Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (360481)	11/27/2007 4:56:17 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574441

My original premise was that there is a correlation between the crime rate and the health of the economy That's nothing more than a page out of the liberal playbook. The next page says terrorism is due to economic factors... Morality is in decline as is character. It ain't because of your economic standing in society. Let's start with the nonsense in today's schools.

To: tejek who wrote (360481)	11/27/2007 7:52:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574441

I guess I have to show you the data again. FBI Crime in the United States by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1987 - 2006 Violent Crime rate fbi.gov fbi.gov 1986 620.1 1987 612.5 1988 640.6 1989 666.9 Skipping a few 1990 to 1994 where all above 700 1995 684.5 1996 636.6 1997 611.0 1998 567.6 1999 523.0 2000 506.5 2001 504.5 (Note does not include 9/11 Attacks) 2002 494.4 2003 475.8 2004 463.2 2005 469.0 (adjusted from the original reported 469.2) 2006 473.5 So the latest figure is lower than any year under Clinton, any year in the data set before Clinton, and any also lower than 2001 and 2002 and 2003. Only 2004 and 2005 are lower, and the percentage increases where about a percent and a quarter from '05 to '05 followed by just under a percent from '05 to '06. The violent crime index would have to decrease another 7% to equal Clinton's best year, and over 60% to equal the worst year in the dataset (1992). Which isn't to say that I blame Clinton for the fact that crime was higher then, or that I blame the presidents before him for even higher crime rates. I also don't give Bush more than at most a tiny amount of credit for the fact that violent crime rates during his administration have been the lowest on the chart. The president might be the most powerful person in the country but he is only one factor, and usually not an overwhelming one in what happens in the country. Presidents always get too much blame and too much credit. But if you are going to try to make some silly Bush vs. Clinton point on this, the data doesn't support you because violent crime happens at a lower rate now.