Home Social Why Are Liberal Cities Such A Mess?

Why Are Liberal Cities Such A Mess?

835

Authored by Steven Feinstein via AmericanThinker.com,

Many major U.S. cities run by liberal Democrats are in rough shape. They are afflicted by the problems of homelessness, violent crime, gangs, and unemployment to a far greater degree than the country as a whole. Consider the following:

Chicago’s violence and gang-related drug problems are well-known. What’s less well-known is that the city hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1927. The city’s finances — like most Democratically-run major cities — are in shambles. At the end of 2015, according to a 2017 report by the Fiscal Times, Chicago had assets of just $4.7 billion against liabilities of more than $14 billion, a funded ratio of barely 33%.

The homeless population in Los Angeles has risen from a staggering 33,000 in 2010 to over 55,000 in 2018. The city — already dominated by a liberal super-majority of legislators — has just recently pushed through massive local tax increases designed to address the homeless crisis.

San Francisco actually has maps so people can track where the worst incidences of human waste are on the sidewalks. The homeless population now approaches 7000 and there is no law prohibiting sleeping on the streets, sidewalks, or other public places. Discarded syringes are everywhere. San Francisco’s property crime rate is the highest in the nation and “smash and grab” thefts involving broken car windows are so commonplace that repair shops have waiting lists. The DA’s office no longer prosecutes “victimless” crimes like prostitution or drug possession, resulting in a massive influx of drug dealers into the city.

Frighteningly similar situations exist is nearly every other major Democrat-run city, all around the nation:

In New York City, Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Hartford, CT, Newark, Philadelphia and on and on, the story follows the same pattern: Homelessness, high crime, underwater finances, soft policing, lax immigration control (often sanctuary cities), high taxes, and business-averse regulations. It’s a guaranteed formula for failure.

As Investors Business Daily put it:

When Democrats are in control, cities tend to go soft on crime, reward cronies with public funds, establish hostile business environments, heavily tax the most productive citizens and set up fat pensions for their union friends. Simply put, theirs is a Blue State blueprint for disaster.

The question, of course, is why? Why do they choose to govern like that? Can anything about the efficacy and propriety of liberal governing doctrine be extrapolated from these examples?

The answer is a resounding “yes.” To boil down the essential difference between conservative and liberal governing philosophy into the simplest terms, it would be this:

Conservatives believe in equal opportunity.

Liberals believe in equal outcome.

The conservative’s view of government’s role in society (after fulfilling its fundamental responsibilities of national defense, common-sense safety/liability regulations, environmental protections and providing a basic social safety net for those in a temporarily disadvantageous situation) is to set up the game pieces such that those choosing to participate have a reasonably equal chance of winning.

Not perfectly equal, perhaps, but a reasonable shot at success. In the conservative paradigm, individual initiative, hard work and a bit of luck can eliminate almost all the barriers to educational, professional and financial achievement.

In contrast, liberal doctrine stipulates an equal outcome for all people. Their view of government is that its responsibility is to ensure that every individual has at least a minimally acceptable share of society’s spoils (that share being quite arbitrarily determined by liberal politicians, according to their whims and the political exigencies in effect at the time). Liberal governing practices of wealth redistribution, punitive taxation, excessive regulations designed to impede runaway capitalistic profits and “cover every contingency” individual benefit programs all combine to produce — in many instances — the unintended consequence of short-circuiting personal initiative and ambition. Instead, these excessive giveaway programs essentially “teach” some people how to game the system and get the government to pay for their existence in society. That’s not the original intent, but that’s how it ends up playing out in many cases.

Liberal cities are governed by the guiding tenets of softness, misplaced “compassion,” and individual unaccountability. Examples include:

Hands-off policing style (NYC has long since abandoned the highly successful stop-and-frisk practices of the Giuliani years that led to low street crime).

Sanctuary cities, which give rise to higher incidents of crime, poverty, unemployment, and the wasting of taxpayer-funded public resources because of the undocumented population’s draining effect on the community.

The inexplicable decision of cities like Boston to no longer prosecute crimes such as shoplifting and breaking and entering, leading to urban stores not being able to remain open and be profitable (thus denying the community of a valuable resource).

Widespread locally approved abuse of the SNAP/EBT program, allowing its acceptance for alcohol and other nonessential items.

Explicit sanctioning of sleeping on the street or other common public areas and unrestricted public loitering.

Liberal policies have worked almost perfectly to degrade the quality of inner-city life for their residents to the point of abject unacceptability. Instead of raising the standard of living for all the city’s inhabitants, excessive giveaways (too often offered without requiring adequate, verifiable proof-of-need) and lax or missing enforcement of local laws and edicts have the opposite effect — such governmental practice only teaches people that they are forever unaccountable as regards the purported norms of society and that they will be given their daily sustenance for free, without putting forth any commensurate effort on their part. In short, overindulgence by local city governments denies the notion of ownership over their own lives to the lower strata of society. That notion of self-ownership over the control and ultimate destiny of one’s life is absolutely critical to a well-functioning society. Without that sense of personal responsibility, there is no civilized order.

There is an old cliché that speaks perfectly to the societal dangers inherent when the individual does not feel the responsibility of ownership: “No one ever washes a rented car.” Liberal cities are strewn with the abandoned, rusted hulks of rented cars, their rotting carcasses a blight on the landscape, indisputable testimony to failed Democratic policy.

via zerohedge

3 COMMENTS

  1. Because they are running an “open society” program created by Globalists. And with this “Globalist Open Society” comes illegal guns, drugs, human trafficking, gangs, and most importantly the hatred of our laws and our law enforcement. Politicians in sanctuary states are breaking the laws of the USA for allowing this. But most of all, the financial strain put on these “globalist open societies” are just so high that all of these places now look like a third world disgusting mess.

    But these globalist open society politicians and their keepers don’t care. They just up the taxes on everything, allow their open society scum to kill, maim, steal from American citizens.

    So you can thank a socialist democrat, because if you really look who’s running these third world sh*tholes, they are all Democrats.

    GOD BLESS PRESIDENT TRUMP! GOD HELP THE USA!

  2. The question is why the answer is simple they are being governed by socialist democratic who believes in the free everything you don’t have to worry or work the government will pay for their incompetent free healthcare system and food stamps and welfare system and y’all ask why? Lmao are y’all blinded by the Democratic Party flimflam or is it the use car salesmen

  3. Short-n-simple version is conservatives raise ‘the geese that lay golden eggs’, and believe in nurturing their flocks, so future generations will succeed. Liberals want the golden eggs, but they also want to eat the goose.
    All major cities that have been dominated by liberal politicians for generations are full of graft, and payola principles. Liberal politicians need to secure a criminal element around them to prevent their own criminal behaviors and practices from being exposed. It’s been like that for decades, and not likely to go away just because conservatives are waking up to the filth in their backyards.
    You can see just how bad it is by looking at the “New Way Forward Act” sponsored by Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Congresswomen Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Karen Bass (CA-37), and 30 other liberal Members of Congress. The bill is literally designed to subvert written Federal law, skirt around existing local (logical) laws, prevent ICE and other immigration law officials from doing their jobs, invite more criminal illegals into the country, and force taxpayers to pay for any and everything the illegal needs, or wants. Any illegal who was deported that may have some family connection in the USA, can then be imported back into the state where they were, at taxpayer expense; by plane, train or taxi, and in some cases, limousine service. Every aspect of the bill is designed to be as despicable and evil to the country as possible, and still sound “benevolent”.
    The demonrats have lost so many formerly dependent voters, and are desperate to stay in power; so, they now must embrace their inwardly evil sides, even at the risk of exposing themselves as criminals — to garner another voting block of dependents such as MS-13 and other members of the world’s poorer masses. The bulk of the bill appears to be designed to help protect MS-13 gang members, so Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García must be their congressman. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley backed it, and probably thought up some of the more subversive aspects; but that’s more my own opinion based on the way she looks when I’ve seen her on TV (Trump is ‘the occupant’ in the oval office, he’s not her president). Most of these people have an aura of evil around them that is hard to conceal, and it always shows in their faces. When someone has contempt for their own country, but chooses to stay, it’s only because they think they can change it to their liking.
    Conservatives need to wake up and be more active in voting for pure conservatives.
    Term limits would go a long way in curbing these evil people’s control over our great or once great cities.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

*