Post #2022746 · Elektrine

2026-05-03 04:45 UTC

Yes I agree with what you're saying but the tweet ignores that you're likely already doing both giving money to cops and giving money to poor people so the nuance of effectiveness of where to allocate the extra funds is not as simple as the tweet puts. I can think of a ton of times where increasing welfare does not impact crime statistics and increasing cop spending does and vice versa. I really do wish it was as simple as the tweet makes it out to be because throwing money at a problem is actually pretty easy.

Replies (2)

@mabeledo@lemmy.world 2026-05-04 13:16

> I can think of a ton of times where increasing welfare does not impact crime statistics and increasing cop spending does and vice versa. The point is not just to increase it, but to make it enough for people to not resort to commit crimes. But I’m curious about this take. Scientific literature vastly supports the idea of welfare as a societal stabilizer. What it does not support as much is increased enforcement as a way to curb crime in developed and democratic countries. Which concrete examples can you show to support your point?

Open ##2022747
@msage@programming.dev 2026-05-03 05:30

It is, and I have no idea what you're talking about. When people have food on the table and roof over their beds, they don't need to do crime. Fund mental health care for all, and viola, we are only left with wage theft and police brutality as the most common crimes, which are done by rich and powerful people.

Open ##2022748