re: Dennis Prager on why poverty does NOT cause crime

I diskike these arguments because rather than accepting that poverty is one of many risk factors that contributes (causes is too strong is a word for me) to crime, he dismisses it it's entirety. It provides a overly simplistic view, and is no better than those that pretend that poverty is the sole contributor.

His cell phone argument was especially weak. It seems about 10 years too late given that they commonly replace home phones and it's now a societal expectation to have a cell phone. Granted some people overdo it, but it's too archaic of an argument.