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.
No offense, but the day of the 'WASP' mono-culture has passed, and there are just too many other 'cultures' nowadays, each with their own set of values, to generalize about all Amurikins, let alone all 'Californians'. Because folks' priorities and their definition of a 'better life' might vary a lot, depending on whether you're talking to 20-somethings, retirees, with or without kids, from NYC, Seattle, Mexico, Asia… or yes, even the Midwest!
So for some the 'California Dream' may be long gone, but for others, it's simply the beginning (as indeed, has always been the history of the Golden State). In fact I would even go so far as to suggest, that being a "pessimist" here, is probably a sure sign that one is living in the wrong place to begin with!
I agree in general. We have done the Texas thing and enjoyed it for the most part, but decided it was time to come home. I am talking to a friends daughter who is contemplating a move to Dallas today at 5p to help her decide.
The biggest thing that is worrisome here is the continued widening of the gap between rich/poor or even lower middle class. It was in Texas too, but not nearly as pronounced.
Having moved to California from the outside, then moving away for a few months before moving back to California has shined some light on why people either move to or depart California.
As another poster on this forum said, each individual's reasons are valid.
For me, as an unattached/unmarried dude, if you're just looking to date, not get into a serious relationship, and open to advancement and high income earning potential in my field, then California is one of the best places in the world to be.
However, when it comes time to raise a family, whenever/if ever that will be, I would definitely not want to raise a family in California. These are my reasons:
(1) Women/relationships/family: I've lived throughout the world and quite honestly, California women are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to personality, whether north or south. Neurotic, arrogant, and usually lacking in manners... Unfortunately, the mothers do a very good job of passing this trait on to their daughters. This means if you're a guy that you have to be semi-aggressive and play "the game" to get "the girl," or be a total hipster/male feminist if you're in that circle, or you just somehow find a way to get the milk and not the whole cow... (At least in Europe, while the traits of third wave feminism have taken hold there more strongly than even in California, at least women manage to still be relatively more courteous and even direct, and less catty. I enjoyed that more.) I notice that natives often date other natives, and non-natives often end up dating non-natives--not much crossing over. There may be a reason for this.
Oh, and even though "Valley Girl" was very 1980s, its legacy lives on very strongly today, especially all over Southern California. The accent is, how does one politely put this...awful!
Furthermore, the divorce laws are just downright onerous toward men should they find themselves in that predicament. In the long-term, this isn't healthy for the social climate of California and its residents, and certainly not conducive for raising emotionally and psychologically healthy families.
(2) How government regards economic issues: Unless you're in a select few industries, such as the one I'm in, then the job market can really be difficult here. The Democratic powers that be frankly understand this and don't give a damn. Oh sure, sure, Sacramento now offers Hollywood tax credits (I don't work in entertainment, but this is just an example). Doesn't anyone find that embarrassing, that the state which gave the modern entertainment industry its props (pun intended) now sees the need to offer tax incentives?
Furthermore, even though tech is now still booming and successful in the Bay Area and even increasingly Los Angeles, Texas is now stepping up its game, not only in tech, but also in STEM jobs. Especially Austin and Houston: http://www.cnet.com/news/looking-for...to-california/ Just something for California to keep in mind going forward for the next 15-20 years...
Where's a Californian Rand Paul when you need him?
(3) Public schools--ties back into family: I can move back to the South and find public school systems in the suburbs around Louisville, Nashville, Birmingham, Raleigh-Durham, etc. that rival the very best public school systems here in California, and for significantly less in property taxes to fund them. In fact, the highest ranked public high school in the U.S. a few years ago was a public school, the Gatton Academy in Bowling Green, KY.
In closing: So, yes, California's great if you're single. If you want to raise a family, I suppose you can raise a family on the Central Coast, Gold Country, the Sierras, or the North Coast. Those are all very beautiful places where even I might consider raising a family if I could have a job that paid excellently (while still being non-wealthy)...but then there's that whole social climate thing again. So I'll probably end up staying back here 5-10 years, then moving on.
I will, however, still enjoy the heck out of California's most awesome traits: multiculturalism, great universities, scenery, more scenery, microclimates, real climates, nature preserves, and honestly some of the best cuisine on the planet. And I will also contend that we need a Republican governor in this state (well, starting in 2019) to provide some sanity in a sea of Gavin, Kamala, Leland Yee, Steinberg, etc. and their ilk. Not a Schwarzenegger Republican, but like a Pete Wilson or a Rand Paul. Raising taxes on "the rich" usually translates into taxes being raised on the middle class and small business owners, which prices them out to places like Arizona, Texas, and Utah. Yes, it's true, whether you want to admit it or not.
One caveat: If you're truly wealthy and can afford to live in Newport Beach or Atherton, however, this doesn't impact you very much since, well, you can already afford it. I could stay in California and raise a family if I got to that point, simply because I could put my children in the best schools, travel the world, and still live comfortably. Money doesn't buy subjective measures in life (happiness, peace, etc.), but it sure is a heck of an insurance policy.
Last edited by EclecticEars; 01-15-2015 at 11:03 AM..
(1) Women/relationships/family: I've lived throughout the world and quite honestly, California women are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to personality, whether north or south.
I meant literally NorCal or SoCal. Geez, good thing I caught this...
Having moved to California from the outside, then moving away for a few months before moving back to California has shined some light on why people either move to or depart California.
As another poster on this forum said, each individual's reasons are valid.
For me, as an unattached/unmarried dude, if you're just looking to date, not get into a serious relationship, and open to advancement and high income earning potential in my field, then California is one of the best places in the world to be.
However, when it comes time to raise a family, whenever/if ever that will be, I would definitely not want to raise a family in California. These are my reasons:
(1) Women/relationships/family: I've lived throughout the world and quite honestly, California women are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to personality, whether north or south. Neurotic, arrogant, and usually lacking in manners... Unfortunately, the mothers do a very good job of passing this trait on to their daughters. This means if you're a guy that you have to be semi-aggressive and play "the game" to get "the girl," or be a total hipster/male feminist if you're in that circle, or you just somehow find a way to get the milk and not the whole cow... (At least in Europe, while the traits of third wave feminism have taken hold there more strongly than even in California, at least women manage to still be relatively more courteous and even direct, and less catty. I enjoyed that more.) I notice that natives often date other natives, and non-natives often end up dating non-natives--not much crossing over. There may be a reason for this.
Oh, and even though "Valley Girl" was very 1980s, its legacy lives on very strongly today, especially all over Southern California. The accent is, how does one politely put this...awful!
Furthermore, the divorce laws are just downright onerous toward men should they find themselves in that predicament. In the long-term, this isn't healthy for the social climate of California and its residents, and certainly not conducive for raising emotionally and psychologically healthy families.
(2) How government regards economic issues: Unless you're in a select few industries, such as the one I'm in, then the job market can really be difficult here. The Democratic powers that be frankly understand this and don't give a damn. Oh sure, sure, Sacramento now offers Hollywood tax credits (I don't work in entertainment, but this is just an example). Doesn't anyone find that embarrassing, that the state which gave the modern entertainment industry its props (pun intended) now sees the need to offer tax incentives?
Furthermore, even though tech is now still booming and successful in the Bay Area and even increasingly Los Angeles, Texas is now stepping up its game, not only in tech, but also in STEM jobs. Especially Austin and Houston: Looking for a tech job? There are better places than California - CNET Just something for California to keep in mind going forward for the next 15-20 years...
Where's a Californian Rand Paul when you need him?
(3) Public schools--ties back into family: I can move back to the South and find public school systems in the suburbs around Louisville, Nashville, Birmingham, Raleigh-Durham, etc. that rival the very best public school systems here in California, and for significantly less in property taxes to fund them. In fact, the highest ranked public high school in the U.S. a few years ago was a public school, the Gatton Academy in Bowling Green, KY.
In closing: So, yes, California's great if you're single. If you want to raise a family, I suppose you can raise a family on the Central Coast, Gold Country, the Sierras, or the North Coast. Those are all very beautiful places where even I might consider raising a family if I could have a job that paid excellently (while still being non-wealthy)...but then there's that whole social climate thing again. So I'll probably end up staying back here 5-10 years, then moving on.
I will, however, still enjoy the heck out of California's most awesome traits: multiculturalism, great universities, scenery, more scenery, microclimates, real climates, nature preserves, and honestly some of the best cuisine on the planet. And I will also contend that we need a Republican governor in this state (well, starting in 2019) to provide some sanity in a sea of Gavin, Kamala, Leland Yee, Steinberg, etc. and their ilk. Not a Schwarzenegger Republican, but like a Pete Wilson or a Rand Paul. Raising taxes on "the rich" usually translates into taxes being raised on the middle class and small business owners, which prices them out to places like Arizona, Texas, and Utah. Yes, it's true, whether you want to admit it or not.
One caveat: If you're truly wealthy and can afford to live in Newport Beach or Atherton, however, this doesn't impact you very much since, well, you can already afford it. I could stay in California and raise a family if I got to that point, simply because I could put my children in the best schools, travel the world, and still live comfortably. Money doesn't buy subjective measures in life (happiness, peace, etc.), but it sure is a heck of an insurance policy.
You put a lot of thought into this, and I think its deserves a rebuttal.
1) Some of the women do fit that profile, but in my experience living here (which considerably exceeds yours), many, if not most, are well-adjusted and not at all what you describe. I also have little sympathy for non-natives castigating CA for having a “transplant culture” (which what your posts implies), and simultaneously blaming the local culture for one’s lack of success in finding a mate, bearing in mind you only need one. I don’t know what else to tell you.
2) Yes, the quality of our schools has declined since the late 70's. Immediately prior to the passage of Proposition 13, local revenues provided nearly half of the funding for California’s public schools. That burden since has been shifted to Sacramento, which in turn relies in the highly variable and often volatile and unpredictable levels of income tax revenue, making it difficult for the state to keep up with its obligations consistently. Yes, the population was also grown considerably due to immigration -legal or otherwise, but good luck try having a rational discussion of the role Prop 13 has played without getting roasted. Which brings me to #3.
3) Pete Wilson also paved the way for utility de-regulation and ultimately Enron. The resulting tens of billions of stolen dollars was the beginning our fiscal implosion. Deregulation at the Federal level paved the way for the housing bubble and inevitable burst, tearing down the firewall between commercial and investment banking via Gramm-Leach-Bliley, all in the name of laissez faire nonsense. I have little regard for Gavin Newsom and Leland Yee, but I have even less desire to live in Rand Paul’s libertarian fantasyland. That’s why kids like him invented Dungeons and Dragons. And the most commonly cited reason people give for moving out of state is the cost of real estate, a function of demand. Taxes are relatively higher, but they also serve as a convenient excuse for the unspoken frustration at the inability to draw an income to compete in that admittedly insane market.
It seems your happiness is contingent on local ideology and sociology, both of which are largely out of your control.
You put a lot of thought into this, and I think its deserves a rebuttal.
1) Some of the women do fit that profile, but in my experience living here (which considerably exceeds yours), many, if not most, are well-adjusted and not at all what you describe. I also have little sympathy for non-natives castigating CA for having a “transplant culture” (which what your posts implies), and simultaneously blaming the local culture for one’s lack of success in finding a mate, bearing in mind you only need one. I don’t know what else to tell you.
I'll concede that there are some well-adjusted women with whom I'm friends, and that California isn't the transplant culture it used to be. Problem is, many of those well-adjusted women are taken, and the ones that aren't have baggage otherwise (kids, etc.) that I don't want to deal with right now. Speaking in generalities, of course. I just interact with and observe a greater proportion of angry women in Southern California than I did living in the South, Midwest, western Europe, and the Bay Area (which still isn't much better than SoCal). Just my experience.
I also read last year, I think in the L.A. Times, that the percentage of native-born residents in California is now just over 50%. Much higher than it was in the 1950s-1980s, yes, but while California isn't as transient as Nevada, Arizona and Florida, it is still more transient than places like Texas (high in-migration, yes, but the natives stick around come Hell or high water), Kentucky, and Indiana. And SF, L.A., San Jose, Irvine, and San Diego, for examples, still feel much more transient/newcomer-ish than many places in this country.
2) Yes, the quality of our schools has declined since the late 70's. Immediately prior to the passage of Proposition 13, local revenues provided nearly half of the funding for California’s public schools. That burden since has been shifted to Sacramento, which in turn relies in the highly variable and often volatile and unpredictable levels of income tax revenue, making it difficult for the state to keep up with its obligations consistently. Yes, the population was also grown considerably due to immigration -legal or otherwise, but good luck try having a rational discussion of the role Prop 13 has played without getting roasted. Which brings me to #3.
Well...I see your point, and Prop 13 has had an impact on school funding. The great systems continue to be in areas where property values and income levels are high, i.e.: Orinda, Irvine, Encinitas, Palo Alto, etc. The poorer quality systems continue to be in places where property values are more subject to extreme market cycles, yet where incomes aren't quite so high, i.e.: most of Inland Empire and Central Valley. And honestly, the same can be said in the cities I mentioned in my last post, i.e.: Louisville's poor west end vs. wealthier east end/Oldham County, Nashville's poor east and west ends vs. wealthier Williamson County, etc.
The point, though, wasn't that California's public schools are not the same quality overall that they were up until the 1980s. It is that even though my property taxes in Oldham County would far exceed those in a poorer area in Kentucky, I can put children in the same quality public schools in Oldham County that I could in south Orange County, and with property tax rates that are still dramatically less for new homeowners than in SoCal.
3) Pete Wilson also paved the way for utility de-regulation and ultimately Enron. The resulting tens of billions of stolen dollars was the beginning our fiscal implosion. Deregulation at the Federal level paved the way for the housing bubble and inevitable burst, tearing down the firewall between commercial and investment banking via Gramm-Leach-Bliley, all in the name of laissez faire nonsense. I have little regard for Gavin Newsom and Leland Yee, but I have even less desire to live in Rand Paul’s libertarian fantasyland. That’s why kids like him invented Dungeons and Dragons. And the most commonly cited reason people give for moving out of state is the cost of real estate, a function of demand. Taxes are relatively higher, but they also serve as a convenient excuse for the unspoken frustration at the inability to draw an income to compete in that admittedly insane market.
"Libertarian fantasyland." I can't concede that point at all, sorry. Rand Paul is far more of a shrewd, methodical, "realist" political strategist than his father ever was. In fact, a lot of hardcore Ron-esque fantasyland libertarians have grown to hate Rand because he doesn't "stand up enough" for them.
It seems your happiness is contingent on local ideology and sociology, both of which are largely out of your control.
Many of the children who live in California will never afford to buy a house.
That brings up a good issue. Ive told my kids that they have to make good decision, take the right steps financially to make it here. Kids need financial education in high school that is not there, it should be mandatory. Does anyone know of programs in California high schools? Dave Ramsey program is in scattered schools around the country, that would be a good place to start.
In short: I guess you can say that I love California, but many of the people suck.
Unlike other places, huh. People are so very different everywhere but California. So wonderful. Makes a person wonder why anybody lives here, eh?
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 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.
