What do Seattleites want? (schools, to live, cost of)

[sofia76]

Originally Posted by newguy416

I think it's because of all the water, mountains and protected areas...can't build on any of those.

That doesn't sound any different from other states that have mountains, water, and protected areas .... And last I checked, there was plenty of land over in Eastern Washington. And all that land between Vancouver WA and Olympia.

[sofia76]

By the way, the population of Washington state has almost doubled since 1970. Part of it is because there were jobs here when there were NOT jobs in places like California, New York, and other major states with large populations. Isn't that the American way? Go where there are opportunities to make money! Go where this is more land! Go where the land is cheap(er)! Go to where the natives will be stunned and awed by your mores sophisticated sensibilities!

Not to mention, in a capitalist society, there has to be growth ... or else there isn't enough money being made. Every time one of us shops at that new Target, or send our kids to that brand new school, or drives down a road that didn't exist five years ago, we are participating in that.

[Inkpoe]

Originally Posted by sofia76

That doesn't sound any different from other states that have mountains, water, and protected areas .... And last I checked, there was plenty of land over in Eastern Washington. And all that land between Vancouver WA and Olympia.

Except you listed places where most people don't want to move to and doesn't provide the most economic resources (jobs).

[sofia76]

Originally Posted by Inkpoe

Except you listed places where most people don't want to move to and doesn't provide the most economic resources (jobs).

Exactly. But that's not an issue of limited land. That's an issue of desirability. Every state has areas that are considered more desirable for living in, and areas that go largely unpopulated because of things like distance from metropolitan areas, or climate, or access to natural resources, or difficulty in driving because of mountains, canyons, rivers, and lakes. Washington is no different in that sense. And in fact, with only 6 million people, Washington is far less populated than, say, New York State, which also has mountains and bodies of water, and yet has 20 million people (1.5 million of whom live on an island that is 1/4 of the size of Seattle proper).

I was responding to what CarlB said: But yes, other states have population increases too, but they don't all have limited land available like we do.

I just don't see how that is an issue for Washington.

[CarlB328]

Then you obviously aren't from there. The change has been dramatic and substantial.

[Anders15]

no NBA team?

[AlohaHuey]

Originally Posted by sofia76

Exactly. But that's not an issue of limited land. That's an issue of desirability. Every state has areas that are considered more desirable for living in, and areas that go largely unpopulated because of things like distance from metropolitan areas, or climate, or access to natural resources, or difficulty in driving because of mountains, canyons, rivers, and lakes. Washington is no different in that sense. And in fact, with only 6 million people, Washington is far less populated than, say, New York State, which also has mountains and bodies of water, and yet has 20 million people (1.5 million of whom live on an island that is 1/4 of the size of Seattle proper).

I was responding to what CarlB said: But yes, other states have population increases too, but they don't all have limited land available like we do.

I just don't see how that is an issue for Washington.

Look at a map, preferably a topographical map, and you'll see that there are mountains on one side and water on another. Washington STATE has a lot of empty lands in the east, but the jobs and economic engine of the state are in the Puget Sound area, which has considerable limitations on land growth. Mountains have rivers that flood, so that keeps the foothills area development somewhat limited, along with the obvious topographical features.

We just don't have the infrastructure to crush more millions into the existing area.

[AlohaHuey]

I want to be able to ride light rail to a nude beach to smoke pot. :-)

[sofia76]

Originally Posted by AlohaHuey

Look at a map, preferably a topographical map, and you'll see that there are mountains on one side and water on another. Washington STATE has a lot of empty lands in the east, but the jobs and economic engine of the state are in the Puget Sound area, which has considerable limitations on land growth. Mountains have rivers that flood, so that keeps the foothills area development somewhat limited, along with the obvious topographical features.

We just don't have the infrastructure to crush more millions into the existing area.

Usually I agree with your comments, AlohaHuey, but I remain dubious about this. Certainly, putting more millions into the existing area may not be desirable but it is certainly do-able. And in fact, Washington State is projected to grow by another 2 million over the next 10-15 years. It will mean more density and probably more sprawl, which has already happened to accommodate the 3 million additional folks who weren't here 30 years ago. If there isn't enough room in the Puget Sound area, then the answer might be locating more jobs and economic engines to other parts of the state. To my mind, it just makes sense to have multiple metropolitan areas in a state this size. IMO, Oregon, for example, would be improved by a second Portland (or a larger version of say, Ashland, Eugene or Bend). It doesn't seem healthy to me to just have one major metro area. What happens when jobs are hard to be found in that one city? People either stay unemployed or they have to leave the state to find a job. Look at states like Florida, Texas, California, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey Tennessee, North Carolina, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, etc. - they all have more than one major city.

[CarlB328]

Native Washingtonians don't want to destroy our beautiful wildernesses to accomodate more people. Let them move to Texas.