Montana relocation: resentment toward newcomers (Kalispell, Lakeside: crime rate, living in, moving to)

[Zeeburt]

Originally Posted by Alt Dach

The issues most of us have is with those who work hardly at all and pocket millions if not billions from the crony capitalistic system we ACTUALLY live in.The "market" system you describe exists only in Econ 101. Actual capitalism means socialism for the super rich and dog eat dog for the rest of us.Some like to consume their fellow man-most of us don't. No socialist societies failed,none has ever existed. Russia et al were Capitalistic societies with central planing whih IS a bad deal. China is a "communist" one without and they are cleaning our clock.

The USSR was capitalist? Interesting. If you love socialism so much, why don't you move somewhere it is rampant and enjoy?

My business is large and deals with the free market system on a daily basis. How do you assert it exists only in a textbook? Are goods and services not produced and exchanged every day?

I suspect your real point is that those who earn less have less, and those who earn more have more. I call this "fair", and I see first-hand how it spurs productivity. If you don't like the concept of competition and earning what you have, your alternative is the socialist system you tout, where everyone has the same and the uniform standard of living is much lower.
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]

[Alt Dach]

[quote=Zeeburt;5026376]

The USSR was capitalist? Interesting. If you love socialism so much, why don't you move somewhere it is rampant and enjoy?

My business is large and deals with the free market system on a daily basis. How do you assert it exists only in a textbook? Are goods and services not produced and exchanged every day?

I suspect your real point is that those who earn less have less, and those who earn more have more. I call this "fair", and I see first-hand how it spurs productivity. If you don't like the concept of competition and earning what you have, your alternative is the socialist system you tout, where everyone has the same and the uniform standard of living is much lower.

I don't tout socialism or the "free market". And I do livein far and away the most Socialist country in the world, the USA. I wish it wasn't socialist but the super-rich ,its sole receipants will never stand for that.

Productivity has always been spured by the lash and its wielders have always deemed it "fair".

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

It seems you missed the point of my question. Let me try a different way: If one person works 70 hours and another person works 40 hours, do you take issue with the fact that the person working 70 hours might have a higher income, be able to spend more, and therefore drive prices up because of their contribution to demand? I sure hope you don't see a problem with it. Productivity and increased demand are good things. Those who don't keep up find things tougher, and that is precisely why a free market and competitive economy work so well. If there was no incentive to compete and produce and survive, less would be produced. (Just look to socialist economies - many of which are now gone - to see the result of little or no competitive pressures.)

I get the point of your question, but I don't agree with your philosophy on what's good and what's not when it comes to economics.

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

Yes, growth causes prices to go up and makes it harder for those who are economically stagnant or contracting to survive. This is a good thing, as the alternative is to have no growth or contraction, causing prices to fall, along with standard of living and opportunity. I am shocked that you see a lot of farmers struggling right now... the ones I know are seeing record incomes as the subsidies and commodity prices are generally making them rich.

It's not that they are all struggling so much (with the exception of some of the small, family farms being overtaxed and forced to sell to larger outfits or to subdivide.) it's just that they are used to a price and get grouchier than most folks when they have to pay more for a service and put on a better whiny face to try to get a better deal. As much as they gripe about prices, I also hear them talk (with full justification in their tone of voice) about how much they need to raise their prices to offset costs. Some of em are hilarious! Some of the cheapest old farts I know are farmers!

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

My kids are very young too, but I am determined to provide financial stability for my family and have to choose between working very long weeks now and less later, or the other way around. I could do what you do and hope things work out (most people do this - nothing wrong with it), but I have a goal of achieving a "normal" lifetime of work in half of a lifetime.

Good luck, I hope you accomplish your goals before having a heart attack or something.

I'm actually in the process of setting up a new division of the company I am currently working for and I'm sure I'll be doing 60+ hr weeks for a while once we get a move on.

Maybe that's why my posts have been grouchy lately... work work work, politics and more work lately. Need a break.

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

The Co-Op is expensive for just one reason... limiting yourself to local goods means passing up on the efficiencies of big stores and chains, so the cost is higher and the prices must be higher. If you had your way - limiting economic growth - you'd see higher prices for everything, similar to the way it was earlier this century (in real terms, of course).

If I had my way I'd have been born with a silver spoon! Just kidding..

I'm just not a fan of the evolve or die economics of the day.

I like things the way they were, and am tired of people moving in and trying to change everything to suit them.

It's ironic to me that people claim it would be a violation of their rights to not be able to move and change places to suit them, but yet the harm that is caused by that kind of change to other people is just fine. Seems like a double standard to me.

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

It is good that all those variables and challenges are there. Without them, we would be in simpler times with a much lower standard of living. As tough as things may seem, they are *much* easier than in the past, when standards of living were much lower and people had to grapple with much more serious challenges than where to buy the cheapest milk or gas, or how much a new home costs.

Simpler times with a lower standard of living doesn't sound like such a bad thing to me.

I'd be OK with turning the clock back 35-40 years, before the mainstream household computer, and definitely before the internet and cell phones. Sometimes I think all this stuff does more harm than good.

Just my opinion

[Greensleeves]

Originally Posted by Heart

I have yet to experience any hostility or attitude toward me since moving here. Everyone I meet that I happen to get into a conversation with, has been very warm or welcoming. Maybe I'm just lucky and running into happy accepting people?

I go out with a smile on my face, and I have noticed it makes a difference. I have been waved at by strangers. I love it!

I have NO desire to change what Montana is. In fact, I want to fight the subdivisions they are proposing to build in my area.

It's too bad Hamilton gave in and is allowing this and a wal mart.

WHAT??????
Say it isn't so!!!

Hey, you know what's funny? If you read the first few posts and the last few posts, you'd never guess they're all on the same thread!

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by Timberwolf232

I'm just not a fan of the evolve or die economics of the day.

I like things the way they were, and am tired of people moving in and trying to change everything to suit them.

It's ironic to me that people claim it would be a violation of their rights to not be able to move and change places to suit them, but yet the harm that is caused by that kind of change to other people is just fine. Seems like a double standard to me.

Simpler times with a lower standard of living doesn't sound like such a bad thing to me.

I'd be OK with turning the clock back 35-40 years, before the mainstream household computer, and definitely before the internet and cell phones. Sometimes I think all this stuff does more harm than good.

Just my opinion

Mine too..... and getting more and more that way as I get old and crotchety

As I say in another thread, growth bad, stable good. Yeah, without growth no one gets rich. But when things are *stable*, no one gets POOR who wasn't poor before. And I think that's more important for more people.

As to simpler times... I think more people were genuinely happier than we see today. Less stressed. Fewer things to worry about. More time to relax. More chance to go fishing and drink a beer with your friends, not worry about the price of eggs going up because of "growth".

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by Reziac

Mine too..... and getting more and more that way as I get old and crotchety

As I say in another thread, growth bad, stable good. Yeah, without growth no one gets rich. But when things are *stable*, no one gets POOR who wasn't poor before. And I think that's more important for more people.

I agree 100%. Look at how many people OWNED their homes in those days. It was a bad thing to have to get a mortgage! Now people stress about credit ratings and coming up with enough just to get a mortgage. Kind of scary when you think about it.

Originally Posted by Reziac

As to simpler times... I think more people were genuinely happier than we see today. Less stressed. Fewer things to worry about. More time to relax. More chance to go fishing and drink a beer with your friends, not worry about the price of eggs going up because of "growth".

Heck Rez, if you ever get back out this way I'd go fishing and have a beer with ya.

[Reziac]

[quote=Alt Dach;5031389]

Originally Posted by Zeeburt

I don't tout socialism or the "free market". And I do livein far and away the most Socialist country in the world, the USA. I wish it wasn't socialist but the super-rich ,its sole receipants will never stand for that.

Productivity has always been spured by the lash and its wielders have always deemed it "fair".

You need to read Why They Behave Like Russians which is now out of copyright and available to read for free at the Open Library project.

Despite being 60 years old, it's a very good picture of what happens to a culture under a restrictive government that completely controls all above-board commerce. And remember the USSR was nothing new. Czarist Russia was run the same way -- and largely by the same people. They just moved up to the cushier jobs that were vacated by the purge.

[Greensleeves]

People who grew up here and people that moved here before it was "discovered" accepted a certain lifestyle to be here, and it generally didn't include all the amenities of suburban life. Unfortunately, this is no longer true. It sickens me every day to see this change.

I concur. But let me explain...

I am the first of my Mother's side of the family to be born and raised off the Reservation.

You see, my Mother's people feel just as you feel. Imagine having lands to hunt and lakes to fish and suddenly having them all taken away by strangers! However, most of us have come to accept that change is inevitable, for the bad or for the good. What else can we do?

I just recently had to leave another western state, because I had the misfortune to fall madly in love and had made plans to marry a wonderful man who lived in a small, rural town. I stuck it out for a year, but after months of being unemployed, with no prospects in sight, being passed over for interviews, and finally being told that it would take time for me to 'prove' myself to the locals, I finally called it quits. I'll be going back from where I came, with a broken heart.

My philosophy was simple. Marry the man of my dreams, work to pay my bills, pull my own weight and be a good neighbor. Nowhere in this scenario did it appear to me that I needed to 'prove' myself. Many of these people who needed 'proof' that I was worthy to live among them come from families whose names announce their European heritage and are fairly new to the continent. The mountains and plains, the rivers and streams have always felt like my home. Yet, someone's ancestor laid a claim to them and now I am no longer welcome.

My Grandfather, Father and all my 8 brothers and sisters were born in Montana. To me, Montana is a place of comfort. It is a beautiful state full of good, hardy souls. Someday I would like to come back and call it my home. But I think if someone told me I was not welcome, I would be inconsolable.

After all, I have to belong somewhere.

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by Greensleeves

After all, I have to belong somewhere.

I think that's what a lot of people are looking for, a place to belong. Hope you find your way back home!

[jimj]

Originally Posted by Greensleeves

People who grew up here and people that moved here before it was "discovered" accepted a certain lifestyle to be here, and it generally didn't include all the amenities of suburban life. Unfortunately, this is no longer true. It sickens me every day to see this change.

I concur. But let me explain...

I am the first of my Mother's side of the family to be born and raised off the Reservation.

You see, my Mother's people feel just as you feel. Imagine having lands to hunt and lakes to fish and suddenly having them all taken away by strangers! However, most of us have come to accept that change is inevitable, for the bad or for the good. What else can we do?

I just recently had to leave another western state, because I had the misfortune to fall madly in love and had made plans to marry a wonderful man who lived in a small, rural town. I stuck it out for a year, but after months of being unemployed, with no prospects in sight, being passed over for interviews, and finally being told that it would take time for me to 'prove' myself to the locals, I finally called it quits. I'll be going back from where I came, with a broken heart.

My philosophy was simple. Marry the man of my dreams, work to pay my bills, pull my own weight and be a good neighbor. Nowhere in this scenario did it appear to me that I needed to 'prove' myself. Many of these people who needed 'proof' that I was worthy to live among them come from families whose names announce their European heritage and are fairly new to the continent. The mountains and plains, the rivers and streams have always felt like my home. Yet, someone's ancestor laid a claim to them and now I am no longer welcome.

My Grandfather, Father and all my 8 brothers and sisters were born in Montana. To me, Montana is a place of comfort. It is a beautiful state full of good, hardy souls. Someday I would like to come back and call it my home. But I think if someone told me I was not welcome, I would be inconsolable.

After all, I have to belong somewhere.

I've always been puzzled about the "prove yourself" thing. Exactly what qualifies those people to be the judges? That's why we enjoyed living in the south. Unless you're a yankee you were accepted at face value until you proved otherwise. Granted once you proved otherwise you might as well move since they'd never trust you again (real long memories) but you really had to mess up to get to that point. That's how we run our life here, we'll be friends with anyone until such a time as they demonstrate they don't play well or judge people by what others gossip about. I don't care about your politics or how you deal with joe shmo at the store, I only care about how you deal with me and mine.
A perfect example of this (or some variation) that I've seen many times. Let's say you contract for some work like a fence you want built and halfway through the guy just up and leaves taking the money you paid him and does not return for months after many promises to do so. You go after him to finish or give the money back and end up taking him to court to get it since he will not bother to call you. If this person is a local and well known you'll be persona non gratis in town and labled a "trouble maker" to be avoided. Just don't get it sometimes I guess....