Is Boston having the same problems with "crime" as many blue cities like SF, LA, NYC, Portland, Chicago, etc.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by msRB311

I do think you're missing the point too...if people could choose anywhere in the world to live, job situation doesn't matter, i think it's safe to say most would not choose MA. The reason so many choose it is for jobs....which they NEED. If they just needed a house the world would be their oyster.

I never said anything about MA, and I've pointed this out to you several times.

[msRB311]

Then why are you posting on the boston forum? That's what we are talking about.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by msRB311

Then why are you posting on the boston forum? That's what we are talking about.

At no point has my discussion with the other two users been about Boston, and I've pointed that out to you several times. It has been about California and whether negative net migration implies low desirability. I responded to a comment about that, and I think I've been pretty clear on what I'm talking about.

[PureBoston]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

At no point has my discussion with the other two users been about Boston, and I've pointed that out to you several times. It has been about California and whether negative net migration implies low desirability. I responded to a comment about that, and I think I've been pretty clear on what I'm talking about.

Your premise would be far easier to swallow if only the Golden State wasn't hemorrhaging human bodies. It's Yogi logic: people are leaving, it MUST be desirable.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by PureBoston

Your premise would be far easier to swallow if only the Golden State wasn't hemorrhaging human bodies. It's Yogi logic: people are leaving, it MUST be desirable.

Yeah, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the most expensive place to live went up by a further 40%. If California is seeing negative migration and Ohio is seeing positive migration, Ohio must be a more desirable place to live.


/sarcasm

But we've been down this road already, and either you don't see this distinction or don't care about the distinction. I'm not going to keep at it, though. You can have the last word.

[bostongymjunkie]

When all is said and done the fact that people move to a certain area may be underwritten by desire to live there, but it could also mean they are willing to tolerate it for other reasons. And when your options in certain areas are limited, you have a tendency to be more tolerant. Tolerance is not desirability, it's putting up with a place because you feel compelled to do so for one reason or another. I can say that from firsthand experience of living in so-called desirable cities that I couldn't stand, only because I needed to for my career or other reasons. Places like Greater Boston and urban areas of CA have housing supply problems which further compound things. Most of the Northeast and coastal cities are benefiting from history/industrialization, climate and geography as opposed to anything being done new today. If anything, people are tolerating how they are being run today for the benefit of the other factors. The country is being run into the ground by globalization so people with means will go where they can make the most of it. People without will go where they can hurt the least or, in some cases, get the most from the state. Then there's the immigration from OCONUS where people go to certain areas for very specific reasons independent of desire.

[msRB311]

I think a lot of people put up with the real estate prices in Boston because of the job they have here and the public education is good. Not because MA is this fabulous, magical place to live.

[bostongymjunkie]

I think framing all of the possible "reasons" people have for going to a certain place under the heading "desirability" is a misleading conversation with likely political motivations.

[PureBoston]

V8

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

Yeah, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the most expensive place to live went up by a further 40%. If California is seeing negative migration and Ohio is seeing positive migration, Ohio must be a more desirable place to live.


/sarcasm

But we've been down this road already, and either you don't see this distinction or don't care about the distinction. I'm not going to keep at it, though. You can have the last word.

Bottom line is that if you don't take care of your taxpaying citizenry, economically and socially, somebody else will. This can't be divorced from politics since California and Massachusetts currently suffer from the same ailment: an abusive and arrogant Democratic political trifecta with all the hubris of a liberal hegemony. Dismiss the "hell" of states such as Florida, Texas and North Carolina at one's own peril. They're becoming a comfortable haven for an increasing percentage of the population. What people are beginning to question most of all in expensive and putatively desirable states like ours and California is value. Are they really that much better? For the money? Voters and politicians alike, in both, better get their sh*t together and realize that preeminence going forward is far from written in stone. Fleeing taxpayers leave a heavier wagon with fewer horses to pull it, and we know how that ends. Folks in this big and beautiful country vote with their feet. Always have and always will.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by PureBoston

V8

Bottom line is that if you don't take care of your taxpaying citizenry, economically and socially, somebody else will. California and Massachusetts currently suffer from the same ailment: an abusive and arrogant Democratic political trifecta with the hubris of a liberal hegemony. Dismiss the "hell" of states such as Florida, Texas and North Carolina at one's own peril. They're becoming a comfortable haven for an increasing percentage of the population. What people are beginning to question most of all in expensive and putatively desirable states like ours and California is value. Are they really that much better? For the money? Voters and politicians alike, in both, better get their sh*t together and realize that preeminence going forward is far from written in stone. Fleeing taxpayers leave a heavier wagon with fewer horses to pull it, and we know how that ends. Folks in this big and beautiful country vote with their feet. Always have and always will.

Can't rep this enough. While other states look towards the future, like an inbred royal family we are a state increasingly living off the dividends our "past" greatness.