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.
Do you know how annoying fireworks are if I had to listen to them all year? I can barely listen to them during the month they are available. If that is the thing that you look down at California for, God Bless California.
Exactly....LOL.
In Florida they're illegal but they set up tents on the side of the road and sell them, and they LOVE their fireworks here.
I doubt most of them could tell you why we celebrate the 4th of July, but they love making noise.
That is what I miss about "liberal" California, for example in CA if you get caught driving with no insurance they impound your car.
Here in FL they give them a ticket and they keep driving.
I am not for big govt. but CA has rules on the books that keep the roads safer and protect consumers.
They only passed a seatbelt law here about two years ago, and they complain about cameras catching red light runners.
I thought LA was bad until coming down here, it is a free for all.
I don't get why people say it's too crowded. There are many areas in California to go where it isn't crowded. Obviously if you live right in the city then of course it will be crowded!
Americans, especially Westerners, always whine about that. I think a big part of it is related to traffic. Suburban sprawl development almost always demands a car trip for every errand. And once an area gets big enough, you can't build enough roads (or make them sufficiently wide). So then people move somewhere else to re-create the same problems as the place they left, never realizing that the underlying problems were the twin issues of poor land use management and a lack of mass transit.
Those old guys would choke on their powdered wigs if they saw what our country is up to today. Don't even TRY to tell me people can self govern and monitor themselves. I have proof positive that they can't, 51 years on this earth. I came to this conclusion after only 18 and the next 33 just reinforced that and exceeded even my worst expectations.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
I do agree those old guys would indeed choke on their powdered wigs. We've allowed ourselves to become dominated by an elite, which is what they made every effort to try to prevent. We are dominated by a 2 headed oligarchic monster today. On one head is the Business Elite and the other is the Government Socialist Elite. Neither cares about average people.
Problem is, we've slowly but surely given our rights away to the elites. When people won't (and yes, I do believe it's mostly a matter of choice) self governn, by default they cede control to an elite (whether a business elite or a bureaucratic one). The predictable result is the widespread abuse of power we see in the US today, also known as tyranny.
You might want to read up on the Iron Law of Oligarchy:
What I've found is that it is common for each generation to think they stand alone... my city has had real estate booms and busts going back to the mid 1800's
I remember being in college in the 80's with mortgage rates hoovering around 15% and friends saying they will never be able to afford a home and how easy it was for their parents to buy when rates were 4%...
They forget that those areas where their parents bought in the 50's were often on the outskirts of town, considered less desirable, long commute and lacked the infrastructure in many cases...
The interesting part is those that bought in the 80's with 15% mortgages are now the same ones that cashed out and made a killing... I've reminded some of my friends how hard it was for them to buy their homes starting out and it is something their kids have to go through.
In the 70's, I would walk by many city owned homes in Oakland on the way to school... they were abandoned and the city was selling them for $1 to someone that would move in, spend $5000 in improvements over 5 years and then they would get the title for $1.
I know one of these dollar homes that sold for over $300k a few years ago and now it is banked owned and last I checked 60 to 65k could buy it... maybe less.
I'm sure you remember that buying a home came with it's own set of challenges back then...
I needed to have 3 years of steady employment in the same field with 2 years on the same job, 20% down plus closing, 6 months of living expenses in the bank, the home had to appraise and have a termite clearance....
A couple of years ago, a friends son, a Safeway checker had bought 5 homes and the receptionist at work bought 3... today, they the bank owns them. They were buying with literally nothing but a signature in some cases.
Prop 13 is the only bright spot California Tax Payers have...
I bought my current home at the height of the market and knew going in what I as undertaking and fully expect to be looking back 30 years from now and hear people say that I was one of the lucky ones that bought when prices were cheap.
Some good points here. But I do think median home prices in CA have far outstripped median incomes. As you noted, lending was much stricter in the early 1980s, but that's also what kept home prices in line with incomes and prevented the competitive, rat-race environment we have today.
I don't mean this in an insulting way, but if you care what other people think about the car you drive, the problem would seem to be with you, not with California.
There are many millions of people in this state who drive all sorts of junk cars and they seem to do all right.
I personally think that once you budget enough money to get basic reliable transport, any additional premium you choose to pay for a vehicle is a silly waste of money. I sure as hell wouldn't pay extra for perceived "status."
I never understand why some people brag about the car they chose to buy. It's not like it's a unique piece of art or something they personally designed or crafted. It's a mass-produced comsumer item of which I could buy an identical copy if I were so inclined.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I drive a 14 year old car and I have friends. None of my friends or co-workers seem to care about the kind of car I drive. CA can be superficial, but you can certainly find people who aren't.
If somebody loves California then they most likely wont be putting it down every chance they get. I love my family members therefore I support them and do not continually put them down. I've seen people criticize the Golden State and they believe they have a right to be hyper- critical because they once lived here. These are the people who I consider non-natives regardless of where they were born because they obviously don't love California.
Well, let me speak for the California critics, if I may. First, I'll say there's certainly some truth to what you say. Some people get a kick out of bashing California.
But mostly, I think they're frustrated because they DO LOVE CALIFORNIA but don't like the direction they see it going in. If they didn't care at all, they likely wouldn't be spouting off about it on the internet. It's kind of like having a kid who's a juvenile delinquent who just doesn't listen no matter what you say or do. It can be a really frustrating thing to watch, especially for those who feel powerless to effect (what they consider to be) positive change.
A lot of folks feel frustrated that the prevailing sentiment in CA is basically for more solutions that they think have failed the state (more tax, more regulation, more environmentalism designed to limit the housing supply and keep prices out of reach for average people, an open border immigration policy, etc.). They see the potential for a state that could still give folks at the median income a shot at things like home ownership (without insanely high mortgages), half decent public schools that don't have to divert time and resources to people who aren't even here legally, reasonable taxes and regulations that don't kill business or encourage them from expanding elsewhere.
Many who have left the state would like to see it undergo a spell of "tough love" instead of the warm and fuzzy kind. I kind of think America as a whole needs this, but California more so than other states.
Now, I will say this....I think people whine too much about overcrowding. That is mostly a land use planning issue. If people don't like traffic and overcrowding, then that means they are going to have to get used to living in denser, multi use areas (e.g.-- homes, businesses, & retail all need to be zoned closer together and tied to mass transit lines. I've seen this done on a recent trip to Germany & Austria. Higher density doesn't have to mean lower quality, especially if homes are well built, instead of the cheap crap we have here). So on this one issue, I think it's a case of people wanting contradictory things.
But other than that, I think the critics are mostly right.
Last edited by mysticaltyger; 07-20-2010 at 03:47 AM..
California is for those who still have a future and dare to dream outside the box.
That is why the Silicon Valley, advances in biotechnology/ nano technologies and the creative movie studios will never sprout in the Ozarks or the South for that matter.
California is not just the nice weather or beautiful sunsets... California is a state of mind.
It's this kind of arrogant attitude California's critics don't like. Sure, maybe no movie studios are going to open up in the Ozarks, but it's been a more than 20 year trend that more and more film production is being done outside CA, most recently in New Mexico. It's basically being slowly hollowed out, but a lot of people like yourself act as if we've got a lock on the industry.
Same thing for technolgoy. There's this kind of attitude out there that Silicon Valley can never be surpassed. But there are lots of other places in the world working on it.
California is indeed a state of mind. And it's a state of mind that too often says: "We're superior to everyone else. We can keep doing what we've always done and still stay on top". People, businesses, states, & nations with that kind of attitude always set themselves up for a big fall, or maybe a long slow slide. Many of us have seen the slide ocurring for 20+ years now, and we are shocked at how many are still blind to it and/or who think the solution is to do more of what we've always done, yet call the status quo "thinking outside the box".
Well, let me speak for the California critics, if I may. First, I'll say there's certainly some truth to what you say. Some people get a kick out of bashing California.
But mostly, I think they're frustrated because they DO LOVE CALIFORNIA but don't like the direction they see it going in. If they didn't care at all, they likely wouldn't be spouting off about it on the internet. It's kind of like having a kid who's a juvenile delinquent who just doesn't listen no matter what you say or do. It can be a really frustrating thing to watch, especially for those who feel powerless to effect (what they consider to be) positive change.
A lot of folks feel frustrated that the prevailing sentiment in CA is basically for more solutions that they think have failed the state (more tax, more regulation, more environmentalism designed to limit the housing supply and keep prices out of reach for average people, an open border immigration policy, etc.). They see the potential for a state that could still give folks at the median income a shot at things like home ownership (without insanely high mortgages), half decent public schools that don't have to divert time and resources to people who aren't even here legally, reasonable taxes and regulations that don't kill business or encourage them from expanding elsewhere.
Many who have left the state would like to see it undergo a spell of "tough love" instead of the warm and fuzzy kind. I kind of think America as a whole needs this, but California more so than other states.
Now, I will say this....I think people whine too much about overcrowding. That is mostly a land use planning issue. If people don't like traffic and overcrowding, then that means they are going to have to get used to living in denser, multi use areas (e.g.-- homes, businesses, & retail all need to be zoned closer together and tied to mass transit lines. I've seen this done on a recent trip to Germany & Austria. Higher density doesn't have to mean lower quality, especially if homes are well built, instead of the cheap crap we have here). So on this one issue, I think it's a case of people wanting contradictory things.
But other than that, I think the critics are mostly right.
I think you have good points on poor land planning issues and the subsequent "overcrowding."
On the other hand, I think that SOME (relocated) critics are basically whining pains in the patootey who even though they've moved away to somewhere they consider "so awesome and better than CA", they're still on the CA board every day focusing on and bashing a state in which they live no longer. How does this even make sense? Does the lady protest too much, ya think?
I can guarantee that when I leave the state I currently in, I will NOT be coming back to my state's forum to bash it and the people who wish to possibly relocate to it. I simply CANNOT believe the amount of energy some ex-Californians give to a state that supposedly s*cks so bad. Too many ex-Californians who can't stop looking back...if you ask me. Yeah, that speaks volumes too. They try to convince others that it s*cks so bad because they're still trying to convince themselves.
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.
