• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dems Still Need to Address Crime

ttwtt78640 said:
OK, how much additional or total annual income do you think it would take to elevate someone out of their allegedly ‘crime causing’ poverty status?

After all, it was your assertion that reducing poverty would reduce crime. My idea (proposed mostly in jest) was to use the money it would otherwise take to incarcerate a convicted crimial to ‘bribe’ them out of committing future criminal acts.
Click to expand...
It's not bribery, if they have enough to eat they won't have to steal to do so.
 
Gateman_Wen said:
It's not bribery, if they have enough to eat they won't have to steal to do so.
Click to expand...

Again, you use such non-specific terms. Certainly, $20K/year would cover feeding someone, yet you indicated that would not be enough.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Again, you use such non-specific terms. Certainly, $20K/year would cover feeding someone, yet you indicated that would not be enough.
Click to expand...
YOu're deliberately derailing the point by focusing on minutia.

Have A nice night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom