Thomas wrote:georgeob1 wrote:The decline, as you noted, started in New York about two years later than it did in the rest of the country.
... which indicates mostly that Dinkins was a below-average crimefighter. It appears we basically agree in our assessment of Dinkins.
georgeob1 wrote: It appears to me that during his tenure as mayor he (1) initiated a beneficial trend that was already going on in the country as a whole, but not yet in New York; and (2) made much more rapid relative improvements while he was in office than occurred in the rest of the country during the same period. Both observations follow directly from the data you referenced.
I agree. But it doesn't take a crime-fighting superhero to explain this pattern. All it takes to explain this is that Dinkins was a below-average crime fighter (a point we agree on), and that his two successors were at least average in this field. I agree the data doesn't
refute that Giuliani was much better than the average American mayor -- but to explain his results, you needn't assume that he was, either.
georgeob1 wrote: Politicians, Giuliani included, are generally very quick and adept at taking credit for things that were happening anyway (witness Clinton's boasting about deficit reductions)
I agree George Bush I is getting way too little kudos for the sound fiscal policies he initiated. Especially not from Republicans endorsing his irresponsible, tax-your-grandchildren-and-spend son. If George H. W. Bush weren't alive, he would be turning in his grave these days. I miss him.
How did you find out Bernie and I disagreed about this? I was staying out of this discussion, but since you've invited me in, I'll give my perspective.
Looking at statistics is a good thing. It can give an overall view of patterns we would not see in any other way. However in order to understand the full picture, you have to have been there. Since I've been criticized for saying this before about other issues, let me anticipate the potential argument. I think you have to look at a phenomenon from above as well as on the ground to get a true picture.
I lived in New York while I attended graduate school in the early 70s. I left in 1976, but I continued to return for frequent trips through the mid eighties. Living in New York in those years was frightening even to a woman still young enough to think she was above danger. On the day I arrived in New York at Penn Station, I was immediately accosted by an aggressive pan handler and in the evening, an eminent Columbia law professor was mugged, stabbed and died for his wrist watch. This took place three blocks from where I was to live, just outside the Columbia campus.
Crime rates in New York represented violent crimes against unrelated people. Much of the violent crime in other cities was largely between family members or with someone familiar. New Yorkers were disgusted and leaving the city at an alarming rate. There was a lot of talk about the end of New York City as some had known it.
Times Square was nothing but panhandlers, whores and X rated movies. I remember one billboard in Times Square advertising Deep Throat. The movie was showing in a theater right below the sign. And of course the others were showing everywhere. There was graffiti all over the city. While graffiti can be fun, it covered the buildings and subway cars completely, including many of the windows. It was unsafe to ride the subway after 9 PM. The subway entrances reeked of urine, and homeless people were often passed out on the stairs. When you emerged from any of the tunnels or bridges, you were immediately greeted by kids squirting water on your windshield and smearing it around, expecting a tip for making a mess of your view.
East (Spanish) Harlem and most of Harlem in general looked like a war zone. There were many abandoned buildings, broken out windows. I accidently came out of the subway on my first visit on the East Side and 119th Street. It was shocking, the friend I was with and I gasped we were so surprised. We wandered around for a few blocks looking for the Columbia Campus. We asked for directions in a post office and the postal worker scolded us so that we were even more freaked out. He said, "see that bus over there? Go directly there and get on it. It will take you to the West Side. Don't you know you're in danger?"
These are just a few examples, ask anyone that was there. It got so bad I stopped going to New York for almost a decade. And when I returned with my children I was worried. But the New York I found in 1994 was remarkably different from the New York I described above.
I don't know any New Yorker who believes it wasn't Giulliani that cleaned it up. How he cleaned it up is a disgusting story in the violation of civil rights and brutality. But there's no doubt it was Guilliani and his crowd that made the difference.
The important aspect to be considered about Giulliani and New York is not whether Giulliani cleaned up the city, but the way in which he accomplished this task. Giulliani is to be feared because he's into brutality. He thinks it's the way to get things done.
from wikipedia
