:Don: I believe we had increased urbanisation in the 1890s, then again in the 1950s. I agree that packing more people together leads to greater violence, all else being equal. I also agree that economic issues effect urbanisation. However, this is not a *direct* economic effect on the violent crime rate.Yes, of coruse economic issues effect urbanisation- why do people move from the country and into the cities, if not for the porspect of better life, higher wages, or to at least escape the stagnant agrarian economy.
:Don: The crime rate was rising *before* the depression occured, and continued to rise at about the same rate until around '35, when there was a downturn--in the middle of the Great Depression.
The depression began before teh depression occured, or rather, the economic bad times began- gross poverty (groos inequelity of wealth rather) existed before the great Stock Market Crash of '29- the crash itself was just the true crisis revealing its allready latent features.
:Don: When I think of '68, I don't think of economic downturn. I think of Vietnam, sex, drugs, rock and roll, and a significant change in society.
France suffred major crisis, Britain nearly abandonned stirling, if you check out the SPecial issue of 'New Left review' by Robert Bremner, you'll find a chart of "rate of Profit in G7 COuntries" Going back to the 1940's, you'll see that '68 was a crsis year in the world market, as was '73.
:Don: Right now, the US is doing well economically. We had a minor downturn in the early 90s, but we have actually been doing well since I can remember (I didn't pay much attention to economics in the 60s and 70s).
Doing well is relative, wages have fallen, growth still isn't above 6%- no-where near teh phenomenal growth of the Tiger economies pre-crash. Large and permenant unemployment, etc.
:Don: If the root cause is economics, why did homicides go down during the Great Depression?
After '35 there was a recovery.
:If the root cause is the disparity in wealth, why was the homicide rate so low back around 1900, when the greatest disperity in wealth existed?
Because wider conditions, such as urban development weren't around- people who are poor, but have *community* are less likely to commit crime, the alienated poor isolated in cities are more crime prone.
: The '20s had more equity of wealth than pre-1914, and better economic conditions than the Great Depression, but it also had a greater homicide rate (yes, the rate continued to rise some after the boom of the '20s ended, but that was just the continuation of a trend).
But it also saw the rise of industrialisation, more divsiion of labour, more factory work, etc.
Lets put it this way- Gansterism and prohiobition busting had economic factors- why did people work for the gansters? Why did people put up with them? Because there was money to be made, folks were poor, and desperate, and getting involved with the Mob was one way to make a large bundle of cash- it wasn't simply prohibitting a good that made the mobs work, it was teh surrounding poverty.
