Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She is actually quite right. The truth hurts though and many run from it. It takes years for decay to set in. Then once set it is like a disease. Just look at Los Angeles and the giant cesspool of refugee decay and violence. A city under siege. I can not stand even driving through this city.
Just read that article last night...along with the reader's comments, which fall in line with VandalsLOL's thoughts above. I was also curious as to a "local's" view on the refugee situation around Boise and SE ID in general. Is the infrastructure set up to handle them? Jobs, housing, opportunities to be productive and contribute?
Why are people so knee-jerk against the mere thought of questioning the thought of refugees being brought in? Is it pure bleeding-heart emotion, or is there logic behind the thought that these refugees are all A-OK?
Also find it interesting when you hear of Idahoeans bemoan the thought of more Californians moving there but completely support the idea of refugees being shuttled in. They are not going back you know?
These all contribute to the cultural change out there folks. Out of state is bad enough. Out of country is another thing entirely.
Its anecdotal, but I watched something similar happen to my little hick town high school when they started bringing kids from South Central Los Angeles to the local Group Homes. The first couple were alright and I got to know them, partied with them, played sports with them. Then another dozen were brought in and they possied up and went back to their old street games and 2 years after I graduated the school has armed guards.
Good times.
But seriously. I would love to know more on the topic specific to Boise etc.
For a few reasons, but the biggest reason being... they're not being located here in huge numbers. So their impact is, at best, minimal.
Second, most refugees are being relocated for pretty extraordinary reasons, often times because their lives were in peril, and they're not simply running away from "illegal immigrants," liberals, or other reasons of convenience. So forgive most people if their sympathies run with those who are facing a bit more dire situation than your typical Californian. Moreover, the refugees don't tend to be the group that is driving up prices and spurring rampant development in the area.
Third, many people tend to believe diversity is a good thing and tends to make a community more healthy and enjoyable.
Fourth, if you actually come and check out the situation here, it's not like refugees here are "living in blight" any more than your typical "white trash" family living in a trailer park, with their Confederate flags waving proudly, trash and detritus on their lawn, proudly asserting their "freedom" from the tyranny of zoning, code enforcement, CCRs, and other scourges of government. It seems most refugees are actually trying.
Judy Peavy Derr's comments were insensitive and petty. Really, complaining about "124 dialects" sounds pretty damn ignorant to me.
Just read that article last night...along with the reader's comments, which fall in line with VandalsLOL's thoughts above. I was also curious as to a "local's" view on the refugee situation around Boise and SE ID in general. Is the infrastructure set up to handle them? Jobs, housing, opportunities to be productive and contribute?
Why are people so knee-jerk against the mere thought of questioning the thought of refugees being brought in? Is it pure bleeding-heart emotion, or is there logic behind the thought that these refugees are all A-OK?
Also find it interesting when you hear of Idahoeans bemoan the thought of more Californians moving there but completely support the idea of refugees being shuttled in. They are not going back you know?
These all contribute to the cultural change out there folks. Out of state is bad enough. Out of country is another thing entirely.
Its anecdotal, but I watched something similar happen to my little hick town high school when they started bringing kids from South Central Los Angeles to the local Group Homes. The first couple were alright and I got to know them, partied with them, played sports with them. Then another dozen were brought in and they possied up and went back to their old street games and 2 years after I graduated the school has armed guards.
Good times.
But seriously. I would love to know more on the topic specific to Boise etc.
The statesman is a well known liberal paper, with only liberals view which doesn't amount to much. Do not listen to the bemoaners either. I could go on about why but then sage would delete my post. I talk from experience and fact. I have lived and worked in several major cities in my life, with my first job being for Bears and sterns in NYC. I have also worked in LE in areas with blight and violence and have seen first hand what comes next.
Refugee blight or decay is a real issue, not some imaginary friend you play with.
There are some cultures who have had large numbers of refugees who, in general, have moved here, been grateful for the opportunities they were given, accepted short term help, learned the language and become productive members of society.
And then there are other cultures who have had large numbers of refugees move here who, in general, go onto Section 8 housing assistance, food stamps, and other welfare programs, stay on them for decades, and not contribute much of anything.
As a landlord in Boise, I see the differences a lot. It isn't a refugee thing, it is a cultural thing.
I'm a bleeding heart liberal on many topics, but not this one. You are welcome to come here if you are willing to at least attempt to contribute to society. But if you are just coming here to mooch, we don't have the infrastructure or the resources to accommodate more multi-generational welfare households. The entire state has fewer people than many large cities (about 40 metro areas in the US have more people than Idaho).
One of the defining characteristics of people in Idaho, in my opinion, is that we value self sufficiency. Everyone needs a helping hand at times, and we are all willing to help out, but we don't like moochers. I suppose you could say "Idahoans help those who help themselves" (make of that comparison what you will).
So I'm not against all refugees as a concept. Some of them are incredible, hard working people who have improved our society. But I am against refugees who have nothing at all to contribute except more mouths to feed, who have no interest in bettering their own situation, and just want to be handed everything.
The statesman is a well known liberal paper, with only liberals view which doesn't amount to much.
Really? The Idaho Statesman? Are we talking about the same newspaper? I don't even read it anymore because I consider it much too conservative. I guess that says a lot about me if it is generally considered liberal.
For a few reasons, but the biggest reason being... they're not being located here in huge numbers. So their impact is, at best, minimal.
Second, most refugees are being relocated for pretty extraordinary reasons, often times because their lives were in peril, and they're not simply running away from "illegal immigrants," liberals, or other reasons of convenience. So forgive most people if their sympathies run with those who are facing a bit more dire situation than your typical Californian. Moreover, the refugees don't tend to be the group that is driving up prices and spurring rampant development in the area.
Third, many people tend to believe diversity is a good thing and tends to make a community more healthy and enjoyable.
Fourth, if you actually come and check out the situation here, it's not like refugees here are "living in blight" any more than your typical "white trash" family living in a trailer park, with their Confederate flags waving proudly, trash and detritus on their lawn, proudly asserting their "freedom" from the tyranny of zoning, code enforcement, CCRs, and other scourges of government. It seems most refugees are actually trying.
Judy Peavy Derr's comments were insensitive and petty. Really, complaining about "124 dialects" sounds pretty damn ignorant to me.
thanks for your insight. Do you have a reference to the refugee relocation information from the city? Budget, locations, volume and relocation schedule? I value your feedback but it gets combersome when it is laced with hollow accusations and assumptions. You know extremely little about me.
I could easily make some sweeping assumptions about you but I couldn't be bothered. Insinuating I'm "simply running" is [MOD CUT]. I truly am sorry you are watching your world change around you. I've been there, been living it for decades now. My home is long gone, ravished, trod-upon. I can blame the politicians, the "diversity, the thought-police, the rampant taxes, retarded special interest payola laws and regulations and/or I can blame the East Coasters, the Southern Californians, the ex-US immigrants, the "diversity" but in the end it doesn't mean crap. People migrate. The USA is in a huge state of flux right now, economically, socially etc.
regarding refugees; I've been, looked around, didn't see a problem. This is why I am asking you or other locals! BUT I am not interested in emotional "we like diversity", "foreigners are neat". I would rather know the long term plan for the refugees, how much it will cost to support them, how to house them blah, blah blah.
Peavy Derr is just some random talking head to me. Just seeking facts.
Last edited by Sage of Sagle; 10-13-2015 at 02:21 PM..
Reason: Language
For a few reasons, but the biggest reason being... they're not being located here in huge numbers. So their impact is, at best, minimal.
Second, most refugees are being relocated for pretty extraordinary reasons, often times because their lives were in peril, and they're not simply running away from "illegal immigrants," liberals, or other reasons of convenience. So forgive most people if their sympathies run with those who are facing a bit more dire situation than your typical Californian. Moreover, the refugees don't tend to be the group that is driving up prices and spurring rampant development in the area.
Third, many people tend to believe diversity is a good thing and tends to make a community more healthy and enjoyable.
Fourth, if you actually come and check out the situation here, it's not like refugees here are "living in blight" any more than your typical "white trash" family living in a trailer park, with their Confederate flags waving proudly, trash and detritus on their lawn, proudly asserting their "freedom" from the tyranny of zoning, code enforcement, CCRs, and other scourges of government. It seems most refugees are actually trying.
Judy Peavy Derr's comments were insensitive and petty. Really, complaining about "124 dialects" sounds pretty damn ignorant to me.
who says diversity is good? Lets look at the most diverse city in the country, Los Angeles. Maybe the most diverse city in the world. This shows how your statement is false. Cite facts not opinions. You remember what Clint Eastwood said about opinions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
