Who's fault is it when someone chooses to rape, rob, beat someone, murder, deface or steal someone else's property and generally behave like a thug?

Via Daily Timewaster

 

This gets really tiring.... (Robert Reich vomits forth)

In other words, much in modern America depends on where you draw boundaries, and who's inside and who's outside. Who is included in the social contract? If "Detroit" is defined as the larger metropolitan area that includes its suburbs, "Detroit" has enough money to provide all its residents with adequate if not good public services, without falling into bankruptcy. Politically, it would come down to a question of whether the more affluent areas of this "Detroit" were willing to subsidize the poor inner-city through their tax dollars, and help it rebound. That's an awkward question that the more affluent areas would probably rather not have to face.

It is?

Look Robert, I happen to know more than a bit about what happened in Detroit.  My family on my father's side grew up and lived in River Rouge.  Yes, that suburb of Detroit -- a place of steel plants, car plants and other industry.  A gentrified area that slowly turned into a sewer.

Here's the real "awkward" question -- what is your rational response when crime starts to move higher where you live? Should you simply sit and take it as your cars are stolen, your building defaced, your daughter raped, your grandmother mugged on the way back from church, and in addition pay ever-higher taxes in order to "suppress" these changes?  Or is it more rational to move and let the animals fight among themselves -- a process that continues until there are only animals left?

More @ The Market Ticker