Skyrocketing Chicago crime has small businesses, corporations pack their bags: 'Enough is enough'

[ElChupacabra]

Right there is no place for results on personal finances, poverty, cost of living, state and local taxes, quality of life but certainly rhetoric is always much more important as it creates a diversion from the issues that really are important. Why would anyone want this country to be like your state, California, NY? You cannot bring the mountains, beaches and weather from California, but you can bring the social disasters that are happening there, your state and NYC in particular. Crime stats using per capita and the red state blue state argument is bogus as I have pointed out as there are highly populated blue cities in Red states and those cities are run by Democrat Mayors. You cannot seem to grasp that reality and the impact those cities have on stats for the state

Interesting, since that's all you're bringing to this conversation. What role do the items you mentioned in the first part of your opening sentence play into high crime in GOP run cities with high crime, and why aren't those failures a part of your debate? If large cities run by the GOP didn't have the same issues you'd have a point,

 

[Conservative]

Interesting, since that's all you're bringing to this conversation. What role do the items you mentioned in the first part of your opening sentence play into high crime in GOP run cities with high crime, and why aren't those failures a part of your debate? If large cities run by the GOP didn't have the same issues you'd have a point,

High crime compared to the Blue cities? you have zero credibility, why is it high cost of living cities have such high crime? there is your answer, high cost of living due to liberal economics. You ever going to tell me why anyone would want the country to be like your state, NY, or California? Keep ignoring the results in your own state diverting to other problems so people won't focus on your state results.

 

[Mina]

See there you go again distorting Reagan and Bush results....

[/QUOTE]

I reported the facts. Why lie about that? Do you imagine the poverty rates are hard to find, such that my claim (that poverty rose in the Reagan/Bush era) would be hard to verify?

Loading…

www2.census.gov

As you can see, by the end of the Reagan/Bush era, the poverty rate was 1.8 points higher than what they'd inherited from Carter.

If you'd prefer to talk jobs, let's do that. When Ford left office this nation had 80.690 million jobs. By Carter's last month, that figure was 91.033 million. By the end of the Reagan/Bush era, the figure was 109.794 million. Grade-school-level math will tell you that's an annualized job creation rate of just over 3.06% for Carter, and just under 2.37% for Reagan/Bush.

It's bad enough that the pace of job creation slackened so badly during that failed Reagan/Bush era, relative to what they'd inherited. But what makes it extraordinary is that Carter was achieving that level of job creation even as the Fed hiked rates severely on him, and deficits were actually falling a little as a share of GDP. He didn't have the massive influx of both monetary and fiscal stimulus that was lavished on the Reagan/Bush economy, yet still managed to run a much stronger job-creation machine.

Leading the nation in poverty doesn't mean they are leading the nation in quality of life or cost of living

Quality of life is in the eye of the beholder. We can, however, measure things we'd expect to reflect the general perception of it. For example, where are people so miserable with the quality of their lives that they're killing themselves at high rates? WY, AK, MT, NM, ID, OK, CO, SD, UT, and WV. Meanwhile, where are people so happy that suicides are rare? NJ, NY, MA, RI, MD, CT, CA, IL , DE, and PA. In fact, by that metric, 12 of the top 12 quality-of-life states are blue states.

Or look at it the way an economist would. How much are people willing to pay for the privilege of living in each state?

You can't prove it's nicer to live in a Central Park West luxury apartment than in a corrugated sheet-metal shack in a slum of Mumbai, since that's subjective, but you can show how much the market, as a whole, thinks the "cost of admission" to live in each place is worth by what price levels the market has bid those places to. In the same way, we can see to what level the market has bid the median cost of buying into each state, to determine what people overall see each as being worth.

By that metric, the states that the collective wisdom of the market has decided offer the greatest quality of life are HI, CA, WA, CO, and MA. The worst qualities of life, by that metric, are MS, WV, AR,OK, and KY.

Interestingly, those track life expectancy pretty closely. Hawaii and California rank one and two for life expectancy, not just home values, and Washington, Massachusetts, and Colorado all make the time ten for life expectancy. Meanwhile, MS, WV, AR, OK, and KY all make the bottom ten for life expectancy. So, it appears it's not just the quality of life that's horrible in conservative areas, but also its duration.

.You keep wanting to make this a Red vs Blue or Democrat vs Republican, why?

Because that's the choice we citizens get to make. It generally comes down to two candidates, a Republican and a Democrat. It turns out, Republican ideas tend to be a train wreck, while Democratic ones tend to work out well, here in the real world. That should inform our votes.

Can you tell me what policies have Democrats implemented that promote your own individual wealth creation?

Sure. They have been more supportive of public investment in education, both primary and secondary. That has kept it possible for people from economically modest backgrounds to pull ourselves up through hard work, rather than facing an almost insurmountable wall just by way of not having started with economic privilege. I also think Democratic successes when it comes to things like the Brady Bill, and long defending Roe v. Wade, helped to revitalize our cities, by bringing about a huge decline in urban crime in the Clinton era and beyond. Cities are engines of economic growth, but those engines can fail when they wind up clogged up by urban decay and crime.

Why do you support the D so strongly

I don't. I support the truth strongly. It's liberating. You should try it.

 

[coyote505]

High GDP doesn't necessarily help the poor. Take the disastrous Reagan/Bush era, for example. Real GDP per capita was far higher in 1992 than it had been in 1980, yet poverty had actually RISEN substantially in that time. By comparison, during the Obama presidency, real GDP per capita didn't rise as much, in percentage terms, but poverty rates actually fell.

So, it's not enough to have the engine of big cities creating higher GDP. That doesn't AUTOMATICALLY help the poor. You need the right kind of leadership to make sure that extra production actually buys widespread prosperity growth, rather than just getting horded by the wealthy.

Historically, we have a pretty good idea what works and what doesn't, on that front. For example, since the Census started tracking poverty rates, there's been a net INCREASE of such rates under Republican presidents, and a gigantic net DECREASE under Democratic presidents. Basically, if leadership at the top sits back and waits for the laissez faire market to decide where all that added wealth goes, it'll all go to the rich, and then some, leaving the poor worse off. But with more active and competent leadership at the top, the system can be tweaked so that a substantial portion of the added production shows up as broad-based prosperity, even for people at the bottom.



You could say that a blue state leads in poverty in the same sense that a blue state leads in terms of people with blue eyes, or the name "Michael," or people born on a Tuesday, or with an undergraduate degree, etc. Since California is by far the biggest state, it tends to lead in a lot, good, bad, and indifferent, if we measure by raw count. It has more rich, more poor, and more middle class, as well. But if we measure in per capita terms, that tells us a lot more.

In those terms, the states that lead the nation in poverty are MS, LA, NM, WV, KY, AR, AL, OK, TN, and MI. As you might have predicted, that's dominated by conservative states. The bottom ten poverty rates are nine blue states plus Utah.

NM is definitely NOT a red state. Donkey dominance since the Depression. You had to be a donkey to get a WPA/CCC job.

We are in a tight race with MS to be 50th. Changes place from year to year. Our education is consistently 49 or 50, although our education expenditures are mid-pack. Might have something to do with a legislature dominated by lawyers, and educators with a strong aversion to school choice. Practically every time we see a news story of some kid getting an academic award, he is either private schooled or home schooled.

 

[Mina]

Apparently not enough to respond to the messenger in this OP

I responded.

Worst problem by whose standards, yours?

Mine, of course. It would be pretty weird if I applied a standard I didn't agree with, wouldn't it?

Do you understand the difference between poverty and cost of living?

Yes. Why, don't you? If you ask nicely, I'd be happy to explain it to you.

What superior social results are in California, NY, and Chicago

Well, for one, NY and CA have the third and second highest life expectancies in the country. I'm less sold on Chicago. It's not in great shape -- it's just in way better shape than a number of American cities conservatives almost never bring up.

What you see is your own personal opinion not backed up by data.

My opinion is a result of the data, which is why it's always backed up by the data. The problem people like you have is you come at this problem in reverse. You decide what you believe, then go searching for data to support it. Since you've committed hard to the R, that puts you in a position where it can be emotionally difficult to adapt when you see you were wrong about the facts. I go the other way, and go and study the facts to decide what position to support. Since the only reason I even took the position is because of the facts, if the facts should change, it's not emotionally difficult to change my conclusions along with them.

If you don't live in a big city what credibility do you have?

I do. However, my opinions aren't any stronger because of that. In fact, you could argue they're weaker. People who live in a particular situation tend to judge by their own personal experiences, and it can be very hard to remember that doing so is working with a sample size of one, which is statistically meaningless. It's too easy to be led astray by the eccentricities of our own random experiences and immediate surroundings. People who lack that temptation, because they're viewing things from outside, are stuck working with statistics, instead of personal anecdotes, and that's a whole lot more reliable when it comes to getting the big picture.

Then that is contrary to the D of today, where is the truth in the Democrat party in talking about results?

I'm not clear what you were trying to say there.

Sorry but that just isn't true, he lost California by over 5 million votes and NY by 2.5 million, then add in Chicago, the vote was 81 million to 74 million, where did that 7 million vote win come from?

Biden's popular victory came from votes across every single state.... obviously. Even in the state where Biden did worst, he got nearly a hundred thousand votes, which was over a quarter of all votes cast.

You are free to move to any city you want, the question remains what does Boston have to do with the OP

I explained that already. Have you considered reading posts twice, so you don't find yourself asking questions that were already answered? I think Boston and the other elite cities are important to keep in mind when confronting anecdotes from Fox News propagandists, that try to portray "Democrat cities" as being in rough shape. It's valuable context.

? You are responding to a post that I was required to make to another liberal poster, this OP is about the disaster in Chicago, you want to address that without making it partisan liberal bs?

I have addressed the situation in Chicago -- for example, pointing out that it's actually quite good relative to a number of other big cities, especially those in conservative areas. Just so you're clear: when someone addresses something in a way that makes you sad, that doesn't mean they didn't address it. It just means their take on it isn't the one you hoped to bring about.

 

[Conservative]

I reported the facts. Why lie about that? Do you imagine the poverty rates are hard to find, such that my claim (that poverty rose in the Reagan/Bush era) would be hard to verify?

https://www2.census.gov/programs-su...Carter, and just under 2.37% for Reagan/Bush.

There is no context to your data ...ouch with reality and no context to your data

 

[Conservative]

I responded.

Mine, of course. It would be pretty weird if I applied a standard I didn't agree with, wouldn't it?

Yes. Why, don't you? If you ask nicely, I'd be happy to explain it to you.

Well, for one, NY and CA have the third and second highest life expectancies in the country. I'm less sold on Chicago. It's not in great shape -- it's just in way better shape than a number of American cities conservatives almost never bring up.


My opinion is a result of the data, which is why it's always backed up by the data. The problem people like you have is you come at this problem in reverse. You decide what you believe, then go searching for data to support it. Since you've committed hard to the R, that puts you in a position where it can be emotionally difficult to adapt when you see you were wrong about the facts. I go the other way, and go and study the facts to decide what position to support. Since the only reason I even took the position is because of the facts, if the facts should change, it's not emotionally difficult to change my conclusions along with them.


I do. However, my opinions aren't any stronger because of that. In fact, you could argue they're weaker. People who live in a particular situation tend to judge by their own personal experiences, and it can be very hard to remember that doing so is working with a sample size of one, which is statistically meaningless. It's too easy to be led astray by the eccentricities of our own random experiences and immediate surroundings. People who lack that temptation, because they're viewing things from outside, are stuck working with statistics, instead of personal anecdotes, and that's a whole lot more reliable when it comes to getting the big picture.

I'm not clear what you were trying to say there.

Biden's popular victory came from votes across every single state.... obviously. Even in the state where Biden did worst, he got nearly a hundred thousand votes, which was over a quarter of all votes cast.

I explained that already. Have you considered reading posts twice, so you don't find yourself asking questions that were already answered? I think Boston and the other elite cities are important to keep in mind when confronting anecdotes from Fox News propagandists, that try to portray "Democrat cities" as being in rough shape. It's valuable context.

I have addressed the situation in Chicago -- for example, pointing out that it's actually quite good relative to a number of other big cities, especially those in conservative areas. Just so you're clear: when someone addresses something in a way that makes you sad, that doesn't mean they didn't address it. It just means their take on it isn't the one you hoped to bring about.

Again, another novel that doesn't really address the OP, is the messenger in the OP lying?

I gave you the facts about Biden's popular vote win, 5.5 million in California and 2.5 million in NY, his margin of victory was 7 million votes, what is 5.5+2.5 million? My point is spot on, did he win other states of course but without California which sent out ballots to every registered voter in the state and NY he would not have won the popular vote regardless of the other states.

 

[Mina]

What world facts?

The ones I laid out in my posts, for starters. Feel free to reread them.

If results matter then Trump would be President, at least results that most people believe matter, economic

As a reminder, Trump presided over an era when deficits exploded, mortality rates soared, and we had the biggest single-year surge in murder rates on record. Those results matter. As for economics, Trump's last year was one of the worst years in American history, economically. He even out-did the catastrophe at the end of the Bush years. You have to go all the way back to the Great Depression to find something like it, in terms of the rapidity of economic shrinkage and job losses.

I see no evidence that have any clue about right wing or conservative policies as everything to you is rhetoric and personality based

As you know, nothing I've said in this thread is personality based. In each and every case, I have spoken not of the personality of the people involve, but rather of their measurable, statistical results. I remind you: if you say stuff that is flatly and demonstrably untrue, I'll simply call people's attention back to this thread, where it is all preserved verbatim. People can see that stats I have referenced, over and over again.

Claiming that Trump led us into the biggest catastrophes in history is a statement by an indoctrinated liberal who is not only civics challenged but easily swayed by liberal rhetoric....

Granted, catastrophe is a qualitative term. I can't prove it's "catastrophic" when the economy shrinks by more than in any other single year since the Great Depression. If, for example, you think rapid economic collapse is a good thing, then it wasn't a "catastrophe" at all, but rather a triumph. For those who wanted to see America's economy shrink by over 3% in a single year, Trump led us into an economic triumph unlike anything seen since the days of Herbert Hoover!

, Can you tell me exactly what Trump had the authority to do to prevent that catastrophe

Sure. For starters, he could have used the bully pulpit to set a good example. Be seen wearing a mask frequently, rather than coming right out and ridiculing people for wearing them. Discourage people from trusting that COVID would just disappear like magic, and instead inspire them to fight it. Stop holding super-spreader events. Promote skepticism for snake-oil cures like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. Talk up vaccines loudly and often, and take on those who disseminate disinformation about them (especially political allies). Also, set policies based on the suggestions of experts, rather than based on what will play well with the bigots in the base.

To that last point, consider his infamous "travel ban." It was nothing of the sort. People could continue to come into the US from various places without quarantining, testing, or contact tracing -- including even people coming from Wuhan. Instead of the kind of testing and tracing the experts wanted, he gave us what was basically a "Yellow Peril" policy, where Chinese nationals were banned. That, of course, didn't do crap to slow the spread of COVID, but played well with the racists he relies on.

Look, I get it: you've never had a course in civics. Your understanding of the world is just whatever seeps through the shit-clogged drainage pipe of Fox News straight into your little baby-bird mouth. So, in a sense, it's not even your fault that you're so wrong about everything. Nobody ever told you any different. But you have a choice. Consider reading a book, for example. Good luck.

 

[Conservative]

The ones I laid out in my posts, for starters. Feel free to reread them.

As a reminder, Trump presided over an era when deficits exploded, mortality rates soared, and we had the biggest single-year surge in murder rates on record. Those results matter. As for economics, Trump's last year was one of the worst years in American history, economically. He even out-did the catastrophe at the end of the Bush years. You have to go all the way back to the Great Depression to find something like it, in terms of the rapidity of economic shrinkage and job losses.


As you know, nothing I've said in this thread is personality based. In each and every case, I have spoken not of the personality of the people involve, but rather of their measurable, statistical results. I remind you: if you say stuff that is flatly and demonstrably untrue, I'll simply call people's attention back to this thread, where it is all preserved verbatim. People can see that stats I have referenced, over and over again.



Granted, catastrophe is a qualitative term. I can't prove it's "catastrophic" when the economy shrinks by more than in any other single year since the Great Depression. If, for example, you think rapid economic collapse is a good thing, then it wasn't a "catastrophe" at all, but rather a triumph. For those who wanted to see America's economy shrink by over 3% in a single year, Trump led us into an economic triumph unlike anything seen since the days of Herbert Hoover!

Sure. For starters, he could have used the bully pulpit to set a good example. Be seen wearing a mask frequently, rather than coming right out and ridiculing people for wearing them. Discourage people from trusting that COVID would just disappear like magic, and instead inspire them to fight it. Stop holding super-spreader events. Promote skepticism for snake-oil cures like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. Talk up vaccines loudly and often, and take on those who disseminate disinformation about them (especially political allies). Also, set policies based on the suggestions of experts, rather than based on what will play well with the bigots in the base.

To that last point, consider his infamous "travel ban." It was nothing of the sort. People could continue to come into the US from various places without quarantining, testing, or contact tracing -- including even people coming from Wuhan. Instead of the kind of testing and tracing the experts wanted, he gave us what was basically a "Yellow Peril" policy, where Chinese nationals were banned. That, of course, didn't do crap to slow the spread of COVID, but played well with the racists he relies on.

Look, I get it: you've never had a course in civics. Your understanding of the world is just whatever seeps through the shit-clogged drainage pipe of Fox News straight into your little baby-bird mouth. So, in a sense, it's not even your fault that you're so wrong about everything. Nobody ever told you any different. But you have a choice. Consider reading a book, for example. Good luck.

You want to discuss your negative opinion of Reagan, Bush or any other Republican start a new thread, this one is about the crime in Chicago which you still have not told me that the messenger in this OP is lying. It is a waste of time discussing economics with a liberal especially in this thread and with your novels. You really need to learn how to do research at bls.gov, bea.gov, treasury.gov and stop buying rhetoric. I doubt seriously you were even around during the Reagan years thus get your information from books that you apparently want to believe, Reagan's results generated enough positive information to win 49 states in 1984 now I would expect you to doubt that information and provide biased alternative information including

Then for Trump start another Thread telling what the Constitution says about the Presidential responsibilities and what Trump could legally do to stop the pandemic. You like all liberals and people with TDS blame him without any statement of his legal responsibilities. Since you haven't taken civics that is obvious how about management 101? Management 101 you cannot have responsibility if you don't have the authority and NO President had the authority the left wants you to believe. that is left to the states and cities

 

[HenryChinaski]

You want to discuss your negative opinion of Reagan, Bush or any other Republican start a new thread, this one is about the crime in Chicago which you still have not told me that the messenger in this OP is lying. It is a waste of time discussing economics with a liberal especially in this thread and with your novels. You really need to learn how to do research at bls.gov, bea.gov, treasury.gov and stop buying rhetoric. I doubt seriously you were even around during the Reagan years thus get your information from books that you apparently want to believe, Reagan's results generated enough positive information to win 49 states in 1984 now I would expect you to doubt that information and provide biased alternative information including

Then for Trump start another Thread telling what the Constitution says about the Presidential responsibilities and what Trump could legally do to stop the pandemic. You like all liberals and people with TDS blame him without any statement of his legal responsibilities. Since you haven't taken civics that is obvious how about management 101? Management 101 you cannot have responsibility if you don't have the authority and NO President had the authority the left wants you to believe. that is left to the states and cities

You’re a crotchety old dude. Your posts reek of 30 years of Fox News. Your anger is misdirected. My suggestion is go outside and take a walk and implement a bit more fiber in your diet. I’m about to take a walk through my “shit hole crime ridden” neighborhood here, enjoy the weather and check out a new mom and pop pizzeria that just opened in my neighborhood and then take a walk along the lake. Enjoy your holiday weekend.

 

[Conservative]

You’re an angry old dude. Your posts reek of 30 years of Fox News. Your anger is misdirected. My suggestion is go outside and take a walk and implement a bit more fiber in your diet. I’m about to take a walk through my “shit hole crime ridden” neighborhood here, enjoy the weather and check out a new mom and pop pizzeria that just opened in my neighborhood and then take a walk along the lake. Enjoy your holiday weekend.

No, my comments are based upon data and facts, not personal support or liberal indoctrination like you. I lived in Indy for 17 years traveling back and forth to Chicago quite a bit. Today's Chicago isn't like it was and is more dangerous and more costly than ever due to liberal politics and economics. You can deny it but the facts then prove you to be nothing more than a partisan liberal supporting the D regardless of the D results.

 

[HenryChinaski]

No, my comments are based upon data and facts, not personal support or liberal indoctrination like you. I lived in Indy for 17 years traveling back and forth to Chicago quite a bit. Today's Chicago isn't like it was and is more dangerous and more costly than ever due to liberal politics and economics. You can deny it but the facts then prove you to be nothing more than a partisan liberal supporting the D regardless of the D results.

Write letters to your state representatives and Congress person if you’re angry or go just outside and take a walk. Don’t worry about Chicago. I’ve lived in the city my whole life, 51 years. I’ve lived through mega change and gentrification. I love i this town including all of its dysfunction and wouldn’t live anywhere else in the US. Worry about whatever “Mayberry utopia” you live in (where is that again?) And stay off Fox News that shit rots your brain.

 

[Conservative]

Write letters to your state representatives and Congress person if you’re angry or go just outside and take a walk. Don’t worry about Chicago. I’ve lived in the city my whole life, 51 years. I’ve lived through mega change and gentrification. I love i this town including all of its dysfunction and wouldn’t live anywhere else in the US. Worry about whatever “Mayberry utopia” you live in (where is that again?) And stay off Fox News that shit rots your brain.

In case you haven't noticed and I have, you have not responded to the content of the OP and the individual in that article, Is he lying? Is the Chicago paper lying about record setting murders in the state? You are like most liberals loyal to a fault totally lacking objectivity and ignoring reality

 

[HenryChinaski]

In case you haven't noticed and I have, you have not responded to the content of the OP and the individual in that article, Is he lying? Is the Chicago paper lying about record setting murders in the state? You are like most liberals loyal to a fault totally lacking objectivity and ignoring reality

I live here. I’m seeing new businesses open on the northside including my neighborhood regularly. There’s also business growth in Hyde Park and Beverly on the southside. I don’t have to respond to a ****ing sensationalized hit piece from Fox News. An organization that is nothing but a long running grift for brain pills, dick pills and reverse mortgages by the way.

 

[Conservative]

I live here. I’m seeing new businesses open on the northside including my neighborhood regularly. There’s also business growth in Hyde Park and Beverly on the southside. I don’t have to respond to a ****ing sensationalized hit piece from Fox News. An organization that is nothing but a long running grift for brain pills, dick pills and reverse mortgages by the way.

Got it, Fox paid that individual to lie about the city and of course paid the newspaper to post about the record number of murders in the city in 2021 that will be surpassed this year. Quite a conspiracy theory you have there and such loyalty for some unknown reason. it is great loving your city and state but not very mature not to admit the problems that exist

Do you always go through life blaming someone else for real issues in your city? You have the same hatred for Fox News as you have for Trump and that is sad, a pure diversion from your own reality

 

[Integrityrespec]

What a crying shame!

And some (not all) Dems downplay violent crime.

Especially amusing are those people who ask, "What crime? I have walked around many so-called dangerous cities and never had any problems."

Let them continue to walk around New York City or Baltimore or New Orleans or Philadelphia or .... They may, sadly, be forced to change their mind. (Hear tell one neighborhood is trying to secede from Atlanta.)

If they are voting democrat they are supporting this type of crime.

 

[Conservative]

I live here. I’m seeing new businesses open on the northside including my neighborhood regularly. There’s also business growth in Hyde Park and Beverly on the southside. I don’t have to respond to a ****ing sensationalized hit piece from Fox News. An organization that is nothing but a long running grift for brain pills, dick pills and reverse mortgages by the way.

Another Fox News Hit job??

2021 homicides worst in almost 30 years

Cook County hasn't seen this kind of gun-violence since the early 1990s.

www.axios.com

 

[HenryChinaski]

Got it, Fox paid that individual to lie about the city and of course paid the newspaper to post about the record number of murders in the city in 2021 that will be surpassed this year. Quite a conspiracy theory you have there and such loyalty for some unknown reason. it is great loving your city and state but not very mature not to admit the problems that exist

Do you always go through life blaming someone else for real issues in your city? You have the same hatred for Fox News as you have for Trump and that is sad, a pure diversion from your own reality

How many business owners did Fox interview?
I can go down Clark Street right now and walk in 30 businesses and ask the same 10 questions. A couple of them, I’m going to get the answers I want for my news story. I told you, I live here on the northside in Rogers Park, not the best neighborhood but not the worst. New businesses are opening here from Foster to Howard Street. Fox is feeding sensationalism and half truths to keep you angry about liberals in cities. What’s your address? I’m gonna send you some fruit

 

[Conservative]

How many business owners did Fox interview?
I can go down Clark Street right now and walk in 30 businesses and ask the same 10 questions. A couple of them, I’m going to get the answers I want for my news story. I told you, I live here on the northside in Rogers Park, not the best neighborhood but not the worst. New business is opening here from Foster to Howard Street. Fox is feeding sensationalism and half truths to keep you angry about liberals in cities. What’s your address? I’m gonna send you some fruit

So the Chicago papers are liars too

 

[HenryChinaski]

So the Chicago papers are liars too

I’m looking at the Chicago sun-Times and the Tribune right now and I’m not seeing any stories about “small businesses closing up shop in droves” I would think the two main newspapers in Chicago, one left wing and one right wing would be reporting on this “groundbreaking and fascinating” story that Fox News somehow seems to have the inside skinny on..

 

[Conservative]

I’m looking at the Chicago sun-Times and the Tribune right now and I’m not seeing any stories about “small businesses closing up shop in droves” I would think the two main newspapers in Chicago, one left wing and one right wing would be reporting on this “groundbreaking and fascinating” story that Fox News somehow seems to have the inside skinny on..

Again did Chicago set a 30 year high murder record last year, true of false?

 

[Integrityrespec]

Wow! The left has some strange positions about life and crime.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Again did Chicago set a 30 year high murder record last year, true of false?

Next year it might be lower. In other news, we hit a 30 year high in 1957. And then it was a 20 year high in 1968. A ten year low in 1992. 2003 was high 2006 was low. Up and down, up and down. We can do this with any city including Jacksonville Florida, Tulsa Oklahoma and Branson Missouri. Worry about your own utopia and don’t worry about my town.

 

[Conservative]

Next year it might be lower. In other news, we hit a 30 year high in 1957. And then it was a 20 year high in 1968. A ten year low in 1992. 2003 was high 2006 was low. Up and down, up and down. We can do this with any city including Jacksonville Florida, Tulsa Oklahoma and Branson Missouri. Worry about your own utopia and don’t worry about my town.

I don't live in utopia nor do you. Stop being a cheerleader and recognize the problem of liberalism

 

[HenryChinaski]

I don't live in utopia nor do you. Stop being a cheerleader and recognize the problem of liberalism

I never said I lived in utopia, I don’t. But I’ve lived in Chicago my whole life and that qualifies me to be able to call out a “sensationalized hit piece” from Fox News. Worry about your own backyard and go for a walk..