Why bother, dude? You believe what you want to believe. You're so invested in what you're told that you can't believe your eyes. Defund the police? ...Can't defund it if it's getting more money, right? Those are the FACTS.   

Meanwhile, in reality world, Chicago has been downsizing its actual sworn-in police department members in spite of high crime for the last 5 years. So, even though they are increasing their budget, putting you clearly on the right side of the FACTS, they aren't using it to actually, you know, get more police. They are reducing their police force. But, hey, technically downsizing isn't defunding, right? That downsizing is just a coincidence. Don't worry, though... while you repeat the FACTS about their budget increasing, I'm sure some nice corporate contractor is somehow finding new ways to funnel money from the taxpayers while crime continues to skyrocket. And I'm not even going to mention the problems the defund the police movement has created for cops who are now too afraid to police. Gotta love dem FACTS.

LOL

Police forces nationwide struggled to maintain numbers during Covid and many have struggled ever since. 

Including Chicago. 
Nothing to do with "defunding." 
They are actively recruiting but can't get enough officers to fill the vacancies. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chi...o-suburbs/

Hey, would you look at that. Another article telling us what to believe.

Well, some of us actually got into the numbers of the Chicago Police budget. Some of us looked where they were spending more money. Some of us know that the Office of Constitutional Policing and Reform, which is part of the police reform movement, is what's contributing to Chicago's expanded police budget. Some of us know that the department doesn't contain any police officers, but a reform management team. Some of us looked at whether Chicago is actually expanding or shrinking its police force, so we don't have to blame COVID for what the city authorized. Some of us see that Chicago can't fill out it's need for officers because they're leaving to go police other areas or taking other jobs (about the only thing your article got correct, while conveniently tap dancing around the reason for this exodus).

Because of that, some of us can read that article you posted, and know that the shortage in Chicago has nothing to do with Covid. Some of us can see how they say "during the pandemic months," and realize that it's a substitute for, "during the George Floyd riots." Open your eyes, man. Use that brain of yours to challenge the system and stop repeating this hogwash.

---

Why bother, dude? You believe what you want to believe. You're so invested in what you're told that you can't believe your eyes. Defund the police? ...Can't defund it if it's getting more money, right? Those are the FACTS.   

Meanwhile, in reality world, Chicago has been downsizing its actual sworn-in police department members in spite of high crime for the last 5 years. So, even though they are increasing their budget, putting you clearly on the right side of the FACTS, they aren't using it to actually, you know, get more police. They are reducing their police force. But, hey, technically downsizing isn't defunding, right? That downsizing is just a coincidence. Don't worry, though... while you repeat the FACTS about their budget increasing, I'm sure some nice corporate contractor is somehow finding new ways to funnel money from the taxpayers while crime continues to skyrocket. And I'm not even going to mention the problems the defund the police movement has created for cops who are now too afraid to police. Gotta love dem FACTS.

The y axis origin of a graph like this should be either 0 or 12,154
9000 was picked to make the data look worse than it is.
We also don't know if "sworn police officers" are getting more specialized.  Perhaps some tasks they used to do are now done by other types of police department employees

But mostly

None of us are in Chicago.
None of the politicians any of us might vote for have anything to do with Chicago.

They've only been collecting the data for 5 years, so what you see is what you get. If the y axis was 12,154, that would make it look worse than it is, but whatever. Keep fighting the good fight, man. 

Also, don't say stupid [BLEEP] like, We don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. Say, YOU don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. It's there to find if you go look for it. 

This is just bad policy, and it doesn't matter if we live in Chicago. We can point to it and say "I told you so," because we're hoping you ostriches can pull your heads out of the sands long enough to acknowledge the problem. Your ignorance is not my ignorance.

---

The y axis origin of a graph like this should be either 0 or 12,154
9000 was picked to make the data look worse than it is.
We also don't know if "sworn police officers" are getting more specialized.  Perhaps some tasks they used to do are now done by other types of police department employees

But mostly

None of us are in Chicago.
None of the politicians any of us might vote for have anything to do with Chicago.

They've only been collecting the data for 5 years, so what you see is what you get. If the y axis was 12,154, that would make it look worse than it is, but whatever. Keep fighting the good fight, man. 

Also, don't say stupid [BLEEP] like, We don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. Say, YOU don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. It's there to find if you go look for it. 

This is just bad policy, and it doesn't matter if we live in Chicago. We can point to it and say "I told you so," because we're hoping you ostriches can pull your heads out of the sands long enough to acknowledge the problem. Your ignorance is not my ignorance.

The bolded makes zero sense in context. You may be confusing me with someone else you're debating? 
Or attributing something in a linked article to me personally? No idea what that's about. 

And, it's fine if you want to call me ignorant because I prefer to take facts at face value opposed to the way you want to spin them into something else. Have at it. I can deal with it. 

The bottom line here for me is that Chicago has a crime problem. It's had one for as long as I can remember, and it is even worse now. 
Even though the annual police budget in Chicago has increased throughout all of this, it may need to increase more for them to bring crime levels back to "normal" parameters. 
Nothing wrong with that. 
But that is not a dynamic that anyone in their right mind would label as a "defunding" unless they were trying to hyperbolize and politicize the roots of the problem.  All of this is magnified because Chicago had a mayor who threatened a "defunding" quite publicly but ended up marginally trimming the increase in budget to a lesser increase. She brought ire from the right, and here we are.

Of course the headline of this thread here (that calssicly misused the "woke " term, and the article in the OP isn't saying that ^ it's spewing a bunch of fear and hyperbole instead.
You want to attack me for giving context to a bunch of hyperbolic blathering? Go for it. 
I think all of the fear-mongering, ranting, and frothing at the mouth around here could use some perspective sometimes.  Glad you enjoyed this tiny dose of it enough to call me stupid and ignorant. 

Also, please feel free to quote me ever jumping on any of the defunding bandwagons. 
Every budget should be scrutinized, police or otherwise, but I've never been a proponent of taking cops off the streets. I've only ever spoken up for reform in recruitment and training of officers (which would require MORE funding)  - and for cutting the fat out of unnecessary expenses like some these suburban police forces all over the country buying up armored personnel carriers and giant arsenals of tactical gear/ weaponry so they can play toy soldier running drills on their off days. 

The only thing I'm trying to actively defund is my HOA.

---

They've only been collecting the data for 5 years, so what you see is what you get. If the y axis was 12,154, that would make it look worse than it is, but whatever. Keep fighting the good fight, man. 

Also, don't say stupid [BLEEP] like, We don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. Say, YOU don't know if sworn police officers are getting more specialized. It's there to find if you go look for it. 

This is just bad policy, and it doesn't matter if we live in Chicago. We can point to it and say "I told you so," because we're hoping you ostriches can pull your heads out of the sands long enough to acknowledge the problem. Your ignorance is not my ignorance.

The bolded makes zero sense in context. You may be confusing me with someone else you're debating? 
Or attributing something in a linked article to me personally? No idea what that's about. 

And, it's fine if you want to call me ignorant because I prefer to take facts at face value opposed to the way you want to spin them into something else. Have at it. I can deal with it. 

The bottom line here for me is that Chicago has a crime problem. It's had one for as long as I can remember, and it is even worse now. 
Even though the annual police budget in Chicago has increased throughout all of this, it may need to increase more for them to bring crime levels back to "normal" parameters. 
Nothing wrong with that. 
But that is not a dynamic that anyone in their right mind would label as a "defunding" unless they were trying to hyperbolize and politicize the roots of the problem.  All of this is magnified because Chicago had a mayor who threatened a "defunding" quite publicly but ended up marginally trimming the increase in budget to a lesser increase. She brought ire from the right, and here we are.

Of course the headline of this thread here (that calssicly misused the "woke " term, and the article in the OP isn't saying that ^ it's spewing a bunch of fear and hyperbole instead.
You want to attack me for giving context to a bunch of hyperbolic blathering? Go for it. 
I think all of the fear-mongering, ranting, and frothing at the mouth around here could use some perspective sometimes.  Glad you enjoyed this tiny dose of it enough to call me stupid and ignorant. 

Also, please feel free to quote me ever jumping on any of the defunding bandwagons. 
Every budget should be scrutinized, police or otherwise, but I've never been a proponent of taking cops off the streets. I've only ever spoken up for reform in recruitment and training of officers (which would require MORE funding)  - and for cutting the fat out of unnecessary expenses like some these suburban police forces all over the country buying up armored personnel carriers and giant arsenals of tactical gear/ weaponry so they can play toy soldier running drills on their off days. 

The only thing I'm trying to actively defund is my HOA.

Well, I would hope that it makes zero sense, since I was specifically replying to Mikey. I don't think of you as ignorant. I think you're a smart guy that does his due diligence by reading up on issues which should be packaged and condensed into bite sized chunks by journalists who thoroughly understand the issues. Unfortunately, the media is bought and paid for. They don't do their research, and they cherry pick facts, and they pit us against one another. I agree those headlines are hyperbolic, but there is one side of the aisle that is clanging the gongs, begging the left to slow down, and there is another side of the aisle that is really good at giving platitudes as they bulldoze their ideology through the Western landscape, which often doesn't end up doing the things they claim. 

The bolded part made me lol.

---