Quote:
Originally Posted by flylock shox
I'd argue that, if Covid has shown us nothing else governments can marshal huge sums of money if properly motivated. Municipal governments less so, but I see no reason cities should have to deal with what is essentially a national issue on their own.
And we agree that "defund" and "budget cuts" are basically synonymous. My question is more whether you see cutting police budgets as an essential - or even primary - aspect of what advocates want, or whether proper funding of social agencies is really the central aim.
Underlying my question is, I suppose, a question about whether the argument is primarily about spending on social programs to improve the way citizens are dealt with by police, or about punishing police, or both.
I should add, I'm only directing the question to you because of your very personal stake in these issues, which most posters won't feel as keenly. But the question really is one I'd be interested in a variety of views on.
|
They didn't marshall huge sums of money, they just used your future money to pay other people and add it to the debt you as a taxpayer will have to pay back. They did not cut one government service and restrict spending. They can "defund" or "reallocate" all the funds they need but people should not be surprised when a social worker is attacked the first night they go out to a domestic dispute.