Just from the perspective of street crimes reported in NYC this past year alone, the bail bond system needs fixing more than “reform”. How many times do we have to read about major crimes, including murder, in which the accused walks out of the courtroom, free to rejoin society and free to rob, or murder at whim?
At whim?
This **** really worries you, huh?
There's always something to make you fearful.
Whenever someone like the author of that piece confuses two issues - whether to release prior to trial, and the bail or other conditions of that release - an intelligent discussion of the issue is difficult.
Of course, that's what some people want to happen.
Whenever someone like the author of that piece confuses two issues - whether to release prior to trial, and the bail or other conditions of that release - an intelligent discussion of the issue is difficult.
Of course, that's what some people want to happen.
We all know what the definition of insanity is, so I have to wonder when society will connect the random crime dots to criminals released back out to the streets by our courts? We are way past “intelligent discussion” — I have yet to hear a candidate address this issue. Has anyone?
Just from the perspective of street crimes reported in NYC this past year alone, the bail bond system needs fixing more than “reform”. How many times do we have to read about major crimes, including murder, in which the accused walks out of the courtroom, free to rejoin society and free to rob, or murder at whim?
The article is useless as it does not seem to cite statistics regarding the effects of bail reform on crime rates. It is the usual obsession with single events that passes for policy discussion in the U.S.
The article also states that the judges in question have been shown the door. "By the way, Democratic Party voters had the good sense to show both Martin and Glass the door in the primary earlier this year."
So, the problem is not with bail reform, but the decisions made by the judges.
Whenever someone like the author of that piece confuses two issues - whether to release prior to trial, and the bail or other conditions of that release - an intelligent discussion of the issue is difficult.
Of course, that's what some people want to happen.
We all know what the definition of insanity is, so I have to wonder when society will connect the random crime dots to criminals released back out to the streets by our courts? We are way past “intelligent discussion” — I have yet to hear a candidate address this issue. Has anyone?
I'm sorry you don't like the idea of "intelligent discussion". How and when suspects are to be released pending trial is not a simple issue. Candidates and officials have addressed the issue, but for some reason that's not covered in most of the news sources you rely on (or maybe you just skip over that coverage).
Just from the perspective of street crimes reported in NYC this past year alone, the bail bond system needs fixing more than “reform”. How many times do we have to read about major crimes, including murder, in which the accused walks out of the courtroom, free to rejoin society and free to rob, or murder at whim?
At whim?
This **** really worries you, huh?
There's always something to make you fearful.
Actually it worries me. 95% of street crimes are committed by 1% of the criminals. The ones who have been arrested 30 times and walk out within a day.
Also, if someone got caught 30 times be assured that there are 200 times they didn't.
Just from the perspective of street crimes reported in NYC this past year alone, the bail bond system needs fixing more than “reform”. How many times do we have to read about major crimes, including murder, in which the accused walks out of the courtroom, free to rejoin society and free to rob, or murder at whim?
The article is useless as it does not seem to cite statistics regarding the effects of bail reform on crime rates. It is the usual obsession with single events that passes for policy discussion in the U.S.
The article also states that the judges in question have been shown the door. "By the way, Democratic Party voters had the good sense to show both Martin and Glass the door in the primary earlier this year."
So, the problem is not with bail reform, but the decisions made by the judges.
the article really isn't about "bail reform" because the author seems to be in favor of some of the reforms.
I have long thought the cash bail bond system used in most of the U.S is an anachronistic abomination that should at least be dramatically reformed, or scrapped altogether. The federal courts did so nearly four decades ago. And I have supported the efforts to reduce the reliance on the cash bonds for misdemeanor charges or non-violent offenses. Having someone sit in jail for a hot check or marijuana charge because they cannot afford the bail bond fee is ridiculous and counterproductive on many levels.
It's an instance of a writer basically saying that the human beings who are responsible for running the criminal justice system should never make a mistake. And that they should be clairvoyant and know which persons they release on bail are going to commit crimes in the future.
our criminal justice system is far from perfect. But if someone is trying to make the argument that the worst aspect of it is that not enough people get locked up, that's a pretty dubious claim. If anything it's more common for people to get locked up for too long relative to the offenses committed.
Reading sources for a conversation on crime. Many of the most egregious crimes, seemingly happening on a weekly, almost daily basis, are the random physical attacks on people walking on the streets; and the “accidental”shootings and deaths of children in Atlanta, Washington, and Chicago. The perpetrators of virtually every one of these crimes were found to have arrest “rap” sheets with multiple catch and release outcomes — as many as 40 in one case!
Surely governors could make a difference. The criminal Justice system needs to be fixed. Protecting criminals should not result in more innocent victims being targeted and our cities made unsafe.
did you read the articles you linked to?
from the first:
There is no data that links changes to the bail system to increases in crime, said Preeti Chauhan, a professor of psychology and director of the Data Collaborative for Justice at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, which examined the changes to the New York bail system.
from the second:
But a confidential analysis of police data, conducted by city officials but not released to the public, offers little if any evidence to back up their claims. In fact, the analysis, obtained by The New York Times, suggests the state’s new bail law and the mass release of inmates from city jails in recent months because of the coronavirus outbreak played almost no role in the spike in shootings.
from the third:
Few see Judge Merrick Garland, President Biden’s pick for attorney general, as a progressive who will reform the criminal legal system. But the Biden administration recently acknowledged that mass incarceration does not make us safer. And as the nation’s chief federal prosecutor, if confirmed, Judge Garland will have the power to prioritize federal bail reform and reduce sky-high rates of pretrial jailing. Doing so will decrease mass incarceration, advance racial justice and enable Judge Garland to stake his claim as a progressive prosecutor. In fact, federal bail reform is an area where he may have already shown an appetite for change.
I will admit that NYC random acts of street crimes worry me specifically since I have children living on the Upper West Side, so there is that. but take a look at a few of the crimes which allows people a get out of jail free card.
I will admit that NYC random acts of street crimes worry me specifically since I have children living on the Upper West Side, so there is that. but take a look at a few of the crimes which allows people a get out of jail free card.
Are you aware of the concept that if you're arrested it does not mean that you're guilty?
I will admit that NYC random acts of street crimes worry me specifically since I have children living on the Upper West Side, so there is that. but take a look at a few of the crimes which allows people a get out of jail free card.
Are you aware of the concept that if you're arrested it does not mean that you're guilty?
Heck, no! mtierney says if you get arrested you go to jail, whether you committed a crime or not. Then in a year or two, if you're innocent, maybe they'll let you out or not. That's American Justice.
Heck, no! mtierney says if you get arrested you go to jail, whether you committed a crime or not. Then in a year or two, if you're innocent, maybe they'll let you out or not. That's American Justice.
If you think what’s going on right now across the country in our major cities is a good thing, I would love to hear how.
If you think what’s going on right now across the country in our major cities is a good thing, I would love to hear how.
for someone who has lived through the 70s, 80s, and 90s you seem completely unaware that crime in cities (especially New York) remains at historically low levels.
Over there, you get to sue the State if you’ve been imprisoned but you’re not guilty, yes? So ultimately that’s even more expensive than just locking up the arrestees. And clogs the Court diaries up even more. Counter-productive?
Elizabeth II as an early working woman, and role model for young women in the modern age. (Car mechanic; use of radio & tv broadcasts; email & social media; corporate leadership; change champion etc)
Over there, you get to sue the State if you’ve been imprisoned but you’re not guilty, yes? So ultimately that’s even more expensive than just locking up the arrestees. And clogs the Court diaries up even more. Counter-productive?
Maybe after you’ve been cleared and released, and if you can afford it. One of the biggest problems with the US justice system is that people are being incarcerated awaiting trial for misdemeanor charges because they couldn’t afford even small bail amounts, and they can be in there for years. Innocent people are committing suicide in jails across the country. It’s an absolute travesty.
Heck, no! mtierney says if you get arrested you go to jail, whether you committed a crime or not. Then in a year or two, if you're innocent, maybe they'll let you out or not. That's American Justice.
If you think what’s going on right now across the country in our major cities is a good thing, I would love to hear how.
You know, I was being hyperbolic but now I realize that’s actually what you think. Everyone who’s arrested must be guilty. You’d have had Kyle Rittenhouse languishing in an Illinois jail with the methheads and rapists for a year.
Maybe after you’ve been cleared and released, and if you can afford it. One of the biggest problems with the US justice system is that people are being incarcerated awaiting trial for misdemeanor charges because they couldn’t afford even small bail amounts, and they can be in there for years. Innocent people are committing suicide in jails across the country. It’s an absolute travesty.
Maybe after you’ve been cleared and released, and if you can afford it. One of the biggest problems with the US justice system is that people are being incarcerated awaiting trial for misdemeanor charges because they couldn’t afford even small bail amounts, and they can be in there for years. Innocent people are committing suicide in jails across the country. It’s an absolute travesty.
It's not "all" the data, but should be enough to get going. Besides, I think we've all agreed "incremental" is better than "all at once" ;-)
I had looked at the Gini coefficient data and some other studies of upward mobility around the world before I posted. But I didn't bother with posting the links. I always feel like someone who makes a claim like the U.S. system provides "more opportunity for all" than other countries should be able to back it up with a definition of what "more opportunity" means, and then some sort of quantifiable evidence.
but what we got was a more or less circular argument that per capita GDP is an indicator of opportunity because well, because it is.
I don't see how GDP Per Capita is not an indicator of opportunity. Yes it's an imperfect measure, it's a mean rather than a median, it doesn't take into account inequality and a number of things, etc. But ultimately, it indicates how much money there is to go around, and more to go around = more opportunity. It's math.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
Is Europe really as economically mobile as it seems if rising to the middle class there could well be the equivalent of lower class here?
And ultimately, yes it's my opinion that the US system is better than the European social model. It is your opinion that the European social model is better. If it is your opinion that your opinion is a fact, as seems to be the case, then it is my opinion that you have an overly inflated regard for your own opinion.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
This is what that report is measuring: "The median disposable (after-tax) income of middle-class households in the U.S. was $60,884 in 2010. With the exception of Luxembourg – a virtual city-state where the median income was $71,799 – the disposable incomes of middle-class households in the other 10 Western European countries in the study trailed well behind the American middle class."
"Disposable income" is a meaningless comparison. What are the comparative health care costs, support for families, education costs, etc.?
Yes, people in European countries may be taxed more. Everybody knows that. But that's not the end of the analysis.
I don't see how GDP Per Capita is not an indicator of opportunity. Yes it's an imperfect measure, it's a mean rather than a median, it doesn't take into account inequality and a number of things, etc. But ultimately, it indicates how much money there is to go around, and more to go around = more opportunity. It's math.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
Is Europe really as economically mobile as it seems if rising to the middle class there could well be the equivalent of lower class here?
And ultimately, yes it's my opinion that the US system is better than the European social model. It is your opinion that the European social model is better. If it is your opinion that your opinion is a fact, as seems to be the case, then it is my opinion that you have an overly inflated regard for your own opinion.
Two thing jump out to me here.
1. You're argument is that US GDP is higher because US social spending is lower. That might be true, but it might not. As I've noted, there are other plausible explanations as well (eg higher immigration levels, with immigrants more easily absorbed). You're doing a bit of question-begging here by claiming a clear connection between GDP and social spending. In fact that relationship is unclear and ambiguous.
2. Isn't the fact that you can have less income but still be middle class a point in favor of Europe and against the US? Aren't you in essence saying people who are poor here would be better off in Europe?
This is what that report is measuring: "The median disposable (after-tax) income of middle-class households in the U.S. was $60,884 in 2010. With the exception of Luxembourg – a virtual city-state where the median income was $71,799 – the disposable incomes of middle-class households in the other 10 Western European countries in the study trailed well behind the American middle class."
"Disposable income" is a meaningless comparison. What are the comparative health care costs, support for families, education costs, etc.?
Yes, people in European countries may be taxed more. Everybody knows that. But that's not the end of the analysis.
Disposable income doesn't show the whole picture. Just, as I explained, GDP doesn't.
So what if your disposable income is $80,000 considering costs may be much higher. In many European countries very high speed internet costs about $20. Try getting that here. Same with with telephone costs. Mass transit costs are much lower. They do pay a lot more for gas.
Maybe what the quality of life indicators we should look at are life expectancy, level of literacy, birth mortalities instead of money.
I don't see how GDP Per Capita is not an indicator of opportunity. Yes it's an imperfect measure, it's a mean rather than a median, it doesn't take into account inequality and a number of things, etc. But ultimately, it indicates how much money there is to go around, and more to go around = more opportunity. It's math.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
Is Europe really as economically mobile as it seems if rising to the middle class there could well be the equivalent of lower class here?
And ultimately, yes it's my opinion that the US system is better than the European social model. It is your opinion that the European social model is better. If it is your opinion that your opinion is a fact, as seems to be the case, then it is my opinion that you have an overly inflated regard for your own opinion.
Two thing jump out to me here.
1. You're argument is that US GDP is higher because US social spending is lower. That might be true, but it might not. As I've noted, there are other plausible explanations as well (eg higher immigration levels, with immigrants more easily absorbed). You're doing a bit of question-begging here by claiming a clear connection between GDP and social spending. In fact that relationship is unclear and ambiguous.
2. Isn't the fact that you can have less income but still be middle class a point in favor of Europe and against the US? Aren't you in essence saying people who are poor here would be better off in Europe?
1. You're oversimplifying my argument - I'm saying US GDP is higher largely because of the overall size and reach of government, which taxation and social services are functions of. As I posted previously I think this HBR piece pretty well captures why US GDP is higher. Points 4, 6, and 8-10 tie directly into my argument.
Immigration is a positive factor and it is point #5 in the HBR piece, but I can't see that as the primary explanation as to why US GDP is in the order of 50% higher than Europe over the long term, as per numbers I previously posted. That very significant and sustained gap must have systematic roots, in my view.
2. The Pew report adjusts for Purchasing Power Parity so as I read it, the upshot is that the middle class in Europe is less well-off than middle class in U.S. in terms of their living standards. So I don't see how that would be a point of favor for Europe.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
This is what that report is measuring: "The median disposable (after-tax) income of middle-class households in the U.S. was $60,884 in 2010. With the exception of Luxembourg – a virtual city-state where the median income was $71,799 – the disposable incomes of middle-class households in the other 10 Western European countries in the study trailed well behind the American middle class."
"Disposable income" is a meaningless comparison. What are the comparative health care costs, support for families, education costs, etc.?
Yes, people in European countries may be taxed more. Everybody knows that. But that's not the end of the analysis.
I suspect the folks at Pew Research Center are smart enough to not put out "meaningless comparisons". And not only publish such dreck, but actually leave it on their site for five years now! If the report is really rubbish, Don't you think some astute reader such as yourself would have brought this fatal flaw to their attention by now, and they would have deleted or corrected the report? And poor Rakesh Kochhar, the author of the report -- he would have been fired or demoted. Or at least given a stern talking-to by his superiors, to shape up or ship out.
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
This is what that report is measuring: "The median disposable (after-tax) income of middle-class households in the U.S. was $60,884 in 2010. With the exception of Luxembourg – a virtual city-state where the median income was $71,799 – the disposable incomes of middle-class households in the other 10 Western European countries in the study trailed well behind the American middle class."
"Disposable income" is a meaningless comparison. What are the comparative health care costs, support for families, education costs, etc.?
Yes, people in European countries may be taxed more. Everybody knows that. But that's not the end of the analysis.
I suspect the folks at Pew Research Center are smart enough to not put out "meaningless comparisons". And not only publish such dreck, but actually leave it on their site for five years now! If the report is really rubbish, Don't you think some astute reader such as yourself would have brought this fatal flaw to their attention by now, and they would have deleted or corrected the report? And poor Rakesh Kochhar, the author of the report -- he would have been fired or demoted. Or at least given a stern talking-to by his superiors, to shape up or ship out.
Check into all of that and get back to us, then.
[Edited to add] You could also review his latest on the middle class - which is 50% of the population in 2021 (see his article below) compared to 59% in 2010 (per the report you cited).
Relatedly, this report that shows many European middle class people would be lower class by U.S. standards. Which correspondingly means many people in the U.S. lower class would be the equivalent of middle class in Europe. The conclusion: "Overall, regardless of how middle class fortunes are analyzed, the material standard of living in the U.S. is estimated to be better than in most Western European countries examined. But to the extent that governments in Western Europe are more likely to provide services to households that may not be captured in household income, such as the National Health Service in the UK, it is possible that differences in the quality of life between the U.S. and Western Europe are narrower."
This is what that report is measuring: "The median disposable (after-tax) income of middle-class households in the U.S. was $60,884 in 2010. With the exception of Luxembourg – a virtual city-state where the median income was $71,799 – the disposable incomes of middle-class households in the other 10 Western European countries in the study trailed well behind the American middle class."
"Disposable income" is a meaningless comparison. What are the comparative health care costs, support for families, education costs, etc.?
Yes, people in European countries may be taxed more. Everybody knows that. But that's not the end of the analysis.
I suspect the folks at Pew Research Center are smart enough to not put out "meaningless comparisons". And not only publish such dreck, but actually leave it on their site for five years now! If the report is really rubbish, Don't you think some astute reader such as yourself would have brought this fatal flaw to their attention by now, and they would have deleted or corrected the report? And poor Rakesh Kochhar, the author of the report -- he would have been fired or demoted. Or at least given a stern talking-to by his superiors, to shape up or ship out.
Here's why it's a meaningless comparison. At no time does he allow for the fact that Europe has national health care systems, drastically lower drug prices (we spend 400B a year on drugs - which makes it part of our larger GDP), far lower education costs, etc.
But if it's from the Pew Research Center it must be the truth, and not subject to criticism.
Also, it's not so much that the Pew report is wrong. It's more like "so what"? What exactly is his point?
But I do think that ignoring some pretty drastic costs of living differences makes much of his argument moot. He also does not mention that one of the reasons incomes are lower in Europe is that they choose to have more vacation time and generally do not work themselves to death the way we do. (Though Friedman thinks that's a good thing for the U.S. )
So, more reason to sue for damages but as you say, it’s less likely to be feasible.
Whenever someone like the author of that piece confuses two issues - whether to release prior to trial, and the bail or other conditions of that release - an intelligent discussion of the issue is difficult.
Of course, that's what some people want to happen.