Yes you said the Depression which is what I addressed. That article is also indictive of the stats that show there are not direct, consistent parallels
between crime and economics as a whole. Rather they are some what interpretive and misleading correlating factors given certain time periods. People attribute these to predetermined life views. As was my second point
While that is true it is rather simplistic. For instance, low income household crime in cities is directly disproportionate to low income rural and suburban areas. Not only that but in rural/suburban areas the curve between economics and crime (ala Great Depression) tends to not be correlated.
Jobs don't stop crime. Compare the 80's with the late 90's.
We agree more than it sounds. I just am rejecting the preimse (not necessarily by you) that if everyone had a job there would be no crime. Sure economics affect some fringge elements one way or the other, but ultimately I believe the bulk of those that are criminals would be so regardless and that the net gain on either side is negligible to the overall stats. I also agree stats are just about worthless. They can be made to make any point. They also can not account for cultural forces behind the numbers. Which are usually key, but even more subjective.