them fast (unfair) promotions to high positions, social grants, BEE shareholdings ?
Will a person with criminal tendencies effectively manage the next *Fidentia ? (*Fidentia: The widow and orphan fund that was looted to bankrupcy)
A criminal in a cosy position simply becomes an incompetent person that lacks moral judgement who is now empowered to disenfranchise many more.
Here is the list of social ills that I consider of importance (please add or debate)
* Crime (It destroys opportunities and quality of life for everyone)
* Incompetence (private and public sector causes incompetence causes widescale misery and destruction of opportunities)
* Reverse Discrimination (leads to incompetence, takes opportunities away, is morally wrong in a free democracy, chases competent people out of SA - brain drain)
* Socialism vs Capitalism
* The One-Party state phenonem and the message that we should strive for maximim unity (One Nation, ANC-Unity, ANC-alliances with Cosatu and the South African Communist Party) destroying of diversity, choice and debate - ultimately creating the perfect environment for a dictatorship.
Maybe for the reasons of focus, one should pay special attention to the most important three:
Crime
Incompetence
Reverse Discrimination
Your thoughts ?
Perhaps there is a unifying banner that one can use to bind these things together ?
Quality of Life ?
Loss of Opportunity ?
Human Rights ?
I've thus far decided on the theme of Truth by labeling the society: Truth SA - a very impactful name. Again remember the primary purpose of the organisation is the collection and dissemination of high quality information and argument.
If the government is not doing everything that a generally competent government can be expected to do in order to address the many social ills of SA then we'll be the watch dog to remind them to play nice because the whole world is watching.
The DA tried to play this role (as have the Independant Democrats), but as minority opposition POLITICAL parties success is somewhat limited and they have conflicts of interrests as they fight for political power.
Glad you took the red pill. Lets see how far the rabbit hole goes...
PS: You should book a time to watch the DVD: Thank you for smoking. Its very thought provoking about human nature and lobbying to government.
One of the common arguments these days is that the crime in South Africa is caused by poverty.
Could this be bullshit propaganda to keep us dumbed down to the fact that crime is actually a complex multi-factor problem of which poverty is only a component ?
To help illuminate this complex issue, I've interviewed Dr Crime.
Names may have been changed. Then again, perhaps this interview did not actually occur.
SA Critic: Which do you think is the biggest predictor of criminal behaviour: race or poverty ?
Dr Crime: Here's a study done in America: http://www.nationalistpartyusa
SA Critic: Those are some pretty damning stats.
However, what if you brought poverty into the equation? You may find an equally strong correlation, i.e.
poor people commit crime
black people are poor
therefore black people commit crime?
"In 1999, for example, for every dollar of wealth held by the average white household, the average Black household held barely 9 cents."
(src http://www.umich.edu/news
Dr Crime: A very good book on analysing the differences between correlated statistics versus causal factors in economics is Steven Levitts' book "Freakonomics". Its a lotta fun too - I'll lend it to you when I see you next.
Applying the statistical methods mentioned in 'Freakonomics' to the above facts, it is possible that ANY one of the following could be correct:
(a) poverty causes crime
(b) crime causes poverty
(c) crime and poverty are both caused by another third factor that causes both
(d) No casual relationship is in effect and they are simply correlated
It does seem interesting that black people are both poor and criminal.
So is it skin colour or poverty that causes crime ?
All that one then has to do to try and determine whether it is 'poorness' or 'blackness' that causes crime, is to look at other communities that are poor but not black (and see how they correlate with crime), and communities that are black but not poor (and see how they correlate with crime).
So how do poor white neighborhoods compare with poor black neighborhoods for crime ?
and how do rich, black neighborhoods compare with rich white neighborhoods for crime ?
So statistically one can determine what is really going on without resorting to old racial rhetoric questions such as: 'Why are the black people still so poor and backwards in America where they've shared the same constitution with their white counterparts for a 100 years ?' Why are the blacks in the rest of Africa (free from white interference) just as poor or poorer than their counterparts in America and South Africa where they are being mistreated by the whites ?
Anyway, back to the statistical argurment:
So how do poor white neighborhoods compare with poor black neighborhoods for crime ?
and how do rich black neighborhoods compare with rich white neighborhoods for crime ?
West Virginia:
1,718,777 Whites 95.0% of the population.
The incidence of violent crime in West Virginia is consistently among the lowest in the nation. Violent Crime Rate National Ranking: 44
WV is also one of the poorest states in the country. The poverty rate in West Virginia is 17.90%. The national average is 12.38%. Percentage of the poverty population that are White is 92.28%. The national average is 55.60%. So, we can conclude that poverty is NOT an indicator of crime rates.
I don't have enough statistics to test all the variations of the statistical test, but I believe you can see where this point is headed
Thank you for raising the point about poverty and crime again.
If reducing poverty in South Africa would solve crime then it would make sense to rather go and present entrepreneurship workshops in the townships, free of charge....
I'm still open for you to prove me wrong with this.
My argument is: Using completely bogus statistics here: Lets say 5% of blacks are criminals no matter what you do and 2% of whites are criminals no matter what you do. My belief is that you have to stamp these elements out of society and totally marginalise them by making it clear to them that crime is NOT acceptable.
Instead of dancing around the issue and trying to sympethise with them, and trying to find excuses for them such as: They killed that man because they are poor. SA has the highest rape stats in the world because our people is poor (reaaally?). Ditto for murder and violent assaults.
Why isn't ethiopia the most violent place on earth ?
I appreciate your argument, because these arguments are very commonly used as excuses for avoiding taking the actions needed to attack these problems directly.
Take the red pill.
SA Critic: Sorry, I'm so accustomed to using that argument that it's hard to stop :-)
You are correct: poverty does not cause crime. It's a pretty convincing argument on the surface, but it falls apart under scrutiny. I'll take the red pill.
However, "blackness" as a cause of crime is a difficult pill to swallow, let alone ask someone else to swallow (especially a black person :-)
Dr Crime: Very true. Any statistical generalisation is unfair to the individual in the group. Because tendencies do not rule over the power of the individual.
Well, as you all know I've dedicated a significant portion of my personal resources this year to establish a non-profit organization that seeks to study and promote information related to the problems in South Africa. (Crime, Incompetence, Reverse-discrimination, ANC-one-party-state)
The purpose of the organization is to have the government seriously tackle crime (and the other social ills), regardless of its racial attributes.
To you and me, would we care whether they lock up white or black murderers ? Or do we simply want government to do its job as effectively as possible? We are not interrested in racially-based solutions although we have to look at all statistics to understand the prevalance and distribution of crime to make sure our non-racial solutions will properly solve the problem across all races.
We also need to be able to understand the govenerment propaganda and people's common misconceptions and know how to conclusivly rip it to shreads with fact and argument. This requires deep understanding beyond just our stated facts.
Can one prevent people from turning into murderers (or other level criminals) by giving them fast (unfair) promotions to high positions, social grants, BEE shareholdings ?
Will a person with criminal tendencies effectively manage the next *Fidentia ? (*Fidentia: The widow and orphan fund that was looted to bankrupcy)
A criminal in a cosy position simply becomes an incompetent person that lacks moral judgement who is now empowered to disenfranchise many more.
Here is the list of social ills that I consider of importance (please add or debate)
* Crime (It destroys opportunities and quality of life for everyone)
* Incompetence (private and public sector causes incompetence causes widescale misery and destruction of opportunities)
* Reverse Discrimination (leads to incompetence, takes opportunities away, is morally wrong in a free democracy, chases competent people out of SA - brain drain)
* Socialism vs Capitalism
* The One-Party state phenonem and the message that we should strive for maximim unity (One Nation, ANC-Unity, ANC-alliances with Cosatu and the South African Communist Party) destroying of diversity, choice and debate - ultimately creating the perfect environment for a dictatorship.
Maybe for the reasons of focus, one should pay special attention to the most important three:
Crime
Incompetence
Reverse Discrimination
Your thoughts ?
Perhaps there is a unifying banner that one can use to bind these things together ?
Quality of Life ?
Loss of Opportunity ?
Human Rights ?
I've thus far decided on the theme of Truth by labeling the society: Truth SA - a very impactful name. Again remember the primary purpose of the organisation is the collection and dissemination of high quality information and argument.
If the government is not doing everything that a generally competent government can be expected to do in order to address the many social ills of SA then we'll be the watch dog to remind them to play nice because the whole world is watching.
The DA tried to play this role (as have the Independant Democrats), but as minority opposition POLITICAL parties success is somewhat limited and they have conflicts of interrests as they fight for political power.
Glad you took the red pill. Lets see how far the rabbit hole goes...
PS: You should book a time to watch the DVD: Thank you for smoking. Its very thought provoking about human nature and lobbying to government.
Labels: Crime, race, South Africa
posted by the SA Critic at
10:11 AM
3 Comments
