Quote:
Originally Posted by boi2socal
Yeah, the anti-California folk are few and far between. Some days when it is warm and hazy you'll feel like you're back in California. But other days you'll take a stroll along the tree lined river and know you're nowhere near California. Out of control sprawl is actually not a new resident's fault but the fault of your city council or county commissioner. Growth can be managed to a degree but why would Meridian or Eagle want to limit or better manage growth when it means extra revenue? So maybe those taking out their anger on Californians should redirect it closer to people in their local government if it really bothers you so much. 
Fact is, this is America and people can live where they want. |
You raise some good points.
I do think the "anti-California" sort of xenophobia exists here to a large extent in a number of ways. California, or more specifically San Francisco, tends to represent in people's minds the sort of out of control, debaucherous, anything-goes radical liberalism that is supposedly the cause of the downfall of our society economically, socially, morally, whatever. If you're from California unfortunately you'll get suspected of enabling this type of attitude. It's silly, but Boise really is still a very traditional, conservative red state. And it's stronger the further from Boise you get.
Perhaps even stronger the anti-California xenophobia exists because of our growth the past 15-20 years, and all of the problems or negatives that come with it - crime, crowding, sprawl, traffic, increased taxes, increased cost of living, etc. Mostly I think it's because of the equity-rich that cashed out during the height of the housing bubble, moved here and literally bought an entire house free and clear. Or rather, built extremely large houses and invited an entire market of these developments that have catered to them.
There is valid criticism here, as this type of newcomer changes the entire demographic of the area significantly - they raise housing prices beyond what the local can afford, but they also put the local at an employment disadvantage because they now have to make more to be able to maintain their lifestyle. Meanwhile, the newcomer, having a paid off or nearly paid off home, can afford to take a job at a lower wage, which is attractive to any employer, especially with the experience the newcomer usually brings.
I have literally witnessed this shift in the past 15 years in the professional makeup of Boise, as well as the type of housing built, the cost of housing in specific areas, and the property taxes that come with it.
It's a sad inevitability, I guess.
But you're right that you can hardly blame the individual for exploiting situations to their advantage - after all, it's sort of the American way. The blame should really go to our local leaders in business and government for inviting this type of growth. And while it has resulted in some positives, in many people's opinions the negatives have far exceeded the positives, as Boise is now a place built and ran on speculation and economic bubbles - in other words, it's now a boom and bust place that depends on growth to survive, as we've eradicated our truly local business structure.
Which is likely why Boise is so attractive to Californians - it mirrors so many of the communities that have come into their own and grew rapidly in such a short time, only to overgrown, overcrowd, and push an entire demographic of people and developers to look to the next sleeper town.
All of this combined I do think anti-Californian sentiments are quite strong here, though people will never say anything to a person's face. But believe me it comes out at time, much like a number of people's latent racism (see any immigration topic for examples of this). Check out any Boise public forum - the Statesman is a good example. Any topic on growth and you'll see a number of vitriolic anti-Californian posts. The irony is some of these people are likely ex-Californians themselves. For other examples check some of the posts on this forum about it. Hey, if it wasn't an issue this topic wouldn't come up time and time again. Or ever better, check out the Colorado forum, where that sentiment is much more alive and vocalized. But yeah, it's likely a bit overblown.
That doesn't mean the next ex-Californian should be scared of this, however. As most have said, it will usually never directly come out and/or you likely won't experience anything more than getting flipped off, if even that.
One last point, and this is just thinking aloud. Yes, this is America and people have a right to move where they want. But I do think this attitude is so misguided. There is a phenomenon called the "tragedy of the commons," and while it doesn't apply specifically here, the overall concept does. Yes, we have certain freedoms here, but that freedom comes with consequences. In almost any situation or context you think of an individual action hardly has any significant consequence, but when it's a 100 or a 1000 individuals doing that same thing, the consequence is felt.
Let's look at California. It's a state with unrivaled natural beauty, with some of the most abundant natural resources anywhere. It has great weather, great culture, and was (and perhaps still is) an economic powerhouse. But look what happened...
As more and more people moved there and enjoyed the natural resources, for recreation or economic exploitation, more and more regulations were needed. There is a direct link to population and regulation, economically and environmentally.
Now there are many that say that California is a wasteland, that it's so regulated you can't do anything there, that it's polluted and trampled and more significantly, the goverment is oppressive and the economy is in shambles.
Does anyone think this is something unique to California, that it can't happen anywhere else?
Look, I've seen it happen here. As more and more people come here and use our resources, enjoy our recreational opportunities, and exploit Idaho economically, we have necessarily had to regulate and govern more. And it will keep happening as more people move here.
There is only so much impact our forests and deserts can take, there is only so much water to use, only so much waste and pollution our land, air, and water can handle. So think about that when you move here - or anywhere -
how are you contributing to the decline of an area simply by your addition?
What ends up happening is the quality of life is lowered for everyone. So while one might think "I have a right to enjoy the same things as the locals that live there do," or you use the cliche pejorative "NIMBY/I have mine," keep in mind you're contributing to the problem. One person hardly thinks they make an impact, but when there are 25,000 people who think they are just one person, the impacts are felt, and we all suffer.
Just some things to think about.
Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads. 
In the long run, your opinion is the only one that really matters.
Linear Mode
