U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 11-21-2010, 03:10 PM
 
Location: Earth
11,738 posts, read 12,304,500 times
Reputation: 3921
Quote:
Originally Posted by londoner1 View Post
I find it very curious that Disgruntled la native knows so much about the personal lives of wealthy people.

He either has a very overactive imagination, has seen one too many soap operas, or has actually lived the lives of several wealthy people and can thus speak for all of them.
He may have gone to one of the expensive westside private schools which would've given him an inside look at the lives of the wealthy.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2010, 03:42 PM
 
2,516 posts, read 2,386,668 times
Reputation: 1399
Quote:
Originally Posted by londoner1 View Post
I find it very curious that Disgruntled la native knows so much about the personal lives of wealthy people.

He either has a very overactive imagination, has seen one too many soap operas, or has actually lived the lives of several wealthy people and can thus speak for all of them.
While I personally am not one of the very wealthy, I did grow up next to them on the same streets, went to the same schools as their kids (and am close friends with their kids), the same events, functions, supermarkets, etc so I'm about as close as an observer as you get without being them. Though many of the "merely rich" share those characteristics too.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 03:43 PM
 
2,516 posts, read 2,386,668 times
Reputation: 1399
Quote:
Originally Posted by majoun View Post
I was referring to young women just under legal age in CA, who would actually be of legal age if they lived in the Eastern states, not pedo crap. Ages of consent don't affect sexual behavior that much ; young females in NJ where the age of consent is 16 act no different than their equivalents in PA or NY where it's 17. Suffice to say even if CA lowered its age of consent to 16 I'd want nothing to do with 16 year olds just like I want nothing to do with 18 year olds right now.

Now, amongst the females of my generation, it was very common to hook up with older guys, some even had contests to try to seduce the dads of their friends especially in the richer areas, and since the statutory rape laws in CA back then were lenient there was little public disapproval. Even the media reported on such liasons back then. That's the only aspect of celebrity media reporting that's gotten MORE restrictive, mainly because the laws are stricter now thus lawsuits are far more likely. However, with the laws getting stricter, the opportunities for blackmail increase. I've heard indirectly and anecdotally through lawyers and detectives about honeytrap schemes against celebrities done by 16 and 17 year old females (and probably males of the same age as well - I happen to know of one case of blackmail by a just-underage male against a certain rock singer and I'm sure there are others.)

Interesting that these girls have become today's "soccer moms" and may be far more adamant about overprotecting their kids today because of their own misbehavior during their teen years. Although not all ; I had a female friend in Beverly Hills who'd go clubbing at the various Strip nightspots along with her teenage daughter for the purpose of meeting guys, and knowing her I don't think she cared that her daughter was underage. (Then again, according to a friend of mine from SMC who went to Beverly while I went to Uni and who I'm still in touch with, "Beverly Hills is the world's capital of underage sex.") I don't know whether bars or clubs in L.A. enforce 21 age limits more than they do in the Bay Area or more than they did when I was a teen ; given that the bars I frequent are places which wouldn't interest teens in the first place I don't know. But I suspect the old policy of not caring about ID when it comes to females in L.A. is still very much in place (and perhaps there is a similar policy re: males in West Hollywood and Silver Lake, I wouldn't know about that any more than I'd know about most of the bars in the Castro....).

I'm just glad NONE of what I was referring to affects me or my life AT ALL nor would it in the unlikely event I ever became very rich at my age.



When there are kids and property ownership divorces get nuts, although even divorces amongst the poor can get nasty. The nicest divorces are those in which there is no property owned (remember the most affluent neighborhoods of the westside are majority renters ; the only westside areas that have a majority of owners rather than renters are Culver City and Westchester. Home ownership is much higher in South Central and East L.A. than on the Westside.) And those in which there are no kids.



True (from my observations of that class). But at the same time that leaves opportunities for blackmail for a teenage girl who's so inclined (or a teenage boy who's so inclined) As I said, this is nothing new. It goes back to the early 20th century.



If you're talking about Paris Hilton or the Kardashian sisters, misplaced priorities.
The old days were a lot more fun, weren't they? Now it's all complicated and weird. You really got to see the old frontier
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 05:29 PM
 
45 posts, read 57,023 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
While I personally am not one of the very wealthy, I did grow up next to them on the same streets, went to the same schools as their kids (and am close friends with their kids), the same events, functions, supermarkets, etc so I'm about as close as an observer as you get without being them. Though many of the "merely rich" share those characteristics too.
So basically you're saying that whilst you had the lifestyle of the very wealthy (going to same events, living right next to them, shopping like them, spending most of your time with them, etc.), you are not actually one of them?

You know, I was always under the impression that people of money rarely make close friends with the help.

So there are 2 options here, really: 1) you're not as poor as you make it to be (which would then automatically make you an unhappy, miserable man who needs prescription drugs and some alchohol to feel content - your words, not mine)
or 2) you are just recycling some old stereotypes about people with money.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 05:41 PM
 
2,516 posts, read 2,386,668 times
Reputation: 1399
Quote:
Originally Posted by londoner1 View Post
So basically you're saying that whilst you had the lifestyle of the very wealthy (going to same events, living right next to them, shopping like them, spending most of your time with them, etc.), you are not actually one of them?

You know, I was always under the impression that people of money rarely make close friends with the help.

So there are 2 options here, really: 1) you're not as poor as you make it to be (which would then automatically make you an unhappy, miserable man who needs prescription drugs and some alchohol to feel content - your words, not mine)
or 2) you are just recycling some old stereotypes about people with money.
This coming from someone in London who has no clue what goes on in LA. Other people actually from LA know what I'm talking about. I'd rather not give too many details about myself on a public forum, but anyone who knows LA knows that my observations about the city are accurate, with some leeway for personal opinion.

I don't claim to know about anything in London. If you told me about London's upper class, I might take it with a grain of salt, but view it at least from someone with experience there.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 05:51 PM
 
45 posts, read 57,023 times
Reputation: 33
I'm sure your observations about the city are accurate, I'm not denying that.

I just didn't like your generalization. You cannot know who is truly happy and who isn't, and declaring a whole group of people unhappy because of their social class, is pretty moronic.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Earth
11,738 posts, read 12,304,500 times
Reputation: 3921
Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
The old days were a lot more fun, weren't they? Now it's all complicated and weird. You really got to see the old frontier
Well, it is true that the Late Boomer/Early Gen X women who are today's "soccer moms" seem to be paranoid and restrictive in regards to their kids as a backlash against their own promiscuous sex and substance abuse when young, especially the "white" native Californian variety. (I realize soccer moms come from all backgrounds, and there are plenty of Latina "soccer moms" including in the rich hoods of L.A., not to mention black "soccer moms" in Ladera Heights/Windsor Hills etc. and undoubtably some Asian "soccer moms" also. )

The female friend of mine in Beverly Hills that I mentioned is from NY/NJ not LA, and I think her attitude reflects the attitude of the NY area rather than LA. The New Yorkers do tend to be less uptight about such things (although you'd never know it from Bloomberg's Californication of NYC - but then he's not a native New Yorker, cue the jokes about the absurdity of a mayor of NYC who's a Red Sox/Patriots fan....) Many of my generation have gotten VERY uptight in our middle age, especially "white" SoCal raised females.

BTW, to me the increased social disapproval of adult men having public relationships with 16-17 year old females and much tougher statutory rape laws may be the LEAST important of the changes in California in the last 30 years! I wouldn't be interested in teenagers even if CA's age of consent was like that of the eastern states. As it is I'm not interested in 18 or 19 year olds, why would I be interested in anyone younger? There's just way too much cultural differences, no common experiences, and differences of interest. Anyone under 30 is just too different, and I doubt I'd feel different if I suddenly became wealthy. Cultural differences due to age are far greater than cultural differences due to race and ethnicity IMO.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 06:22 PM
 
Location: Earth
11,738 posts, read 12,304,500 times
Reputation: 3921
Quote:
Originally Posted by londoner1 View Post
So basically you're saying that whilst you had the lifestyle of the very wealthy (going to same events, living right next to them, shopping like them, spending most of your time with them, etc.), you are not actually one of them?

You know, I was always under the impression that people of money rarely make close friends with the help.
In pre-1970 L.A. the rich freely mingled with the rest of us (before the Manson murders). Even into the '80s there was more of a mingling of classes than there is today. Nowadays, you're right ; L.A. has become more segregated by class as it has become less segregated by race and ethnicity. Today L.A.'s like Britain, Mexico, or New England in its separation of classes, but this was not always the case. Also, some areas that today are almost uniformly affluent used to have a middle class.


Quote:
So there are 2 options here, really: 1) you're not as poor as you make it to be (which would then automatically make you an unhappy, miserable man who needs prescription drugs and some alchohol to feel content - your words, not mine)
or 2) you are just recycling some old stereotypes about people with money.
If he's living where he claims to be living he's NOT poor by any means or anywhere close to it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 06:47 PM
 
2,516 posts, read 2,386,668 times
Reputation: 1399
Quote:
Originally Posted by londoner1 View Post
I'm sure your observations about the city are accurate, I'm not denying that.

I just didn't like your generalization. You cannot know who is truly happy and who isn't, and declaring a whole group of people unhappy because of their social class, is pretty moronic.
I never said all rich people in LA's westside are unhappy. Obviously, I know plenty of happy people here too. But as a general anecdotal trend it seems that the people I've met in less wealthy areas tend to be happier. As for the reasons why, I explained some of my observations. Is it correct or not? I don't know. But it applies to some situations.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Florida
3,360 posts, read 3,028,133 times
Reputation: 1784
I notice the same thing...in poorer economic areas...families, people, seem more 'happy'...in that I think their around or in touch more with the things that make us human...each other...

They tend to turn to each other for happiness...rather than a Benz...

But 'Studies' conducted from Harvard and Yale...by people who are clueless about such things...will try to always paint a real grim picture...
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top