U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-11-2012, 04:41 PM
 
Location: The Other California
4,255 posts, read 4,555,254 times
Reputation: 1520

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
California is too crowded. Why people find even faster population growth rates as ideal is beyond me.
You've obviously never been to California. The Golden State is 80 percent uninhabited wilderness and ranchland, and our farmland is vastly under-utilized. 400,000 acres of productive farmland was fallowed in 2009 alone due to environmental extremism. I own a ranch in a county the size of Rhode Island but with fewer than 29,000 human inhabitants. We've got LOTS of room.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-11-2012, 09:38 PM
 
Location: North America
14,212 posts, read 9,629,574 times
Reputation: 5534
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
You've obviously never been to California. The Golden State is 80 percent uninhabited wilderness and ranchland, and our farmland is vastly under-utilized. 400,000 acres of productive farmland was fallowed in 2009 alone due to environmental extremism. I own a ranch in a county the size of Rhode Island but with fewer than 29,000 human inhabitants. We've got LOTS of room.
It's about not as much the size but the resources. The more people consume more which is not ideal for things. Thankfully as people get into a 1st world stage rates drop so this is a moot point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 11:28 AM
 
Location: IN
20,184 posts, read 34,528,325 times
Reputation: 12519
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
You've obviously never been to California. The Golden State is 80 percent uninhabited wilderness and ranchland, and our farmland is vastly under-utilized. 400,000 acres of productive farmland was fallowed in 2009 alone due to environmental extremism. I own a ranch in a county the size of Rhode Island but with fewer than 29,000 human inhabitants. We've got LOTS of room.
No, a vast amount of acerage has been paved over for housing developments and other uses than farming in the Central Valley due to population growth. You can't create new farmland after its been developed. I'm aware that California has a large amount of rural lands, national parks, and forests but they are remote and tend to be too rugged, too dry, too wet, or too mountainous for much settlement. 99% of the population of California lives in metropolitan counties with high population density
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 11:30 AM
 
Location: IN
20,184 posts, read 34,528,325 times
Reputation: 12519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
It's about not as much the size but the resources. The more people consume more which is not ideal for things. Thankfully as people get into a 1st world stage rates drop so this is a moot point.
Exactly. I predict enormous problems in the near future as water becomes a scarcer commodity in many parts of the US due to a warmer climate leading to more evaporation and frequent droughts. Population growth creates an inherent demand for more water resources as well. Western irrigated agriculture is already facing big problems due to inefficiences of the past.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 11:40 AM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,368,217 times
Reputation: 32243
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
No, a vast amount of acerage has been paved over for housing developments and other uses than farming in the Central Valley due to population growth. You can't create new farmland after its been developed. I'm aware that California has a large amount of rural lands, national parks, and forests but they are remote and tend to be too rugged, too dry, too wet, or too mountainous for much settlement. 99% of the population of California lives in metropolitan counties with high population density
Actually, where millions of people are living now in CA was remote, too rugged and too dry 45 years ago.

A few of us remember what those metropolitan counties that are now jammed to the gills once looked like. **sigh**
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 07:29 PM
 
Location: IN
20,184 posts, read 34,528,325 times
Reputation: 12519
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Actually, where millions of people are living now in CA was remote, too rugged and too dry 45 years ago.

A few of us remember what those metropolitan counties that are now jammed to the gills once looked like. **sigh**
It's amazing to me that California continues to grow so fast even with a high level of out-migration to other states and places. Most of the growth must be through international immigration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,393 posts, read 29,736,370 times
Reputation: 14499
Quote:
Originally Posted by socstudent View Post
Interesting. Really what I'm seeing from this video, besides humor, is that parents with only one child (or the appropriate number that they can actually handle) have the time and the resources to actually parent. Not just spending their time trying to control and keep their children from destroying things and killing each other but actually cultivating their minds and nurturing them into people that will one day think critically of the world and learn that they have a voice. It may sound stupid but his parody of what it sounds like in a one-child car actually sounds a LOT like what my childhood was, as an only child. My parents included me in all the decisions they made, made me feel like I was important and my input was valuable. They didn't have to spend their time just doing the bare minimum to make sure I was alive and healthy, they could help me grow in other ways. Obviously the more resources and patience you have to go around to each child the better, and I guess with more than one it gets difficult for most people. Of course I would have loved to have a brother or sister to play with and most of the time I was lonely, but there were advantages to being an only child as well that I am just now realizing as I become an adult. The opportunities I had because I always had my parents' full attention and support really did help. I am an only child because my mother ended up not being able to have any more kids even though she wanted to. It's not something I chose and if I could have I wouldn't be, but I understand the advantages it gave me. I think parents should just have as many children as they have resources to fully support, otherwise you have people growing up feeling neglected and not being able to form healthy attachments.
I'm one of six and I couldn't agree more. There is really very little time for each child in a big family and kids aren't included in decisions. I was always one of six never me. Decisions were made for all six not individuals.

The fact I'm one of six and stopped at two is telling. I love kids but I wasn't going to over extend myself. My dil, OTOH was an only child and number 6 is on the way. From the outside looking in, she spends her time just trying to keep her brood from killing each other. I see the same anger and resentment in the eyes of her older two that I had in mine at their age (I was the oldest girl in a day and age when girls did all the work so my brother did fine as the oldest). She also invests too much energy in being angry that I don't help her. Sorry, but I have my two and my career and I'm not in position to help. Her mother, who is retired, helps her a lot. I really get sick of the comparison. We're in sitautions that are a world apart. And why get ticked off that someone else isn't helping you with the kids YOU CHOSE to have??? Kind of silly if you ask me.

I don't think I would have wanted to be an only child (my mom died when I was 22 and my dad when I was 34) but I'd take being one of two or three over being one of six any day of the week. My friends who weren't from big families seemed to have a real relationship with their parents. I was just one of six and we're not even close as adults. We get together on holidays, catch up and then go back to our individual lives. I think we had to share too much as kids to share our lives now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 08:08 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,368,217 times
Reputation: 32243
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
It's amazing to me that California continues to grow so fast even with a high level of out-migration to other states and places. Most of the growth must be through international immigration.
The weather's good.

When there is 3 feet of snow in Buffalo and the Rose Parade is on TV showing a 70 degree day... Where do you want to live?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 08:17 PM
 
Location: North America
14,212 posts, read 9,629,574 times
Reputation: 5534
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
The weather's good.

When there is 3 feet of snow in Buffalo and the Rose Parade is on TV showing a 70 degree day... Where do you want to live?
Buffalo actually because i love the cold and snow . Took the starch right out of ya with that didn't i ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 09:45 PM
 
12,932 posts, read 19,824,518 times
Reputation: 33989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
I'm one of six and I couldn't agree more. There is really very little time for each child in a big family and kids aren't included in decisions. I was always one of six never me. Decisions were made for all six not individuals.

The fact I'm one of six and stopped at two is telling. I love kids but I wasn't going to over extend myself. My dil, OTOH was an only child and number 6 is on the way. From the outside looking in, she spends her time just trying to keep her brood from killing each other. I see the same anger and resentment in the eyes of her older two that I had in mine at their age (I was the oldest girl in a day and age when girls did all the work so my brother did fine as the oldest). She also invests too much energy in being angry that I don't help her. Sorry, but I have my two and my career and I'm not in position to help. Her mother, who is retired, helps her a lot. I really get sick of the comparison. We're in sitautions that are a world apart. And why get ticked off that someone else isn't helping you with the kids YOU CHOSE to have??? Kind of silly if you ask me.

I don't think I would have wanted to be an only child (my mom died when I was 22 and my dad when I was 34) but I'd take being one of two or three over being one of six any day of the week. My friends who weren't from big families seemed to have a real relationship with their parents. I was just one of six and we're not even close as adults. We get together on holidays, catch up and then go back to our individual lives. I think we had to share too much as kids to share our lives now.
When I was a kid, children weren't routinely included in decision making regardless of the size of the family. I am one of seven. I had a great childhood, and never felt like a number. The treats weren't as plentiful maybe, but that made them all the more special. My father did father-daughter dates on our birthdays without fail, and there were many times when he would take one or two of us out. If it wasn't our turn, we knew sooner or later it would come up again. My mother was fair with chore distribution, and seemed to have plenty of time for her own interests.

Now, did I want to have seven myself? No. Three is perfect for us.

As adults we have remained close, and try to have reunions every 2 years. We are all scattered across the country. My father is no longer alive, but my mother sees each and every one of her children about 4 times a year, as she can no longer travel easily.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top