|
|
|
|
|
by otakucode
3119 days ago
|
|
Research was done decades ago across all cultures on the globe looking for predictors of violent crime. Hundreds of different factors were considered and evaluated. Only 1 had significant predictive power. Economic disparity. Just poverty itself was OK - so long as it was not present in close proximity to abundance. In every single place where large economic disparity existed, violent crime was high. In no place where economic disparity was absent was violent crime high. Economic disparity causes violent crime. To believe you can accept and encourage one without also accepting and encouraging the other is ignorant, childish, and utterly irrational. (the book 'Nine Crazy Ideas in Science' in chapter 1 cites a bunch of the research done in this field, they were specifically looking for the influence of overall gun ownership rates but found gun ownership prevalence has no predictive power for violent crime rates) |
|
So the use of tetra-ethyl lead in vehicle fuel from 1920 to 1975 in the US roughly correlates with greater nationwide violence between 1942 and 1997. Specific tracts known to have ongoing lead contamination problems show stronger correlations.
So if lead pollution had not been tackled in the 70s, poor people in the alternate-timeline 2017 might be even more murdery, now that wealth imbalances are worse. Their opioid epidemic might look more like the 1980s crack epidemic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-crime_hypothesis