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.
As a writer and avid reader, I would love to hear other folks' memoirs about growing up in CA -- what it was then and what they feel that it has become now. There is such great romance about the state, and now of course there is the reality. It would be great to ahve an anthology of short pieces by people like you. Maybe it would inspire Californians to revolt and bring their state back to what is was like in the good old formative days of our country. But then, I'm sure there were things that weren't so good that we've now made progress on. CA sure is a fascinating place.
The thing is, California means something different to everybody. It's so very diverse in many ways, which is one of its biggest draws. It is as good now to some as it was back 50 years ago for others. It's only gone to hell in the eyes of those who liked it for what it used to be.
It seems to me the natural evolution of a place like California 50 years ago could have only have been a place that was destined to explode in population due to it being such a desirable place to live for so many people and so many reasons (and full of distinct desirable regions all over the state). There's no way to bring it back to how it was 50 years ago.
Thank you! This is why so many disagreements on opinion are turned into accusations of racism. Its okay for blacks to hate whites because "we" enslaved their ancestors, and its okay for Hispanics to hate whites because we "stole" California, but it is NOT okay for a white persn to say..."Hey, I don't like the government ignoring the ILLEGAL crossing of our borders nd making me pay for the consequences with my tax dollars." Suddenly its a racists issue instead of one about rules, laws and regulations.
I don't think that statement is what draws the racism questions. It's the comments that usually come after people question the statements concerning the financial burden some believe the illegals are having on the state. Not everyone agrees on the "facts" tossed around in that specific debate, and the debates tend to fall apart when facts are debated and picked apart.
And we've seen plenty of negative comments citing the Spanish language, references towards Mexicans instead of "illegals", and plenty of blanket statements that ooze with ignorance. Just like all Mexicans get grouped together with illegals, you will sometimes get grouped in with the racists who share your view on the subject. It's something you and the American citizen with Mexican heritage have in common in this debate... unless of course that citizen is a dirty "anchor baby"... LOL
What I appreciate about your post is that you gave thorough examples for your opinion whether positive or negative observations. And clearly, the number of people who post on C-D don't in general reflect the overall opinion of Californians otherwise it would be a Republican state. I've poised the question to other posters who have left California but continually post on this forum with overwhelmingly negative comments. I actually like Curmudgeon but wonder if he actually has regrets for leaving California for the Ozarks and compensates by making negative comments about the very state he writes about abundantly each day.
On the other hand, many people seem to mourn how California has gotten so crowded. I don't have enough years to compare what it was like in California 50 years ago but have plenty of older relatives who did live in the state when the population was half of what it is today and it sounds like it was a real paradise.
Guilty, sorta. I regret feeling we had to move to find the peace and quiet we wanted in retirement in an affordable location where we could purchase a home and maximize our retirement dollars. However, we do love it here on the lake and are content.
By way of comparison, when I was born in San Diego in 1946 the statewide population was under 10 million. By 1951 when my parents bought our home on Lido Island in Newport Beach the population had only reached about 10.5 million. By contrast, the population now is about 38 million with almost half of them living in the greater L.A. area (CSA).
By the way, for the sake of comparison, that house cost them $19K. About 10 years later they almost doubled it's size for an additional $26K -- total investment, $45K. If it was on the market today it would sell for around $1.3 million. What's worse is that so many of the lovely, unique, Mediterranean style homes that populated the island from the mid-40s through the 70s and were the true source of its charm have since been torn down, usually two at a time, so gaudy McMansions could be built in their places. I have to admit to being offended by that type of conspicuous consumption. In its day the island was peopled primarily by young families with children, and a smattering of Hollywood well knowns. That's no longer the case. More's the pity.
So, do I wish CA was still the CA of my youth? Yes. Do I understand and accept it will never be that way again? Also yes. Do I resent it? A little. Mostly I would have loved to have raised my children in that CA I was most priveleged to grow up in and know. It was, in truth, a paradise.
ut someone else posted the "Most Wanted in California" recently...
And I have been looking trying to find the stat's on ILLEGAL ALIENS (Not Latinos) in our Jails and Prisons...
Well, she has a point...
Race/Ethnic Group of Arrestee
In 2008, of the 1,509,666 arrests for felony and
misdemeanor offenses:
zzArrests of whites accounted for 35.2 percent
(531,095).
zzArrests of Hispanics accounted for 41.2
percent (622,320).
zzArrests of blacks accounted for 17.4 percent
(263,321).
zzArrests of persons of other race/ethnic groups
accounted for 6.2 percent (92,930).
The thing is, California means something different to everybody. It's so very diverse in many ways, which is one of its biggest draws. It is as good now to some as it was back 50 years ago for others. It's only gone to hell in the eyes of those who liked it for what it used to be.
It seems to me the natural evolution of a place like California 50 years ago could have only have been a place that was destined to explode in population due to it being such a desirable place to live for so many people and so many reasons (and full of distinct desirable regions all over the state). There's no way to bring it back to how it was 50 years ago.
And it is just as racist to claim that we TOOK California when we did NOT! I am finding it more and more distressing every day that those considered to be a minority are welcome and encouraged to talk rubbish about how "bad" Americans and whites treat them, but when we speak out against treatment towards ourselves we are racists.
My issue with your original statement is this: If you lived in an all-white neighborhood and experienced crime [the usual stuff: burglaries, vandalism, auto theft, etc. that occurs in every city] would you say: "And the white people are STILL stealing the things we've paid for...our cars, cells phones, government tax dollars, etc..."? No, you wouldn't even mention the ethnic or racial background of the criminals. Evidently, based on your earlier post, you live in a heavily Latino neighborhood. Many majority Latino neighborhoods in Los Angeles metro are poor or struggling working-class. So the crime committed in those neighborhoods is mostly a reflection of the overall population: Latino. Since the largest ethnic group in Los Angeles county is Latino [mostly Mexican and Salvadorean] it is logical that the criminal activity would be mostly Latino. Just like in all-white areas of the nation; the crimes would be committed by whites. Poor white people like poor brown or black people commit the most crimes because they are desperate and some will do whatever they can to get want they want. Crime is color-blind.
When you move to Simi Valley and let's say your house is burglarized by a white person will you say it is just those "white" people? No, you would say a burglar robbed me and not even bother to mention that he was white\ anglo. Are all the people who live around you in your current location Mexican? Sounds like a overwhelming majority are so wouldn't it be logical that the majority of crimes are committed by Mexicans. So does that mean all Mexicans are criminals?
Guilty, sorta. I regret feeling we had to move to find the peace and quiet we wanted in retirement in an affordable location where we could purchase a home and maximize our retirement dollars. However, we do love it here on the lake and are content.
By way of comparison, when I was born in San Diego in 1946 the statewide population was under 10 million. By 1951 when my parents bought our home on Lido Island in Newport Beach the population had only reached about 10.5 million. By contrast, the population now is about 38 million with almost half of them living in the greater L.A. area (CSA).
By the way, for the sake of comparison, that house cost them $19K. About 10 years later they almost doubled it's size for an additional $26K -- total investment, $45K. If it was on the market today it would sell for around $1.3 million. What's worse is that so many of the lovely, unique, Mediterranean style homes that populated the island from the mid-40s through the 70s and were the true source of its charm have since been torn down, usually two at a time, so gaudy McMansions could be built in their places. I have to admit to being offended by that type of conspicuous consumption. In its day the island was peopled primarily by young families with children, and a smattering of Hollywood well knowns. That's no longer the case. More's the pity.
So, do I wish CA was still the CA of my youth? Yes. Do I understand and accept it will never be that way again? Also yes. Do I resent it? A little. Mostly I would have loved to have raised my children in that CA I was most priveleged to grow up in and know. It was, in truth, a paradise.
You sound a bit like some of my older relatives. I have a great aunt and uncle who still live in the first house they bought in Berkeley in the 1950's. 1059 or so I believe. They told me they bought that house for 9,500 dollars back then. Today, that house is worth just under 1 million I believe. And like I said, I remember when California's population was almost half what it is today.
For those nostalgic for the old California, I highly recommend reading a book written in the 1930's by authors who were paid by the government to travel the nation and described what they observed. "The WPA Guide to California" was just one such book that included a thorough road guide to the entire state. The way California was in the 1930's reminds me of rural areas of the Central Valley today. For example the San Gabriel Valley was just small towns surrounded by citrus groves for miles.
Here's a brief quote on Monrovia: "Pop 10,090, Monrovia is surrounded by orange, lemon and avocado groves and other orchards. Poultry raising and small gardening are important in the vicinity. The town is noted for a wide variety of trees and shrubs; in the northern part of town is a papaya plantation."
Monrovia was one of the larger towns but all of them were separated from each other by 10 or more miles and reached by two lane roads [no freeways or even 4 lane highways]. Just farms of groves and other agriculture.
The entire state of California is covered and almost unrecognizable compared to today. I have this book; you can get it for $10 on Amazon or other book websites: Guide To California 1940 WPA Print from Zazzle.com
And it is just as racist to claim that we TOOK California when we did NOT!
someone doesn't know their history.
Here in a nutshell:
1846
Zachary Taylor invades Mexico from Texas, takes Monterrey
Kearny invades from Kansas, takes Santa Fe, splits his army, part proceeds south to El Paso and beyond, deep into Chihuahua, part heads west, takes Arizona and Southern California. Kearny is nearly defeated by the Californios, he has to be rescued by Kit Carson slipping through the Californio lines in the rainy dark and running to San Diego to get help from Commodore Stockton, who has already occupied San Diego.
Fremont, already in California arrests the governor of the north, Vallejo, kills a couple of Mexicans and proceeds south to join Kearny, carefully avoiding battle.
Winfield Scott lands at Veracruz conquers Mexico City, and occupies it for two years.
US Navy takes most Mexican Pacific coast ports and holds them for up to two years.
It was an invasion and dismemberment. The United States of America took half of the Republic of Mexico, killed thousands of Mexicans, occupied the capitol and major seaports for several years and forced a treaty on the Mexicans at gunpoint.
Thats the facts.
Last edited by Highnlite; 08-11-2010 at 06:41 PM..
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.
