There is research, and it's pretty intuitive. Create stability. Reduce income inequality. Focus spending on social programs. Help people out of addiction, crime, give them a network, healthcare, education and jobs. People who cannot work need funding. Enough to live a dignified life. People are happy when they don't have to worry. People who are happy with the system doesn't really commit crime.
I don't get why this is downvoted. If you want to take part of the benefits of capitalism and maximize your profit, you should be ready to waive some benefits if asking for collective support.
I'd argue that depends on 1. laws being put I to place for strictly rational reasons, 2. arrest decisions do not depend on race and 3. punishment magnitude is equal for equal crimes.
You're saying that black people have a higher propensity for crime. Is it not more plausible that humans are more or less alike, and the difference is outside their control?
Well yes, that's structural racism for you. And before you judge people for committing crimes, ask yourself: would you have abstained if you had the same life story? Do you think they would fall into crime less if they had a more privileged upbringing?
This is great. Anything that may only be "owned" by one person at a time should categorically be able to be resold. Licenses too. If you're a proponent for capitalism (which I guess all publisher decision-makers are), then let the market work. The profit motive will solve all problems.
They tout "sustainability is non-negotiable" on their page, while encouraging recycling over more sustainable reuse. I mean, they're allowed to do that, but be honest about it.